WillieG

Joined on Jan 6, 2012

Comments

Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (533 comments in total)

Not since the introduction of the Canon 6D has there been such a disappointing camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 14:03 UTC as 21st comment | 8 replies
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (533 comments in total)
In reply to:

Isoruku: Why is this camera necessary?? The D7200 seems to have better dynamic range, two card slots, etc. The release of the D7500 suggests a unique and almost self-destructive cluelessness.

This camera is a mistake. Many of us who wanted a resolution increase, after the D7100 and D7200, won't buy it. Let's hope it does so badly in sales that they quickly upgrade it next time. Other than the D500, which was well worth waiting for, cameras are upgraded so often these days that it's no big deal to wait for the next one.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 11:44 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (533 comments in total)
In reply to:

WillieG: Finally, an upgrade to the D7000. Unfortunately we were hoping for a D7200 upgrade. When the D7200 wasn't enough of an increase over my D7100 I waited for the next iteration. I was hoping for a little more resolution but the D7500 is a step backwards. Looks like I'm still waiting. Nikon is a little like the artist van Gogh; periods of sheer brilliance followed by interludes of insanity.

I don't find any of his works crap. Where did you get that from??? I was talking about craziness.

I don't "really or truly need" anything. I "wanted" a significantly higher resolution camera given that that the MP had remained the same for the last two models and I said that in the comment. I wanted that increase in the D7200 upgrade. Not that much to ask for. I didn't get it so I won't buy it.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 17:57 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (533 comments in total)

Finally, an upgrade to the D7000. Unfortunately we were hoping for a D7200 upgrade. When the D7200 wasn't enough of an increase over my D7100 I waited for the next iteration. I was hoping for a little more resolution but the D7500 is a step backwards. Looks like I'm still waiting. Nikon is a little like the artist van Gogh; periods of sheer brilliance followed by interludes of insanity.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 15:58 UTC as 67th comment | 4 replies
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

LubinPhoto: Thanks for the review. I have mixed feelings about which to choose between Canon and Nikon since I often shoot with either. For sports, Nikon seems to have the edge with the massively better battery life and better image buffering. However I'm more invested in Canon. I'd likely get the Canon for that reason alone. Image quality is not a big issue for the past couple generations for these types of camera as they are all great and the difference in a customer's eyes are not noticeable, especially when printed. I'm not a video shooter so this may be better of an upgrade for those not going down the Cinema line of cameras.

LubinPhoto if you're heavily invested in Canon then maybe you should go that route. You'll lose the superior battery life, low-light performance, and Autofocus on the Nikon but the Canon does many other things just as good and Video is a little better.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 15:51 UTC
In reply to:

PanchoVilla: A lot of butt hurt Nikon users in here. Glad DPReview showed just how good the cheaper and more capable the 1DXmkII is in comparison to the D5! Go Canon!

"While the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II’s autofocus is very good, and leagues ahead of earlier-generation professional Canon cameras, the D5 leaves it in the dust. The D5’s AF system is without question the most capable of any camera that we have ever seen."

"...the worlds best AF system."

Hows that for butt-hurt, Canon Fanboy. Did you even read this review?

Go down in flames Canon!

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 18:46 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2016 (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rouseabout: I think this is rigged! I tried the D500 and every shot had bad lighting and composition. Sony does lighting and composition better

The D500 you tried had a defective component. It was attached to the handgrip.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 14:12 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2016 (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sonyshine: The only mystery is why it took Nikon so long to make a camera ( D500) that their user base so clearly wanted ( to replace the D300s) and had been crying out for for a very long time.

At least Nikon heard the call eventually....

I'm glad it took so long. This camera would have been a lot more watered down if it had come out 3 years ago. Now it's the best DX camera of all time by a large margin.

"At least Nikon heard the call eventually...." They didn't just decide to release this camera last year. This has been in the works for a long time. If it takes a few extra years to build a superior camera, then so be it. We don't need a new camera every couple of years with incremental increases in performance, anyway.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 13:56 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steve in Scotland: It is a brilliant piece of kit (as are most cameras) but I still cannot understand for the life of me why on sensor phase detect wasn't included. It's not like Nikon have no experience of this (The N range has had it for years). It seems like they are happy for Canon to walk off into the sunset as the videographer's choice of SLR. I've not got a problem with that as I am a stills person with a load of Nikon lenses but other folk with a large investment in Nikon glass wanting video capability must be feeling frustrated.

The reason Nikon is happy to let Canon "walk off into the sunset as the videographer's choice of DSLR" is that, even though you see a lot of people complaining about slow video feature evolution, the number of people who want video is still a drop in the bucket compared to stills shooters. Nikon gives their photographers what they want and most don't want video. You'll notice that the D500 is flying off the shelf in spite of modest video capabilities.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 15:26 UTC
In reply to:

chipmaster: Comparisons and DP score of 89 aside, I'd say based on two days of olympic watching that Canon is slamming Nikon on camera placement with them white lens dominating everything I've seen.

"Not too bad for a camera 'Left in the Dust' by the competition eh? :-)"

Remember, these photographers didn't all rush out and buy a full camera system the week before the Olympics started. Their selection of cameras is based on a status quo as old as the dust the Canon got left in. :-)

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2016 at 15:08 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Guess Canon will offer Log profile and other features with the C version of the 1DX Mk.II... for a premium of course. Will Nikon do anything to get better video specs or will they wait until 2020?

Like most photographers I don't care about video so I hope they wait until 2120.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 15:15 UTC
In reply to:

rrccad: No mention of the horrible banding in the d5 .. has that been resolved in newer versions of acr?

Also .. dxo which tbh I dislike their overall scores, show a subtly different dr curve for both cameras based upon differences in actual iso.

No mention of the awful oil and dust problem with the 1DX either.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 14:49 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: This totally outguns the 7d mkII. Canon have a fair bit of catching up to do if they want to maintain the competion.

More like it blows the 7D2 away and that's a big deal in this class of camera. The difference in availability dates is not much over one year.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 13:37 UTC
On article Setting new standards: Nikon D5 Review (505 comments in total)
In reply to:

CptRoger: It should be about time to see movable LCD screen also on these tools and abandon that silly idea that pros do not need them and have always to bust their knees and backs squatting down and rolling into mud to shot throgh the viewfinder. I'd rather that that video capabilities... even if a frame/crop out of a 4K footage may be usefull from time to time not to miss the action.

Nikon listens to its customers. If there was a large outcry to get those childish flippy screens they'd be there already. There may come a time when even the Pro cameras end up sporting this useless junk but for now I'm happy that Nikon isn't putting them on everything so I don't have to pay for something I won't use. To B Marsh: Useless and unwanted(by the majority of Photographers) features like video, flippy screens, and built-in wi-fi are the reason why you and I have to pay so much for our equipment. Camera manufacturers are trying to cater to the youngsters with all this junk and serious photographers are the ones who have to pay for it.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 15:38 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1999 comments in total)
In reply to:

RayVagh: I don't like color from Nikon cameras. Always yellowish. I prefer Canon, more natural.

"Color science is not Nikon's forte."
Well, apparently, it's not Canons forte either because anyone who's ever read a review knows that Canons colors are too red. Default settings for any given camera should be neutral and overly red is not neutral. More people may prefer warmer colors than cooler but the warmer colors are still inaccurate.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 11:53 UTC
On article Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR (336 comments in total)
In reply to:

stevevelvia50: My original 16-85 works perfectly fine, and is sharp. Yes 2.8 would be nice, but I really don't need it.

Agreed. Hundreds of dollars more for another 2/3 stop gain and with a loss of 5mm focal length? I don't know what Nikon was thinking. My 16-85 is super-sharp. I don't want to take a chance that the 16-80's I might buy are less so.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2016 at 15:07 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (784 comments in total)
In reply to:

EcoPix: Nice camera, but it doesn't let Nikon off the hook for the last 5 years, does it? Even if they'd issued a D400 when they should have, it would be due for an upgrade now.
I know it's water under the bridge, but we shouldn't ignore what Nikon did to us. It could happen again.
Also, the fact that they kept this secret speaks to Nikon's same old contempt for its customers. More responsible makers give road maps, so their users can make sound purchase decisions.
And the fact that it's such a conservative design shows that they could have easily released a D400 with the basic specs years ago. It's not as if they've been sweating on a total rethink of the camera obscura for 2016, is it?
They didn't even incorporate a hot shoe for a video viewfinder, which would have challenged the mirrorless world. They could have easily put that over the left hand dial, a la Nikon F. This generation of pro Nikons would have been the time and place to do it.
(Cont.)...

Paranoia will destroy ya.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 15:15 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (784 comments in total)
In reply to:

dougster1979: The endless comments moaning and whining about the price of this camera.......You have a choice, yes a D750 is cheaper if thats the camera for you and you prefer full frame go buy it. If you like Landscape photography its probably not the best choice. Nobody is holding a loaded gun to you, and forcing you to make the purchase. Nikon is simply expanding it range...."but its too expensive for me....." "I can buy a D610 for this much....", "....why would I spend that much on a crop sensor..." If you don't want to, don't!!!

That's what I said. Try something original.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 20:22 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (784 comments in total)
In reply to:

dougster1979: The endless comments moaning and whining about the price of this camera.......You have a choice, yes a D750 is cheaper if thats the camera for you and you prefer full frame go buy it. If you like Landscape photography its probably not the best choice. Nobody is holding a loaded gun to you, and forcing you to make the purchase. Nikon is simply expanding it range...."but its too expensive for me....." "I can buy a D610 for this much....", "....why would I spend that much on a crop sensor..." If you don't want to, don't!!!

To dougster1979

What is "endless moaning and whining" to you is expressing your opinion and letting everybody know what you want, to others. Take your own advice and if you don't like their comments - don't read them. Stop reading when you see something that bothers you.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 19:01 UTC
In reply to:

Zoron: I'll be super bummed if D900 has no built-in flash

I have a bag full of flashes and I'm still "bummed" by the lack of a built-in on this camera. They say it's so the camera can have D810 class weatherproofing but I've never had the need for a better weatherproofed Nikon. The flippy screen gimmick diminishes the cameras integrity a little, too, so you're adding integrity and taking it away at the same time. Would've preferred a 30 MP camera with a built-in flash, no flippy screen, two SD slots and no wi-fi. But I already have a roomful of Nikon gear and Nikon has to cater to the kiddies and video people.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 19:44 UTC
Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »