NCB

Joined on Mar 19, 2013

Comments

Total: 138, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Is it just me, or are these pics not very good?

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 16:20 UTC as 10th comment | 7 replies
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (257 comments in total)
In reply to:

marioaguila: SUCCESSOR OF THE D7200?
No. Not by far.
FIRST: D7200 has 24 megapixel resolution versus 20 of the D7500. Concrete Effect: 20% less resolution complicates cropping or cropping, as it reduces the pixel density by 20%.
SECOND: It lacks a second memory card. Effect: You can not use a second card as a replacement or to have more memory, or to use an Eye-Fi.
THIRD: No grip for vertical shots and second battery
-------------
ALLEGED BENEFITS OF D7500
Video 4K? Until when the geeks believe that the photographers are interested in the video that comes with the camera. If you do not have not notice.
8 photos per second versus 6, for burst shooting? About 10% of the photographers may be interested. Not me.
Tilting touchscreen display. Interesting, but does not compensate for losses in Resolution and External Memory.
Last word. Please please don't compare it with the D500, that I don't like also. D7500 is supposed to conquer the D7200 owners, that already decided not to change to the D500

For real world photography, 20Mp is fine. Very few users use or need a second memory card. Likewise the vertical grip. Users who demand the last two will go for the D500 anyway.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 17:23 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (533 comments in total)

20Mp a move in the right direction; easily enough for DX.

Wonder if this heralds a move away from Sony sensors. Maybe a good idea for a lot of reasons.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 17:50 UTC as 53rd comment | 5 replies
On article Fujifilm X-T20 Review (334 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: Another fail.

I've had X-T10 before and it was an ergonomic disaster. Fuji repeated the same awful design in X-T20.

This camera is too small even for the Japanese ladies' hands. There is no grip and there is no room on the back for palm support. Your palm will be accidentally pressing rear buttons. You literally hold this camera with two fingers like a dirty diaper. Even a kit 18-55 lens is too heavy for it. I even tried an add-on grip, which is just another disaster.

Fuji should learn a thing or two from Sony. I can hold A7 with a 70-200mm lens attached without any troubles with one hand.

Good point about the ergonomics. Had a similar problem with the Panasonic LX-100; holding it was pinching it between the fingers, felt awkward and far heavier than it was. Style taking precedence over practicality. Why do manufacturers do it? Are people really swayed by that "classic rangefinder" hard sell? Cameras are for using, which to me means being able to grab one one-handed and it being secure and comfortable. You can still have the direct controls.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 18:51 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T20 Review (334 comments in total)

In some ways not directly relevant because it's a different sensor, but over the last few months I've been using a Fuji X-E2S. Disappointing. I don't find the colour appealing, and the much vaunted film emulations are really nothing of the sort; they're profiles similar to those used by other manufacturers and given fancy names.

Worryingly, the unbelievably sharp results of sensor and lenses are just that; unbelievable. At default settings over-sharpening can be a problem, which isn't entirely eliminated by turning down the setting; I suspect there's a lot of sharpening going on in software in an attempt to give those sharp results, more than with other manufacturers. This may be a Fuji thing.

As to pleasure to use, opposite to what DPR has found before, for a camera with direct controls I think the Df beats it hands down; the Df comes across as a serious photographer's camera in a way the X-E2S doesn't.

From this review I suspect I'd feel the same about the X-20.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 15:28 UTC as 91st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

fedway: Ironic: the title pompously states, "it should matter to you." Yet, subject tracking only really matters depending on what subjects matter to you. Some of us couldn't care less about shooting weddings, hyperactive children moving around, BIF or sports. All the bandwidth spent on the topic is because of the technical geekiness factor not necessarily due to it's over-all relevance to many people.

Spot on. I don't shoot moving subjects. My ideal is a single AF point fixed in the centre of the lens and the better cameras let you do just that. Focus & recompose to me is quicker than anything else. For what I shoot.

So no, it doesn't matter to me and it shouldn't matter to me.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Our first cameras (391 comments in total)

The first cameras I used were a couple of old medium format pre-war folding cameras which my parents had long since discarded. Pure trash, although I did record some memorable moments. A pre-war Kodok Compur Duo 620, given to my brother by a godfather and passed to me when he discarded it, was altogether better; I was camera-less when it fell apart until I inherited my father's Yashica rangefinder, nice. When I finally could afford to buy something, a Pentax SF7 was a big mistake, rapidly swapped for a Yashica FX3 then Nikon F601; both great and I still have them.
With the Nikon coolpix 800 in 2000 I entered digital; some of the best colours I've ever seen and I still have it.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:26 UTC as 171st comment
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (891 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathansmith: I have switched from FF Nikon completely to Fuji, and the EVF is LARGER than a FF Nikon viewfinder. While I originally bought a Fuji camera to save weight, the optics are amazing, but the viewfinder is like viewing a large screen in a movie theater. It'a huge, bright, sharp, and unaffected by outside light. I don't need a funky magnifier sticking off the back of my camera. For awhile when I shot with both Nikon and Fuji, with the Nikon after taking a photo, I would often put the camera to my eye to review what I had just shot. "Oh, I forgot. I can't do that!" I have my Fujis show me in the viewfinder for 1/2 second the shot I just took, so I know I nailed it. Plus, being able to see the exposure before taking the photo, and dialing in exactly how I want it, is much faster than guessing and then having to review the back screen in bright sun.

I complain about the EVF on my fairly recent Fuji X-E2S for one simple reason; it's not as good, anywhere near as good, as the OVFs on my Nikons. Period.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 17:32 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (891 comments in total)

Looking at the DPR staff responses, there's a fairly strong feeling in favour of the OVF being a much nicer experience. I'd go along with that. I'd go further. I have a D3100 and find the viewfinder fine; not all entry-level APS-C OVFs are pokey (the D5500 is, which is why I sold the D5500). The D3100 OVF is as pleasant as my Df; it's not 100%, but I can accomodate that. I even have a Coolpix 7100 where I find the OVF usable and overall a good experience; you learn to allow for the cropped view.

I also have a Fuji X-E2S. The EVF is disappointing; it's poor compared with the rear screen for showing you what you get and it disappears in bright light.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 18:30 UTC as 266th comment | 7 replies

Stunning! Nikon's latest P lenses are hitting the jackpot in terms of quality, affordability and portability. Stick this on a D3400 or D5600 and you have a combination weighing less than 900gm.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 14:13 UTC as 33rd comment
On article Nikon D5600 review: making connectivity a snap? (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: These 5000 series Nikons are fantastic little machines. I love the pictures they take. I really want to buy this 5500 or 5600 for its big 3.2 inch screen. I owned the d5100 previously which also took fantastic photographs. The only thing that lets the 5000 series down is the tiny viewfinder. Its just way too small. You can barely see anything through it. The the viewfinders in the canon rebels (or whatever they're called) are bigger & brighter.

Good point. Had both a D3100 and a D5500 and the D5500 viewfinder was small compared to the D3100, so they've obviously shrunk it to minimise the size of the camera. The D5500 one was poky, the D3100 OK. These cameras deserve a good viewfinder, preferably 100%.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2017 at 21:20 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 review: making connectivity a snap? (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: As much as I am a fan of the D5xxx family. Though the camera is too small for my hands. I think it should be dropped, bring out the D7400 in keeping with profitability model they need to be doing. Beef up the D3400 to the level of the D5600 now. Or drop the D3400. Hmmm.

Had a D5500 and had to make the choice between that and my D3100. Kept the D3100. As you say, the D5500/D5600 is a bit small. The D3100 is more comfortable in the hands, has a larger clearer viewfinder, has a less cluttered feel, and I believe the D3400 is essentially the same body. For certain types of shooting the D3100/D3400 is ideal. I'd keep the D3400 as the basic no-frills model, for which I think there's a market. Dropping the D5600 opens up a gap for mirrorless. However, that's for the future. As of now, the D5600 is an attractive camera in many ways.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2017 at 21:03 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 review: making connectivity a snap? (346 comments in total)

This is a camera which will satisfy an awful lot of buyers. Above all, it produces very good pictures, which is simply what most people are aiming at.

I had a D5500 for much of last year, and in the end sold it on. It was too small, as was the viewfinder. My D3100 gave me a much better experience. The same may apply to the D5600, although there are subtle changes to the body which may make the grip better. It would be interesting to compare the D3400 to the D5600, re size and shooting experience.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 17:35 UTC as 64th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (243 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 (243 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 (243 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 54th 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 204th 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
Total: 138, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »