Lardinio

Lardinio

Lives in United Kingdom Hailsham, United Kingdom
Works as a Head of Business Strategy for an IT company in UK
Has a website at lardinio.zenfolio.com
Joined on Jun 4, 2006
About me:

Nikon D300 & D50, 80-200/2.8 and 60/2.8 Micro both Nikkors, Tamron 17-50/2.8 and Sigma 50/1.4 HSM & 10-20/4-5.6 HSM. Just an amateur currently, learning about stuff and suffering from a bit of lens lust. I got into DSLRs to take pics of my kids growing up ie reportage and portraits, but have since got into sports. I have an interest in wedding photography and would like to develop that (perhaps commercially) and am toying with landscapes.

Comments

Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rascati: Breaking News - Seattle, WA
DPR and Ken Rockwell are pleased to announce that they will be merging their sites now that actually holding and testing a camera are no longer necessary before writing about them. Gotta drive people to the site somehow. Why else would they leave this article on the front page if they weren't trying to stir the pot. Really inexcusable. Every camera and system has flaws or deficiencies in some way. So why do they choose to single this one out. The new site will be called the "DPR Enquirer". Before you start with the replies, please be advised that I'm ok with them stating this opinion. I'm having more issues with their journalistic approach vs the comments. I can't help but feel that they are leaving this article up just to get hits on the site.

Why have you got to test one before you can form an opinion of it? And they chose this camera because 1) it's a Nikon and a lot people get emotional and have interest in Nikon solutions and 2) very few people understand the Nikon strategy based on what they are seeing, not just the V3 either. The whole Nikon 1/CX platform.

So here's my opinion, because I have one (not a Nikon 1, but an opinion that is)

If the V3 was half the price (ie $500/600), I'd get it because it would make sense as an ocassional walk around/travel/second camera system. If the sensor was a DX and we could use existing Nikon lenses at their current lengths and it supported CLS, then I'd buy it at it's current price.

I just don't get who this camera is aimed for. It seems to me that unless you are a birder there are plenty of other systems out there that are better or less money or both.

I guess people are fustrated that Nikon don't give them what they want.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2014 at 16:10 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (597 comments in total)
In reply to:

capanikon: I like it. I like the V1-style body. I like how a grip is option (ala Nikon FM2n or F3). I think Nikon is trying hard to satisfy too many people ... as an enthusiasts, this camera still has a ton of "noob" features such as tilt screen and touch screen and photo effects modes. I don't consider lack of EC dial to be a drawback but is instead a very positive thing!

Do you like the $1,200 price? And have you considered how many better camera systems you can get for much less money?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 07:28 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (597 comments in total)

Welcome to the Nikon 1 V3 - Fast Everything, except fast moving off the shelves!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 07:24 UTC as 214th comment | 1 reply
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)

I'm stuck (happily!) with big investment in Nikon glass and system. If I'm going to buy a Fuji it's because I want a second, small, cheaper system with just a couple of lenses. As facinating as the X-T1 is, it doesn't fit my requirements at that cost. May be I'll buy one used in a couple of years when it'll be down at £500.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 16:39 UTC as 321st comment | 3 replies
On Hands-on with the Nikon D3300 and 35mm F1.8G lens article (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: $650. That's $150 less than the D5300, and the D3300 comes with a lens. Nice work Nikon. Still . . . I wish you could make a camera that can compete on price against the Sony A65! The A65 is only $500 without a lens, and only $600 with a lens (cheaper than this slow camera). And the Sony A65 has built-in GPS and a fold-out screen, like the Nikon D5300. One more very important feature most of the Sony cameras have is built-in image stabilization (in the camera body), something that should be a serious consideration for people trying to choose what entry-level camera to buy. Frankly I'd say Sony wins for the entry level photographer who doesn't expect to spend a lot of money on lenses in the future. Sony offers a few good upgrade options too.

But if you want a Nikon, this is a really good starter camera that can be used to capture very sharp, high quality photos, I'm sure.

Sony has always brought out cheaper innovative bodies, so they can snare you with their overpriced, average lenses. It's a cheap trick and Sony is a wizard at it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2014 at 16:45 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

AdamT: Stunning camera and a fabulous move by nikon but the second tier AF doesn`t cut it for the money IMO ... I`d rather have seen the 24Mp sensortoo as its good enough at high ISOs and treads a good compromise between rez and high ISOs on FF .. a cam of this price really ought to have the proper AF system (which even the £800 D7100 has)

They should have brought out 2 cameras, let's call them Df a & b

Dfa - 16Mp FX sensor, 51 point autofocus, 2 SD card slot, 1/8000's and 1/250 sync $3,000

Dfb - 24Mp FX sensor, 39 point autofocus, 1 SD card slot, 1/4000's and 1/200 flash sync $1,800

Oh wait, they already have the Dfb is called a Nikon D610! Silly me.

So I guess the Df is just a D610 with the D4's sensor in a retro body with a load of feature stripped out.

If they had made the Dfa, I would have paid $3,000 for it for sure. Wouldn't have cost them much more either. In fact, I susptec they'd ahve increased their sales by about 25/30% based on those simple changes judging by comments all over the forums. Real shame. Sticking with my D700 for now then.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 22:57 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeakAction: First I saw the price, and thought, "Hm. Well, maybe if it has the right features..." Then I saw that it had the D4 sensor, and that was good. Then, I read this part: "...the Df is a 16MP, full-frame DSLR with the sensor and processing guts of the company's flagship D4"

That's what I was waiting to hear. If this camera has the sensor AND the processing of the D4, then I'm happy to spend the money on it. As a professional photojournalist and commercial shooter, I currently have in my bag: Two D3's, a D800, and a D600. For all their more modern features, the D800 & D600 still can't match the high ISO perf (RAW or JPG) and general smoothness of my old D3's (when in JPG mode). If the Df has the brains of a D4, then I feel it's worth the money because no other body, save the D4 itself, can boast that. Naming convention aside, this is essentially the "new" D700 (which the D800 is not, having jumped several hurdles and gone chasing after the MF market), which shared its guts with the D3.

Get real, just cos you shoot a DSLR doesn't mean you have to shoot RAW

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 22:49 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)

I was reading this in an article defending the camera "This isn’t a camera to grow your business. This isn’t your second or third wedding body. This isn’t your do-it-all camera. This is the “grow yourself” camera. This is a gift to yourself for a job well done. This is a camera to remind you why you are a photographer"

Say, I'd love a camera for the sake of it, a nice little toy to play with, but I don't have $3k to grow myself. Neither has 99% of people who buy Nikon.

If I want to grow myself I'll stand in a bag of fertiliser, much cheaper.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 22:44 UTC as 462nd comment | 6 replies

I applaud Canon for having the guts to use an APS-C sensor in their mirrorless. I've been using Nikon for years and was appaled at their overpriced lump of sub micro 4/3's uselessness that they spewed onto the market with the launch of the Nikon 1. I still have yet to find a decent review of their product and even with the prices coming down have found no reason to purchase one. I'm not a 'pro' shooter, but I want a decent sensor, manual controls etc. I will NEVER invest in their CX format, but will remain loyal to Nikon for the DSLR's. Canon may have made a mistake by dumbing down their initial offering (it's hardly inspiring), but at least they have a good sensor and the right size to attract a decent audience. In my mind this is a great solution for those potential canon shooters who don't like the bulk of a DSLR but want optical performance and a system they can grow into. Nikon 1 users have no migration path at all. Stoopid.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 16:45 UTC as 189th comment
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Looks like Sony has set the dinner buffet of sensor densities and Nikon has made its selections. Whilst Sony is chancing higher Mp for its higher APS-C model line and lower Mp for lower APS-C model line, Nikon has inverted it instead so lower models have higher Mp for lower APS-C model and maybe keep the lower Mp for its higher APS-C/FF models.

Sony Sensor Densities:

SLT-A57 = ~212.7 pixels/mm (lower APS-C model) = ~16.7Mp
NEX-5N = ~213.1 pixels/mm (lower APS-C model) = ~16.5Mp
NEX-7/SLT-A77 = ~259.7 pixels/mm (higher APS-C model) = ~24.7Mp

Nikon Sensor Densities (Inverted):

D3200 = ~262.8 pixels/mm (lower APS-C model) = ~24.7Mp
D7100* = ~206.7 pixels/mm (higher APS-C model) = ~15.7*Mp

D800 = ~206.7 pixels/mm (lower FF model) = ~36.8Mp
D4 = ~138.9 pixels/mm (higher FF model) = ~16.6Mp

*Based on the above Nikon sensor density inversions:
I would predict they will select for their upcoming D7100 (updated D7000) to be ~15.7Mp APS-C sensored and 15.4Mp effective (4800 x 3200 Image).

So you think the D7100 will have less pixels than D7000 and the D400 no increase at all? Ummmmm. I would hazard a guess that both D7100 and D400 (if indeed these models are produced, this year or at all) will have a minimum of 18mp and probably the same 24mp sensor with improved image processing pipeline offering higher ISO capability.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 15:34 UTC
In reply to:

Lisa O: All DSLRs should have built in WiFi (especially the $3000 ones) at least the add on is only $60. But it looks weird sticking out the back. I like the Red one!

Wifi has different standards in different countreis, having it build it would increase production costs and create potential inventory/production issues.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 14:42 UTC
In reply to:

magneto shot: well a sensor of 1" might be smaller than 4/3 but bear in mind that means the Image quality is better than any enthusiast compact u have seen including S95 and lx5.

1" is bigger than 1/1.8

no?

When you start comparing the Nikon 1 to an S95 or LX5, Nikon has failed. no?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 08:28 UTC
Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12