Did Nikon screw up?

Started May 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
John Cerra2 Regular Member • Posts: 289
Re: Buy the 5DIII because...

jacobwhite wrote:

You can complain about the 5.5 fps burst rate...but I don't care.

I find that quite good my issue with the 600 is more connected to the distribution points of the AF - I find the to crammed in the middle. I'm "complaining" about 4 fps on the 800 - I'd rather have less resolution and 5.5 fps - which would have made me a happy camper.

I bought the D600 in the middle of December and started a volunteer shoot for the high school boys basketball team at my old school. There are six players on the team that are D1 locks,two probable NBA players, maybe three. The team was good enough to win the state tournament. They are big and fast, anin often playing in sub optimal lighting. My D300s might have a better focusing set up, but the iq was never close. In hindsight, the D300s is at a disadvantge in two ways: iso 1600 is marginal in the home gym, and the lesson depth of field with every fixed lens hurt it.

I started the season shooting with 50mm f1.8 D and an 85mm f1.8 D. I had not hoops in 30 years, but the feel for the game stayed withThe equipment today is much better:)

It was love at first sight...I was nailing shots I could never have imagined. The real question was how iso 3200 would hold up on my screen and computer.  My conclusion is that you can shoot iso 3200 with complete impunity.

My only problem was nailing the autofocus. I tried all the modes and now shoot in S or C-9.  The general problem is that if you don't control the focus spot, the C program will occasionally move to the fans in the background, and you get lovely shots of them with blurred players in the foreground. This happens when you are are shooting  from the baseline and are trying to get a point guard racing directly at you, and you have a shorter focal length that has includes more background. Sometimes I got a few shots in focus, and then lost some.

I experimented with 180mm 2.8 and 300 f4 lenses. The former wasbut a bit inflexible and the 300 was inflexible and slow.

One way I coped was to shoot with a 20mm  from the baseline. You give up shooting anything down court, but the dramatic effect on shots in the paint is worth it.

During the season I bought the 70-200 f4. The first game was at the Prudential Center in Newark, with superb lighting. The place was empty and I got an elevated seat five rows up at mid court. It was an ideal location, I could shoot both baskets and I lost few shots to out of focus because the focus distance didn't change much.

Into the post season, and games were always neutral sites, with bad hs gym lighting.  Sometimes I was given a floor pass, and when the lighting got better, I could shoot two cameras again. But the D300s shots were fill in. Generally I had the zoom on the D600 and it worked well.

My conclusion: I could buy one new camera and one new lens. I was not planning on shooting basketball when I bought the D600.  If I knew that I might have been susceptible to the charms of the D700.   There are better sports cameras than the D600 in terms of design, AF and fps/buffer. There are few cameras with a better sponsor and Iq. I lost some shots, no doubt, but in the end I got more great  shots than I ever thought possible, and a kick butt landscape camera to boot.

Because the players are under the age of 18, I don't like to put the shoots in the public domain. If you want to see the, send me a pm, and I will send you a link and Pw. In some cases, I have. full ooc jpeg card dump and some edieted shots in side by side directories.

-- hide signature --

You can complain about the top shutter speed of 1/4000 of a second, I can't remember the last time I needed 1/8000.

Can live with 1/4000

You can complain about the autofocus speed, and I acknowledge the d4faster. But once I figured it out, I was fine.

Please do let me know how you figured it out - because that may actually help me understand if this is he camera I can live with.

You can complain about the weather sealing, and I will acknowledge  it doesn't match the d300s.

Never complained about weather sealing

I can directly compare my shots vs pros that were shooting top of the line Canons, their state finals photos have been widely published around here.  The Canon color space seems cartoonish like in terms of over saturation.

Are you sure that they don't retouch their images? It really is the mags fault for picking people's images that are over-saturated...

Maybe this was easier for me, since I followed one team and knew the players and their tendacies. But over several games, in varying light conditions, after ceding them the prime spot on the baseline...I had no problem getting great shots and better iq.

How did you do a whole season with the D600? I thought it only came out a few months ago?

So while you search for the holy grail, I am getting pro caliber prints at a fraction of the camera cost. So I guess it's how you look at it....I am ecstatic and think that Nikon nailed it.

-- hide signature --

Currently shooting aD300s, a D200, D70 and N50. Have a 'F.'
Also shooting with Konica 35mm SLRS (T3 and FT-1) with numerous Hexanon Lenses. Printer: Canon i9900.

Currently shooting aD300s, a D200, D70 and N50. Have a 'F.'
Also shooting with Konica 35mm SLRS (T3 and FT-1) with numerous Hexanon Lenses. Printer: Canon i9900.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow