NCB

Joined on Mar 19, 2013

Comments

Total: 125, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

NCB: My first DSLR. I was in the middle of a 6 month hospital stay (spinal cord damage, luckily I walked out at the end ) when it came out; it caught my eye and I decided I deserved it! A few teething troubles; reckoned the matrix metering was dodgy so switched to centre weighted. Interest is totally landscapes, and the 18-70 kit lens was just the job. Keep on coming across pics I took which showed how good it was. Only exceptions were things like local moorlands in mid Wales where the colour was dodgy (pinkish bracken) .

Still have it; was looking at a good pic a few days ago which inspired me to power up the batteries and it'll shortly get an outing. But picking it up reminded me of how big and heavy it seemed. It was eventually superseded by a D3100 which has much nicer handling, and overall even better pics, as does a more recent purchase a Df. But it's still a cracking camera.

Should have said, first proper camera of any sort was a Yashica Minister III rangefinder. Nice. Before that had been using mainly trashy old folding medium format stuff my parents had discarded, grim! But I did get my hands on a pre-war German Kodak Compur Duo 620, not trash at all; no metering, just guessed exposure depending on what speed the film was, much easier than you'd think.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 22:47 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

samfan: I bought D200 in May 2006 and when the D80 was announced a month or 2 later, seemingly pretty much the same camera (same sensor, same focusing system, same viewfinder, same LCD, etc.) for half the price, I was pretty pi**ed.

Honestly however, once I got to actually try it, I really didn't like it that much. I mean sure, it was certainly a very capable, well-rounded camera.

But the biggest flaw was that Nikon completely overhauled the exposure system for the D80. Before then, Nikon DSLRs used to be very conservative, but with the D80 it was completely off the bat. The exposure was ridiculously unreliable and way too much targeted at "nice photo of faces", background being blown up be damned. I also learned that the focusing system was quite a bit downgraded too.

Later I fell in love with the D40 range and bought the D60 where I learned to tolerate the funky exposure system, but it always rubbed me the wrong way in the D80.

See my post further down re exposure. Yep the matrix metering was unreliable, strange because the two Nikon compacts (800, 8400) I'd been using were usually spot on. So I switched to centre-weighted, which is what I used in film days, and that was fine.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 22:41 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)

My first DSLR. I was in the middle of a 6 month hospital stay (spinal cord damage, luckily I walked out at the end ) when it came out; it caught my eye and I decided I deserved it! A few teething troubles; reckoned the matrix metering was dodgy so switched to centre weighted. Interest is totally landscapes, and the 18-70 kit lens was just the job. Keep on coming across pics I took which showed how good it was. Only exceptions were things like local moorlands in mid Wales where the colour was dodgy (pinkish bracken) .

Still have it; was looking at a good pic a few days ago which inspired me to power up the batteries and it'll shortly get an outing. But picking it up reminded me of how big and heavy it seemed. It was eventually superseded by a D3100 which has much nicer handling, and overall even better pics, as does a more recent purchase a Df. But it's still a cracking camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 17:39 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply

Pity in some ways, but wasn't sure they had the right products. The DL24-85 would have been a sort of replacement for my Coolpix 8400, but I really wanted a quality built-in viewfinder plus a proper grip.

Nikon has blown hot-and-cold over the premium compact market ever since the 8400, 12 years ago. The P7100/P7800 was their best attempt and decent (cracking 28-200 lens) but could have been even better. I suspect there's been an ongoing battle in Nikon as to whether they should be in this market. Think they should. What they could do is a P7900, basically a P7800 with a better viewfinder and a few minor tweaks. Think that should sell.

People on about smart phones miss the point. There will always be a market for proper cameras, something which gives a photographer a huge amount of pleasure from shooting with.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 18:33 UTC as 202nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

peterwr: The 4.1Mp 995 was the end of the line, if memory serves. Man, I *wanted* one of those, but by the time I could afford it, it was out of production.

The swivelling lens unit was a work of genius. I wish Nikon would make an updated version. An 8Mp version with a 2/3" chip and a 3" screen would do nicely.

Yep, the 4500. Was in production for a long time, because of popularity with digiscopers. A whole range of attachments was developed for it.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 13:22 UTC

The 950 was a bit to big/heavy for me; I needed something to slip in a rucksack pocket. So I bought the Coolpix 800, which came shortly afterwards; same 1/2" 2mp sensor, 38-76 lens. I still have it and occasionally use it.

I loved the quality of the pics of those cameras; great, balanced colour which I'm not sure Nikon has since equalled. A pic which I took in 2001 with the 800 is currently Pic of the Day on the UK Geograph web site.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 19:27 UTC as 51st comment

interesting article, Carey. The answer to using a 50mm equiv lens is to keep on using it until you feel comfortable with it. Or until you reach the point at which you say 50mm is not for you. Me, if I use a prime it'll be a 50mm, and a lot of stuff I use it for is landscapes. I like the "as the human eye" sees it factor.

Re "framing the shot in the head before you use the camera", you can do this with zoom lenses as well.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 16:36 UTC as 104th comment | 1 reply

Liked Kodachrome, but found it a swine to scan. Most of my film output was Kodak print film, processed by Kodak, and the prints were a doddle to scan. Very rarely go that route these days because I haven't found anywhere in the UK which does good printing from Kodak film. If Kodak is waking up to the fact there's a real market in film, I hope they'll restart their own labs; doesn't have to be large scale, just scaled to suit the market. I found Kodak processing from the late 1980s through the 1990s to be outstanding.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 23:03 UTC as 89th comment | 1 reply
On article 2016 DPReview Readers' Best Shots: Places (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

quietrich: I know I'm going to get slammed, but Ill assume this kind of gallery is posted as a basis for discussion rather than an exercise in validation. Food for thought:
“… we are there with our cameras to record reality. Once we start modifying that which exists, we are robbing photography of its most valuable attribute.”
Philip Jones Griffiths
"It has become increasingly clear that the arts, and the aesthetic more generally, occupy no hallowed ground, but live on the everyday earth of our lives."
Arnold Berleant

These images across as exercises in using Photoshop rather than exercises in using a camera. Reality isn't boring; to some of us it's fascinating. To others, obviously not.

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2016 at 00:23 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

Yep. Photographers do lighting and composition, not cameras.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2016 at 00:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5 added to studio scene comparison tool (87 comments in total)

Not very good, is it? Compared it with the Nikon D3400, Fuji X-E2S and Leica Q.

Reckon the Nikon and Fuji came out on top, Nikon very good on noise but losing detail a tad with noise reduction. The Leica doesn't seem to do noise reduction; noise is awful, but has the best detail. The Canon doesn't really compete.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 18:00 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 2: Full-Frame (368 comments in total)

Ignore. The Sony has some great attractions, but the D750 is an overall better camera (if you look at strengths across the board) and at around $1800 is easily within this price group.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 16:12 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
On article Kodak Ektra 'photography' smartphone goes on sale (90 comments in total)

Will depend on what the output is actually like. It has to be good, very good.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 20:54 UTC as 36th comment
On article 2016 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras around $500 (267 comments in total)

Think you need a thorough edit of this review. On the opening page you don't mention Nikon J5, but if you click on Nikon D3300 that's what you get. Further on, it's a toss-up as to whether you get D3400 or D3300. Needs sorting.

Surprised you didn't mention jpeg quality in the plus points re the D3300/D3400. It's good, to very good, probably better than the Canon T6, although my feeling is that it isn't as good as the previous generation of Nikons, like the D3100. Also surprised that the Nikons didn't get a big plus for actually having a viewfinder (it's not huge, but it's certainly big enough to be very usable), unlike the mirrorless opposition.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 19:55 UTC as 35th comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon reportedly eliminating 1000 jobs in Japan (518 comments in total)

10% of workforce isn't a big deal; could be just a question of sensible streamlining. We just don't know. Nikon must be wondering what to do next with their lower end markets; the D3400/D5600 cameras are pretty good for what they do, but what do they do next? Better wi-fi, features like focus-stacking, and so on, might help. The DL compacts might have a future if they finally emerge, but not putting a viewfinder in two of them may not be too bright. Nikon's got a lot going for it in a number of areas, but it needs to do some repositioning.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 23:52 UTC as 6th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-3040 Zoom (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

brumd: The samples look not bad at all. Who needs more than 3.3MP anyway?

I used to print A4 from a 2mp Nikon 800. Worked about 50% of the time; I still have some of those pics up on the wall; the other 50% needed higher resolution.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 12:49 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

AKH: If you are only looking for great image quality and don't care so much about super fast frame rate or weather sealing etc. get a Nikon D3400 and save huge amounts of money. It is not so sexy or anything, but Its sensor is as good or in most cases better than all the cameras in this test :-)

Go the whole hog and get a D3100 if you can find one. For sheer image quality it is way better than my D5500. Time we stopped cramming so many pixels on APS-C sensors.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2016 at 17:23 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (765 comments in total)

I was allowed to borrow my parents' bashed around pre-war medium frame fold-up 120 cameras, Kodak and Agfa I think; truly awful! Much better was a pre-war Kodak Compur Duo 620, passed on to my brother and eventually to me; good shots, until it fell apart. I used to guess exposures. First camera really for keepers was a Yashica Minister III rangefinder inherited from my father. Excellent stuff, did me for 10 years before I moved into SLRs.

Digital was Nikon Coolpix 800, 2mp + 38-76 lens, which did me for 5 years; sharp pics and wonderful colours.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 16:43 UTC as 479th comment
On article Olympus E-M1 Mark II Iceland sample gallery (83 comments in total)

One of the best review galleries I've ever seen from DPReview; well done. Some of us have been crying out for examples of how cameras perform under real landscape conditions; some of us shoot this sort of stuff.

Until now I'd rather dismissed Olympus cameras for landscapes; trying to work out how it would deal with the colours when only "Pretty" example snaps have been taken isn't easy, and I had the impression that Olympus did sort of nice pics but lacking in that extra depth which makes even dull conditions come alive. Not any more; these are good pictures. The 12-200 lens seems impressive as well.

Note to DPReview: stick more of this sort of testing stuff in reviews, if you can.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 16:26 UTC as 17th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Photokina's greatest hits (47 comments in total)

I bought the G1, and it still gets the odd outing. Very nice images. I'd use it more but the handling drives me insane; too many small buttons crammed on the back, too easy to grab and find you've ended up in some mode or other which takes you minutes to get out of. EVF is pretty dismal but it's good enough for framing, which is what it's there for.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 15:54 UTC as 6th comment
Total: 125, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »