Tomas_X

Tomas_X

Lives in Czech Republic Czech Republic
Joined on Feb 16, 2008

Comments

Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tomas_X: Why the D300 owner does not want D7000.
I can hold my D300 whole day in my hands, but 3 hours holding D7000 results in right hand pain. Bad grip and smaller discomfort body.
I know the differences between AF MultiCAM 3500 DX (D300/D3/D4/D800) and 4800 DX (D7000/D600). The AF in D300(s) is bettter than the one in D7000. And the reason is not 51 points versus 39 points.
I want the fastness, reaction, buffer, framerate of D300 successor, not the D7000 effort. I want 8-10 fps of the further D400.
I want 3/5/7/9 steps exposure bracketing, I could not make this photo with D7000: http://www.tomx.eu/Foto/Vylety_Cechy_a_Morava/Vyhlidka_Maj_2011/slides/Vyhlidka_Maj_03.html .
I want D300 strategy of exposure metering, not D7000 burned highlites.
I want to connect big flash lights to D300 body connector which D7000 does not have.
I want D300 material quality, not D7000 problems well known.
I want AF-ON, D300/D4 features of AF, not reducted D7000 sets.
I want lossless NEF compression.

Everybody who compare D300 and D600 price, totally forget the lenses!!!!
The owner of D300 has for instance Nikkor 10-24, 17-55/2.8, 16-85 VR, 35/1.8 and 70-200/2.8 which is 300mm equivalent or 55-300 which is 450mm equivalent.
Can you calculate the price of changing DX lenses to FX equivalents which brig to me the 1,5 EV gain written in the discussion?
I love my Nikkor DX 10-24 and do not want sell it for low price and buy 16-35. Why to do it? The reason???
I love my Nikkor DX 17-55/2.8 for indoor photos (often with SB-800 flash) and I do not want to sell it and buy the expensive and heavy 24-70/2.8
I love my 16-85 VR and I do not want 24-120/4.
I love my 70-200/2.8 VR I, its 300mm equivalent and croping its bad corners by DX crop.
I love my lightweight DX 55-300 VR
I love my DX 35/1.8
My only one lens which is better on FX than DX is Nikkor AF-S 85/1.8G. Only one, six lenses are better on DX!
It is much better solution to buy D400 than D600!!!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 09:17 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tomas_X: Why the D300 owner does not want D7000.
I can hold my D300 whole day in my hands, but 3 hours holding D7000 results in right hand pain. Bad grip and smaller discomfort body.
I know the differences between AF MultiCAM 3500 DX (D300/D3/D4/D800) and 4800 DX (D7000/D600). The AF in D300(s) is bettter than the one in D7000. And the reason is not 51 points versus 39 points.
I want the fastness, reaction, buffer, framerate of D300 successor, not the D7000 effort. I want 8-10 fps of the further D400.
I want 3/5/7/9 steps exposure bracketing, I could not make this photo with D7000: http://www.tomx.eu/Foto/Vylety_Cechy_a_Morava/Vyhlidka_Maj_2011/slides/Vyhlidka_Maj_03.html .
I want D300 strategy of exposure metering, not D7000 burned highlites.
I want to connect big flash lights to D300 body connector which D7000 does not have.
I want D300 material quality, not D7000 problems well known.
I want AF-ON, D300/D4 features of AF, not reducted D7000 sets.
I want lossless NEF compression.

These D300 owners do not care about they look as pros or not. They/we only want D300-type bodies and D300-type AF and D300-type power and ergonomy. Professional or amateur using is not importaint, we use D300 features and ergonomy for many years, we love them and we do not want downgrade to D7000 body-type. It is so hard to capture? Have I be pro to be allowed to want some level of the camera? The professional and amateur difference is making the money, but both make the photos and why the professional must have another feeling in his hands at making photos?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 09:08 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tomas_X: Why the D300 owner does not want D7000.
I can hold my D300 whole day in my hands, but 3 hours holding D7000 results in right hand pain. Bad grip and smaller discomfort body.
I know the differences between AF MultiCAM 3500 DX (D300/D3/D4/D800) and 4800 DX (D7000/D600). The AF in D300(s) is bettter than the one in D7000. And the reason is not 51 points versus 39 points.
I want the fastness, reaction, buffer, framerate of D300 successor, not the D7000 effort. I want 8-10 fps of the further D400.
I want 3/5/7/9 steps exposure bracketing, I could not make this photo with D7000: http://www.tomx.eu/Foto/Vylety_Cechy_a_Morava/Vyhlidka_Maj_2011/slides/Vyhlidka_Maj_03.html .
I want D300 strategy of exposure metering, not D7000 burned highlites.
I want to connect big flash lights to D300 body connector which D7000 does not have.
I want D300 material quality, not D7000 problems well known.
I want AF-ON, D300/D4 features of AF, not reducted D7000 sets.
I want lossless NEF compression.

Every advantages of the newer D7000 camera can be placed in the D300 body and save D300 body and D300/D3/D4/D700/D800 autofocus module. This is the principe. The advantages of new sensor and new firmware are not fixed to the D7000 body and D7000 MultiCAM 4800 DX and small buffer. They can be placed to the D400. Nikon has the customers for D400 and it is the main thing. I am happy Nikon will calculate people who want to buy D400 and not the people who do not like D400. :-) :-)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 06:35 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tomas_X: Why the D300 owner does not want D7000.
I can hold my D300 whole day in my hands, but 3 hours holding D7000 results in right hand pain. Bad grip and smaller discomfort body.
I know the differences between AF MultiCAM 3500 DX (D300/D3/D4/D800) and 4800 DX (D7000/D600). The AF in D300(s) is bettter than the one in D7000. And the reason is not 51 points versus 39 points.
I want the fastness, reaction, buffer, framerate of D300 successor, not the D7000 effort. I want 8-10 fps of the further D400.
I want 3/5/7/9 steps exposure bracketing, I could not make this photo with D7000: http://www.tomx.eu/Foto/Vylety_Cechy_a_Morava/Vyhlidka_Maj_2011/slides/Vyhlidka_Maj_03.html .
I want D300 strategy of exposure metering, not D7000 burned highlites.
I want to connect big flash lights to D300 body connector which D7000 does not have.
I want D300 material quality, not D7000 problems well known.
I want AF-ON, D300/D4 features of AF, not reducted D7000 sets.
I want lossless NEF compression.

DX crop has one big problem: 0.70x viewfinder magnification against 0.94x of D300 which can be increased 1.20x by DK-21M and you still see bottom line with exposure. You cannot magnify D800 viewfinder and still see bottom green line!!!
marike6: I tried make photos with D300 and D7000 against the sun. I do not care about DR on paper, but I saw burned highlites on the about 2EV overexposured D7000 pictures. I can send tou the RAW samples!!!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 06:30 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)

Why the D300 owner does not want D7000.
I can hold my D300 whole day in my hands, but 3 hours holding D7000 results in right hand pain. Bad grip and smaller discomfort body.
I know the differences between AF MultiCAM 3500 DX (D300/D3/D4/D800) and 4800 DX (D7000/D600). The AF in D300(s) is bettter than the one in D7000. And the reason is not 51 points versus 39 points.
I want the fastness, reaction, buffer, framerate of D300 successor, not the D7000 effort. I want 8-10 fps of the further D400.
I want 3/5/7/9 steps exposure bracketing, I could not make this photo with D7000: http://www.tomx.eu/Foto/Vylety_Cechy_a_Morava/Vyhlidka_Maj_2011/slides/Vyhlidka_Maj_03.html .
I want D300 strategy of exposure metering, not D7000 burned highlites.
I want to connect big flash lights to D300 body connector which D7000 does not have.
I want D300 material quality, not D7000 problems well known.
I want AF-ON, D300/D4 features of AF, not reducted D7000 sets.
I want lossless NEF compression.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 22:00 UTC as 37th comment | 10 replies
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)

Everybody can see in the forums there are many of D300(s) users who do not want to switch to FX and who do not want to buy D7000 or D7100. I do not understand why there are so many people who think they know better what we need. I understand many D300 owners are affraid D400 will not come, but I do not understand the people who do not want for D400 and must explain why is D400 pointless. Their arguments are not universal and are unusable for D300 owners who wait for D400.
Why every DX D300 owner has to switch to FX? The D300 owners who want to switch to FX, already bought D3, D700, D800 and maybe some of them D600 now. But there are many rest D300 owners who want the semi-profi DX body. We love our DX lenses and our FX lenses on DX bodies.
We know our D300(s) very well and we know why we do not want D7000 or D7100 or D7200.... How can the people who do not own D300 strictly tell the D7000 is better in every way. We know it is not, we know why is D300 body the right for us.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 21:42 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

MattBrisVegas: One more reason to think of switching to a m4/3 system EXCEPT why are m4/3 lenses so expensive? I can't help but compare this 75mm f/1.8 for $900 to the Nikon 85mm f/1.8 for $430 (both today's prices at B&H). The m4/3 lens is built to cover a smaller image circle, so it uses much less optical glass. So why is it about twice the price?

Oly 75/1.8 is not telecentric lens, see the perspective here:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2067763/p6270021?inalbum=olympus-m-zuiko-digital-ed-75mm-1-1-8-review-samples
Telecentric lenses are for machine measurement, no for pictures. You would not like pictures of telecentric lenses. They are totally disnatured. Totally. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2012 at 09:30 UTC
In reply to:

Entropius: Something that I've wondered about about the D4:

In the press release, Nikon makes a big deal out of the fact that some of the autofocus points will focus with lenses dimmer than f/5.6; they say that some of them will work down to f/8. Canons, I know, also have issues with this.

However, every Olympus DSLR will quite happily autofocus at f/7 (even my old banged up E-510, with its 3-point AF sensor, 1 point cross sensitive). It'll even AF at f/11, using a f/5.6 lens with a 2x converter -- although it's slow in poor light.

Does Olympus have some sort of magic AF sensor? In my experience Olympus single-shot AF beats Canon's hands down (although continuous AF is a whole different story).

I can use AF at f/11 with any Nikon body (D300, D80, D70) when I use f/5.6 lens and Kenko 2x teleconvertor, but the quality of AF at such conditions are not Nikon standard. Now at D4 Nikon has produced standard f/8 AF.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 08:57 UTC
On Just Posted: In-depth Sony SLT-A77 review article (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter K Burian: I have tested the a77 and it produced GORGEOUS high ISO JPEGs. All you need to do is use the Multi-Frame Noise Reduction feature (accessed via Auto ISO) OR the similar Handheld Twilight Scene mode. (The template form of reviews and comparison photos does not seem to lend itself to a testing of unusual features such as this.)

See one of my ISO 5000 JPEGs at https://picasaweb.google.com/110698711952841559844/SonyA77ISO500FABULOUS#

The camera snaps six photos very quickly. The Bionz processor micro-aligns them to minimize the effect of any camera shake, allowing for sharp shots at surprisingly long exposures. It then composites the six captures into one, discarding most of the noise data for clean photos even at very high ISO. (My ISO ISO 5000 photos resemble those made at ISO 800 without this feature).

The fully-automatic Handheld Twilight Scene mode is identical but overrides are not available when this mode is used; the camera controls all aspects of the image.

If you summarize more frames into one picture, you can simply make one exposure with the sum of times of all frames and you can get lower ISO for such longer time. :-)))

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2011 at 16:39 UTC
On Sony unveils SLT-A77 flagship APS-C DSLR-rival article (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

ms18: APS-C 24Mp must be more noise. Already loosing some light by SLT mechanism

Prognathous, I have read on DxOMark:
"The argument above provides a method to compare cameras with different resolutions. A high-resolution camera can still be turned into a low-resolution camera by averaging its pixels. "
.. and I can tell arguments:
If you can resample down true RAW data, photon noise on the same resolution will be the same. But if you will resample after demosaicing, you will have more noise!!
The worse case is by read noise. Every pixel reading add some noise. You have 24 000 000x average read mistakes or 16 000 000x average read mistakes or 12 000 000x average read mistake.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2011 at 19:00 UTC
On Sony unveils SLT-A77 flagship APS-C DSLR-rival article (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

ms18: APS-C 24Mp must be more noise. Already loosing some light by SLT mechanism

Prognathous, where do you think DxOMark says about independence of the resolution and the noise?
Here is DxO method of measurement:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/About/Sensor-scores

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2011 at 18:41 UTC
On Sony unveils SLT-A77 flagship APS-C DSLR-rival article (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

ms18: APS-C 24Mp must be more noise. Already loosing some light by SLT mechanism

Prognathous: Number of pixels has direct impact to the pixel area, because this is sensor area divide by number of pixels. The pixel area has direct impact to the captured signal. The captured signal has direct impact to the signal / noise ratio.
When you have less noise at the high megapixel sensor, you must reach it by the dramatic hardware and software technology improvements. The dramatic technology improvements has its limits. The effectivenes cannot be over 100%, you cannnot divide photons and electrones, you cannot force the photons in the light in the nature not to be stochastic and such limits.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2011 at 16:40 UTC

Very cheap, sharp & macro & close-up & near normal DX lens. Good arguments for existence of the lense.
But I will not buy it. I have DX platform (D300) and I would upgrade from AF 85/1.8D to AF-S DX 70/1.6G, rounded aperture blades to have SWM lenses only for the motorless future and AF-C predictive AF for moving people small DOF shots.
I would love AF-S DX 24/2G, AF-S DX 20/2G and AF-S DX 16/2G too.
I would love some DX VR II f/2G in the range 30-50mm for very low light handheld shots. Or I would upgrade form AF-S DX 17-55/2.8G to AF-S 16-60/2.8G VR II.
Many people would like AF-S DX 60-250/4 VR, as is Pentax lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2011 at 21:33 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13