Lives in United States Boston, MA, United States
Joined on Feb 19, 2004


Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7
On Preview:nikon-df (2792 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathantw: 100% viewfinder coverage is so much better than the stupid 94% or 97% coverage of my D700. That was a pretty bad decision on Nikon's part to not have it 100%. I know I could get it under live view, but that takes up battery juice, so no thanks.

Never really understood people's complaints about less than 100% finder coverage. You're not shooting slide film, so if it bothers you so much, then run a batch job and crop prior to viewing your files.

Posted on Nov 24, 2013 at 21:35 UTC
On Preview:nikon-df (2792 comments in total)

All I really wanted was a D4 in a D700 body - with the best AF module that Nikon is able to build. Sigh.

Posted on Nov 24, 2013 at 21:29 UTC as 141st comment | 2 replies
On Preview:nikon-df (2792 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pakio: What? No ISO 50? Why in the hell they make sensors up to ISO 12000, who needs that? I want to shoot at F1.4 in daylight!

Buy an ND filter.

Posted on Nov 19, 2013 at 00:29 UTC
On Preview:nikon-df (2792 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Just a Photographer:

You see I’m not saying what the “norm” should be, that’s what you’re doing–despite claiming that’s not what your doing. My point was that the “norm” has radically changed in the last 10 years with the introduction of better and better sensors for DSLRs.

Then the D4's sensor is not a normal sensor–in ten years time it’s high ISO capacity may very well be normal.

You can limit your high ISO use (and here “high ISO” will mean something different 5 years in the future), but you can only legitimately speak in generalities about your preferences.

In fact many seek out the D4 (and now will seek out this Df) to be able to shoot in lowlight without a flash and without the blotching and banding problems that shooting at high ISOs with both the D610 and D800 can incur. And that seeking good equipment for high ISO shooting is perfectly normal.

In fact black cats in the dark would be hard for the D4, so that could inspire further development of better lowlight sensors.

Some of us do actually shoot routinely at ISO 6400 (indoor basketball). So a D4 sensor in a less expensive body is hugely attractive. I care about the AF performance, too, so I'm on the fence on this.

Posted on Nov 19, 2013 at 00:28 UTC

VR? Who would want to hand hold that thing? It belongs on a gimbal head.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2012 at 10:52 UTC as 46th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Sad Joe: Another nail in the coffin of 'real cameras' - smart phone devices will kill off DSLR's just as digital killed off film - only a matter of time.

Companies like Sony will invest massive amounts of monies as items like the IPad, IPhone as its where the money is...

A Canon branded camera phone anyone ?

Yeah, right. We'll all dump our DSLRs and shoot sports with phones. This may make phone photos a bit better, but they'll still be bad. But, hey, many people have low standards, so this will improve images in that niche.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2012 at 10:57 UTC
On article Nikon V1 and J1 - hands-on first impressions (245 comments in total)

Great. Now you can choose a camera that will match your shoes.

Nikon should have made a digital SP rangefinder. Yes, a small market, but at least they could have produced a camera that they could have been proud of.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 00:37 UTC as 89th comment
Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7