Josh152

Joined on Sep 24, 2011

Comments

Total: 1078, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article NAB 2017: Hot products and trends (46 comments in total)
In reply to:

PropaPH: VR is like nuclear fusion, always ten years in the future

Ahhh VR. Pay $800 for an HTC headset and another $1200+ for a PC with the horse power for it and play glorified tech demos that feel like they should be mobile games. But No yeah I'm sure it's the future of gaming like everyone says lol. The only traction it's gotten in gaming is among those with more money than sense.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 06:09 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 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.

Maybe I can make this easier to understand. Take a hypothetical D7300 with the same af, sensor, and processing, upgrades, same flippy screen, same newer control scheme but give it only one card slot, no ai tab, no af adjustment, no battery grip, lower batter life, lower end strap lugs, while charging the same price as the D7200. How well do you think that would have went over? That's why this camera is called the D7500 not D7300. But that is still missleading because the camera is missing several of the key features that make a semi pro/enthusiast camera what it is in the Nikon line up. The removal of those pro/advanced features fundamentally changes the class of camera the D7500 is. It is a new class Somewhere between full amateur camera like a D5600 is and semipro/enthusiast like the D7200 is. So D6500 is a much more accurate and less confusing name.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 20:35 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 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.

No you still dont' get it. I said slight down grade compared to the D7200 which it undeniably is. This was done to make room in the line up for the D500 nothing more. It is not "progressing the series" In the same way the D750 is not a D700 progression. The D7000 series is gone, done, kaput in the same way the D7xx line is despite there being a D750. You calling removing some the key features used to define the semi-pro/enthusiast class a progressing of the series is absurd. It is a regression, well not really since the series is really just discontinued. Doesn't matter if you call it a slightly lower end D7200 or a higher end D5600. The fact is that you are getting less camera for the money. The D7500 is between the D5600 and D7200 it is not the same class of camera as the D7200. Let me put it this way. If there was no D500 this camera would have been the same price and had the same new features while retaining the ones taken away.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 20:07 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 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.

@Tbolt47 I dont think you understand. You are confused by the name too. The D7000 line has been discontinued. It used to be the high end DX option but now the D500 is. That is what I mean when I say it's the upgrade path for the D7200. People on the D7200 have two options when/if they want a new Nikon DSLR. Go with a D7500 that in more ways than it isn't is a clear downgrade compared to the D7200 but maybe still good enough if they dont mind getting less for the same money, or go with the D500. What Nikon has really done is made a slightly up market D5600 and called it the D7500 while completely discontinuing the original D7000 line. There is no true D7200 replacement and never will be. Nikon has basically just done a price hike on the D5600 while adding a few features. Which is why it should have been called a D6500. I suspect the D5600 and D3200 will be merged into one camera at the D5600 price point or just a little less and the D3200 price point will go mirrorless.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 18:07 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 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.

See you're another one who got confused by the name. The D7500 is NOT meant to be a D7200 replacement or upgrade. That camera is the D500. What Nikon has done is gotten rid of semi pro DX DSLR's in favor of having a full pro body (D500). The D7500 is meant to be a D5600 upgrade. And as that it is a great step up since you get better AF, An AF motor, a top LCD and the D500 sensor and processing.

The D7500 is not a bad camera at all. It just has the wrong name and price. Call it a D6500 and charge $999 for body only and it would have been seen as another great Nikon home run. Even just changing the name to D6500 and keeping the price would have gotten the camera a much better reception. But even DPR is confused by the D7500 name. You can tell with the title of this article. The only people who should upgrade to this camera are people on D3xxx and D5xxx cameras. Anyone who who is on the D7xxx line now should be looking at a D500. That is their intended upgrade path by Nikon.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 18:51 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kaso: Two upgrade options for a D7200 owner: D500 and D750.

@KASO thanks my reasoning is Nikon took out fully half the features that made the D7200 worth it's price but kept the three most important ones to most people (better af module, AF motor, top plate LCD) so it is worth more than a D5600 for sure but shaving a couple hundred or so off the price is makes sense given it is not as full featured as the D7200 was and so is defiantly not worth the same amount of money.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 03:43 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kaso: Two upgrade options for a D7200 owner: D500 and D750.

@chary zp

Thanks!

The thing is if you think objectively about it D7500 is actually a great D5600 upgrade but unfortunately it is a D7200 downgrade in most ways but shares the D7200's naming convention.

So D6500 would have been the perfect name and is probably what Nikon would have chose if the D600 fiasco didn't happen and the D750 could have been named the D650. But Nikon apparently wanted the names to match or something so D750 meant D7500. At leas that's the only rational I can think of that makes the decision to name the camera D7500 make any sense. Which does Sound good on paper for uniformity but in practice is a very dumb idea when you have already set expectations for the features you get in a D7xxx camera that is still current in the lineup and the features you get for it's price point too. The actual result of using the D7xxx naming and price point is that D7500 feels more like a neutered D7200 than the D5600 upgrade it's meant to be.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 03:36 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kaso: Two upgrade options for a D7200 owner: D500 and D750.

@flee
Its not supposed to be a baby D500 though in the same way the D750 isn't really meant to be a baby D810. The difference is though the D800 series replaced the D700 with a camera of same price a and quality so re-purposing the D7xx naming for the D610 replacement wasn't as confusing or off putting and was really the only way Nikon could go since it also had to distance the camera from the bad press the D600 got. But the D7500 is akin to Nikon releasing a 50mp D5X for $3999 and then naming the D750 successor the D850 and giving it the D810's price. It's no wonder so many people had a negative reaction.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 03:29 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kaso: Two upgrade options for a D7200 owner: D500 and D750.

Exactly and that's why the name is wrong. The D7500 is still the upgrade path for the D5600 but not the D7200. The D500 is the upgrade path for the D7200 now. So a name like D6500 would make more sense, be way less confusing, and make it obvious what Nikon is trying to do. That is replace the D7200 with the D5xx line. They should have just done a clean sweep and completely replaced the D7xxx numbering to make it clear. Oh and charged a max of $999 body only for the D6500 given the missing features compared the the D7200.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 22:09 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Josh152: After reading all the controversy around this my feeling is the D7500s real problem is it's price and name. For the same price of the D7200 it has lost many key features Nikon uses to differentiate the enthusiast/pro cameras from the entry level cameras. How anyone thought this would end well is beyond me. It is one thing to do this with a circa 2008 camera that has already been replaced with two other cameras (D700/D750 thing.) But for a current line of cameras it only leads to confusion and back lash.

I get it. It's like many were saying before the D500 came out. There probably isn't room in the line up for both a D7200 type camera and a D500. But IMO what Nikon should have done was discontinue the D7xxx line and called this camera a D6500. Even for the same price but with the D6500 name there wouldn't be half the back lash and confusion. It would still be over priced IMO but at least than people would easily see what the camera was supposed to be.

The problem with the price is the removal of 3 of the key features Nikon used to justify that higher price vs the D5xx series. They kept the higher price but removed the dual card slots, the Ai tab, and battery grip compatibility which were 3 the of the five main things that made the D7xxx series worth the extra money. The fourth and fifth being better AF and the AF motor which thankfully the D7500 still has.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 19:06 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (262 comments in total)

After reading all the controversy around this my feeling is the D7500s real problem is it's price and name. For the same price of the D7200 it has lost many key features Nikon uses to differentiate the enthusiast/pro cameras from the entry level cameras. How anyone thought this would end well is beyond me. It is one thing to do this with a circa 2008 camera that has already been replaced with two other cameras (D700/D750 thing.) But for a current line of cameras it only leads to confusion and back lash.

I get it. It's like many were saying before the D500 came out. There probably isn't room in the line up for both a D7200 type camera and a D500. But IMO what Nikon should have done was discontinue the D7xxx line and called this camera a D6500. Even for the same price but with the D6500 name there wouldn't be half the back lash and confusion. It would still be over priced IMO but at least than people would easily see what the camera was supposed to be.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 17:26 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

RedFox88: Those ten didn't get PTSD from that plane decent. Lawyers. Wow!

What's next? I can sue the State for a deer running in front of my car getting my heart rate up because they didn't kill enough if them off ?!

Given the rate of descent those people probably legit thought the plane was crashing and they were all going to die. If the plane had been lower they could have been right. PTSD from that would not be unusual at all.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

Nikita66: ugh, f6.3 wide open at the long end, snail slow

come on, come on, DX uwa prime pleeeeeaaase !
personally want: 10mm 2.8, AF, removable hood, filter thread and AF. small as possible. thank you very much

The lens is wide open until you take the photo no mater what you have the aperture set to. AF always happens with the lens wide open so it has as much light as possible to work with. So with your Canon lens set to f/11 and 300mm the AF is actually happening at f/5.6 and if the lens is at 70mm it's happening at f/4.5. What RedFox88 said is correct. At 300mm the new Nikon will have to AF at f/6.3. What effect if any this will have on the AF speed and accuracy remains to be seen but generally speaking more light means the AF works better.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: Neither the Nikon D3400 nor the Canon (USA name) T6 have self-cleaning sensors. I realize that they want to keep cost and price down, but that seems to be a step too far.

Calling it self cleaning is a huge exaggeration IMO. All it does is slightly vibrate the filter in front of the sensor. Only the most loose and smallest dust comes off. You're best bet other than wet cleaning is to take a blower bulb to it which will work with the cameras you mention as well as remove far more contaminants.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 15:38 UTC
In reply to:

Josh152: I've been waiting for a modern 105mm but this is disappointing to me. I would have much preferred f/1.8 or f/2.0 and the smaller size, weight and price tag that comes with it. Also no VR is really disappointing as well. There are times I wish my 105 f/2.5 AI-S had it. It's very useful on my 24-85 and no f/1.4 is not a substitute since it doesn't' have enough DOF a lot of the time.

@lars
Well I could live with the size, weight and even price of the f/1.4 if it had VR. In fact with VR I would really want this lens instead of just being "meh" about it.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 21:35 UTC
In reply to:

Lars V: Hmm 105 sits right between 85 and 135... thinking I could swap out my 85/1.4G, 85/1.4D and 135/2D DC for a 105/1.4E. Intriguing. Looking forward to actual critical reviews and third-party samples.

Yeah for primes on FX I use a 105mm and my 180mm and never feel like I need anything in between 105mm and 180mm or 50mm and 105mm. 85mm has always felt too short to me. More like longer standard than a telephoto.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 21:32 UTC
In reply to:

madecov: Lot's of complaining, mostly about price. I think it's great Nikon introduced something new and not just a re fresh of something already in the line.

My biggest complaints are no VR and the weight. The price as expected but I was hoping for VR at least as that is my main con for the 105 f/2.0 DC. I wouldn't have minded f/2.0 if it was necessary so I could have VR. But Nikon is trying to win the aperture arms race instead of making balanced lens with sensible compromises. Oh well.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 17:56 UTC
In reply to:

EdwardBingo: It will be interesting to see the AF performance when wide open. I hear lots of complains about AF accuracy from 85 1.8/1.4 users, that has become an issue with hi-res DSLRs.

The trouble is at f/1.4 you can have such shallow DOF that simply moving the camera a couple millimeters when you press the shutter can make you miss focus. Unless you are testing with a stable tripod and remote release a good target under bright lighting you can't make any claims about AF accuracy at f/1.4 and be taken seriously IMO. What the High res DSLRs did was show people their technique was not as good as they thought but people just want to blame the gear rather than admit it.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 17:44 UTC
In reply to:

Thomas Kachadurian: I'm not a nikon guy, but this is the first really ground-breaking lens news we have gotten in a while.

Just throwing all sense of balance to the wind and making a f/1.4, non stabilized boat anchor of a lens is not ground-breaking lol. Sigma has been doing that for a while now. But at least Nikon has weather protection so I'll give them that.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 17:36 UTC

I've been waiting for a modern 105mm but this is disappointing to me. I would have much preferred f/1.8 or f/2.0 and the smaller size, weight and price tag that comes with it. Also no VR is really disappointing as well. There are times I wish my 105 f/2.5 AI-S had it. It's very useful on my 24-85 and no f/1.4 is not a substitute since it doesn't' have enough DOF a lot of the time.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 17:29 UTC as 31st comment | 6 replies
Total: 1078, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »