A Photo Of The New Nikon???

Started Jan 11, 2010 | Discussions
PhotoRecon Veteran Member • Posts: 4,032
Re: He's Doing Everything I Wouldn't Do.

thanks in kind, Eric.

m.

Jacques Gratton
Jacques Gratton Regular Member • Posts: 238
Re: I think Thom gave it away.

24-120 VRII on D900
--
Jacques Gratton Photographer
http://www.jacquesgratton.com

 Jacques Gratton's gear list:Jacques Gratton's gear list
Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR
david7703 Regular Member • Posts: 111
Re: My Not-So-Elementary Deductions, Mr Watson.

ok, i'll play...

the hood and lens look like the 17-35mm/f2.8.

the viewfinder is too big to be DX...but we know he likes the D90 bodies..

hmmmm...

D90 FX?..

thafuzz Regular Member • Posts: 204
ok I'll bite

No #4

Presuming "knowledge of Nikon gear" one may asume that is a 17-35 2.8 lens (old).

Bob uses D90s but this one does not look like D90 so new.

That leaves # 2.

Nikon must be preparing a higher pixel FF at a lower price point. The cam in the Pic looks like FF. At twilight. Good Iso, like the D3.

So "D900" (He used to use D90, lol) in a compact shape (he travels) with a old 17- 35. Otherwise we would not have seen this pic.

Thom?

KnightPhoto2
KnightPhoto2 Senior Member • Posts: 2,034
Re: I think Thom gave it away.

Thoughts R Us wrote:

Thom Hogan wrote:

Look, let's make this simple. There's a camera and a lens in the shot. There are four possibilities:

1. New Camera. New Lens.
2. New Camera. Old Lens.
3. Old Camera. New Lens.
4. Old Camera. Old Lens.

First, can you rule out any of those based upon what Bob has written and shown you?

We can rule out option 4...old camera. old lens.

Agreed

Second, can you rule any of those out based upon what you know about Nikon products?

Stumped me on that one. I would still guess a new camera, as I don't believe that Nikon would shoot a campaign like this for a lens alone.

Agreed, and I'll add that we are expecting many new lenses and > 1 body, so both lens and camera are new.

Third, can you make any assessment based upon your knowledge of Bob's photography?

No answer on that one, except the observation others have made that Bob likes to travel light, and thus favors smaller, lighter bodies.

OK, so we have a D700-sized body or something even lighter in FX. Smaller than D700 was not expected, but maybe it's here already (sooner than we thought)?

In which case, Thom has long called for a zoom to match this lower end FX body. So the 24-1xx replacement. But boys and girls, is that lens too big for f3.5-f5.6 in which case it's an f4 zoom?

Fourth, why would they be in a chopper at twilight?

To show off low light/high ISO capabilities.
BTW, thanks Thom for your insight and making this so much more fun!

OK if low light is the schtick, that rules out the 24 megapixel sensor in the D3X. But it leaves open either an:

  • 18+ megapixel sensor with good low light performance in a smaller than D700 body, in other words a HEAD TO HEAD 5Dii competitor. This would align with Canon dropping their price this week. No one has mentioned video - is that why you go up in a helicopter at twilight, seems likely.

  • or a D700S (D700 with D3S sensor)? If it's a D700S I'll order it and sell my D700.

 KnightPhoto2's gear list:KnightPhoto2's gear list
Nikon 1 V3 Nikon D500 Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +22 more
bikinchris
bikinchris Forum Pro • Posts: 21,559
I think you are the closest

My guess is that this is a NEW body with a smaller form like the D90 with an FX sensor. In other words, a lower price with FX. It has video, thus the flyover of Miami. The lens is harder, since I don't really expect a replacement for the 17-35 to be so soon. But maybe this is a suprise replacement of the 17-35.

david7703 wrote:

ok, i'll play...

the hood and lens look like the 17-35mm/f2.8.

the viewfinder is too big to be DX...but we know he likes the D90 bodies..

hmmmm...

D90 FX?..

-- hide signature --

I am an expert at contradicting myself. Just wait a while. It will be evident.
Chris, Broussard, LA

 bikinchris's gear list:bikinchris's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D4S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF VR +1 more
bikinchris
bikinchris Forum Pro • Posts: 21,559
Re: He's Doing Everything I Wouldn't Do.

It was also cold that night according to the blog, so this may have been a 'dry run' before opening the door.

PhotoRecon wrote:

thanks in kind, Eric.

m.

-- hide signature --

I am an expert at contradicting myself. Just wait a while. It will be evident.
Chris, Broussard, LA

 bikinchris's gear list:bikinchris's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D4S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF VR +1 more
KnightPhoto2
KnightPhoto2 Senior Member • Posts: 2,034
Re: He's Doing Everything I Wouldn't Do.

One of the articles in his Blog specifically mentions his gyro, which he sends to himself at his hotel via UPS, since he say the shape of it is too suspicious for flying with these days. So maybe the gyro had not arrived yet...
--
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/119002

 KnightPhoto2's gear list:KnightPhoto2's gear list
Nikon 1 V3 Nikon D500 Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +22 more
Lahocla Regular Member • Posts: 116
Re: I think Thom gave it away.

In Bob's post he specifically says that the photo is of the back of his head and the back of the camera (actually its more the side of the camera - not that I think that is important). This may be a clue ... that its the camera he is trying to hide. Not the lens.

If that lens was not-yet-released and Bob was working for Nikon then I think he would be in trouble for allowing that much of it to be seen.

So I'll go with new camera, and existing lens. At least in this shot. The new/upcoming Nikon lenses may be in his gear bag!

I'm not familiar with Bob's work & gear choices but going by what others have said then the camera should be no bigger than a D700, and perhaps only the size of a D90. Great high-ISO for the night shot and/or video. FX is logical - especially with the apparent mirror box - but given Bob's preference for DX perhaps is a new standard in high ISO in a DX or smaller body?

-- hide signature --
david7703 Regular Member • Posts: 111
Re: I think you are the closest

yeah i don't expect a replacement or upgrade to the 17-35mm, so my guess was more in line w/ one of the options fromThom's list: new body/old lens.

p.s. (if you read Krist's blog, he doesn't exactly say that the pic is of a new body AND new lens..he only mentions the camera as it relates to the post.

here's the quote..

" But that does explain the shot of the back of my head and the back of the camera for this post. We’re shooting aerials of Miami…at twilight. "

Billx08 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,373
Re: My Not-So-Elementary Deductions, Mr Watson.

Hans Giersberg wrote:

. . .

The aerial shots may indicate he's shooting with a VR lens, but at best that's a weak clue. The lens is almost certainly a zoom, and from the lens hood we know it goes wide.

Not necessarily. A fast, wide, fixed focal length f/1.4 could also fit, and Bob could zoom with his pilot, not with his feet. But then the lens also seems about the size of the old 17-35mm f/2.8 so . . .

PhotoRecon Veteran Member • Posts: 4,032
Re: He's Doing Everything I Wouldn't Do.

Chris,

I can't imagine a "dry run," per say. But I actually can simpathize about the freezing cold; which up at altitude, can be quite freezing.

He wrote Miami was freezing that day. I know what he's saying, as I had lived in Miami for a couple of years - and loved the place. The place was okay: the women I loved. But once or twice, it did in fact get cold (well, women did anyway). My poor plant died one night because of this (I would have given-up any cold woman for this plant).

And I can simpathize about being cold, myself. Early past year, I too rode along during freezing temperatures. I was outside the helicopter and after an hour, and after flying around above 800 ft during that time, and after having ridden outside at an almost constant 50-60 mph; when the pilot suddenly increased the speed of the machine, practically doubling its speed, and when I turned around to climb back in - I fell off the skid, from which I had been standing.

The camera & gyro were frozen to my hands; well, my hands had become so cold, the fingers & hands, themselves had no sensation & wouldn't function. They were basically frozen - although I was wearing bicycling gloves.

And here, during the then freezing temps over Atlanta, I was being towed alongside/behind the helicopter. Literally. How I managed to get back onto the skid & eventually back into the rear cabin of the chopper - is a book all to itself.

So yes. Bob Krist may have a point to shoot within a closed cabin. But me? Not ever. I'll permit myself to be towed in the 100+ mph wind before willingly shooting through glass in a warm & fuzzy state-of-being.

A warm toast to the adventures of photography !

marc

nico3d
nico3d Contributing Member • Posts: 878
Re: I think Thom gave it away.

Thom Hogan wrote:

Fourth, why would they be in a chopper at twilight?

my bet is they are there to prove 2 things with the new stuff. You can shoot with very low light and moving.
SInce it's a city, i'd say it's a WA, the hood is definitely for WA.

And maybe, since it's low light and the f stop has to be fast, it might be one of the primes that Thom said were ready... maybe the 24 f1.4 ?

I have no clue about the camera. If it's the D900, that camera, as a small D3X shouldn't be able to shoot extreme low light like the D3S

-- hide signature --

'there's more in each of us than we know'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicolasmarino/

 nico3d's gear list:nico3d's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
PhotoRecon Veteran Member • Posts: 4,032
Re: He's Doing Everything I Wouldn't Do.

His using a gyro (because of his seemingly high-caliber in photography), as well as that of shipping the odd looking device to location - makes sense.

marc.

sandy b
sandy b Veteran Member • Posts: 9,340
First, I don't think what he "prefers" is germaine to this conversation

I think if Nikon hired him to showcase a FF camera, he said sure! I also don't think they would hire a helicopter to showcase a D90 replacement. I also don't think they would do the helicopter for JUST a lens. Maybe they would, but I doubt it. I think he's using a new FF and a new wide zoom, and we will kinow for sure in about 3 weeks. Oh, and I bet he is shooting video from that helicopter. (too).

 sandy b's gear list:sandy b's gear list
Nikon Coolpix A Nikon 1 J1 Nikon D750 Nikon D7500 Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +10 more
PhotoRecon Veteran Member • Posts: 4,032
Re: My Not-So-Elementary Deductions, Mr Watson.

there are basic limitations of flight over & around such structures as buildings, etc. A zoom, not a prime, would be the ideal way to go.

Also, there's a great expense involved, per minute, to photo from a helicopter as a platform. i.e. it's cheaper to actually zoom - where, the machine gets one into a basic position.

marc.

thafuzz Regular Member • Posts: 204
Re: He's Doing Everything I Wouldn't Do.

Marc, having done a few helcopter shoots myself I know where you are coming from, never through glass, outside on the skid anyday. I can not do extreme sports anymore due to multiple spine fractures, but heli rides out on the skid, any day, just don't get the jobs these days.

Nice galleries. Do you give lessons ?

sandy b
sandy b Veteran Member • Posts: 9,340
He may have just been doing a recon flight

setting up some shots.

 sandy b's gear list:sandy b's gear list
Nikon Coolpix A Nikon 1 J1 Nikon D750 Nikon D7500 Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +10 more
Thoughts R Us
Thoughts R Us Senior Member • Posts: 2,793
Re: He may have just been doing a recon flight

Maybe Bob is trying to show what the average consumer can do with the camera without all sorts of extra equipment.

The problem with the videos by people like Vincent Laforet is that they require all types of expensive peripheral equipment.

Keep in mind that even a camera as good as the D700, and thus presumably its upcoming successor, is aimed at the consumer/prosumer market...that's where the majority of the sales will come from. The pros will make up their mind on other factors besides the marketing campaign.

Thus if you show people what they can do without any extra equipment beyond the range of many consumers you may have a more effective sales demonstration.

Billx08 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,373
Re: My Not-So-Elementary Deductions, Mr Watson.

PhotoRecon wrote:

there are basic limitations of flight over & around such structures as buildings, etc. A zoom, not a prime, would be the ideal way to go.

That may be true if a particular building is what needs to be photographed and due to surrounding structures you can't get very close. But look at the photo. It suggests that the goal is to produce a wide angle shot showing much more than buildings. Road traffic with plenty of lights to show the approaching darkess that a wide aperture lens would be well suited for, and the buildings would be just part of the dramatic backdrop and there wouldn't be any need to approach them with a longer lens, zoom or otherwise. This may only be speculation but I'm comfortable with it.

Also, there's a great expense involved, per minute, to photo from a helicopter as a platform. i.e. it's cheaper to actually zoom - where, the machine gets one into a basic position.

If the above is correct, time wouldn't be a significant factor. A single approach to that area is all that would be needed and the majority of the time in the air would probably be getting there from the airport and returning (or from the helicopter pad). Proper timing would also be needed to arrive at the appropriate moment. You're right, it would be expensive to circle, waiting for just the right time when the amount of light is the proper balance. Any good photographer would know when to "be there", even if f/8 isn't used.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads