Joined on Feb 7, 2012


Total: 2, showing: 1 – 2
On article Nikon D850: What we hoped for – and what we got (404 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gavril Margittai: Don't want to rain on people's enthusiasm regarding the new marvel but today 99% of pictures or even videos are looked at or watched on phones, 45Mpixel vs 35Mpixel who would care.
I say this with sorrow and regret. But this is the reality. And since the majority of the pictures are taken today with camera phones people got used, almost expecting full focus and don't even care about technical merits of the photos.
Maybe military satellites can use resolution above 12Mpixels but I am not in the spying business.

For the vast majority of shooters, this is completely true. Real, usable, clean pixels are quite necessary for some of us. I'm shooting for high resolution graphic prints on architectural walls, routinely printing 8' high x 12'+ wide (seen from 1' away). I shoot most of my own media, but I've purchased stock from all brands and models of cameras and am constantly evaluating my next gen selection of cameras. Currently shooting Nikon bodies with mostly Nikon lenses, 99.99% still shots. I'm firmly in the Nikon camp, but that's mostly because of what I do (and the massive investment), it's all about your application and that's why many of us have a herd of bodies and lenses...right tools for the job. If I'm shooting my daughter's game, I'm not using the D810...overkill. These discussion threads are great, just so everyone remembers that it's all an art and is (thankfully) up to each to make their own story.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2017 at 15:38 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D800 hands-on preview (263 comments in total)
In reply to:

djh591: I own a D70 and have been patiently waiting for this round of Nikon releases and would like to throw out a question to the masses here. I shoot a wide variety of pictures. Everything from my kids indoor and outdoor activities, vacation pictures, portraits and the once in a blue moon wedding. I would estimate that I am pushing around ten thousand shots a year. I made an investment in a 200mm 2.8 Nikon lens a couple of years ago for evening football and baseball games and have had reasonable success stopping the action with my D70 and its limited ISO range. My question is what would you recommend as an upgrade? The D4 is out due to the price tag. So I am somewhere between a D7000 or the D800. Your advice is appreciated.

The D7000 is a great camera and has very good low light performance (3200 is still very good and it starts to fall-off and be grainy @4000+). I currently shoot with one and have compared it side by side with the D700. I can’t say enough for good glass, which is 90% of the battle. The only big complaints that I have on the D7000 would be the small buffer and the low light AF isn’t great. I’m anxious to see how it stacks up against the D800, but comparing the two is like apples and bananas. I’m looking to go FF, so I’m very interested in the D800 (Landscape & Architectural Photos); but the D7000 is a GREAT aps-c, is a great camera for $1k and the 16mp is enough for most any application. Yes - FF is better, but might not be the best choice for everyone; unless they have $3k for a body and $2k laying around for each lens. If you’re shooting with a D70, you’ll be blown away by the performance of a D7000. The D800 - I have no experience in besides reading reviews, like everyone else.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 18:06 UTC
Total: 2, showing: 1 – 2