russbarnes

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Has a website at www.russbarnes.co.uk
Joined on Jun 9, 2010

Comments

Total: 171, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoPoet: Keeping my D7200 but using my Fuji X T-2 more each day

Why have you got an XT2 and a D7200? That makes no sense at all...

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 02:02 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

Svetoslav Popov: 20MPx but not OLPF? What a mess.
I always hated the artifacts of the D70/D50. Now there's another one. Sigh.

You've never seen output from a D500 then. There's nothing messy about it, in fact it's class leading.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 01:54 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jack Hogan: This camera is a turnoff for landscape shooters like me. Lower resolution, probably lower DR at base and the old AF. The old AF is no slouch but then I would prefer a D7200 over the obviously-crippled-by-marketing D7500 today even if they both cost the same $1000. Tsk, tsk Nikon, two years later and this is all you can come up with at a critical juncture in the industry?

I use the D500 as a backup to my D810 and all I shoot is landscape. I can confirm that the sensor is outstanding for landscape work and you will gain cleaner higher ISO too. There's plenty of examples on my Flickr Stream here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/russellbarnes/

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 08:04 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheMexican: One SD card?? no UHS-II??
why oh why?!

Price differentiation, protecting the higher end models and profit. Does that cover it for you? ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 07:11 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

endofoto: Nikon D7200 has a better sensor than D500 and better dynamic range than FF D5 (see DXO comparison) and Nikon wanted to cripple D7500 to sell pricy D500 I think. In other ways it is improved over 7200.

The D500 sensor and associated output is outstanding. It's the cornerstone of the camera - I've not found anyone that didn't agree.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 07:08 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

sandy b: 50 shot 14 bit raw buffer. Huge improvement. But, damn, that second card slot.

Removing the 2nd card slot is partially how they deliver that increased buffer. Quid Pro Quo. Reducing resolution of the sensor is another, no one seems to be bitching about that. It's all about moving data around the camera in the most efficient way. If you want a 2nd card slot buy the D500 speed machine with its XQD support.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 07:05 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

barrym1966: D7500 powered by Sony :)

Seriously though the removal of a card slot... Why would you do that?

Bandwidth concerns. The slot isn't the fastest so two slow slots slows the whole camera down. That's why FPS is what it is.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 07:02 UTC
In reply to:

Vivid1: You will get the exact same poll results if you asked the question:
"Which brand of camera do you own:
- Canon
- Nikon
- Sony
- Fuji etc etc..."

No you won't.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 08:40 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: Makes the Nikkor 58mm f1.4G look like a pretty good deal. Out of focus highlights are pretty hard edged, why would anyone want it?

At the risk of raising old arguments, the Nikon 58mm f/1.4G clearly wipes the floor with something like this, especially in bokeh terms.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 11:03 UTC
In reply to:

x10x10x: Very nervous Bokeh, what's the point.

Agreed. Looks worse than a cheap 50mm 1.8

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 11:01 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (274 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tilted Plane: Great, sharply worded review.

I am probably not the only one with a Nikon 14-24mm that wonders about how the Sigma compares there, at least down to 14mm.

Based on this review, the reputation of the world class Nikon 14-24mm continues to be more of than safe.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 10:45 UTC
In reply to:

AshMills: Should be good for sales of focus alignment tools, skincare products and chiropractor treatment. Images do look great though.

Has anyone weighed this thing yet, because that important number seems very hidden!?

Nearly 1.2Kilos? Is that right? Dear god what are they thinking? Another bloated offering like the 35 and 50 before it then. Never going to get me to part with my ££££

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 14:44 UTC

A thing of beauty. They should bring back that logo too. Despite being made in 1948, if that had been manufactured last week no one would bat an eyelid. Classic design lasts 70 years or more...

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2016 at 20:35 UTC as 37th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

technotic: Anyone preordered?

Tumbleweed.................

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 05:39 UTC
In reply to:

Chaitanya S: I hope this lens solves focus breathing and shorter effective focal length of VR2 lens.

I bet you a huge amount of money it has been resolved... Nikon do listen to their users.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 06:14 UTC

Are my eyes deceiving me or is that tripod mount arca-swiss compatible?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 06:03 UTC as 97th comment
In reply to:

andyyau: Just $2800! It is lucky that I am not Nikon user.

@andyyau lol you get to pay an outrageous sum for the ridiculously poor 5DMKIV instead. Wake up and smell the coffee - Canon are on a serious price gouge like all other manufacturers.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 05:57 UTC

The point of including Flourite is to make the beast lighter, just as they have done in the super-teles. But this is a 100g saving, making it somewhat moot. No doubt part of the price premium here is for "improvements" like this but given there is basically no weight difference at all to the VRII version I think Nikon are going to struggle to justify anything other than marginal improvement all round. I was looking forward to the possibility that this was going to be closer to 1KG when Nikon Rumours announced the inclusion of an FL element but it now seems my expectation was wildly optimistic. All of this just adds up to disappointment. The spectacular f/4 version is still the lightweight king.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 05:54 UTC as 98th comment | 4 replies

Interesting. Personally the last thing I'd want is an advert on a camera bag for what's inside. For the same reason I never use branded camera straps either. They look nice nonetheless...

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2016 at 18:13 UTC as 43rd comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon 105mm F1.4E ED sample images (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

YA9Productions: I need a portrait lens, this or the 85 1.4G?
my longest lens is 50mm.

35, 58, 100 works well for me. 85 and 105 are pretty close while 58 and 85 are also similar. As such for a pair 35 and 85 are probably the way to go as is 58 and 105 but it's definitely down to personal preference.

I love my Zeiss 100 f/2 ZF.2 way too much to give it up for this 105 1.4.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2016 at 03:48 UTC
Total: 171, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »