@shutterdancer:One reason my team has had as much success with the D7000 and similar cameras is we use JPEG fine large and video almost exclusively. With that shooting style the exposure better be accurate. We do NOT rely on post shooting fixes. If your exposure control is not spot on I do not even recommend it to anyone. BUT if your exposures are almost perfect there is LITTLE to be gained with RAW. HOWEVER the D7000 could be vastly improved on thru Expeed 3 processing, etc., the D7000 NEEDS an upgrade. But I do believe that the upgrade we need in my business is the D7200 probably over the D400 which will be faster, better built and way more expensive. We will see. IF THE D400 is that MUCH BETTER I will buy it! I have repeatedly made large competitive prints etc. of RAW versus JPEG Fine Large and see NO advantage whatsoever. Shooting in RAW slows everything down. And as we are known as the pro action photo people we don't need SLOW. I am not though saying shoot in JPEG fine large unless you can achieve awesome exposure control.
D400
(862 posts) (98 voices)-
Posted 7 months ago #
-
@DaveyJ,Shooting what you do,Jpeg fine for speed looks like the way to go...tons of sports and action shooters use jpeg fine. I shoot RAW,because I just don't like to throw away data.If RAW and jpeg were money,my RAW CD would be worth much more than my jpeg CD ;-)
To use a music analogy....which sounds better, a live band,or an mp3 of the band?
I'm starting to shoot more BIF shots,so a FPS increase would be nice,and because I will continue to shoot RAW,I would like to have a decent buffer as well.I understand though,that none of us ever get everything that we want.If we did Nikon would have to make a million or so different camera bodies LOL.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Flying Tiger said:
Nikon are really missing a trick here - huge numbers of photographers would be willing to immediately buy a 24 MP D300s replacement and the 80-400mm lens replacement is so overdue it is laughable. Canon almost built their company on the back of the success of their 100-400mm f5.6 lens and a Nikon lens of a similar quality would be a real cash cow for them. As a profit making business, surely Nikon should drop everything in favour of the much requested D400 and 80-400mm replacement!
Best wishes
Frustrated Nikon fan from LancashireI would like to point out I have an 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR Nikkor which does an excellent job. On this forum is a comparison with the 400mm f/2.8, and the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII with TC-20EIII, and the far less expensive 80-400mm holds its own quite well.
See this for the lens discussion:
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3549
Possibly the focus speed and wide open resolution is noticeable, but for the vast majority of shots it performed quite well. When Nikon does bring out the VRII version, then we will have an outstanding long zoom for a lot less than the 200-400mm f/4.
Posted 7 months ago # -
I agree msmoto, lots of Nikon shooters wouldn't be able to resist the combo that Flying Tiger suggests!
Posted 7 months ago # -
Warning, angry post ;-) ----
I keep looking at the option of buying a D800 rather than wait for the D400. If I'm going FX full time, then Canon makes long reach lenses for less then Nikon, and I'll dump the whole enchilada and go get something different.
For sports/action the "mythical" D400 is the best compromise... just an updated D300S people, what's so tough about that? The D300 is from 2007, that's a very long time in technological terms. Let's get the 2012/2013 version already Nikon!!!
The 15MP crop from the D800 is a crutch to get by, I hate the idea of spending a lot of extra money and shooting that way. We take this stuff seriously, getting close to the time to set magazine down, and either take a s*it or get off the pot.
Posted 7 months ago # -
@ David.... a lot of us are waiting for the D400. So, my plan is to just wait...but accumulate some more nice glass while I am waiting.
Also, I picked up a P&S from Ritz Camera on their last day in Greensboro, NC. A fun little Olympus E-PL2, originally $599....I paid $200. So, if you have a Ritz Camera or other store closing...grab a P & S and have some fun while we all wait for_______ Nikon to get the D400 up and going.
The real disappointment will be if they do not have a phenomenal camera. It will have to be noiseless at 6400 ISO. Actually, as long as I have waited...it better have native 12,800 ISO or I may opt for something else.
Let us all hope the camera we are expecting is coming.....soon....
Posted 7 months ago # -
I think Flying Tiger is right on. The current Nikkor 80-400VR is NOT equal to Canon's 100-400 f5.6 for the uses I put a tele to. The 70-300VR is the END of Nikon's lens for fast, light, and decently priced lens. I could buy a D800 and a 200-400 and then I 'd have a camera and a lens that would get very little use here at my field and action business. Plus I'd have an poor investment. I've owned my lifetime share of $6,000 lens and $8,000 camera bodies. The return to Nikon would be very good. The flooded factory raised hell with the Nikon offerings and although they may have had success with their FX offerings financially.....they have failed a number of Nikon pro photographers. If I was Nikon I'd close that horrendous gap before the loyal go away and it will be forever I am guessing as once someone switches they rarely come back.
Posted 7 months ago # -
DavidHarsay said:
...Canon makes long reach lenses for less then Nikon...Where does this myth come from? The vast majority of Canon lenses are much higher.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup
Here is a sample:
Canon-75-300mm-f/4-5.6 III-199.99 -Nikon- 70-300mm f/4-5.6G-172.95
Canon-70-300mm-f/4-5.6 IS USM-649.99 -Nikon- VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED-589.95
Canon-100-400mm-f/4.5-5.6L IS USM-1699 -Nikon- VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED-1849.95
Canon-70-200mm-f/2.8L IS II-2499 -Nikon- 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II-2399.95
Canon-28-300mm-f/3.5-5.6L IS USM-2689 -Nikon- 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR-1049.95Many of Canon's lineup is more mainly due to them overbuilding everything. The other thing they do is continue all the old models for years after their upgrades which Nikon does not do. For matching any range, almost all of Nikon's are cheaper.
Posted 7 months ago # -
On the main Blog there is a link to a concept C1
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9227219592/a-serious-rangefinder-compact-camera
so would you buy a C400 ?
Posted 7 months ago # -
@ sevencrossing
Did you see my little photo on PAD?....:-)
Posted 7 months ago # -
Great post from TaoTeJared!! I have been waiting for a long time for an upgrade 80-400VR Nikkor. His post makes me think I should try the current lens again!
Posted 7 months ago # -
-
TaoTeJared said:
Where does this myth come from? The vast majority of Canon lenses are much higher.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup
Here is a sample:
Canon-75-300mm-f/4-5.6 III-199.99 -Nikon- 70-300mm f/4-5.6G-172.95
Canon-70-300mm-f/4-5.6 IS USM-649.99 -Nikon- VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED-589.95
Canon-100-400mm-f/4.5-5.6L IS USM-1699 -Nikon- VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED-1849.95
Canon-70-200mm-f/2.8L IS II-2499 -Nikon- 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II-2399.95
Canon-28-300mm-f/3.5-5.6L IS USM-2689 -Nikon- 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR-1049.95Many of Canon's lineup is more mainly due to them overbuilding everything. The other thing they do is continue all the old models for years after their upgrades which Nikon does not do. For matching any range, almost all of Nikon's are cheaper.
Though those prices may be true for MSRP, canons do have sales while nikon does (hardly) not. Buying used nikons will be MUCH more expensive than canon used.
Anyways anybody know the eta for the d400?
I currently have a D300s (12000 shutter count) do you think i should upgrade?
Posted 7 months ago # -
@ dudezz....
Shutter count on D300s of 12,000 or 120,000? My D4 has over 15,000 since March.
I think if I had a D300s and the D400 comes out I would upgrade only if it has 12,800 native ISO and at least 8 FPS. My guess is it will...as of now too many have native ISO of 6,400. The D400 is going to have to be a real advance, and hopefully the delay, or strategic timing, is a result of the technology development for the latest specs.
Posted 7 months ago # -
-
Emceee said:
D5200 before the D400... oh the agony continues...Not been around "Photography with Nikon" very long, have we? :-)
Nikon are clearly after the mass market with this one but details are still too few to know if it will be the sales hit over the holidays that I suspect they will want.
My preference is to see the D400 before I buy my next camera body as then I'll be able to feel that I have made the right purchase.
In the meantime, I am about to start on a mini-project to refurb/CLA an old Ansco (made by Agfa) Speedex 120 film camera. It has the usual for this model problem of the focus ring frozen due to grease that has turned to concrete over the last 50 years. Assuming I can get it all working again, it might make for some interesting images. I wonder just how many mega pixels I'll be able to scan from a 120 neg? Time to drop a few grand on a decent scanner? SIGH ... Does it ever end?
Posted 6 months ago # -
bjrichus said:
Nikon are clearly after the mass market with this one but details are still too few to know if it will be the sales hit over the holidays that I suspect they will want.Well one would think they might save the D5200 until next year for the mass market appeal since they just released the D3200. I was expecting a D7100 or D400 before the D5200.
I guess since they released the D600 they are trying urge a few D300(S) users to make the jump up to FX even if the body ruggedness isn't up to snuff.
Posted 6 months ago # -
The difficulty in "thinking" Nikon is going to do anything is the fallacious idea that what Nikon does makes any sense at all to the professional consumer.
I cannot understand why we have not seen the D400. On the other hand, it may be the DX camera I am hoping for and have the 12,800 native ISO, 8 FPS with full continuos servo focus, a full magnesium body, in other words a Pro DX camera. If they do not come through.... I will be thinking about some other options in the next twelve months for the crop sensor body.
Posted 6 months ago # -
-
Looks like no D400 this year. Admin just posted that the last camera of the year from Nikon will be the D5200.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Says Flying Tiger:
No D5200, we want our D400 - and you will make lots of money!
Flying Tiger said:
Same old story, but why not give the Nikon fans what they want. I have taken magnificent pictures with my D300(s) and they are excellent tools, but they are now just a little long in the tooth. FX is not the be all and end all and a top quality DX rival to the Canon 7D would be a very popular model for Nikon.Please make this release your priority, because the other stuff can wait!
You know that it makes sense, Mr Nikon!
Regards
FT
Posted 6 months ago # -
PB PM said:
Looks like no D400 this year. Admin just posted that the last camera of the year from Nikon will be the D5200.I at least want a D7000 replacement :( And after the D5200 release there is nothing left but the D7000 and D300S...so hopefully it turns out to be something awesome for making us wait so long.
Posted 6 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
