n057
Lives in
Saint-Lambert, Québec, Canada
Joined on
Feb 26, 2006
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |  |
| Orange butterfly on brown by elmo from Bittersweet | Jellyfish by bebemaster from Your City - What went wrong? | Christ On The Clouds by wam7 from Heavy - Light | 69,368 Pounds of Tractive Effort by cjf2 from Powerful | Peregrine...with breakfast by Tazz93 from My Best Photo of the Week |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
2450FeatureWhat is equivalence?
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
Stevyjb: I Just DO NOT KNOW what Nikon are thinking ! I Take it that they just don't want to SELL CAMERAS ANYMORE ! This is yet another camera update that Nikon has intentionally handicapped Performance and features from the previous Model ! Time to start looking elsewhere i Think !
OK, how would you have lowered the price? You hear all the time that "the sensor is key", so they kept the same sensor as the D500. They made the body plastic, less expensive. The monitor went to 2 megapixels to 900k. The shutter life went from 200k actuations to 150k. No AI coupling tab. Probably slower processor. One card slot instead of two. 8 instead of 10FPS. 51 AF points instead of 153. USB 2 instead of USB 3. A few other compromises. They managed to shave $750 off the price that way.
How would you handle it better?
Sergey Borachev: Easy! The D7500 is unbuyable. I think most will either stay with the D7200 or get the D500.
If you want a follow-on to your D200, the logical path is either a D300, D300s or a D500. Anything else is not-the-same-thing. Yeah, the price is unbeatable, but you get what you pay for ...
Nobby2016: so this camera is better than a 1DX... i doubt it.
What do you mean by "better"? More megapixels? Faster AF? Higher ISO? Higher IQ?
Have a look here for a start, and we are talking FF vs APS-C
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%201D%20X,Nikon%20D500
Alphoid: I've been a user since Bibble days. It'd be a fine program if:
1. It didn't crash. Stability is still a serious issue. I wish they invested in fixing bugs over feature development.
2. Camera support was more up-to-date.
I like that it's reasonably open. Cross-platform, including Linux. Metadata in XML files. Etc. It's very consumer-friendly that way.
Mine is still stable, but I found a few things not as expected. For instance, there is supposed to be a "Get More" page in the Tools panel. I don't see it. I reported that. I guess they prioritize problems depending on the number of reports they get.
There should be some way of indicating that the review is still WIP.
One pernicious side effect is that by the time the review is up, most of what you talk about in the review is already old news, and people are less curious to look at the review. I am curious to see where the D810 will show in teh "most popular cameras" list as a result of the delay ... Although those interested mostly have already voted with their wallet :-)
Alphoid: I've been a user since Bibble days. It'd be a fine program if:
1. It didn't crash. Stability is still a serious issue. I wish they invested in fixing bugs over feature development.
2. Camera support was more up-to-date.
I like that it's reasonably open. Cross-platform, including Linux. Metadata in XML files. Etc. It's very consumer-friendly that way.
It would be interesting to document all parameters then.
I run Linux only since 1999. Went through Mandrake until it morphed into Mandriva and now Mageia since Mandriva forked.
I ran Bibble when it first became available, went through all versions, then followed them to AfterShot when BibbleLabs was bought by Corel.
I have two Nikon D200 and one Nikon D500.
AfterShot lists all Nikon cameras, except D5/D500.
Last time I used Aftershot 3 was this morning.
LouCioccio: Just tried AfterShot Pro 3. I had the original Bibble and I upgraded after they sold it to Corel. That being said I have LR6 but felt more comfortable with Bridge-PSCS5 workflow. I just got a D500 and Bridge CC would open an Camera RAW worked but not CS5. A work around was in Camera RAW 9.5.1 to save. LR6 just did not seem to work for me. I do have OnOne10 and that interface is fine I went back to Aftershot and tried the newest version. BAM! Processed my D500 NEF and opened in CS5. I'll play with it more as from CS5 I can use all my plugins.
Are you saying you can open D500 RAW files with AfterShotPro 3? It fails to see my files. I can see support for practically all Nikon DSLRs, but not the D5 and D500 ...
Alphoid: I've been a user since Bibble days. It'd be a fine program if:
1. It didn't crash. Stability is still a serious issue. I wish they invested in fixing bugs over feature development.
2. Camera support was more up-to-date.
I like that it's reasonably open. Cross-platform, including Linux. Metadata in XML files. Etc. It's very consumer-friendly that way.
How long was it that you used Bibble/AfterShot? I went though all versions, and it has been a long time that I got a crash.
And what OS are you using?
blink667: Any reason, IQ wise, I would buy this over a used D7100?
Until ISO 400, the D7200 has a slight edge. Above that, the D500 has a slight edge. But then the D500 extends from ISO 50 to 100, which the D7200 cannot touch, and also above ISO 25600, which the D7200 knows nothing about.
And the D500 has qualities other than ISO, which the D7200 cannot touch either.
aris14: The only disadvantage I see in this cam is that's overpriced...
It is priced correctly for that line of cameras, about the same price as the D200 and D300 when they got announced.
Artak Hambarian: I want this camera, but with at least 42mp full frame sensor, easily am ready to sacrifice the frame rate.
Take a number. Go to the FX forums and pester until Nikon listens. And do not buy other stuff in the interim. That is how I spent the last 7 years :-)
Artak Hambarian: I want this camera, but with at least 42mp full frame sensor, easily am ready to sacrifice the frame rate.
You want a camera with similar features but not in APS-C, so you do not want "this" camera.
LFPCPH: They will make it fullframe - maybe ...
Make it fullframe ?!?! Horrors!
brownie314: Why Nikon! Why make a lens that already exists for DX. The Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 is an excellent lens that can be had for less than half the price of this Nikon lens. Why not give us a nice, compact 24mm 2.8 (or 2.4) prime! It would make the D3300 and D5500 very compact. But no.
Brownie314, there may be other reasons to not like that lens, but not the fact that "it already exist for DX". What do you say about the legion of 24-70 and 70-200 lenses which everybody and their uncle makes? There are also a bunch of primes from various manufacturers, and that just gives more choice to everyone.
You may not like the price, you may not like the variable aperture, but I see no problem with it being "me too" :-)
Le Kilt: Gosh, remember, all compacts cameras are mirrorless. Now some have interchangeable lenses. And some are getting great sensors. Convergence ? The question is do you want TTL optical viewfinder, even if it means more bulk. All the rest is... yawn...
As far as I care, my Coolpix 995 and Coolpix L12 are mirrorless -but I much prefer my bulky D200. I don't care abou wether it is mirrorless or not. Give me an OVF.