Cameralabs D7100 review up: verdict...

Started Apr 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP mosswings Veteran Member • Posts: 8,700
Re: no need

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Reilly, cameralabs is among the most respected photography review sites there is, and I've never seen this Guy with a testing agenda.  At this point you appear to be getting angry with anyone who holds even a slightly different opinion from yourself. Making absolute categorical statements doesn't make them correct.

Sorry if it came over that way.  We do tend to get worked up around here.  Let ye without sin cast the first stone, etc.  I think you have been enjoying the back and forth more than most if the number of threads you have started on this very subject are any indication.  As well, we have seen a variety of categorical statements in this thread and many others.  The underlying or overt premise of some of these posts is that the Nikon is simply doing a marketing gimmick and that everything is the same, we're seeing things that aren't there, we're being dishonest with ourselves, blah blah blah.

Well, I can state categorically or otherwise that things are indeed different and better, all things considered, as many of us have already noted.  I shall have no hesitation in so saying, I hope in a manner consistent with Mako's blood pressure :^)

I'd never even heard of Cameralabs 'til now.  Everyone who knows Nikon DSLRs well knows that the jpgs are okay at best, but not representative of the best the camera can produce.  The respect factor you mention would have increased if he had shot raw and worked with the files a few minutes longer.

In Gordon's defense, he did shoot RAW and employ an optimized LR-only rendering strategy, like most photogs do.  So in this context his review site does represent a fair swath of the photographic hobby, in fact what would be commonly called the "serious" contingent.  That being said, I do think we're retreating to our respective corners, and I'm trying to pull us all out from those comfortable places into an area where we might be able to come to some greater perspective.

Reilly's point is well taken. Microcontrast and detail will have beneficial roles to play as they improve the RAW data quality, and this leads to improved rendering, even downsized, when it's required.  As much as I'm impressed by Reilly's work on the studio shots and the D7100's performance in this milieu, I've even more impressed by what Jim and especially Rudy are turning out.  Jim, showing what's possible with the very best optics and technique, Rudy showing what those of us with more constrained budgets, skills, and subjects can reasonably expect. Neither are snapshooting, as many of the first-shots now being posted are.  The results from this latter category are as to be expected; nothing fantastic.

A while back someone posted a 4 shot downsized series including the D40, D300, D7000, and D7100. On cursory inspection the D40 shot looked great - punchy, apparently really sharp, all that.  The others looked rather more restrained in comparison - but they were more accurate.  I finally understood why my friend with a good eye and a D40 always came back from a flower venue with such attractive, punchy, contrasty shots seemingly effortlessly...his camera wasn't picking up everything mine was, and I had to work the file to get similar results.  But that file let me do more.

We need to choose the tool based on our desires and capabilities.  Today's best cameras are capable of better images, but they demand more of us to do so.  No different that with any other pursuit.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Olympus Stylus 1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow