-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D70 Faults
- Thread starter stratcat55
- Start date
Robert Cohen
Senior Member
I've got an 8008s with the 35-70 2.8 and the same 70-210 you have. Along with 28mm and 50mm 1.4 primes. I bought the D70 kit. The older lenses don't have quite all the functionality as the newest Nikon lenses, so I thought it'd make sense to buy the kit lens. Nevertheless, I expect to be using the older lenses also. I've always loved the 35-70, and for available light a 50mm 1.4 is hard to beat.
--
--Bob
Robert Cohen
Senior Member
Hi Bob! No, I don't have a Springer Spaniel. Both of my dogs are PBGVs (Petit Basset Griffon Vendeen), a more obscure breed.
They're very expressive and the lack of lag time is already helping me get some shots that I would probably have missed with my 4500.
--
--Bob
Brad Wright186399
Member
- Messages
- 20
- Reaction score
- 0
I got my D70 a few days ago, and I absolutely love the results. Yes, you can get a bad shot or two if you don't pay attention to the metering. That's the way camera work. Digital doesn't mean you can forget common sense.
What I really like about this camera is that it takes such a high percentage of great proffessional looking shots. It is lighting fast! I don't miss shots waiting for the thing to power up or flush its buffer. The glass that it comes with is very good, but I don't expect it to compete with the Ultra-high end stuff. The wide angle at 18 mm makes it extremely versatile. The built in flash system is a major plus. It is way ahead of the Cannon.
All in all, I think you will love this camera.
What I really like about this camera is that it takes such a high percentage of great proffessional looking shots. It is lighting fast! I don't miss shots waiting for the thing to power up or flush its buffer. The glass that it comes with is very good, but I don't expect it to compete with the Ultra-high end stuff. The wide angle at 18 mm makes it extremely versatile. The built in flash system is a major plus. It is way ahead of the Cannon.
All in all, I think you will love this camera.
Scotty200054
Leading Member
Gary
I bet the D70 goes with you on your next trip. You will love it so much that there is no way you will leave it.
This camera is addictive!
I bet the D70 goes with you on your next trip. You will love it so much that there is no way you will leave it.
This camera is addictive!
Man-Fai Wong
Veteran Member
--
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ 'the light of the world.' (John 8:12)
See profile for more + some basic photog resources.
As usual, YMMV + caveat emptor.
Contact me at [email protected]
Indulge my fancies at http://www.pbase.com/mandnwong
LurkerMan
Leading Member
Seriously, you can sum it up all right there. I made the exact same observation earlier this morning. WhoTF regularly shoots at 1/4000 and 1/8000... guys covering Indy Car racing and water sports maybe... and in general photography almost no one. People are "hunting" for flaws , the parameters of which won't ever fit into their workflow.
It's ridiculous....
Boy, am I enjoying my D70 - already getting some reasonable results!
Will soon be ready to post a few photos, just getting my head around the camera...coming from a CP5700 most recently I find it lovely that...
...the D70 is far closer to my Nikon film cameras I know and love.
--
Regards, Paul.
http://www.pbase.com/montydog/ntf
Will soon be ready to post a few photos, just getting my head around the camera...coming from a CP5700 most recently I find it lovely that...
...the D70 is far closer to my Nikon film cameras I know and love.
--
Regards, Paul.
http://www.pbase.com/montydog/ntf
Old Ed
Senior Member
Hi TMc -
The MAIN reason for the kit lens is that it gives
you wide angle coverage (28-105 equivalent).
With your 28-85 you'd be stuck with a low
end of 42 equivalent.
The secondary reason is that the kit lens has
the latest bells and whistles (e.g., "D" metering).
Your 70-210 would be a very nice complement
to the 18-70 kit lens. The 28-85, while a nice
lens, would be redundant if you had the kit lens.
(I would like to sell my 8008, with the 28-85,
if I could find someone who wanted that outfit.)
Happy shooting, Ed
The MAIN reason for the kit lens is that it gives
you wide angle coverage (28-105 equivalent).
With your 28-85 you'd be stuck with a low
end of 42 equivalent.
The secondary reason is that the kit lens has
the latest bells and whistles (e.g., "D" metering).
Your 70-210 would be a very nice complement
to the 18-70 kit lens. The 28-85, while a nice
lens, would be redundant if you had the kit lens.
(I would like to sell my 8008, with the 28-85,
if I could find someone who wanted that outfit.)
Happy shooting, Ed
archaic
Well-known member
Wow, that sounds like quite a breed with a moniker like that! Don't know about yours, but my dog (and cat) are both posers -- especially the cat!
I fully agree. If you don't like the camera why even participate in the forms. Leave and go somewhere else so the people that have real problems and need answers can get them.
I noticed that someone photographed a bright section of the sky with exposure compensation set to Two and A Half F-Stops Positive. That's +2.5...
Then they complained about the resulting image, and in another thread others who own a different brand agree that the nikon camera has a problem. Sigh.
Stan
Then they complained about the resulting image, and in another thread others who own a different brand agree that the nikon camera has a problem. Sigh.
Stan
-------------------------------------------------
You hit everything right on the head.
The 28-85 becomes redundant to the kit lens and can't get very much on resale. I was also thinking about keeping these and getting a 20mm f2.8 (which gets me to 30mm).
Either way, I'm out $300. to $500. and the advantage of the existing Nikkors is not as much as I was hoping.
Thanks for your perspective.
TMc
Thanks for reminding me! Ah, the knock-out aroma of undliuted stop bath! Pushing Tri-X Pan all the way up to 1200 (incredible!). Having to decide, BEFORE YOU TOOK THE PICTURE, mind you, what developer you were going to use on the film to get the contrast just right, and exposing the shot accorrdingly. Double-loading the film on the spool, back to back, even when you had a five-spool development tank, because you had so much film to develop at once. Getting that wrist action just right on the tank agitation. Using your fingers in spots on the print in the developer tray so the warmth would speed up the processing in just that area (never used tongs).
You know, I got much better exercise in the darkroom, bouncing from point to point, shaking this and wiggling that, and listening to music, than I do sitting in front of the PC fiddling with PS. Yeah, it's a great program, but I miss the tactile response. Plus, I can't get away with yelling at people when they open the door! The chemicals probably gave me cancer, of course.
So, you are absolutely right to point out to those complaining that a little post-processing might be necessary aren't gaining much sympathy from experienced photographers. Expecting perfect shots from just about any camera is utterly unrealistic. I still use two 30 year old Olympus OM-1 cameras and a 25 year old Mamiya M645. I love my cameras, although they have lots of limitations. (All manual; never went in for that fancy-boy automatic stuff. The first automatic camera I bought was my first digital, three years ago. If they made one, I would get a fully-manual digital camera. Too many damn buttons and menus.)
I am ready to get a DSLR that is more like what I am used to in the film world. The D70 looks like the ticket. Of course, I would like more, but I can't justify the cost. (That Mamiya 645 with the Leaf back is really pretty, but $7k is not in my budget.) I expect that a camera like the D70, at this price range with the technology in its current state, is going to exhibit issues that will have to be worked around. Face it, $1200 or so for a DSLR kit is cheap. Frankly, the spec of the D70 and the initial reviews are incredible for the price. If those issues mean a little post-processing work with PS, that is fine. I doubt that I would let any photo go without some PS work anyway.
If the camera takes crappy pictures, that is another thing entirely. Some cameras seem to exhibit problems that can't really be addressed in PS. Front and back focusing problems, for example (no names, please). But, an occasional moire or CA I can live with. If the occurrence is as infrequent as is being reported, it is minor. It is, in fact, a much better record than I ever achieved with film. I would have been thrilled to have one disappointing shot out of 150.
If folks can't handle this reality, they should save their money and get a $500 P&S because no camera is perfect. The problem is that a lot of inexperienced people are rushing to buy a camera when those same types of people would not have purchased an equivalent film camera 20 or so years ago. People today think that photography is easy; just pay a lot of moneny for a good piece of equipment and you, too, will produce great pictures. It is true that these new cameras make this more of a reality than before. This new equipment is great stuff, and I am very excited about it. But I also know that equipment like this has limitations.
Don't expect miracles. Learn to work with it.
Should I talk about my LP collection and turntable, which I still love? (Maybe not...)
The more I learn, the less I know.
You know, I got much better exercise in the darkroom, bouncing from point to point, shaking this and wiggling that, and listening to music, than I do sitting in front of the PC fiddling with PS. Yeah, it's a great program, but I miss the tactile response. Plus, I can't get away with yelling at people when they open the door! The chemicals probably gave me cancer, of course.
So, you are absolutely right to point out to those complaining that a little post-processing might be necessary aren't gaining much sympathy from experienced photographers. Expecting perfect shots from just about any camera is utterly unrealistic. I still use two 30 year old Olympus OM-1 cameras and a 25 year old Mamiya M645. I love my cameras, although they have lots of limitations. (All manual; never went in for that fancy-boy automatic stuff. The first automatic camera I bought was my first digital, three years ago. If they made one, I would get a fully-manual digital camera. Too many damn buttons and menus.)
I am ready to get a DSLR that is more like what I am used to in the film world. The D70 looks like the ticket. Of course, I would like more, but I can't justify the cost. (That Mamiya 645 with the Leaf back is really pretty, but $7k is not in my budget.) I expect that a camera like the D70, at this price range with the technology in its current state, is going to exhibit issues that will have to be worked around. Face it, $1200 or so for a DSLR kit is cheap. Frankly, the spec of the D70 and the initial reviews are incredible for the price. If those issues mean a little post-processing work with PS, that is fine. I doubt that I would let any photo go without some PS work anyway.
If the camera takes crappy pictures, that is another thing entirely. Some cameras seem to exhibit problems that can't really be addressed in PS. Front and back focusing problems, for example (no names, please). But, an occasional moire or CA I can live with. If the occurrence is as infrequent as is being reported, it is minor. It is, in fact, a much better record than I ever achieved with film. I would have been thrilled to have one disappointing shot out of 150.
If folks can't handle this reality, they should save their money and get a $500 P&S because no camera is perfect. The problem is that a lot of inexperienced people are rushing to buy a camera when those same types of people would not have purchased an equivalent film camera 20 or so years ago. People today think that photography is easy; just pay a lot of moneny for a good piece of equipment and you, too, will produce great pictures. It is true that these new cameras make this more of a reality than before. This new equipment is great stuff, and I am very excited about it. But I also know that equipment like this has limitations.
Don't expect miracles. Learn to work with it.
Should I talk about my LP collection and turntable, which I still love? (Maybe not...)
GT Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
No kidding. I don't think I've ever shot anything above 1/1000. Of course, I remember when cameras with that setting were cutting-edge fast, too...
GT Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
--
GT Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
Superb! Right on the money!
Nice, consice points.
The more I learn, the less I know.
Nice, consice points.
GT Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
Robert Cohen
Senior Member
I guess if I had kids, I'd be taking pix of them. Since I have no kids, I take photos of my dogs (and my girlfriend's cat).
For photos of PBGVs, see the breed club's web site, pbgv.org. Also there is a "slide show" of photos I took with my CP4500 of a Hunting Instinct Test last October.
--
--Bob
David Chin
Forum Pro
... here:
http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/dslr_links
3rd link from the bottom.
stratcat55 wrote:
--
Regards, David
Dee70 - Kindly contribute your Dee70 link here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=8104743
CP.4.5.0.0. http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/
http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/dslr_links
3rd link from the bottom.
stratcat55 wrote:
--
Regards, David
Dee70 - Kindly contribute your Dee70 link here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=8104743
CP.4.5.0.0. http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/
archaic
Well-known member
Nice looking dogs -- looks like a very friendly breed. Cute to see them taking thier owners on walks in the grass/woods. I see they keep the tails long unlike Springers. What's your reaction to the D70 versus the coolpix?
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum