Overcoming some of the limitations of a D600

Started Nov 16, 2012 | Discussions
C D M Forum Member • Posts: 57
Re: Missing my point...

TOF guy wrote:

C D M wrote:

There's no magic here: the motion blur at 1/8000 is guaranteed to be half of what it would have been at 1/4000.

Actually this is not exactly correct.

True! If the motion is accelerating, the motion blur at 1/4000 will be more than twice that at 1/8000s (conversely the difference in blur for decelerating motion will be less). More to the point, what I mean is that the added 125 microsecond exposure time of 1/4000 vs 1/8000 is not likely to make any difference in motion blur for most typical situations. Given that it takes much longer than 1/4000s for the shutter to cross the entire focal plane, you'd sooner notice the effect of rolling shutter than any added motion blur. For comparison, 1/4000s would be on the order of the duration of a flash at 1/4 power (the flash would actually be longer).

lancespring Veteran Member • Posts: 3,974
Re: Missing my point...

J Mankila wrote:

lancespring wrote:

Being limited to a max shutter speed of 1/4,000th is not going to prevent anyone from being a good photographer.

I've seen a beautiful shot of a bird with such fast strokes that 1/4000 couldn't have stopped the motion, and 1/8000 was the answer. That's what the photographer said and I believe it. Not having shot the photo, or having some motion blur in the wings wouldn't have kept him from being a good photographer, but he was thankful of the fast shutter speed. Engineers at Nikon pushed themselves and the photographer pushed the boundaries of photos of that particular bird - that's progress.

There, your argument is officially busted.

Sorry, but your argument is totally pointless.  Neither anirbana nor I are even photographing hummingbirds.   Hummingbirds don't even live in much of the world.   So even if a photographer had a desire to photograph them ( which I don't ) they would not even necessarily have access to such a subject.

You guys sound like a bunch of spoiled little children, demanding that their parents give them the latest and great version of a product, or throwing a tantrum otherwise.

If you think that photography is having the fastest this, the highest resolution that, etc.., then you certainly have a most perverted and twisted view of the hobby.

 lancespring's gear list:lancespring's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D600 +1 more
primeshooter
primeshooter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,842
Re: Overcoming some of the limitations of a D600

FlyfishNerd wrote:

primeshooter wrote:

Aperture control in movie mode is coming in a firmware update.

How sure are you about that? the rumor at Nikonrumors.com is still a rumor I suppose? Or do you know something we don't know yet...

Poster in this thread FTH petitioned Nikon along with a lot of other video guys and they are going to implement it.

lancespring Veteran Member • Posts: 3,974
Re: Here are ny responses

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

anirbana wrote:

1. Max shutter speed of 1/4000.

In my mind that is not a big limitation. I have always owned cameras with max shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. But I really can't remember when was the last time I shot at that speed. I have frequently gone up to around 1/2000 but not any faster. To be able to make an informed decision, what you can do is download one of the "free" photo analysis software programs and run it on your computer. It will show you a complete analysis of counts of images you have shot at different shutter speeds. If you find you shoot a lot at faster shutter speed, then D600 is not a camera for you. Given the fact that you can go down to 50 ISO equivalent in D600, it only helps you stay under that shutter speed.

Thanks be to God that we finally had an honest person speak on this issue.

Let me also add that I honestly cannot recall any time when I have used a shutter speed faster than 1/1000th.

 lancespring's gear list:lancespring's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D600 +1 more
primeshooter
primeshooter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,842
Re: Wrong.

FTH wrote:

3. Aperture control in movie mode- I know there is no way to overcome this other than a firmware update (that too subjected to hardware design). Is there any hope on Firmware side?

Wrong.

This is why self proclaimed tech geeks are getting over my nerves here, because most of them actually don't know anything about technology and just spend their time speculating about tools they don't have and never used. Not accusing you here, just saying that this is the result of repeating stupid things that someone assumed and became by the magic of those forums, a "technical evidence"...

This issue is actually on his way to be solved by Nikon by a simple "firmware" update, it has strictly nothing to do with any hardware limitation. ( it will be solved thanks to a petition that we have sent to the main department)

Hey again. It's good to know Nikon are starting to become a little more able to listen to customer's in this sense for updates to cameras. Canon seem to be much more susceptible to it up until now, they updated the firmware with real user improvements for alot of cameras - take the 5DII for example - added functionality.

One thing I don't get with Nikon is why in bulb mode in any of their cameras you can't tell the camera to expose for say, 2,3 minutes (or whatever you want), without the release? It would be the simplest of electronics but they never give an update to do this. You are limited to 30 seconds or holding the damn button down causing camera shake. I have a remote, but really with a 4 second delay mirror up and this function you wouldn't need one. Perhaps I answered my own question. And bracketing, I want -2, 0 +2. Not the current where I have to take 5 shots to get 3! What the heck is that? There are alot of stupid things on all Nikon's cameras that need updating and modernising IMO.

J Mankila
J Mankila Veteran Member • Posts: 4,234
That is not the point...

lancespring wrote:

J Mankila wrote:

lancespring wrote:

Being limited to a max shutter speed of 1/4,000th is not going to prevent anyone from being a good photographer.

I've seen a beautiful shot of a bird with such fast strokes that 1/4000 couldn't have stopped the motion, and 1/8000 was the answer. That's what the photographer said and I believe it. Not having shot the photo, or having some motion blur in the wings wouldn't have kept him from being a good photographer, but he was thankful of the fast shutter speed. Engineers at Nikon pushed themselves and the photographer pushed the boundaries of photos of that particular bird - that's progress.

There, your argument is officially busted.

Sorry, but your argument is totally pointless. Neither anirbana nor I are even photographing hummingbirds.

That is not the point. The point is, as I said in my first post, that you don't want to or can't take advantage of the technological progress. That, however, is not the fault of the new generation of photographers who are willing to embrace the current technology to the same extent that you did, back in the 60's or so.

Why you think you weren't spoiled brats back then compared to the photographers of the 40's is beyond me. You had 1/2000 shutter speeds for heaven's sake!

Look into the mirror.

You guys sound like a bunch of spoiled little children, demanding that their parents give them the latest and great version of a product, or throwing a tantrum otherwise.

That is a silly argument, and untrue, also. If you re-read my writings in this thread you will notice that it is, indeed, your own projections and imagination that has given you that impression. It has nothing to do with reality.

If you think that photography is having the fastest this, the highest resolution that, etc.., then you certainly have a most perverted and twisted view of the hobby.

No one is saying so. If you re-read my post, you'll notice that I referred to an experienced photographer, not my own experience.

All your arguments are baseless and false. But keep it coming.

-- hide signature --

regards
Janne Mankila, Finland

Leo360 Senior Member • Posts: 1,141
Re: Here are ny responses

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

In my mind that is not a big limitation. I have always owned cameras with max shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. But I really can't remember when was the last time I shot at that speed. I have frequently gone up to around 1/2000 but not any faster. To be able to make an informed decision, what you can do is download one of the "free" photo analysis software programs and run it on your computer. It will show you a complete analysis of counts of images you have shot at different shutter speeds. If you find you shoot a lot at faster shutter speed, then D600 is not a camera for you. Given the fact that you can go down to 50 ISO equivalent in D600, it only helps you stay under that shutter speed.

Alternatively, if you are  using Adobe LightRoom you can filter your images by image metadata parameters including shutter speed. No extra software needed.

Leo

 Leo360's gear list:Leo360's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
Deleted-pending Senior Member • Posts: 2,665
I'd rather take great IQ
2

over fancy bells and whistles. Our studio used both Canon and Nikons for 2 years, but canons sensors (thick AA filters) and processing engines are ages behind Nikon ones.Therefore, the workflow with canon raw files requires more work to get decent shots. To us cameras are tools and Nikon cameras are just perfectly calibrated for a nice and fast workflow. This counts for stills and video.

primeshooter
primeshooter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,842
Re: I'd rather take great IQ

FTH wrote:

over fancy bells and whistles. Our studio used both Canon and Nikons for 2 years, but canons sensors (thick AA filters) and processing engines are ages behind Nikon ones.Therefore, the workflow with canon raw files requires more work to get decent shots. To us cameras are tools and Nikon cameras are just perfectly calibrated for a nice and fast workflow. This counts for stills and video.

Agree, but should be able to have both. Some of this stuff would be so basic to fix.

lancespring Veteran Member • Posts: 3,974
Re: That is not the point...

J Mankila wrote:

That is not the point.

You don't have a point dude. As I said, your comments are all POINTLESS.

The point is, as I said in my first post, that you don't want to or can't take advantage of the technological progress.

I never said any such thing. You are putting words into my mouth that I never said. All I am pointing out is that this issue is being overblown by yourself and others to a completely ridiculous extent. How many photos do YOU take at a shutter speed of 1/8000th? Do you have A SINGLE SUCH PHOTO THAT YOU CAN SHARE WITH US?

Do you honestly think that if I ever had a situation where I needed a 1/4000th second shutter speed, that I would not use it?   Think again.

Just how important is it to be able to shoot at such a speed, if there are hardly any circumstances at all when such a shutter speed is ever needed by the vast majority of photographers? So far, your only ridiculous argument is that it is needed to photograph Hummingbirds.

Well, BIG DEAL DUDE! That is trivial, that is TOTALLY INSIGNIFICANT.

You have not made one single point here to argue that having a 1/8000th second shutter speed is important or a necessity.

 lancespring's gear list:lancespring's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D600 +1 more
primeshooter
primeshooter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,842
Re: That is not the point...

lancespring wrote:

J Mankila wrote:

That is not the point.

You don't have a point dude. As I said, your comments are all POINTLESS.

The point is, as I said in my first post, that you don't want to or can't take advantage of the technological progress.

I never said any such thing. You are putting words into my mouth that I never said. All I am pointing out is that this issue is being overblown by yourself and others to a ridiculous extent. How many photos do YOU take at a shutter speed of 1/8000th? Do you have A SINGLE SUCH PHOTO THAT YOU CAN SHARE WITH US?

Just how important is it to be able to shoot at such a speed, if there are hardly any circumstances at all when such a shutter speed is needed. So far, your only ridiculous arguement is that it is needed to photograph Hummingbirds. Well, BIG DEAL DUDE! That is trivial, that is INSIGNIFICANT.

I take quite alot at 1/8000. Try shooting with a f/1.4 prime lens wide open in the carribean and you will understand a little more. Why would you whine about having more options? For you there might hardly be any situations. But Nikon don't just make camera's for you though do they!

MOD TOF guy Forum Pro • Posts: 14,991
Re: Missing my point...

C D M wrote:

(snip)  More to the point, (snip) 1/4000 vs 1/8000 is not likely to make any difference in motion blur for most typical situations.

Agreed, the purpose of 1/8000 sec is rarely to freeze motion. It is useful if one takes an image of a scene under sunny sky with a fast prime and as shallow DOF as allowed, that is with the lens wide opened. At 1/8000 one just take the image. At 1/4000 one must either close the lens some, but it would be at the expense of the desired shallower DOF, or use an ISO setting of less than 100, at the expense of some DR, or use a ND filter, at the expense of a less bright VF and less light reaching the AF points (and sometimes one does not have the filter handy).

It's not a frequent situation by any means for most people. I'll take my own situation as example: my only 2 primes are the 50 f1.8 (stolen but I intend to replace it) and 150 f2.8 (for macros). So it would affect only pictures taken with the 50 f1.8 which I don't use often and then not in sunlight (more for museums and locations with little light). So the 1/8000 capability of the D800 would not enter in consideration if I were buying n FFa camera today and hesitating between D600 and D800.

-- hide signature --

Thierry

 TOF guy's gear list:TOF guy's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +6 more
lancespring Veteran Member • Posts: 3,974
Re: That is not the point...

primeshooter wrote:

I take quite alot at 1/8000. Try shooting with a f/1.4 prime lens wide open in the carribean and you will understand a little more.

OK, let's see a couple of your many examples.   Convince me that 1/8000th second was absolutely necessary for you to get the pic.

Why would you whine about having more options?

I'm not the one whining here.   I'm criticizing all the cry babies who are whining so loudly about what a huge handicap the D600 supposedly has for not having a 1/8000th second shutter.

 lancespring's gear list:lancespring's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D600 +1 more
lancespring Veteran Member • Posts: 3,974
Re: Missing my point...

TOF guy wrote:

It's not a frequent situation by any means for most people. I'll take my own situation as example: my only 2 primes are the 50 f1.8 (stolen but I intend to replace it) and 150 f2.8 (for macros). So it would affect only pictures taken with the 50 f1.8 which I don't use often and then not in sunlight (more for museums and locations with little light). So the 1/8000 capability of the D800 would not enter in consideration if I were buying n FFa camera today and hesitating between D600 and D800.

Thank goodness more people are bringing sanity into this discussion, and pointing out the truth of just how important and practical this issue is.

 lancespring's gear list:lancespring's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D600 +1 more
Leo360 Senior Member • Posts: 1,141
examples, please!
1

primeshooter wrote:

I take quite alot at 1/8000. Try shooting with a f/1.4 prime lens wide open in the carribean and you will understand a little more.

Examples, please, with full EXIF data.

I, for one, love hot Caribbean landscapes especially at f/1.4 and without ND filter Sorry, if I come across as a skeptic but my bull$hit meter just turned red.

Leo

 Leo360's gear list:Leo360's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
rinsephotographic Contributing Member • Posts: 934
Re: Here are ny responses

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

1. Max shutter speed of 1/4000.

In my mind that is not a big limitation. I have always owned cameras with max shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. But I really can't remember when was the last time I shot at that speed. I have frequently gone up to around 1/2000 but not any faster. To be able to make an informed decision, what you can do is download one of the "free" photo analysis software programs and run it on your computer. It will show you a complete analysis of counts of images you have shot at different shutter speeds. If you find you shoot a lot at faster shutter speed, then D600 is not a camera for you. Given the fact that you can go down to 50 ISO equivalent in D600, it only helps you stay under that shutter speed.

agreed. i am having a hard time imagining where my photography would be limited by a 1/4000 shutter speed. in fact, i don't think i've ever looked at that specification or been aware of the top shutter speed on any camera i've ever owned. i see a lot of people inventing situations or creating highly specific scenarios where it might be useful but i highly doubt that the situation would actually arise...or that if it did, a person couldn't figure out an easy and immediate work around.

portraits at f/1.4 in the caribbean sun? you must not do a lot of portrait work because if you did, you'd obviously know that there is NO WAY you would be shooting anything serious even close to the harsh light of midday and, if you were, you'd be using reflectors, fill, likely a 3 stop polarizer and certainly not f/1.4. a lot of my portrait work (and everybody else's) was done with MF gear with leaf shutters with a top sync of 1/500.

am i saying that there is no way anyone could ever use a shutter speed of 1/8000? no, but it seems unlikely enough to not really consider it a limitation. pradipta's suggestion is a good one: look at your photos, see how often you shoot at super fast speeds.

2. Flash sync speed of 1/200th of a second.

Again, not a big issue in my mind. Even if that hit the limit for a fill flash situation, you can simply dial in to "Auto FP" to support much faster shutter speed - technically up to 1/4000 sec.

this has always been a limiting factor and, therefor, simply isn't a limiting factor. all of us who shoot with a lot of flash long ago figured out how to get around this. pocket wizard's new hyper sync is awesome if one really needs flash and high speeds.

3. Aperture control in movie mode-

Not a problem unless you are an avid videographer that needs to control depth of field every moment. Even if you are, the workaround is simple. Simply stop, change the aperture and start shooting again. I don't know how many amateurs change apertures while shooting video. As far as I know, most of the camcorders don't let you change you apertures at all.

i can see how people would be frustrated with this as it really is a bit of a 'wow' oversight. however, as an actual limitation, i think it applies only to hobbyists experimenting with their video function. while i do not shoot any video myself, one of my friends (and weekend photography partner) is an D/AD in the movie industry; he owns several dslr rigs (canon - the enemy!) for doing high end commercials and indie shorts and movies. i have never seen him or his cinematographers use lenses that don't have manual focus and manual aperture control. indeed, most of their lenses are stepless aperture cine lenses. i don't know how much they change aperture mid-scene, however, so i can't comment on how useful or not useful the whole thing is, but i can say that automatic aperture control is not really something they would ever think about. honestly, the amount of gear they use is very imposing. and expensive.

4. AF-ON -

If your shooting habit involves using the AF-ON to track focus, then this could be a problem. But only you can tell whether this is a problem for you or not. I use the AF-ON exclusively when I shoot my kids sports. So, that would've been a big problem for me if I was considering D600.

Thoughts and ideas appreciated. No dust or oil comments please.

i use AF-ON for focus so that i can decouple my meter from my focus...which means i also use AE LOCK a lot too. this actually is a large imitation for me.

Oil spots is not a problem at all. One really needs to learn to clean the sensor if they want to use a DSLR. We had the same problem with D3. But it literally went away after the first thousand or so shots.

cleaning sensors is second nature to those of us who lived through the early days of digital slrs. obviously, persistent oil or dust spots are less than ideal, but so was the fact that my d2x collected dust like a vacuum. annoyed me but i dealt with it. i'd rather not have to clean, but it wouldn't be a major factor in my decision to buy/not buy a d600...af-on a bigger thing for me.

in the end, the d600 is just like any camera as ever been since, well, since the dawn of photography: capable in some ways, limited in other. this is obssession with the 'perfect camera' is laughable. cameras (and lenses) are tools. if you are serious, you don't own just one. i think all of this hyper-analysis we're seeing is coming from people who are punching above their photographic weight class; they've stretched themselves to buy the 'perfect camera' and are now carping because it isn't perfect in every way they want it to be. so buy another camera that compliments your current camera. can't afford it? work around it, take photos to experiment with how best to do so. the challenge will be good for you, trust me.

-- hide signature --

dave

J Mankila
J Mankila Veteran Member • Posts: 4,234
Reality check...
2

lancespring wrote:

primeshooter wrote:
Why would you whine about having more options?

I'm not the one whining here. I'm criticizing all the cry babies who are whining so loudly about what a huge handicap the D600 supposedly has for not having a 1/8000th second shutter.

Whining so loudly? Re-read our posts and you'll realise that nobody here is saying the difference between 1/4000 and 1/8000 shutter speeds is vital. We're fighting for the right to consider it an advantage. And you're making blanket statements about all of us being juvenile crybabies.

Then re-read your own reply to me (just above) and you'll see LOUD.

-- hide signature --

regards
Janne Mankila, Finland

J Mankila
J Mankila Veteran Member • Posts: 4,234
Finally, we might just be able to agree...

lancespring wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

It's not a frequent situation by any means for most people. I'll take my own situation as example: my only 2 primes are the 50 f1.8 (stolen but I intend to replace it) and 150 f2.8 (for macros). So it would affect only pictures taken with the 50 f1.8 which I don't use often and then not in sunlight (more for museums and locations with little light). So the 1/8000 capability of the D800 would not enter in consideration if I were buying n FFa camera today and hesitating between D600 and D800.

Thank goodness more people are bringing sanity into this discussion, and pointing out the truth of just how important and practical this issue is.

Allow me to continue the trend, then.

Take bright midday and add snow. Take one f/1.2 standard lens, one f/1.4 wideangle and, finally, one f/2.0 telephoto. That's my setup and a typical shooting situation. I bought those lenses (all manual focus) partly in order to utilise the wide open apertures. I'm buying either the D600 or D800 to achieve the same freedom of DOF control and familiar focal lengths that I've enjoyed with my film camera (Nikon F3).

The polariser (high-quality B+W "slim-fit" model) can only do so much to bring down the shutter speeds, can make sky too blue and trees too green, and often massively complicates the shooting by creating veiling glare. Thus, I've had multiple times that I've had to use one or two stops slower aperture so as to avoid blown whites. Have I gotten the shots that I wanted? Yes, but not at the apertures I wanted.

Simply put, D800 (as opposed to D600) would give me one stop more freedom in these situations. And no, I've never even shot hummingbirds, but we've got plenty of other fast birds with which the 1/8000 could come in handy.

PS: I apologise for the row we've gotten into. I don't feel good about it and hope we can come to a some sort of agreement. I'm not one to crave for "the latest and greatest" and I don't think I would ever defend such behaviour. You've gotten the wrong impression, unfortunately.

-- hide signature --

regards
Janne Mankila, Finland

J Mankila
J Mankila Veteran Member • Posts: 4,234
That's not hard to imagine, at all...

Leo360 wrote:

primeshooter wrote:

I take quite alot at 1/8000. Try shooting with a f/1.4 prime lens wide open in the carribean and you will understand a little more.

Examples, please, with full EXIF data.

I, for one, love hot Caribbean landscapes especially at f/1.4 and without ND filter Sorry, if I come across as a skeptic but my bull$hit meter just turned red.

Leo

No examples this time, I'm sorry, but please, read about my experience:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50306093

Landscape shots at wide apertures is incredibly challenging and, therefore, interesting. And ND filters are not the perfect answer, if good.

-- hide signature --

regards
Janne Mankila, Finland

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 58,592
Re: Overcoming some of the limitations of a D600
1

FTH wrote:

C D M wrote:

anirbana wrote:

3. Aperture control in movie mode- I know there is no way to overcome this other than a firmware update (that too subjected to hardware design). Is there any hope on Firmware side?

The only hope is for an automatic mirror flap cycle to set a new aperture. You will not get live camera control of the aperture without some blackout time during the mirror flap.

However, the good news is that you can use any of a wide variety of very excellent Nikon and 3rd party lenses with a manual aperture control ring. You may even want to get a lens where the aperture ring is stepless to allow for a smooth transition between aperture settings.

How exactly did you come with such a false analyse ?

I think his analysis is very probably right. There is a difference in the way the stop down mechanism works between the top end and lower end cameras. The D800 has a separate motor for the stop down mechanism. The D7000 dual purposes the mirror motor, so that motor closes the diaphragm then flips the mirror (the preview function stops the motor before the mirror flips). Therefore the diaphragm can't be adjusted from the camera with the mirror up. If the D600 is built like the D7000 it physically can't operate the diaphragm in LV or video. It's one of the prices you pay for the cheaper camera.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads