WillieG

Joined on Jan 6, 2012

Comments

Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

vFunct: The only people saying Nikon were on the ropes are desperate mirrorless camera users trying to justify their failed amateur purchases.

Actual professionals knew Nikon were always on top of things, since there were never any cameras better than Nikon's.

Sorry, kids, that your mirrorless hopes and dreams were crushed by Nikon. Oh well.

Well said vFunct. There will always be a small number of mirrorless whiners out there. They make a lot of noise about the future but the DSLR is still King. If people wanted mirrorless they wouldn't buy millions of DSLR's every year. There are enough mirrorless offerings out there now to deal a death-blow to the DSLR. But that isn't happening is it? Sure, there are diminishing sales, but that is happening across the board.

The mirrorless whiners who cry about the future and call DSLR users dinosaurs may be missing something. Those reduced sales may very well be due to the cellphones with ever more capable built-in cameras. Maybe the cellphone cameras are the way of the future and that would make mirrorless lovers just a slightly more modern "dinosaur", wouldn't it.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 11:47 UTC
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)
In reply to:

rhurani: On the articulating display: I have a camera with such display; I glued it to prevent its articulation

Understandable. Many people don't want them articulated.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 12:48 UTC
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)
In reply to:

soller: How the Canon 80D's 3" articulating 1.04M-dot display is better than the Nikon D500's 3.2" tilting 2.36M-dot display? Only because its articulating?

That's just personal preference. Don't know why they'd call the Canon's screen better. I'd prefer the D500's screen.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 12:45 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

DesmondD: It depends what you want/need. The D7200 is a really nice camera and has more than enough features for most photographers needs.
The lack of a second card slot could be. a big issue for someone shooting an important event if there is a card failure - no point having the best auto-focus system if you lose all your photos.
I think the D7200 is going to be a last of its kind as the D90 was when the D7000 came out. From now on if we want a dual card slot we will be forced to upgrade half a step to the D500 series. The D7500 is more like an advanced D5700, half a step below the D7200. If we want a focus drive motor we have to keep upgrading, first from the D50, then the D90 and now the D7200. There may be no replacement for the D7200 - we have to step backwards to the D7500[/D5700] with single card slot or up to a D500/510 in future, if we also want dual card slots.

DesmonD The D7500 definitely disappointed many of its potential customers. To drop down below 24MP when you were expecting an increase was bad enough, but then to take a step backwards and lose a card slot. That will cost them some sales. The improvements don't make up for the losses.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2017 at 14:07 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boomlift: So many disregard the second card slot using the reasoning that a single card has more than enough capacity. Not denying that but I love the ability to seperate RAW and JPEG when I get home without a batch conversion. And no grip? The 7500 is the best smartphone clad in DSLR clothes.

Agreed, Boomlift. If the D7200 can have dual slots, so can the D7500. It's not like that one feature is going to sabotage sales of the D500. Many of us are going to give the D7500 a pass and either wait for a D7600 or buy the D7200 at a lower price down the road. Nikon made a mistake reducing features on the D7500.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2017 at 13:32 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (540 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 22nd comment | 8 replies
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (540 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 (540 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 (540 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 68th comment | 4 replies
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (452 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 (271 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 (271 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 (1138 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 (1138 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 (2002 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
Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »