Nice PR stunt from Manfrotto to advertise an old product as new for more money. I have been (and still am) using the (original) Kata 3N1-33 for about 2 years now and it is a fantastic piece of kit. I commute more than 800 miles to work every two weeks and the rucksack gets a lot of abuse on my journeys (cars, trains, planes). It has the right dimensions for carry-on hand luggage, can hold a fair bit of kit and has served me and my photo equipment and laptop without fail so far. It is well worth the money I paid for it. How Manfrotto justify the drastic price increase (it even has the same name!) is anybody's guess though. A great accessory just became a lot less attractive ... I wouldn't have bought one for that price. No matter how good ....Look for a Kata at a good price .... there might be some left ....
SASpurr: In the 'Final Word' subsection of the 'Overall Conclusions' section it states:-
"Yet, I'd caution anyone who considers buying the D800 or D800E solely, or even primarily because of their ultra-high resolution. Pushing these cameras to achieve their maximum level of detail requires an investment of both time (methodical preparation) and money (the very best lenses Nikon makes)."
The part about which I would like clarification is "...requires an investment of both time...". Is the author referring to additional tasks over and above what one would 'normally' do in taking a picture? If so what are these tasks?Or does it refer to care in the conduct of normal tasks: use of tripod, select correct depth of field/aperture, exposure delay and remote control to reduce vibration, switch off image stabilisation??
When digital cameras reached 14 MP, with the first being the Pentax K20D, criticism was raised, that lenses won't cope. It's now crept up to 24MP for APS-C and the sensors are praised for their detailed pictures. Makes me wonder how great all these new kit lenses must be??? Or it was all just a media hype? Using a DX lens on a D800 brings the resolution down to about 15MP which is roughly the same pixel pitch as a Nikon D7000 or Pentax K5 - it is also considered the best compromise between pixel size and resolution. So a D800 is basically a full frame version of a 16MP APS-C sensor as far as I understand it. I think you do need much better glass for a D7100 or D5300 (than a D800) to get the best out of the sensor and a much steadier hand (or fast shutter speeds) for really sharp pictures. Such a high amount of photo sites will pick up any lens movement ....I reckon if Nikon also produced a "D800" with a 24MP sensor, it'd be more appealing to a wider audience.
steelski: What a bunch of phooey. The D7100 beats the K-3 how exactly....ergonomics, no,IQ, noprice, noLV, nomovie mode, nospeed, NO!!!buffer, noAF, debatable....AF in the dark, Nomenus, no!in body sensor shift, NoGPS stat tracking, noMetering, noViewfinder, noMagnesium body, noshutter actuations reliability, nodampening, noUSB3,noflash sync, yesbattery life yes, flash system yesNikon badge yes!!!!! I think your assessment is total bias. to put it mildly. thanks for putting in time and effort.
Pentax has brilliant camera bodies (apart from slow AF) but today's lens line up doesn't reflect what customers want. I've had a K20D and K5 with several lenses before somebody asks. The SDM can't keep up with running kids, most WR lenses are consumer lenses, the Limiteds are too expensive (brilliant though) and Tamron has decided not to consider Pentax mounts in the future (I got that from Tamron Germany). I don't love my D7000 but I can't deny that the picture quality is better (better affordable quality zoom glass). I concentrate more on the pictures these days rather than the camera which is a bonus I suppose ;-)If Pentax get their AF speed and lens lineup sorted I will move back. Just copy the lenses and kit the other manufacturers already have to bring money in to make the brand popular again - tough today but surely not impossible?
YogiGX20: I was initially excited but am now somewhat disappointed. Not necessarily about the Df but about the direction the camera market is going. And the Df is a perfect example for this.
These days, the manufacturers deliberately seem to make cameras worse to justify a - let's be honest, still - ridiculous price for what they are and then advertise it as the next best thing you never knew you could miss. Apart from the sensor, you could have a similar camera (including video) from a camera the fifth of the price! All that's missing now is for Canon to release a retro full frame camera that's worse than the 50D!I can understand this type of camera is appealing as a reminder of the "god old days" and/or status symbol. And everybody is entitled to their own opinion!!!It is, however, not a camera for someone like me, who is looking for an upgrade to my D7000 that hasn't got a ridiculous amount of MPs. Why not put the 16MP full frame sensor in a D300s and keep a cheaper retro line as well?
You don't get my point, do you? It should take better pictures than the D7000 at that price! And do you know the production price of a 16MP Full Frame sensor? I don't. It's funny how all comments on forums become personal insults after post 3!
To clarify: I'm not interested in the "why", I am a consumer who is used to a standard. If I can't get the standard I'm used to, I look somewhere else. Plain and simple. That's what market research is all about. I'm not a fanboy trying to force myself to like everything a manufacturer produces. Or insult people who do ... I'm out of here and will go and take some pictures. More fun ....
I'm talking about shutter speed, flash x-speed, max frames in a burst, AF points, .... that sort of thing. All those things that we know, Nikon is capable of performing well in certain models. For any product in that price range, I'd expect at least the standard set of features of a £600 D7000 for example, plus something else. The sensor alone can't justify a £2000 premium, can it? So what is all that money spend on - downgrading? Putting it into a most profit margin price bracket for all the wrong reasons? I don't get it. I wouldn't buy a brand new very overpriced car, that is poorly equipped, has no extras, looks like a 70's old timer but drives well, would you? I'd either have the real thing or go with the times to make life as easy as possible. But then you can't argue argue about something that's decided with emotions. Not my cup of tea though.
RichRMA, if the D300s is far above the D7000, I would like to ask the question, what Nikon replaced it with? Different target groups, I agree. Although the 16 MP sensor is literally years ahead in engineering of the D300s.Where is the Nikon all metal bodied APS-C model like the Pentax K-3?A D300s with that sensor would put the D610 and the Df to shame! And at $2500 dollars I would get one of those!!! That is my point exactly!!!
I was initially excited but am now somewhat disappointed. Not necessarily about the Df but about the direction the camera market is going. And the Df is a perfect example for this.
Another great lens from Sigma. I was very impressed to hear that Sigma now offer a mount change for their new lens range. Reading that the Pentax and Sony versions don't have OS, however, does that mean if you change the lens mount from Pentax to Nikon for example you get the lens without OS but pay the same (or more with the mount change)? If that's the case, then what's the point????????? Or am I missing something?
MikePursey: Quote: The battery door has a tendency to open during normal operation. Taping it shut when working in wet conditions might be prudent ....
I have to say I have had the K-7 (same body as the K-5/K-5II/K-5IIs), the K-5 MKI and now the K-5II and have taken thousands of shots with each camera. The only time the battery door has opened is when I was changing the battery, not once has it done it otherwise.
Neither has the card door on mine. Over 20k pics in rainy conditions, on the beach, hot weather and the cockpit of a helicopter (my day time job) and it has never had "a tendency to open during normal operation." Either a duff one or dodgy gripping action?
How can Nikon advertise a "Top Model" that is out-performed by cameras 2 1/2 years older with regards to RAW buffer? I'm shooting with a K5 and can rattle away 25+ RAW pictures at 6 fps. Drove me nuts on my K20D when the buffer filled up. Great autofocus specs but shame the camera can't keep up with it. Other Nikons can, so to me that indicates that if you want better performance, Nikon wants you to go full frame!? Fingers crossed there will be a software upgrade like on the K5 which increased the RAW buffer from 10 or something to 25+. Was thinking of moving to Nikon for greater lens selection (+ flash) but that is an instant show stopper for me, as I take all my pictures in RAW format. Shame really ... I feel like Nikon has deliberately held back a bit too much iot leave a distinct gap to the next model. Not very convincing. I think they are trying too hard to pull level (or ahead) of the Sony a77 in terms of specs ...
kenyee: No more Pentax mount? :-P
Another great lens from Tamron I would like to team up with my Pentax K-5 - but can't :-( I'm convinced that a lot of Pentax users would love to buy a sealed 70-200 f2.8 for their (let's not forget: sealed!) cameras. Especially as there are no alternatives other than the Sigma or the older version of the Tamron (both of which are not sealed).
But then, there isn't a Leica version either .... Looking at it from that angle makes it more bearable .... LoL
Come on Tamron or/and Pentax!!!!!!!!!!