-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D2X pdf
- Thread starter deepsea
- Start date
lee sandstead116097
Senior Member
Marceloc
Leading Member
3D_CARD_EXPERT
Forum Enthusiast
--
The future is bright, the future is Orange.
yoshi
Leading Member
E
Ednaz
Guest
I'd convinced myself that I wouldn't be going up to the D2x because I could get the metering system that I wanted in a smaller lighter body, so unless Nikon did something great to the new metering system, and improved the autofocus capability, and continued my ability to use some of my older lenses (which I can't really use with my D100 - and I figured they were going to continue phasing out the old stuff) I'd skip this one.
I'm going off to attach the battery pack to my D100 so that I can convince myself that the size of the camera body is tolerable.
They've got me on this one. It's got everything I figured I needed to be there - ISO 800 is the only downer, but if the noise is well controlled, 1600 is there with one stop of underexposure, and everything I'm shooting is well covered.
Sigh.
I hope it takes until March to arrive; I'll need that long to top up the bank account...
'No, the OTHER left.'
http://www.onemountainphoto.com
I'm going off to attach the battery pack to my D100 so that I can convince myself that the size of the camera body is tolerable.
They've got me on this one. It's got everything I figured I needed to be there - ISO 800 is the only downer, but if the noise is well controlled, 1600 is there with one stop of underexposure, and everything I'm shooting is well covered.
Sigh.
I hope it takes until March to arrive; I'll need that long to top up the bank account...
--
'No, the OTHER left.'
http://www.onemountainphoto.com
Sort of a D2H on steroids, but some of the specs seem... well antique?
If it is real, then I guess they are typos because 80 ISO max is useless for most dim lit scenes.
If it is real, then I guess they are typos because 80 ISO max is useless for most dim lit scenes.
murquiza
Leading Member
I read somewhere in the first report leaked yesterday that it jumps then to 1600 and 3200. In that case and at $4000 may be worth the money, otherwise..., the white lenses aren't ugly after all.
kswalls
Well-known member
If it's not it's the best forgery I've ever seen.
David Goodwin
Leading Member
You two miss the point -- this is camera seems designed to be more of a studio/portrait camera, where you dont need much more than 1/250 sync, or higher than ISO 800 to be useful....
at least thats my POV on this camera ...
at least thats my POV on this camera ...
Hamstor
Senior Member
fair call, but it doesn't make it useless in the field either does it...
I've never shot above 800 on my D100. I would however like 1/500 sync though, but can live without it.
I think I am happy enough to accept this will be my next camera in about 6-12months. The D100 will become my backup and I'll stop comming to these forums for about 5 years so I don't see any new of later models corrupting my desires ;-)
I've never shot above 800 on my D100. I would however like 1/500 sync though, but can live without it.
I think I am happy enough to accept this will be my next camera in about 6-12months. The D100 will become my backup and I'll stop comming to these forums for about 5 years so I don't see any new of later models corrupting my desires ;-)
ISO above 800 has never been useful on any digital I've seen. I'm using a D70 now, and I don't go above 640 because I find the noise is too great beyond that. So, although higher ISO would be nice IF the noise were incredibly low, I won't really miss 1600.
There is no doubt I'll be buying one of these things.
There is no doubt I'll be buying one of these things.
David Goodwin
Leading Member
Not to mention that according to Rob Galbraith it DOES have iso 1600 & 3200 as custom functions, which means they likely are artificial ISO settings (software boosted perhaps) rather than a sensor setting...
E
Ednaz
Guest
noise is not a problem at all as long as you nail the exposure. unlike iso800 or below, there's no wiggle room for adjusting exposure after the fact, but if you get it right, the only real visible loss is a bit of saturation. without it, i couldn't shoot the musicians live in performance in jazz clubs like i do.
and just as grain became a "look" - it started out of necessity as an outcome of push processing, but then became a bona fide effect sought for certain types of images - i see digital noise heading the same direction. i've seen a couple fashion shoots that were full of digital noise - given that they could have used any type of lighting at any intensity they wanted, i'd have to assume that the effect was intended.
'No, the OTHER left.'
http://www.onemountainphoto.com
and just as grain became a "look" - it started out of necessity as an outcome of push processing, but then became a bona fide effect sought for certain types of images - i see digital noise heading the same direction. i've seen a couple fashion shoots that were full of digital noise - given that they could have used any type of lighting at any intensity they wanted, i'd have to assume that the effect was intended.
--
'No, the OTHER left.'
http://www.onemountainphoto.com
tx51210
Forum Enthusiast
The pdf file I have does not include this information.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum