The TRIAXEZ strikes again: the latest pictures from the Miami Beach Air Show (Nikon D810 + Nikkor 800mm)




The TRIAXEZ strikes again with a Nikon D810 camera and Nikkor 800mm lens - check out the latest (amazing) pictures from the Miami Beach Air Show:

 

This entry was posted in Nikon D810 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Eric Parker

    It is a little awkward when he sits in the front row of his kids Christmas Play with that huge ass setup!

    • Eric Parker

      Either that or he can stay at home, open the window, aim towards the school and still watch his kid perform.

      • sickheadache

        Or at the local swimming hole…Did we go there! lol

      • E-Nonymouse A

        If he does that and leaves the diopter open, it may work like a magnifying glass and set the school on fire. Burning ants everywhere!

    • Still less annoying than an iPad.

      • brian valente

        true that

    • Jim Wafwot

      800mm lens in the front row of a play? You could count pores, or eyebrow hairs.

  • Nikon King

    Looks dumb but you can’t argue with the results. The only thing that matters is the final results.

    • jimwinters

      nice

  • animalsbybarry

    I remember seeing these pictures and reading about his homemade device he built from a handcart….a couple of years ago

    • yes, the original link is in my post

    • jimwinters

      its not built from a handcart, its custom tig welded from aluminum tubing

  • Brent Rawlings

    But pink? Really? Why not Nikon yellow?

    • because Miami Beach 🙂

    • jimwinters

      company colors

    • brian valente

      i can totally see this being seen as a potential weapon or some such, so pink makes perfect sense.

  • Ric of The LBC

    Extreme Uncle Bob wedding rig.

  • Tommy Brown

    He doesn’t look very happy…turn that frown upside down.
    Someone must have made fun of that pink thingy!

    • the results speak for themselves

      • Tommy Brown

        They certainly do.

    • jimwinters

      working

  • John Viscovich

    great Idea, But ugly

    • jimwinters

      u could take the tires off when u get to your desired lication if thats what u find ugly, i leave them on though

  • John Viscovich

    Pics are Fantastic

    • jimwinters

      thank u

  • sickheadache

    This is a wonderful Idea for Big Burly Bears. Not for most Puny Japanese Photographers…It would crush them…lol

  • This setup begs for the Pinkon camera of Kai Man Wong LOLL… :))

  • EnPassant

    Just showing off his muscles. A Nikon 24MP DX camera with the 300 PF, 1.4 TC and 1.3 crop would be good enough and much lighter and cheaper.
    Or an Olympus E-M1 II with 300/4 and 1.4 TC which are more expensive but propably a tiny bit better.

    • jimwinters

      u are out of your mind

      • EnPassant

        I’d say some photos speak for themselves… And I don’t think about photos of airplanes.

    • Max

      You must be joking

      • EnPassant

        About what?

        • Max

          About an Olympus E-M1 II with 300/4 and TC being able to give better results than the D810 with 800 setup

          • EnPassant

            You misunderstood. I said the Olympus gear might be a bit better than the Nikon solution I proposed. Because the Olympus lens is very sharp.
            Where in my post do I mention the D810?

            • Max

              Oh I thought you said that the Nikon system you proposed are better than that which is used by the Triaxez guy. And that the Olympus setup is better than the lighter Nikon setup you proposed. Therefore you said the Olympus setup is better than the D810 one.
              That’s how I got there.
              But maybe you only meant that it would be lighter.

            • EnPassant

              Yes. Image quality should naturally be better with the D810. As I wrote IQ should be good enough, although not equal, for most with the other combinations. 16 to 20MP is enough for quite big prints. Especially viewed from some distance. And airplanes have a lot of flat areas with very little details and therefore not as challenging as other subjects, except for people looking at large prints with magnifying glasses.

            • Max

              Ok gotcha

            • Roland Delhomme

              Very little detail? Try counting rivets and pulling inside cockpit detail and even the instrument panel, from passing aircraft, some going 95-99% the speed of sound. Shooting Pentax K-1 and Nikon D 800, 810, the latter for tens of thousands of frames, across several years, and yes, there is a TON of detail to capture. Of course, static display aircraft are a lot easier, and heat shimmer, atmospheric phenomena, technique, settings, lighting angle, optics and buffeting wind on the flight line all make a difference, but no, there’s as mich detail as you could ever want, right down to paint texture and the surface roughness of various materials, the patina of metal, micro detail of polished metal surfaces, etc. Have also shot the EM-1 Mk II lately, but just ordered the Pentax 150-450 for the K-1, and looking forward to shooting D810, D5 again for the next major airshow.

            • EnPassant

              Compared to a nature landscape details on an airplane are very big. Rivets can be counted on sharp photos that are only a few MP big. 16-20MP is a lot of resolution for a fighter jet filling the frame. And big parts of an airplane body is flat and in one color.
              Texture in paint with a lot of haze from the heat in the air? Really?

              Never said that 36MP is not better, if perfectly exposed. But for the small difference in detail rendition it is not worth the trouble and money buying or even renting that 800mm f/5.6 lens except for those who actually make enough money to pay for the lens and giving a good enough income on top of that.

              That is what it is all about. That 150-450 lens you ordered is a much more reasonable lens to use. But if you need to crop a 24MP APS-C camera, like K-3 II would give more MP.
              You have two different DSLR systems?

            • Roland Delhomme

              Hi, and thanks for the well considered input. Regardjng paint texture, yes, Blue Angels, particularly the upper surfaces when they’re banked towards you and you’ve got a good view of the upper wing surfaces and the wing fold line; watch for that, plus sometimes, a mix of the paint’s gloss and surfsace finjsh, and overlying streaks of vapor, sometimes irridicescent, backlit by the bright paint beneath. Tip vortices, probably need me to change my focus point a smidge, and change f stop for depth, reveal little coiled structures like…a Slinky!

              1DX for sale, D7100 going out soon-will see what Nikon does, very nice APS-C machine but needs more buffer-D500 does much better, has greater pixel density in its full APS-C crop than say, a crop mode shot from D750 or D8XX. So D500 has been a real knockout, but one of the top Nikon shooters I know is doing air to air missile shoot photography from F-18 cockpits with D7100, D7200, and he’s on the news stands with cover shots and center spreads all the time. Another, shooting D5, is killlling us with low light shots at improbable ISO. D500, as D5’s little brother, is no slouch at all in detail or ISO; it’s a home run.
              The 150-450, K-1, K-3 II combo is going to go up against D500 with the 200-500 and 200-400 at a later date, next time we shoot an NPS supported event; from what I gather, K-3 II has the same sensor as D7200, and K-1 is same or nearly same as D810. No idea how it all escalated this quickly, started buying a D50 for learning my way and ended up buying, selling trading lots of fun gear and learning from some truly generous and very kind people; we came out of Canon, have a couple film bodies as well, would buiild a darkroom for the 645s if I ever had the time but that’s only a fun thought for now. I’d rent that 600mm f/4 sometime, based on what a few guys I knkw are getting out of it; fat pixels in full frame give them ridiculous latitude to push shadows and thrlw the sliders around in post; clarity, masks, HDR on shock waves and transonic vapor-there’s some insanely good, well processed stuff out there, but I’m equally fascinated and challenged by technical photography for air to air or ground based shooting; the last test program I was involved in, I got to record some historic stuff and some engineering level decisions were really helped by being able to pull very subtle stuff out of the frames.

              EM-1 Mk II feels awesome-personally, I think I’d enjoy having one for cockpit and back seat air to air shots in smaller birds or especially in gliders, as it’s not at all unusual for raptors (hawks, eagles, not F-22s!) to swing by for a look, and the EM-1 stabilization is eerily good, with superb AF as well; on a good day with a clear canopy and a favorable sun angle, it would be a real hoot to get a bald eagle at fist bump range from a glider.

              One thing I’m quickly learning this spring, is to shoot flat or at least dial stuff way back, since high pixel density like D7100, others, scales to something like 54mp in full frame, if my math is right; so you are absolutely right; chasing detail, you fall down a hole where the diminishing returns devour expectations and it’s probably better to be glad for the great shots that come from consistent hard work, but there are those moments, especially now, with hyper sharp monitors at over 500ppi, where it’s very easy to become seduced by the chase for ever finer detail and textures. Lugging a 600 or 800mm FX lens would require sniper reflexes, breathing control, discipline, and Army Ranger stamina, to shoot effectively by day’s end.

              One airshow team we know, the Tigers, does a pass where the canopy is slid aft and the pilot is holding his watch in plain view. No one has read the time on it yet, but we’re getting real, real close. As for rivets, yes, they’re fairly well resolved; fasteners on canopy frames are another obsession and a gauge for how my tracking and panning technique is coming along; it takes nearly a martial arts level of control to get to the best I’ve seen friends do shooting freehand. Maybe another year before I’m happy with my progress-I’m a lucky novice for now. So far, the best tele I’ve shot has been a 135mm f/2.8 prime; an old thrift store find, stabilized on the Pentax body, of course. It’s got me thinking that Nikkor’s 150-180-200mm range probably would nail my ideal short game for birds, especially if if was a VR model. You’re absolutely right about the bulk and weight of the larger teles-even that 150-450 is going to chalkenge me at the end of days on a flight line shooting Oshkosh; we’ll put in over 19-21 hrs a day, consecutively, shooting, editing, in pursuit of the impossible dream shot, along with just enjoying all tne aircrsft and people.

    • Just use your iphone Dude!

      • EnPassant

        Sorry, but I don’t own one. And I didn’t know iphones were coming with FF 800mm lenses nowdays?
        Besides there are no airshows in my country I know of, and I don’t find photos of jetfighters like the above especially interesting.

    • 1741

      Sell your gear an use a cam phone as they’re good enough for millions of people

      • EnPassant

        Another Mr Smart? But you are propably right. I only need a smartphone to take much more interesting photos than you are able to whatever gear you use. I just can’t make up my mind about what to buy when I sold all my photo gear. But as you are such smart maybe you have some suggestions?

    • Zaphod

      Your portfolio speaks for itself.

      • EnPassant

        Yes, it does! For those who understand the language of my images. But I don’t show it for all the eggheads here… Especially not for those who have nothing to show for themselves, but still critisize others for that.

        • Zaphod

          There is a slight difference between us. I haven’t suggested that I can produce better results with less capable equipment than Jim, and produced zero results to show that they can produce ANYTHING. Jim’s photos are amazing, yours are non-existent.

          • EnPassant

            If you read what I wrote I never claimed I could produce better results than Jim, just that similar photos could be taken with a much lighter equipment with good enough image quality.
            On the other hand my photos need more than “gunning” skill. Don’t know if jim could make those.

            • Zaphod

              Oh, I read what you wrote, and I stand by my characterisation of it. Question is, do you understand what you wrote?

            • Zaphod

              I’m pretty sure that Jim can, and has, made excellent photos of whatever he puts his mind to.

              “On the other hand my photos need more than “gunning” skill.”

              Can we see some of those then? The three you posted don’t exhibit any of those ‘skills’.

        • Zaphod

          “But I don’t show it for all the eggheads here”

          Not eggheads, photographers. Like Jim, who produced these works, and is also here commenting.

          Here are some of mine. They aren’t amazing, but nor do I proclaim them to be. Dare you to show some of yours. They will blow us away, I’m sure.

          https://www.flickr.com/photos/thepowersthatbe/

          • EnPassant

            When I see Jim and his rig I remind when I was a kid building my Super Fortress plastic model. I can imagine Jim sitting in one of the gun towers shooting down the attacking enemy aircrafts!
            Because that is almost exactly what he is doing. Only with a camera and big bazooka lens and his rig instead of a real canon. But the movements tracking the jetfighters and triggering is very similar.

            I am an older generation photographer who started with film a long time ago. Back then the way to show photos was prints and making exhibitions. I made one single and a few more with other photographers back in the 80’s.
            I simply haven’t adapted to todays sharing communities on internet and have no image account. Although I did som published work for the local newspaper, today I only do it for my own enjoyment, and don’t feel show anything as I don’t care about likes.
            I know what is good and what is not without asking somebody else.

            I’ll try upload a few photos here. They are all exemples of how I envisioned how the photo would look like before I took it, waiting for exactly the right moment to hit the shutter when what was moving was in the place I wanted it to be.
            If that sounds familiar, that is if you know photographic history, Henri Cartier-Bresson is known to have used that technique for some of his most famous photos. I do it my way and in color. But of course also take other types of images.
            About your photos I can’t say much as I don’t expect people to put their materpieces on flickr. It’s more like the place many dump their snapshots, test photos and so on. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d949dcc607b6ec7cb8660e6af598615208ec7e64e0a19098ac9f9a7b6452c08e.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b1e3923a1ba8dd250ad4bb3436205f05790d92f6c16819e80dee6dc0f7807dd9.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5af77e866dbb8a37383922a39258f9358eaaf242bfcd980c7a68d27f1c94cf90.jpg

            • Zaphod

              Your photos do speak for themselves.

              “It’s more like the place many dump their snapshots, test photos and so on.”

              Thank you for your passive-aggression, and back-handed, well, insult. For someone who purports to not have a full grasp of the nuances of the english language, your personality and attitude come through quite clearly and succinctly.

        • Zaphod

          “But I don’t show it for all the eggheads here”

          Over 100 comments on this site and hundreds on other of photography sites suggest that you are that of which you speak.

          • EnPassant

            Relax! I have work and other things to do than commenting here.
            With the photo you present yourself you are asking for the egghead comment! 😉 But looking it up it seems egghead has different meanings and can be misunderstood. So I’ll retract that comment. I was thinking about about those who have no deeper understanding of photography, like composition and other things.

            Airplane enthusiasts love photos of Airplanes. Catlovers love photos of cats. Doglovers… and so on. Doesn’t prove anything.
            Let my reply with an analogy. Would you claim that the pupils in a class know and understand things better because they are many more than their single teacher?

            • Zaphod

              “I was thinking about about those who have no deeper understanding of photography, like composition and other things.”

              Yes, it was clear what you were trying to say. I just disagree that the people talking here do not have a deeper understanding of photography.

  • Dolt45 is Enema of the State

    imho the pink color is so that public don’t confuse him for a terrorist, imagine if it where all black, it would look more like a bazooka or WMD thingy.

    • jimwinters

      thank u

      • Jose Ortiz

        Then again…..If you know Jim he is sort of a crazy terrorist! LoL

  • William Dyer

    I’ve shot airshows with my D500 and Nikon 200-400 f4. Sometimes that was too long for some of the closer shots. There’s no denying he got great shots, but a zoom seems so much more convenient.

    • You’re on a gear head forum. Gear first, photography second.

      • Zaphod

        The article didn’t even talk about which camera he used. It talked about technique, reasons for design decisions, and has many examples of the results. What’s not to like?

  • Charles

    Pretty is as pretty does…

  • Next year hell mount it on a truck like a turret. Lol Americans and their gun fetishes.

    But realistically speaking you can get the same photos on a lighter setup with monopod and not look like your uncle Bob trying to “out professional” the professionals.

    Also I’ve never seen photos like these before… /sarcasm.

    • jimwinters

      no u cannot, it is physically impossible to track a 600mph aircraft behind a pod of any type

      • Nope, it’s physically possible. You just need skills instead of gimmicks.

        • jimwinters

          show me

          • jimwinters

            show me some shatp 1/60 full
            prop blur pics that u took

            • When I get that lens and camera body, I’ll buy a monopod and show you how to use it.

              For now you can just google airshows, people have been shooting with 800mm lenses (using tele coverters for years) nothing new here. Plenty of examples on the internet.

            • jimwinters

              silly boy

            • Great work man. Other than a couple frozen props (Miami site photos), everything else was perfect.

            • You lost me at “when I get that lens and camera body”. Looked at your website and honestly I wouldn’t be saying anything if I were you. Thank goodness I’m not you.

            • Love your work. Landscapes photographers are so hard to find now days . You’re photos are definitely unique. Keep up the original work. Lol

            • Haha thank you for the sarcasm and compliments. Lol. At least I do what I do well. Keep shooting with your iPhone 3, well that’s what your work looks like.

            • lol will do. At least I’ll get paid more than you shooting with a crappy phone camera.

              I love how you used the blur when you zoom in and out on the videos. You should try a shot where everything is in black and white but only one thing is in colour. I don’t think that’s cheesy at all, would suit your work.

    • Fifi

      You can pan quite nicely, but try tilting 45 or even more degrees up and follow a plane flying 500-600 it’s with a monopod! Good luck with that! And weight is not much of an issue when it’s ballanced on on your shoulders. I’m sure this rig is easier to operate then any lighter setup for photography like this. Thumbs up for TRIAXEZ!

    • ninpou_kobanashi

      It’s weird getting advice from someone who’s never tried it (^_^).

      I tried my gimbal on the Blue Angels in SF and I ended up just hand holding (much shorter and lighter lens).

  • Max

    The 800 is king 😀

  • Those are some crazy good captures. Well done!

    • jimwinters

      thank u

  • Viktor

    Photos are good, really nice, yes…. but it is more result of the lens-camera-photographer trio then of that “whatever…” thing 😀

    Just I do not understand that D8xx, I would rather use D5 or even old D3s…. unless the photographer counted with extreme crop need….

    • paige4o4

      Since he’s using a prime lens and cannot “zoom with his feet” I think cropping is his only real option to get the correct framing. Hence, the D810.

      • jimwinters

        plus, the “thing” allows me to stay on target focused, for minutes at a time without atm fatigue! it also allows the stability to shoot endlessly at 1/60, a moving prop plane like a pitts or other small prop stunt plane…its not impossible without it but u have a 1000x better chance of capturing the image “with” it!

        • 1741

          It’s a brilliant simple rig that works for it’s intended purpose

          • jimwinters

            thank u

            • jimwinters

              aviation photographs are pretty much its only use seing as u need stability and control of all three axis’, and the use of supertelephoto and threrefore heavy glass, which is almost impossible to hand hold for over 20 seconds

      • Viktor

        OK, thanks for explaining, I do not do planes photography…..

    • jimwinters

      i use the d810 and its massive filed because i also shoot offshore racing and sell massive prints

      • Viktor

        If massive prints are the result, then yes, then I do understand it….

  • David

    Wow! Great photos!

    • jimwinters

      thanks

  • karayuschij

    Sorry but I cannot appreciate the quality of the result just seeing a 1000 px large image…

    • jimwinters

      send me your email and i will send u a high res file

  • Fantastic shots, imaginative use of kit. I can’t help but think that swinging that amount of mass around for hours at the speeds needed to track some of that military hardware has gotta take a toll on the body somewhere too! 🙂

    • 1741

      If you used it enough you’d get used to it like lots of pro’s who carry 2/3 d5 bodies with 1 or 2 long lenses an shorter zoom around for hours on end

  • Brubabs

    I don’t understand the negativity and snide remarks, Jim, you’ve put a lot of thought and work into building that TRAXEZ, and judging by the images you have posted it is working very well! Have you used it for other kinds of photography? Thinking of birds in flight, in particular. Is it hard to swing its weight and find the subject and lock the AF on it?

    • jimwinters

      only necessary for planes really! birds don’t require high speed tracking like a jet or a long hover like a harrier or prop stunt plane

  • Gerard Roulssen

    Never go full retard!

  • Frenzy-fanboy-auto-douche

    LOVE your shots man! The D810 and 800mm ROCKS!!!

    As a die hard D750 fanboy and armchair tourist/zoo photographer I know now, that I should have gotten the D810 and not the D750.

    I used to get a hard on each time I heard somebody mention something about the D750’s so called “amazing high ISO performance” and “professional features”. In my sad little make believe world I was fooled to believe that the D750 is a pro low light body.

    Coming from a D3100 I was easily fooled by the marketing pitch when switching to FX and the D750 for the first time in my embarrassing photography career.

    However, I sadly discovered that the D750 isn’t even better at high ISO than a D600 if you shoot RAW and compare the RAW sensor peformance. Only the SOOC Jpegs are cleaner on the D750 but if you shoot RAW and do your own noise reduction that won’t matter much.

    Also the crappy and embarrassing buffer on the D750 only lasts for 2.2 embarrassing seconds and after that the D750 turns into a constipating turtle that uses slow, weak and easy to break SD cards.

    For example on the D810 and D4S the autofocus sensor coverage is about one autofocus sensor wider horizontally and vertically, clearly more effective focusing and an advantage over the D750 for those who uses all the autofocus points and not just the middle one.
    For example on the D810 and D4S the autofocus sensor coverage is about one autofocus sensor wider horizontally and vertically, clearly more effective focusing and an advantage over the D750 for those who uses all the autofocus points and not just the middle one.

    The D810 would have been better in every way….better high ISO print quality, way better buffer at every resolution, faster 7 FPS(16 megapixels) that lasts for about 100 RAW files, best quality 14-bit lossless.

    For action and sports the D810 destroys the D750. For landscapes, portraits and still photography the D810 embarrasses the D750.
    For action and sports the D810 destroys the D750. For landscapes, portraits and still photography the D810 embarrasses the D750.

    The D810 have a better high ISO print quality (Imaging Resource) and it prints slightly bigger and better at every ISO setting. At ISO-64 the D810 can’t be beaten by any other DSLR currently.

    Also the shutter on the D810 is better built and lasts longer. For tough conditions the D810 is more rugged and reliable.
    Also the shutter on the D810 is better built and lasts longer. For tough conditions the D810 is more rugged and reliable.

    You get what you pay for.

    Don’t let anybody convince you otherwise. But, the bottom line is……you have to know how to use the equipment to get the most out of it and you need the good (and expensive) glass as well.
    Don’t let anybody convince you otherwise. But, the bottom line is……you have to know how to use the equipment to get the most out of it and you need the good (and expensive) glass as well.

  • Frenzy-fanboy-auto-douche

    LOVE your shots man! The D810 and 800mm ROCKS!!!

    As a die hard D750 fanboy and armchair tourist/zoo photographer I know now, that I should have gotten the D810 and not the D750.

    I used to get a hard on each time I heard somebody mention something about the D750’s so called “amazing high ISO performance” and “professional features”.

    In my sad little make believe world I was fooled to believe that the D750 is a pro low light body.

    Coming from a D3100 I was easily fooled by the marketing pitch when switching to FX and the D750 for the first time in my embarrassing photography career.

    However, I sadly discovered that the D750 isn’t even better at high ISO than a D600 if you shoot RAW and compare the RAW sensor performance. Only the SOOC Jpegs are cleaner on the D750 but if you shoot RAW and do your own noise reduction that won’t matter much.

    Also the crappy and embarrassing buffer on the D750 only lasts for 2.2 embarrassing seconds and after that the D750 turns into a constipating turtle that uses slow, weak and easy to break SD cards. The CF card in the D810 is much faster.

    For example on the D810 and D4S the autofocus sensor coverage is about one autofocus sensor wider horizontally and vertically, clearly more effective focusing and an advantage over the D750 for those who uses all the autofocus points and not just the middle one.
    The narrow and cramped AF sensor area on the D750 doesn’t stand a chance against the real pro bodies from Nikon like the D4S or the D810.

    The D810 would have been better in every way….better high ISO print quality, way better buffer at every resolution, faster 7 FPS(16 megapixels) that lasts for about 100 RAW files, best quality 14-bit lossless. Even at full resolution 5 FPS(36 megapixels) the D810 lasts more than twice as long as the D750.

    For action and sports the D810 destroys the D750. For landscapes, portraits and still photography the D810 embarrasses the D750.

    The D810 have a better high ISO print quality (facts from Imaging Resource) and it prints slightly bigger and better at every ISO setting. At ISO-64 the D810 can’t be beaten by any other DSLR currently.

    The D810 has a better build quality with a full magnesium alloy frame vs. the D750 that has a partly plastic frame.

    Also the shutter on the D810 is better built and lasts longer. For tough conditions the D810 is more rugged and reliable.

    You get what you pay for.

    The good stuff costs more and…..yes, the image quality is better.

    Don’t let anybody convince you otherwise. But the bottom line is…you have to know how to use the equipment to get the most out of it and you need good (expensive) glass as well.

    • Alphageist

      I’ve owned the D4s, D810 and the D750. The only two negative things that really bothered me on the D750 were the 1) lack of joystick and 2) tight AF points. Other than that, the D750 is one hell of a camera for the price. I don’t own the D4s and D810 anymore as they were sold to fund other toys. I kept the D750 because it still provides me with excellent photos with all sorts of native and adapted glass.

      Did you get your money’s worth from your D750? I say this because your post comes off like someone pissed in your Cheerios.

      • Frenzy-fanboy-auto-douche

        No it wasn’t worth the money with so many shortcomings compared to the D810 and the D4S. I am going to sell the D750 and start shooting a D4S and a D810. The D750 doesn’t even come close to neither…first I’ll get the D810…

        lol, yes we have indeed tried the D750 for fast action and sports and sadly it was quite a disappointing experience with such a weak and limited buffer that lasts for only 2.2 embarrassing seconds. Not much you can do with a D750 when it comes to a men’s 100 metres sprint, especially if you want to capture all the moments.
        At least the D810 is up to the task with a much better buffer but my choice would still be the D4S.

        Agree to the narrow AF system module….I guess Nikon had to make it so narrow in order to make the body thinner. Maybe because the body is so thin it created so many issues with the shutter and flare ghosting. The “ERR” and the faulty shutter mechanism on the D750 is a total disaster lol….4 official recalls by Nikon…last recall in April 2016…LOL

        • Alphageist

          A total disaster? Hyperbole much? From what I’ve seen and read, the D750 is way outside the “total disaster” and more inline with satisfied users.

          You are comparing a D750 to much more costly and feature laden camera bodies, so I don’t see why so much disappointment.

          I’ve never had any issues with my shutter or experienced any flare issues or have ever seen an ERR. Maybe I’m lucky? Or, maybe I have a non effected unit. I just checked Nikon’s website to see if my camera serial shows up for any recalls and the site shows nothing. I might have a later unit though.

  • Neogeta

    I still can’t decide if I think this is one of the best or worst inventions I have ever seen?!

    • jimwinters

      cmon

  • Now you are just talking through your teeth. You have no idea whom I’ve done work for so it’s funny that you claim you make more. You are a poor child talking down on other people’s work when yours is terrible and unoriginal. It’s ok, maybe one day you will grow up.

    • Hey man I’m down to take constructive criticism as long as its legit. If I got people paying for my work then that speaks for itself. I have art directors that hire me to shoot their weddings.

      If you can’t take criticism don’t dish it out little man.

      • Wow you are so special doing weddings. Lmao. Dude you really need a reality check.

        • Weddings for Art Directors who like my documentary, editorial, commercial and fashion work. Do you know what it takes for an Art Director to like your work?

          Did you even look at the range of work I shoot lol. You give insults but you can’t back it up with real work, instead you have landscape photos just like everyone else who takes up photography. The sad thing is you spent thousands on your equipment, while I’m shooting with my crappy iPhone and getting paid for it hahaha

          And judging from your youtube channel you’re a marketing manager for a real estate company and you claim to be a pro. Well that explains the cheesyness. Marketing managers love mainstream work – always sitting in the middle, no opinion type of work, because you have to please the mainstream audience like mums and dads, very avante-gard.

          • Hahaha you need a tissue. Yes I’m the market manager for a technology company. Used to shoot full time and have done work for large companies, but I’m not here to brag. I don’t need to defend myself like you feel you have to. You shouldn’t throw stones when you live in a glass house. You are pathetic man. Well I should say little boy.

            • LOL ok, maybe sometime you should put your professional work up on a website so that I’ll believe you. You big manly man. haha

            • You remind me of the William Hung for photography. You keep talking down about landscape but have a landscape section on your website which is absolutely terrible. Once you understand lighting and color, I’ll respond more. Till then you just aren’t worth it. This all started cause you were talking smack about the air show photos which were mostly very good and much better than anything you have published on your site. Just because you have a website doesn’t mean you are good. So again, stop throwing stones when you live in a glass house. I have no doubt that I would beat you out for a job under any medium. That’s how terrible you are. Go to bed cause it’s past your bedtime child.

            • It’s not that I have a website, it’s that I actually get paid. In the meantime you come up with excuses as to why you don’t post your “pro” work up. The Art Directors that hire me have their commercial work from Bank of Melboune, Cricket Australia, Commonwealth Bank, K Mart, Cadbury on their websites – so your excuse of “oh I don’t have the license” doesn’t make sense – it’s part of your folio, Why can’t you upload it for folio purposes? I’m calling your bluff and I’m guessing you’re a “Pro” like the other “pros” around here who don’t actually get paid.

              Do you understand I shoot documentary, so when you critique my landscape work you do know I don’t shoot HDR, I don’t use a tripod? Documentary work is not meant to be HDR, it’s supposed to be one photo, in that moment, it’s not meant to be photoshopped to get max fake looking HDR. But I feel explaining this to someone who doesn’t even understand different genres in photography is pointless. Especially someone who claims to be a pro who’s shot big clients but can’t post work up because of some BS excuse, meanwhile other real artists are posting up their work from their clients. You talk about throwing stones when you threw the first stone and can’t back up your words so you resort to name calling. You big bad manliest man.

            • Also my professional work was done for large corporations where I no longer own the shots or video content. So I don’t post that work as it’s already been published. I post my fun stuff that I do for me cause I already have a very good six figure day job. Damn you are so not worth it.

  • jimwinters

    well?

  • Nicola Zappettini

    truly amazing, totally crazy stuff! i love it! compliment!!!

  • Gilles Piemonte

    Great idea to put the weight on the shoulders balanced. Did you add a sticker ? “Warning, keep your distance from the swinging machine to avoid black eyes”

  • Roland Delhomme

    That was a tough shoot; those are great shots from Miami; Sunday brought a lot of haze, so my guess is Saturday-actually, yes, Saturday, as Sunday brought the B-1 Lancer; the B-2 flew on Saturday…Very nice job; when the air is that clear, despite the presence of sufficient moisture for nice vapor shots and transonic vapor, it’s nirvana. Was down on South Beach, would have loved to have seen this monster rig in action.

  • JonathanS

    Why do we have to read about this again? Old news – he must be shopping it around again. Just don’t Google him and his public comments.

  • karayuschij

    Thank you. Really impressive result!

  • Back to top