D300 Durability « Nikon Rumors Forum

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.


Nikon Rumors Forum

where there’s smoke there’s forum fire

Register or log in - lost password?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

D300 Durability

(30 posts) (12 voices)
  • Started 3 years ago by Graphicnatured
  • Latest reply from smarterchild
  • Related Topics:
    1. Photo-A-Day: February 2010: Places
    2. Nikon D800/D800E ISO sweet spot with video?
    3. Help with Camera decisions
    4. body vs. glass
    5. D800 Noise in Low Light Video

Tags:

  • Body
  • california
  • cliff
  • durability
  • fall
  • nd
  • ND filter
  • neutral density filter
  • Nikon D300
  • noise
  • sand
  • seal
  • tokina 11-16
  • tyler jordan
  • windansea
  • windansea beach
12Next »
  1. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    Hey all, I just wanted to write about a situation that happened to me last month when I was shooting at Windansea Beach in La Jolla, CA.

    I had walked down the cliff line until I found a nice spot overlooking a long crevice in the rocks. I set up my tripod and took a couple shots and since I had arrived quite a bit before sunset I figured I'd bust out the 10-stop ND I had in my bag and see how that would work with this subject.

    When I turned back around, my camera and tripod were gone. They had blown over, off the cliff. My camera and tripod fell about 8-10 feet and landed buried in some sand. I was horrified at what may lay in store for me when I climbed down to assess the situation, but was happy to see that a) my camera still worked, and b) for the most part, the seals held up and kept sand out of the most important areas. The one issue I had was a grain of sand got lodged in the trash button port, but this didn't happen until the following day when I tried to extract it myself.

    The positive: I was able to still use my camera for a great sunset/twilight session and I wasn't forced to have to replace my electronic friend. Thank you, Nikon. Here's some samples I took within an hour after the fall:


    <p>

    Posted 3 years ago #
  2. EKoo

    member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 23

    offline

    Very nice!! I'm looking to buy ND filters set. What do you recommend?

    Posted 3 years ago #
  3. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    I'd buy the Cokin filter holder, but buy Lee filters. Then I'd add the B+W 10 stop.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  4. jonnyapple

    Goldfingers
    Joined: May '09
    Posts: 3,400

    offline

    Nice photos, Tyler. I'm glad your camera came out okay, too!

    Posted 3 years ago #
  5. astrophotographer

    preferred member
    Joined: Aug '09
    Posts: 136

    offline

    Very nice photos. And I know those rocks. I've tried and failed many times to take a good picture of them. I consider them very challenging.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  6. Gentoo

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 1,538

    offline

    astrophotographer said:
    Very nice photos. And I know those rocks. I've tried and failed many times to take a good picture of them. I consider them very challenging.

    Me too LOL

    Posted 3 years ago #
  7. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    Thanks! I feel I'm still getting to know them as well.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  8. shivaswrath

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 841

    offline

    awesome pics - what lens/settings? I'm always nervous about using the ND filter I have for fear of excessive noise in the picture. . .

    Posted 3 years ago #
  9. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    16mm (Tokina 11-16mm)
    f14
    ISO100
    2 minute exposure
    B+W 10-stop ND

    The noise isn't too bad, but it depends on how much is OK for you. Here's a 100% crop (No noise suppression):

    Posted 3 years ago #
  10. NSXType-R

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 2,803

    offline

    Should there even be noise at ISO 100...?

    Posted 3 years ago #
  11. jonnyapple

    Goldfingers
    Joined: May '09
    Posts: 3,400

    offline

    You don't expect more shot noise (what you'd usually call digital image noise in normal exposures) because that's caused by having too few photons per photosite to get a good average, and that's not happening in long exposures. But you get more Johnson noise (from heating the sensor) and if the photosites of hot pixels fill up, then simple dark current subtraction (where it takes an image with no light hitting the sensor and then subtracts that image from the first one) will take a pixel in the highlights and make it dark. I think they do something more complicated than that in long exposure NR now, though.

    The bottom line is that with digital long exposures aren't really simple to noise correct. That 100% crop looks great, Tyler. You can get images with long exposures that you can't really get otherwise so the noise is just something to be aware of.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  12. shivaswrath

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 841

    offline

    shouldn't be noise, and clearly the crop shows that, but sometimes my D200 will get noisey with long exposures, and esp with a ND filter, I've had to crank up the ISO (hand held) to compensate. . .really, I need to stop being lazy about carting my rinky dink manfrotto around, it's not even 1 lb and only 12 inches collapsed. . .

    Regardless, NICE SHOT!!!

    Posted 3 years ago #
  13. heartyfisher

    preferred member
    Joined: Apr '09
    Posts: 1,701

    offline

    "and esp with a ND filter, I've had to crank up the ISO (hand held) to compensate."
    Doesnt makes sens to me... Isnt the whole idea of ND filter is that the lowest ISO is not low enough? so if you need to crank up the ISO just remove the ND filter and keep the ISO low..

    Posted 3 years ago #
  14. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    Thanks jonnyapple and shivaswrath. I don't ever use long ex NR, but I do have Noiseware Professional, which I think does a pretty good job if I absolutely need noise suppression. For the most part I try to stay away from high ISO if possible and find I don't need the noise filter too much. It's nice to have though.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  15. shivaswrath

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 841

    offline

    heartyfisher said:
    "and esp with a ND filter, I've had to crank up the ISO (hand held) to compensate."
    Doesnt makes sens to me... Isnt the whole idea of ND filter is that the lowest ISO is not low enough? so if you need to crank up the ISO just remove the ND filter and keep the ISO low..

    yeah I confuse myself with that as well. . .I use the ND for the "silk" effect with water/clouds, and in certain instances, have been in pretty low light. . .hence cranking the ISO. . .still confusing. . .

    Posted 3 years ago #
  16. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    I'm not too much of a technical photographer when it comes to using math for my ND which may not be to my benefit. I've always been more of a "feel" artist.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  17. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    Oh, and I don't shoot ND filters hand held. I guess I could with the 18-200VR, but obviously never would with the 10-stop.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  18. jonnyapple

    Goldfingers
    Joined: May '09
    Posts: 3,400

    offline

    If you were a real photographer you would. ;-)

    Posted 3 years ago #
  19. PB PM

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 2,217

    offline

    If you were a real photographer you'd shoot with a Leica or Hasselblad.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  20. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    So I'm told.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  21. kyoshinikon

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 1,200

    offline

    Agreed with PB PM

    Posted 3 years ago #
  22. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    I am looking to get in to large format for serious stuff since I shoot mostly landscapes. Does this make me less fake, or does it still have to be a Leica or Hasselblad? I used to shoot 35mm when I was a kid, gave it up to pursue an art career and have gotten back into photography with digital. Now I'm really seeing the limits and am dissatisfied. Not that I don't love my gear though. My D300 still makes me very happy. I always thought it was just snooty-esque who were Hasselblad or nothing.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  23. PB PM

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 2,217

    offline

    I was being sarcastic. ;-)

    Posted 3 years ago #
  24. Graphicnatured

    senior member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 89

    offline

    I thought perhaps you were, but I just talked to a photographer last week who feels this way. It's hard to see myself ever paying 20k+ for a camera.

    Posted 3 years ago #
  25. PB PM

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 2,217

    offline

    Well, if you made $100,000 from your photography its not unthinkable to have such a camera.

    Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

NikonRumors Forum (http://nikonrumors.com/forum) is proudly powered by bbPress
Disclaimer: This site has no affiliation with Nikon USA or any other subsidiary of Nikon. Please visit the official Nikon website at nikon.com
Copyright © 2008-2011 NikonRumors.com