Joined on Feb 3, 2016


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
In reply to:

Jackdaw61: So, with the converter switched in, I get the same angle of view as an OLY 300mm, with worse stabilisation and lower sensor resolution, plus I lose a stop, and I pay $10,000 more. What's not to like?

Your 300mm can't zoom. That's kind of important for sports photographers shooting from the sidelines, as this lens is meant for. This is also actually a stop faster with the TC due to sensor size.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 10:07 UTC
In reply to:

lightandaprayer: You cannot declare a brand new DSLR to be "great" until it has been in the hands of photographers for a decent period of time and enough images have been made with it. The D700 is a "great" Nikon that is worthy of its classic status. It has proven itself to be an extremely reliable and capable camera. There are still many photographers who are using the D700 to create images for publication.

Considering Nikon's recent track record with the D750 and the older D600, I think that it is premature to say anything based on the D850 specs. If the shutter mechanism does not develop serious defects and there are not other serious problems, then perhaps the D850 has a chance of joining the other Nikon cameras that have earned the classic moniker.

@Deliverator Those 3 shutter recalls ARE for the flare issue. The flare banding was determined to be caused by the shutter.

My D750 is one of the affected ones, and I've never once saw flare banding in real life or had any other issue with the shutter. So to me it's literally just getting a new shutter for free. I have zero complaints, except that I should've accumulated more actuations before sending it in.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 05:03 UTC
In reply to:

Zigmont: I just wanted to point out the mistake in the headline, it should read "Nikon proves it's on the ropes with the D850".

@grimlock361 "Extraordinary loss" is an accounting term for non-operational losses. i.e. the loss Nikon incurred by writing down its semiconductor assets. It's not even anything to do with the camera division.

People harping on about "extraordinary losses" is just flaunting their ignorance at this point.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 04:59 UTC
In reply to:

Osa25: "...must be followed within 96 hours by foreign airlines flying to the United States from the affected airports – but not US-carriers........banned electronic items can still be transported in checked baggage. ...Homeland Security says the ban is not based on a threat of an imminent attack....."

So basically this is a cheap trick form of protectionism to favour US based airlines.

With silly, random unpredictable, stunts like this, well the current govt is going to turn this country into the laughing stock of the world...

"Going to"? I'm afraid that boat sailed months ago.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 21:44 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: 105mm and ... f/1.4? What a waste of glass.
Why not f/2 and make it more bijou and optically superior for digital?
But modern faux-Avedons and pretentious videographers wouldn't know what it means, so give them the f/1.4 because that is all they know.

The lens isn't even out yet and you already know it's not optically inferior for digital. Can I borrow your time machine?

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 10:51 UTC
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5