can't believe it

S2 · Sep 27, 2002

Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control, hmmm...

davidleegoerndt · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

I'm not pretending to be happy with my $2000+ purchase, I am happy! It does what I need it to do. The sharpness issue has been laid to rest several times (can't believe that horse isn't dead yet!). It's not a point and shoot camera, it takes some thought to use it, however, it can be used as a p&s and produce excellent results.

David Goerndt

Anthony Medici · Sep 27, 2002

And I can't believe people will pay over $20,000 for a car that likes to roll over either. Simga, however, has enough of its own problems. I'm sure once the camera is reviewed and is out for a while, problems will surface that Sigma never addresses either. Consider the number of people reporting problems with HSM lenses on the D100. Neither Nikon or Sigma are addressing that issue.

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

Rob Muller · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

I can't believe there are people like you that are NEVER happy with anything.

Rich Gibson · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

Ger Bee · Sep 27, 2002

--- I can’t believe the people who are actually buying that Kodak camera either. Now there is a price tag to get your teeth into.

In short the $2,000 digital SLR is a CHEAP consumer, throwaway product.

When all the features are weighed up the D100 is the number one and comes top of the class league by a fair margin. It has good to great all-round performance and consistently scores high with no really bad points.

Bob &rsun · Sep 27, 2002

For some unknown reason, you have a strong Sigma bias.

In fact, on this post you asked for feedback on the Sigma 15-30 lens:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=3407605

Then, based on one response that you got - and apparently not even based on personal experince - two days later you tell someone else what an excellent lens it is! http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=3419240

Well, according to this survey - based on 18 responses - this lens is rated poorly: (and you call this quality?)

http://www.cmpsolv.com/cgi-bin/output2.cgi?Manu=4.+Nikon+compatible&Type=1.+Ultra-wide+Zooms&Aperture=3.+around+f%2F4&Sort=1.+overall+Performance&x=97&y=4
So, why should anyone here take your D100 comments seriously?

S2 · Sep 27, 2002

I think being an owner of D100 ( and now Sigma 15-30) give me some right to express my opinion. No bias to Sigma, 16 years of happy Nikoning

Just not that happy with D100 :-(
Sorry, you have to face the truth.

digibob said:
For some unknown reason, you have a strong Sigma bias.

In fact, on this post you asked for feedback on the Sigma 15-30 lens:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=3407605
Then, based on one response that you got - and apparently not even
based on personal experince - two days later you tell someone else
what an excellent lens it is!
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=3419240
Well, according to this survey - based on 18 responses - this lens
is rated poorly: (and you call this quality?)

http://www.cmpsolv.com/cgi-bin/output2.cgi?Manu=4.+Nikon+compatible&Type=1.+Ultra-wide+Zooms&Aperture=3.+around+f%2F4&Sort=1.+overall+Performance&x=97&y=4
So, why should anyone here take your D100 comments seriously?

Gabriele Sartori · Sep 27, 2002

You don't know what you are talking about

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

S2 · Sep 27, 2002

Explain me if you do.

Gabriele Sartori said:
reanimator said:

Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

Click to expand...

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

Bob &rsun · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Sorry, you have to face the truth.

If you think the D100 is not capable of first rate images, I'm not the one with a truth problem.

Fact is, your past history is strongly suspect. Fact is, Phil & Steve (& others) rated the D100 very highly.
I know what I'm doing with the D100 and my images constantly rate high praise.

Truth is, I should know better than to correspond with a troll.

Greg Gebhardt · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

--

Seeing that you are a long time memebr her, with 8 total posts, we shoudl all listen to you? Dust is and will be a problem with all of todays DSLRs. There are too many opeople here getting VERY sharp images from the D100.

As far as Sigma, will they really don't count. Their lenses speak for themselves.

Greg Gebhardt D1, D1x, CP5000 & CP5700
Jacksonville, Florida

S2 · Sep 27, 2002

Don't try to cover Nikon's mistakes, not that agressive.
Let them know that there is a problem, they should fix it.

digibob said:
reanimator said:

Sorry, you have to face the truth.

Click to expand...

If you think the D100 is not capable of first rate images, I'm not
the one with a truth problem.
Fact is, your past history is strongly suspect. Fact is, Phil &
Steve (& others) rated the D100 very highly.
I know what I'm doing with the D100 and my images constantly rate
high praise.

Truth is, I should know better than to correspond with a troll.

DrMark · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Explain me if you do.

Taken by a total nobody with a D100 and I am told junk 24-85 f2.8-f4 nikkor lens. UV cheap filter. I guess for a non pro no one taking pictures if this is not good enough for sharpness I don't have a clue what is.

Explain to me what is wrong with the dust and softness of this pic.

Mike Hurst · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

I cannot believe it either.

I can't believe this amazing new technology and how fortunate I am to be involved with it as it grows.

I can't believe how easy it is now to take my own photographs, process them myself, and print them myself. I am in complete control of the whole process.

I can't believe the stunning 11x14 and 12x18 prints I am getting, and neither can my associates. I cannot believe the high ratio of high quality, snappy photos I now get. With my Nikon F100 I got one or two pictures a roll that were worthy of being enlarged. On my recent trip to Hawaii I took 800 frames with my D100. I ended up printing over 150 of them at 8x10 or larger and they look great. My biggest expense now is all the picture frames I am buying. I am running out of wall space for my prints.

I can't believe how much my photo skills have improved since I started using the Nikon CP5000 and now the Nikon D100. I get immediate feedback so I catch my errors as I make them. Photo processors are not compensating for my errors. I see first hand exactly what effects all the different controls have on the final picture. I am now in complete control, and the Nikon D100 allows me to control just about every aspect of capturing an image.

I can't believe that Nikon has put such a powerful capable camera into my hands for such a reasonable price. $2000 is a lot of money but as far as high quality photographic equipment it is inexpensive.

To think that Nikon should be embarrassed over the D100, or that they owe anybody anything is absolutely and patently ABSURD.

If you hate Nikon so much and think Nikon is inferior, go buy Canon or Sigma. Who cares. You can get excellent results with these cameras just as you can with Nikon.

The bottom line is go take some pictures and quit wasting your time trying to convince thousands of Nikon D100 owners that they have inadequate or inferior equipment.

--
Mike Hurst
[email protected]

NNS · Sep 27, 2002

I agree 100 percent. I am very happy and pleased with the D100.

Mike Hurst said:
reanimator said:

Going thru the forum posts, I can't believe some people pretend to
be happy buying $2000 camera that is clearly unfinished (sharpness
problem, dust protection). You have to act to make Nikon fix it or
refund some money instead. I think for this kind of money you
should expect quality.

P.S. and I can hear somebody pointing to Sigma Quality Control,
hmmm...

Click to expand...

I cannot believe it either.

I can't believe this amazing new technology and how fortunate I am
to be involved with it as it grows.

I can't believe how easy it is now to take my own photographs,
process them myself, and print them myself. I am in complete
control of the whole process.

I can't believe the stunning 11x14 and 12x18 prints I am getting,
and neither can my associates. I cannot believe the high ratio of
high quality, snappy photos I now get. With my Nikon F100 I got
one or two pictures a roll that were worthy of being enlarged. On
my recent trip to Hawaii I took 800 frames with my D100. I ended
up printing over 150 of them at 8x10 or larger and they look great.
My biggest expense now is all the picture frames I am buying. I am
running out of wall space for my prints.

I can't believe how much my photo skills have improved since I
started using the Nikon CP5000 and now the Nikon D100. I get
immediate feedback so I catch my errors as I make them. Photo
processors are not compensating for my errors. I see first hand
exactly what effects all the different controls have on the final
picture. I am now in complete control, and the Nikon D100 allows
me to control just about every aspect of capturing an image.

I can't believe that Nikon has put such a powerful capable camera
into my hands for such a reasonable price. $2000 is a lot of money
but as far as high quality photographic equipment it is inexpensive.

To think that Nikon should be embarrassed over the D100, or that
they owe anybody anything is absolutely and patently ABSURD.

If you hate Nikon so much and think Nikon is inferior, go buy Canon
or Sigma. Who cares. You can get excellent results with these
cameras just as you can with Nikon.

The bottom line is go take some pictures and quit wasting your time
trying to convince thousands of Nikon D100 owners that they have
inadequate or inferior equipment.

--
Mike Hurst
[email protected]

Group Idiot · Sep 27, 2002

reanimator said:
I think being an owner of D100 ( and now Sigma 15-30) give me some
right to express my opinion. No bias to Sigma, 16 years of happy
Nikoning Just not that happy with D100 :-(
Sorry, you have to face the truth.
digibob wrote:

It's your JUNK Sigma 15-30 that renders your D100 impotent. It's gotten universally horrible reviews. I can put fuzzy glass on a Hasselblad too. It doesn't mean the camera is defective.

Just know where to direct the blame. When you're the only one experiencing something, you can't represent it as the norm--even if you are a troll.

Brendan

Ger Bee · Sep 27, 2002

S2 said:
Sorry, you have to face the truth.

............... Truth! YOU can't handle the truth.

YOU are entitled to your own opinion and you are entitled to quote fact. But asking US to face the truth is ludicrous and totally unacceptable.

Are you an Islamic militant?

--
Live life to the power of Nikon!!! & Kodak

I have taken down my equipment list because it offended some Oly SLR forum members!

Ger Bee · Sep 27, 2002

Group Idiot said:
It's your JUNK Sigma 15-30 that renders your D100 impotent. It's
gotten universally horrible reviews. I can put fuzzy glass on a
Hasselblad too. It doesn't mean the camera is defective.

….. in my own small world when I was testing the D100 I was shocked to discover how badly my Sigma lenses performed on my D100.

One may remember some of the silly and stupid posts I made but I did persevered, took the advice offered form the forum and I did finally discover the Sigma to be the main root to my troubles.

--
Live life to the power of Nikon!!! & Kodak

I have taken down my equipment list because it offended some Oly SLR forum members!

SeanU · Sep 27, 2002

The only competiton to the D100 is the S2 and the D60 (in the 2k price range). All 3 cameras can take amazing photos, and all 3 cameras have issues. You have to learn to work within the limitations of the hardware to get the best results. Instead of complaining and making baited comments... why don't you show us an example (include the settings). Maybe we can help you get better results.

Sean

can't believe it

Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Rich Gibson

Guest

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Member

Senior Member

New member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts