D71000

Started Sep 13, 2012 | Discussions
IrishhAndy
Contributing MemberPosts: 868
Like?
D71000
Sep 13, 2012

I think we will see a 24mpx d7100 in a few months. It would be more attractive than the d800 in my opinion. Would anyone like one?
--
Without the darkness the light would be nothing !

Nikon D7100 Nikon D800
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
RomeoD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,066Gear list
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to IrishhAndy, Sep 13, 2012

Only if the fps is 8+ and a larger buffer than a D300S.

Oh, and I would love for it to be CF + SD or CF + CF.

-- hide signature --
 RomeoD's gear list:RomeoD's gear list
Nikon D300S Nikon D7100 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Barry Fitzgerald
Forum ProPosts: 29,888
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to RomeoD, Sep 13, 2012

At this stage I'd like a Nikon that can focus properly. The D300s is my last bet if all else fails (and so far I've had 3 failed D90's with awful AF) I'll let you know if the D7k works ok..if not then I've got some serious questions!

I think there will be an update to it probably next year. But with that may come some things that might not appeal to everyone. I for once don't feel 24mp is really needed..worse I lament the lack of (so far) any ability to use smaller res raw files (like Canon) on Nikon DSLR's

For my needs I find 24mp and over too much and a file hog sizes wise. Nikon need to address that IMO and quite quickly (D800 is massive overkill and badly needs that too)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
IrishhAndy
Contributing MemberPosts: 868
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to Barry Fitzgerald, Sep 13, 2012

I hope the D7000 works for you. The D300s would not be a bad camera. I have the D300 and the D700 both of which focus like eagles. It looks to me like nikon quality control has gone right down hill.

I got one of those D5100's and it is not any better than my D3000 for image quality. The slight increase in resolution is barely perceptible.
--
Without the darkness the light would be nothing !

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JoeR
Senior MemberPosts: 1,952Gear list
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to Barry Fitzgerald, Sep 14, 2012
-- hide signature --

I'm not sure of the odds of getting a camera with faulty focusing but I suspect it is realtively low. The odds of getting two in a row is got to be phenominal. Three in a row tells me that it is not a camera issue.

joer56

 JoeR's gear list:JoeR's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D7100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Barry Fitzgerald
Forum ProPosts: 29,888
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to JoeR, Sep 14, 2012

JoeR wrote:

-- hide signature --

I'm not sure of the odds of getting a camera with faulty focusing but I suspect it is realtively low. The odds of getting two in a row is got to be phenominal. Three in a row tells me that it is not a camera issue.

I wish I could believe that, but when the lenses focus with absolute accuracy in live view, then I cannot blame the lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pinkydeh
Regular MemberPosts: 108
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to RomeoD, Sep 14, 2012

i would love to keep using all these CF cards too. Don't see why this constant push to sd. KEEP CF cards!!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kerry Pierce
Forum ProPosts: 17,199Gear list
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to Barry Fitzgerald, Sep 14, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald wrote:

I think there will be an update to it probably next year. But with that may come some things that might not appeal to everyone. I for once don't feel 24mp is really needed..worse I lament the lack of (so far) any ability to use smaller res raw files (like Canon) on Nikon DSLR's

For my needs I find 24mp and over too much and a file hog sizes wise. Nikon need to address that IMO and quite quickly (D800 is massive overkill and badly needs that too)

FWIW, Nikon already has something similar to Canon's sRAW feature. Here is a quote from the d800 manual, on using the Compressed option for NEF recording.
"NEF images are compressed using a nonreversible
algorithm, reducing file size by about
35–55% with almost no effect on image quality."

I'm not sure exactly how sRAW works, but what I've read leads me to believe that it just throws away a certain amount of pixels, depending on what size you choose. I don't see how using Compressed RAW could be any worse than just throwing away a bunch of random pixels. AFAIK, all of the Nikon's have this Compressed RAW feature. I know that in addition to the d800, the d300s, d700 and d3s manuals have it listed as an option. It's certainly likely that the d400 and d7100 would have it.

Kerry
--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

 Kerry Pierce's gear list:Kerry Pierce's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
freddyNZ
Senior MemberPosts: 2,410
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to Kerry Pierce, Sep 14, 2012

Kerry Pierce wrote:

Barry Fitzgerald wrote:

I think there will be an update to it probably next year. But with that may come some things that might not appeal to everyone. I for once don't feel 24mp is really needed..worse I lament the lack of (so far) any ability to use smaller res raw files (like Canon) on Nikon DSLR's

For my needs I find 24mp and over too much and a file hog sizes wise. Nikon need to address that IMO and quite quickly (D800 is massive overkill and badly needs that too)

FWIW, Nikon already has something similar to Canon's sRAW feature. Here is a quote from the d800 manual, on using the Compressed option for NEF recording.
"NEF images are compressed using a nonreversible
algorithm, reducing file size by about
35–55% with almost no effect on image quality."

I'm not sure exactly how sRAW works, but what I've read leads me to believe that it just throws away a certain amount of pixels, depending on what size you choose. I don't see how using Compressed RAW could be any worse than just throwing away a bunch of random pixels. AFAIK, all of the Nikon's have this Compressed RAW feature. I know that in addition to the d800, the d300s, d700 and d3s manuals have it listed as an option. It's certainly likely that the d400 and d7100 would have it.

Canon sRaw is a misnomer - as the full sized image data is demosiaced and interpolated/downsized and the image saved as the sRaw file - it is essentially a 16 bit tiff file - not a raw file at all.

Nikon has uncompressed raw, lossless and lossy compressed formats (depending on camera model - low end models don't have the lossless compressed option). The image data lost in "lossy" compression can be measured, but is very very difficult to see, even when "pushing" the image to extremes in post processing (way beyond what would be done in post-processing steps, even in the extreme for real photography). But there is some loss, so despite it being practically impossible to see, if you want no data loss at all, then lossless compressed format which loses no data - like LZW compression of a tiff image, zip files etc. or uncompressed raw must be used. The D800 can also save true raw data in "crop" modes, in either uncompressed, lossy, or lossless format, so smaller file sizes.

Nikon does a little trick, discarding the last few bits of image data at the dark end of the spectrum, to reduce raw file size. This discarded data is random noise - not image data, so nothing is lost. They have done it since the D100 or earlier, on all models.

Canon recently is "cooking" raw files when using the highest ISO settings. This can be proven mathematically, as the amount of random noise (shot noise) - which is an inescapable consequence of physics - is measuring lower than could be achieved if a sensor was capable of achieving 100% quantum efficiency (capturing and measuring every photon), and "read noise" (electronic interference noise) was zero. Neither are possible, so it is certain that some noise reduction is being applied to high ISO raw files (at least on the 5D Mk III).

Quantum efficiency of the latest sensors from Sony and Canon is getting so good (around 50%) that we're getting to the stage that it's almost "as good as it's ever going to get" (at least for rgb bayer sensors). It has improved from about 25% to 50%, so that's one "stop" of improvement in low iso dynamic range - or high ISO performance, due to quantum efficiency gains alone (read noise gains makes up the extra improvement, especially at low ISO setting). But to get another "stop" of improvement, efficiency would need to be 100% - not possible - everything from microlenses, RGB filters, and the photodiodes would need to be 100% perfect. Read noise can be further reduced, and is the area where Sony/Nikon are absolutely trouncing Canon, overtaking them with the release of the D300/D3, and continuing the gains.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ThomasH_always
Regular MemberPosts: 286Gear list
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to RomeoD, Sep 15, 2012

RomeoD wrote:

Only if the fps is 8+ and a larger buffer than a D300S.

Oh, and I would love for it to be CF + SD or CF + CF.

I am afraid, you might not get that! Compact Flash is dying. Any type of device using CF is becoming a rarity, whereas SD cards have gotten pretty fast, great capacity and they are omnipresent, not only in cameras. This translates into much lower production costs, and the readers are being thrown at people, or provided as a standard, e.g. in laptops.

And, there are two more aspects: One is the mechanical write protection switch, other is the robustness of the connection. The CF uses these many pins, and I for once over the years have dealt more than once with a bend pin. SD connector is simply put a better engineering solution. I am selling my CF cards as long as I can get any money for them.

Thomas

-- hide signature --

RomeoD

 ThomasH_always's gear list:ThomasH_always's gear list
Leica V-Lux 3 Canon EOS 6D
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Barry Fitzgerald
Forum ProPosts: 29,888
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to JoeR, Sep 15, 2012

JoeR wrote:

-- hide signature --

I'm not sure of the odds of getting a camera with faulty focusing but I suspect it is realtively low. The odds of getting two in a row is got to be phenominal. Three in a row tells me that it is not a camera issue.

joer56

D7000 is bang on with all the lenses I have.

As unlikely as that might be (getting 3 defective D90's) I cannot deny that all 3 were out AF wise straight out of the box.

Statically unlikely..but worrying nonetheless regarding QC

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Barry Fitzgerald
Forum ProPosts: 29,888
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to freddyNZ, Sep 15, 2012

freddyNZ wrote:

Canon sRaw is a misnomer - as the full sized image data is demosiaced and interpolated/downsized and the image saved as the sRaw file - it is essentially a 16 bit tiff file - not a raw file at all.

I'd rather have the choice the sraw files I have tried seemed to react the same way normal raw files do (HL recovery etc) that's my own hands on with that.

It's an issue I think esp with 24mp sensors and up..really I don't need that resolution so sraw would be welcomed esp for low light shooting.

Less of a problem with 10-16mp raw files which can be put down to 12bit in some cases saving some space

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Knute
Regular MemberPosts: 458
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to IrishhAndy, Sep 15, 2012

IrishhAndy wrote:

I think we will see a 24mpx d7100 in a few months. It would be more attractive than the d800 in my opinion. Would anyone like one?
--
Without the darkness the light would be nothing !

Nope. I want a D400, I have no interest in a D7000 or D7100.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
stormshadow
Regular MemberPosts: 125
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to Knute, Sep 19, 2012

I don't think we will get a D400. I think that Nikon will change the nomenclature of the D300 line of camera's and that they will become something like the D9000 or something like that. Nikon is obviously reserving the Dxxx line for FX cameras. I see a D7100 replacing the D7000 eventually but i believe that there will be a D9000 that's going to be the D300 replacement and that it will be a pro series DX camera that is weather sealed with all of the features. I hope its at least 24 megapixels and 8 fps with killer ISO performance

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tomas_X
Regular MemberPosts: 154
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to freddyNZ, Sep 19, 2012

You are right. I calculated the estimated values for ISO 204 000 in 14th bit of the image and the result was about 1/32 - 1/64 of one photon.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rsjoberg
Contributing MemberPosts: 516Gear list
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to IrishhAndy, Sep 19, 2012

I'm not spending any $2100 for a D600. I can tell you that much.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
IVANZZZ
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to rsjoberg, Sep 20, 2012

would you guys recommend buying a d7000 at this moment? i dont want to be in a situation where i buy a camera and all of a sudden the announce an newer version!!!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
KnightPhoto2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,333Gear list
Like?
Re: D71000
In reply to IrishhAndy, Sep 22, 2012

Yes but it has to be called 7200 to align with where the 3200 is and 5100 will be...

-- hide signature --

Best Regards,
SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/119002

 KnightPhoto2's gear list:KnightPhoto2's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon D800E Nikon 1 V3 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads