Tbolt47

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Apr 19, 2009

Comments

Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: There is no reason to upgrade from the D7200 to the D7500.
It would make no sense. It will not make you a better photographer and it just has nothing to offer that makes the upgrade really necessary.

I do not see the target audience for Nikon with the D7500.
In more then a few ways its a downgrade from the D7200.

Such a pity to see Nikon fall so hard as if they loose all grip on how to run a camerabusiness.

I think Nikon should really reconsider its line-up.
All that is needed is:

1 low end APS-C Model
1 Mid end APS-C Model
1 High end APS-C Model

1 Mid end FF
1 Mid end High Res FF
1 High end model.

So that makes 6 camera models in total instead of 13.
You could even ask yourself if it is worth to even make a low end model these days.

Also I think its about time to move to mirrorless.
Even though some still think it is not the future - I am personally convinced that DSLR are on the end of their life cycle. The next innovation in this market will be global triggered shutters.

Sorry, got I intrupted. Anyway so yes Nikon could have put the D7500 in a D6xxx series but the problem there is it's a more capable camera than the D7200 in several ways (a bigger improvement than from the D7100 to the D7200) despite loosing a couple of things, so that would only make sense if they bought out a new D7xxx camera that was more capable, but then it would be too close to the D500 and we would still have to many camera bodies.

To me for the D7500 to be put in a D6xxx series it would have to loose something else to drop it below the D7500, such as weather sealing and maybe something else, but I think you are reading to much in the names - Nikon after all Nikon missed the D400 out as well.

The D7500 is what it is and that is a camera with higher performance than the D7200.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2017 at 05:22 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: There is no reason to upgrade from the D7200 to the D7500.
It would make no sense. It will not make you a better photographer and it just has nothing to offer that makes the upgrade really necessary.

I do not see the target audience for Nikon with the D7500.
In more then a few ways its a downgrade from the D7200.

Such a pity to see Nikon fall so hard as if they loose all grip on how to run a camerabusiness.

I think Nikon should really reconsider its line-up.
All that is needed is:

1 low end APS-C Model
1 Mid end APS-C Model
1 High end APS-C Model

1 Mid end FF
1 Mid end High Res FF
1 High end model.

So that makes 6 camera models in total instead of 13.
You could even ask yourself if it is worth to even make a low end model these days.

Also I think its about time to move to mirrorless.
Even though some still think it is not the future - I am personally convinced that DSLR are on the end of their life cycle. The next innovation in this market will be global triggered shutters.

You are still not getting it. The D7xx series has at least 10 key features that distinguish it from the D5xxx series - we have lost 2 of them in the D7500, you say that no longer makes it in the D7xxx series, if you add it to th D5xxx then that line would gain 8 key features, which by you logic wouldn't make it a D5xxx series camera anymore! It would be so far from the D5600.

I think you are also reading far to much into the name of the camera. In some ways the camera is closer to the D500 than the D7200 as it's got the screen, metering module, sensor and a large buffer. The removal of AI is just how Nikon has interpreted the market, whether that's right or wrong, they obviously feel that the majority of users buying this camera do not need it.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2017 at 03:41 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: There is no reason to upgrade from the D7200 to the D7500.
It would make no sense. It will not make you a better photographer and it just has nothing to offer that makes the upgrade really necessary.

I do not see the target audience for Nikon with the D7500.
In more then a few ways its a downgrade from the D7200.

Such a pity to see Nikon fall so hard as if they loose all grip on how to run a camerabusiness.

I think Nikon should really reconsider its line-up.
All that is needed is:

1 low end APS-C Model
1 Mid end APS-C Model
1 High end APS-C Model

1 Mid end FF
1 Mid end High Res FF
1 High end model.

So that makes 6 camera models in total instead of 13.
You could even ask yourself if it is worth to even make a low end model these days.

Also I think its about time to move to mirrorless.
Even though some still think it is not the future - I am personally convinced that DSLR are on the end of their life cycle. The next innovation in this market will be global triggered shutters.

@Josh 152 I do understand. I think maybe you don't quite get it. I don't agree that the D7500 is a clear downgrade. The improvements we have means it can't be called a downgrade, just because we have lost a couple of things, that were probably not used that much by the majority of shooters.

To say the D7500 is just adding a few features to the D5600 is not true all, you obviously don't understand the difference in the series. Nikon don't put dual control wheels in their D5xxx series of cameras, or weather sealing, or a pentaprism view finder, or some many buttons to quickly access items or AF fine tune and the increased durability of the mirror, so there is no way it could be in the D5xxx series, as the D7500 is very different to the D5xxx series -not just a few features as you put.

Dropping a couple of features from the D7200 to get to the D7500 is about progressing the series and that's just the direction Nikon are going.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 18:57 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: There is no reason to upgrade from the D7200 to the D7500.
It would make no sense. It will not make you a better photographer and it just has nothing to offer that makes the upgrade really necessary.

I do not see the target audience for Nikon with the D7500.
In more then a few ways its a downgrade from the D7200.

Such a pity to see Nikon fall so hard as if they loose all grip on how to run a camerabusiness.

I think Nikon should really reconsider its line-up.
All that is needed is:

1 low end APS-C Model
1 Mid end APS-C Model
1 High end APS-C Model

1 Mid end FF
1 Mid end High Res FF
1 High end model.

So that makes 6 camera models in total instead of 13.
You could even ask yourself if it is worth to even make a low end model these days.

Also I think its about time to move to mirrorless.
Even though some still think it is not the future - I am personally convinced that DSLR are on the end of their life cycle. The next innovation in this market will be global triggered shutters.

@Josh152 Well that's where their is confusion over the term "upgrade". It doesn't mean going to the next level of camera. Most people just refer to it as getting a newer camera which might just be the replacement with a few new features, so a D7000 to a D7100 or D7200.
So why should someone one on the D7xxx line be looking at the D500? Not everyone wants to go up to the next level of camera all the time - if you own a D7xxx series camera then the D7500 is still a camera that will do what a lot of those owner already do with their cameras and more than what some people need anyway.
If Nikon think most people who have paid £1000 for their previous camera are just going to drop nearly twice that much for a D500, then they are badly mistaken.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 19:07 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: There is no reason to upgrade from the D7200 to the D7500.
It would make no sense. It will not make you a better photographer and it just has nothing to offer that makes the upgrade really necessary.

I do not see the target audience for Nikon with the D7500.
In more then a few ways its a downgrade from the D7200.

Such a pity to see Nikon fall so hard as if they loose all grip on how to run a camerabusiness.

I think Nikon should really reconsider its line-up.
All that is needed is:

1 low end APS-C Model
1 Mid end APS-C Model
1 High end APS-C Model

1 Mid end FF
1 Mid end High Res FF
1 High end model.

So that makes 6 camera models in total instead of 13.
You could even ask yourself if it is worth to even make a low end model these days.

Also I think its about time to move to mirrorless.
Even though some still think it is not the future - I am personally convinced that DSLR are on the end of their life cycle. The next innovation in this market will be global triggered shutters.

There is a reason to upgrade to the D7500 - if you do a lot of action based photography and the AF turns out to be a noticeable improvement. Otherwise stick with your D7200.

No upgrading doesn't make you a better photographer - no equipment does that but can make it easier for you get the shot - otherwise we might as well all just buy bridge cameras and phones.

I agree with you about too many cameras in the range, but this might be the way Nikon is going anyway.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 13:22 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mac McCreery: I'm curious to know how a camera 'shows its age'. It is an oft used phrase. But if AF is good enough for your photography, the sensor still has good image quality (a given with most all releases over the last how ever many years?), and you don't gun then I'm puzzled!

The statement is "However, if you own a D7000 or even a D7100 that’s starting to show its age" to me that means it's very well used - high shutter count and maybe some problems starting to creep in.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 13:14 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (397 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petroglyph: "The launch of the D7500 presents an interesting quandary for camera buyers: should I buy the D500 or save some money and get the D7500?"

Answer: Samsung NX1 released in 2014: 28.2MP bsi sensor, shoots at 15 fps, records 4K to the sd card in h.265 codec. 1498$ I thought the rest of the industry would catch up in a few years. It seems like a little retrenchment.

The NX1 is great if you want mirroless, the problem is some of the tech isn't quite there yet - if you shoot action the AF and the EVF are a disadvantage, great if you just do landscapes and still life though.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 14:59 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (891 comments in total)
In reply to:

andywhoa: Fuji EVF all the way (landscape photography). I get an accurate view of what I'm capturing and I no longer notice that I'm not using an OVF. There are few hobbies with more snobbery than photography, and an OVF vs EVF debate in 2017 proves it. I don't understand the unwillingness to switch to EVF now that technology has gotten more than good enough.

Most of my photos are action work, where the EVF is still behind, so I prefer an OVF. I would prefer an EVF but when the technology is good enough.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 20:46 UTC
In reply to:

KrisAK: Will Olympus's older m43 lenses still work on this new full-frame camera? I mean, is the image circle large enough to cover the new, much larger sensor?

(This is a full-frame camera, right?)

It's a 4/3 sensor as it says in the text, or are you joking because of the price of the camera?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 17:23 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: Focus/Zoom controls the other way round to the previous version? That should make for some fun moments!

It would appear so. This way around is that it looks like it might be easy to knock the focus ring with your hand while supporting the lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 11:04 UTC
In reply to:

jim bennett: "Now that the D5 has 20.8 megapixels a shutter speed of at least 1/2000th is needed to freeze most fast moving sport. What many people don’t realise is that the more megapixels you have the faster shutter speeds necessary to freeze the same action. "
This is the first time I have heard this. I have always been under the impression that it was about having a high enough shutter speed in relation to the focal length of the lens, and taking into account any crop factor that changes the equivalent focal length, but needing a faster shutter with more megapixels is news to me.

I think the point is that at the same SS any blur would be the same, but becomes more noticeable now you have more pixels - taken with the same SS and viewed at the same size they would obviously look the same in terms of sharpness.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2016 at 10:34 UTC
On article CP+ 2016: Nikon shows off new D5, D500 and DL compacts (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: Why aren't they using SD cards? SD format seems to have the fastest and largest capacity memory cards at best prices, including rugged pro versions. What's the point of still using other formats like CF?

I've used CF and SD cards a lot and never had a problem with either.

Flimsy? What are you doing with them?! I change SD cards often (I don't like to many shots on one card) and have never had a problem with "flimsy" cards.

Have you run check software on your cards to make sure they are OK and not fakes?

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2016 at 15:39 UTC
On article CP+ 2016: Nikon shows off new D5, D500 and DL compacts (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

Morpho Hunter: Wow! .. physically.. that camera is way too huge.. given it's pixel resolution.

I don't see what pixel resolution has to do with the size of the body?

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 20:27 UTC
On article CP+ 2016: Nikon shows off new D5, D500 and DL compacts (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: Why aren't they using SD cards? SD format seems to have the fastest and largest capacity memory cards at best prices, including rugged pro versions. What's the point of still using other formats like CF?

XQD cards can go a lot fastest than UH-II SD cards, but I agree with you because how fast do we need? The D500 can shoot around 76 frames at 14-bit on a UHS-II cards before the buffer fills, but I don't know yet how long the buffer takes to clear after that. But who needs to shoot that many shot in one go anyway.

The buffer on the D7100 is to small for me, but even at 10 fps, I can't see me shooting more than 30 frames in one go and on a fast UHS-II SD they should be able to be written to the card no more than about 4 seconds. But I guess there are some pros that need more.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 19:39 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (784 comments in total)
In reply to:

tecnoworld: I'm curious to see which score this camera will get on DPR. If more than Samsung NX1, then I won't read this site anymore, since NX1 has been out for more than one year and every spec is better than D500.

@technoworld, the AF (mainly AF tracking), buffer size are better specs on the D500, but the big one is the viewfinder - EVF's are still not good for action work. As for the image quality, we will have to wait and see. But like I said there's a lot more to a good camera than specs, I'm not saying the NX-1 isn't a good camera but if you think the NX-1 is going to be better than the D500 for action work, then I think you need to try the D500 when it comes out.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 16:57 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (784 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pandimonium: I thought it was pretty compact, but it is larger than the full frame D750
http://camerasize.com/compare/#648,567

I wondering if they kept the size of the D300 because some people want a camera that balances better with larger lenses, that and for better control layout.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 14:18 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (784 comments in total)
In reply to:

tecnoworld: I'm curious to see which score this camera will get on DPR. If more than Samsung NX1, then I won't read this site anymore, since NX1 has been out for more than one year and every spec is better than D500.

Having "every spec" better, doesn't make a better camera, not that everything is better on the NX1 anyway.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 14:14 UTC
On article Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.3 and View NX 2.10.2 (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): I'd rather take time taking pictures than trying to fix the pictures with computer software. I maybe the only one in 100,000 photo-hobbyist who stay away from shooting raw and spend countless hours manipulating the photos with software.

Other than crop, straighten, and reduce size (for posting here in DPR) I don't have use to sophisticated software. VewNX2 and Picasa is more than enough for my need.

Well we kind of agree then, but I'm not talking about PP to make my photo's perfect, just to make them look like do with a Mk.I eyeball. Yes some pictures I do make look better, but some I just want them to look like they should.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2014 at 10:31 UTC
On article Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.3 and View NX 2.10.2 (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): I'd rather take time taking pictures than trying to fix the pictures with computer software. I maybe the only one in 100,000 photo-hobbyist who stay away from shooting raw and spend countless hours manipulating the photos with software.

Other than crop, straighten, and reduce size (for posting here in DPR) I don't have use to sophisticated software. VewNX2 and Picasa is more than enough for my need.

Doctor is the wrong word for what I'm talking about and getting photo's published doesn't mean anything other than you can take good photos - they could be better with a little PP or maybe they don't need any - we all take photo's that don't really need any PP (other than the basics) but quite often they can be improved a small amount and the same image from different cameras does not always look the same. It doesn't mean that someone that does PP isn't as good a photograph as one that doesn't.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2014 at 13:07 UTC
On article Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.3 and View NX 2.10.2 (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): I'd rather take time taking pictures than trying to fix the pictures with computer software. I maybe the only one in 100,000 photo-hobbyist who stay away from shooting raw and spend countless hours manipulating the photos with software.

Other than crop, straighten, and reduce size (for posting here in DPR) I don't have use to sophisticated software. VewNX2 and Picasa is more than enough for my need.

ecube, working on photos PP isn't just about making them look better than they were, a lot of the time it's about making them look as good as they did when you saw them in the flesh. Quite often the photo's we take don't quite look like they should do and that's where some good PP work can improve them. It's not all about making colours more vibrant and smoothing over people's skin. Sometimes it can just be about improving the DR in the photo, as no camera has DR as high as our eyes, or doing a better job with NR.

Obviously you can do what you like with your pictures, but spend ing more time taking pictures doesn't mean that you can make it look just like it did to you when you were standing there.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2014 at 18:31 UTC
Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »