D300 18-200 and taking lots of pictures
pentaxfun: They seriously aren't even having it be like a 7100e and a d7100 where you can pick whether or not to have an AA? Are you freaking kidding me? Wtf!? According to articles on here as well as other highly regarded photographic sources, the consensus was always the pros of not having an AA-filter only outweighed the cons in a VERY very limit, narrow, ultra specific type of shooting situation. Like, only at a very narrow aperture range, in a specific shooting situation, it was better, but in the other 99% of shooting situations, the image quality was far better with an AA than without one, and thus, other than for a very specific niche of photography, for the avg typical photographers, having an AA-filter was much better than not having one. So, this is blowing my mind that they would really just offer it STRICTLY as a non-AA camera, and not even have it be an optional thing like on the d800. What the hell!!??!?
The higher the resolution the sensor the less likely it is to have moire. Once the camera is higher in resolution than the lens, the lens is your AA filter. Which DX zoom can out resolve a 24 Mega pixel DX sensor? Leica M9 has no AA and Leica has a some very sharp lens. I doesn't seem to hurt their reputation.
Vegasus: Hi guys, It is always good to hear how SLR manufacture introduce new features but.. I think for such expensive camera, some features like "Built-In WIFI wireless n " and bluetooth, touchscreen monitor or an application for iPad/iPhone as a remote controller etc, are included with the price. So don't have to worry to buy extra. Also a memory card is included perhaps a 16gb or 32gb? Sometimes I think it is ridiculous for such high price and not include some of the features. What do you guys think? :)
High end is not always about the most features. Most people buying this are not looking for the most tricked out device.They want a reliable workhorse that they can go into a war/press conference/sport event/wedding with.
If Nikon was smart they would offer the "D4e" edition for the rich people wanting the toy with "everything".
If you ever try to take pictures of a 4-10 year old child playing with a point and shoot you would realize this is a big step up. It may be even better than most SLR’s. My wife thinks her D60 SLR’s are too big and is difficult to focus on a running kid with only 3 focus points. She does not want theoretical image quality but large number of blurry shots. I go to my 4 year olds soccer game with a D300, 80-200 afs/f2.8, mono pod and I just stick out.
To say the price is too high seems to miss the value of a well-focused action shot.
What cheaper camera would have a better success rate in casual photos of a kid’s soccer? Kids playing at a birthday party?
PatrickP: This camera is basically designed for people with a lot of fast / long nikkors and wanna go lighter and longer , not the P&S / mirrorless crowd actually....
with the f-mount adapter :
slap on a 24/1.4G and it becomes 70m f/1.4, with AF50/1.4G becomes 135mm f/1.485/1.4G becomes 230mm f/1.4
all of the above combined with the camera weight about 2 pounds in a fairly small package. even with the 24/1.4 , shooting at f/1.4 it's A LOT of subject isolation. at f/1.4 you would hardly ever shoot above ISO800....
also:70-200 becomes 190-510mm f/2.8 VR70-200 VR2 + 2X TC becomes 380-1080mm f/5.6 VR. (think telescope...)
i can't say i'm not excited....
So what people are saying is that if I take a D3x and crop down the image the backgrounds will magically get sharper?Or get more noise?
I must try that in Photoshop. Some how I don't think so.
Most of the complaints are people who want it to be the D4, D400 or D800.
Anyone wining about no 2.8 or 1.4 lenses, is looking for a D3100. A better argument is why no ultra-compact D3100.
The prices seem slightly high for me but not by much. I am looking at the AW100 its 3:75 so If that’s all I had, going the next step to the J1 makes sense.
Comparing it to a NEX-3,5,7, the J1 & V1 have a huge speed advantage. For many peoples the only reason for getting an SLR is to shoot there kids playing in sports or kids around the house. Point and shoots were just too slow. NEX does not help. This is actually better than an SLR for that purpose.
thubleau3: I don't think EVF will take off .Personally having used both systems EVF is a pain in the proverbial,inacurrate and slow.Sure, mirrorless is the way they will head but I firmly believe that an alternative to the EVF will produce a much better mirrorless camera as the EVF is not the answer.I predicted that Canon and Nikon would venture into mirrorless designs months ago ,but only when they started to see a drop in sales.I also predict that they will come up with a much better option than an EVF.
Are you really predicting that Electronics will not get faster and more accurate. Did you think the 1 MP pixel Digital Cameras would never replace film?
Virgilio G Santos: aside from the "turntable-vinyl market reduction due to digital disc" analogy.... let us be reminded that even discs went thru a miniaturization process. remember movies on laser discs (and you even have to flip them to read the backside!) just to finish a movie? then came the DVD, and it has many times the capacity of that huge laser-disc thing (a laser-dic is as big as a vinyl record, for those who forgot what it is). who would have thought that huge laser-disc size storage capability can be stowed in a smaller size. and then the BluRay came in, and now treatens the DVD's existence. life goes on...
point is- those small-size sensors you now dismiss as "small" may soon have the capability of capturing images better than a medium-format (i'm talking about the size) in the very near future. let's wait a while.
If Nikon was making for a smaller sensor they can make higher quality lenses. (The also make lenses used in making chips)
People assume people will always choose image quality over size. I had someone say "I am going to China I will just take my Iphone to take pictures." If facebook is his only outlet for his pictures he was not to far off.
Size of a system can be an important aspect of getting a picture. I have had people love my image quality with my big lens. But more people love the photographs with my 18-200. I could move around fast enough to get the shot a the angle I want. If could get the same range with the same IQ as the D300 in .2 the weight I might be tempted. Right now my next buy would be the AW100. It can go where no SLR can, In my pocket at the beach.
wb2trf: Many of the comments here falsely identify Canikon with DSLR technology. Those companies will move with the technology, and probably in time not to lose their leadership. I strongly suspect that their top end offerings will be mirrorless within 5-10 years. DSLRs will endure only as niche products. Two things will drive it: first continuous shooting speeds will get so high that stills will be selected in PP (some of which will be in-camera) and the information from adjacent frames will enhance IQ of every selected frame. There is no room for a flopping mirror in that world. EVFs will be better than OVF and CDAF will be be very fast while focus accuracy diminishes in importance in the in camera PP world. Canikon will go with this, not fight it. Physical size is not a big factor and for top end cameras space may go to batteries.
I think you are making assumptions that Full frame cameras are prices artificially high. I think the prices are a function of the sensor yield (number of good sensors per wafer). I suspect the yield goes down dramatically with increase in sensor size.For me crop sensors in SLR & lenses offer the best bang for the buck. Maybe that has a lot to do with what I like to shoot.
The SLR experience is not all about sensor size. It is also about focus response when taking pictures of action. Without fast effective focus I simply can’t get many of the shots I take.Landscape& portrait shooters may not care but that’s not everyone.