Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Nikon is depressing me.


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#21 John Bantin

John Bantin

    Sperm Whale

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teddington/Twickenham UK
  • Interests:former Technical Editor of
    Diver Magazine (UK) and www.divernet.com
    occasional contributor
    SportDiver (Aus)
    Undercurrent
    Author of Amazing Diving Stories (Wiley Nautical)
    Now Senior Editor at Undercurrent.org

Posted 27 August 2010 - 01:13 AM

I just came back from a vacation visiting friends in America and now feel very poor. Time to get to Indonesia, I think!

I have a D200 set-up and a D700 set-up. I am continually torn between which I should take away with me. The fact of the matter is that it doesn't matter. I just need to be a better photographer!

Take pictures. Spend your money on diving trips.

I buy my own photographic kit. Diving equipment manufacturers and diving services suppliers get even-handed treatment from me whether they choose to advertise in the publications I write for or not. All the equipment I get on loan is returned as soon as it is finished with. Did you know you can now get Diver Mag as an iPad/Android app?

 

#22 Tjsnapper

Tjsnapper

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hampshire, England

Posted 27 August 2010 - 02:23 AM

Has the OP forgotten the debacle when Canon released the MkIII (that did not focus properly) and Nikon bought out the D3!!, I can't count the number of snappers I have worked with that jumped ships to Nikon from Canon because of this. I used to be surrounded by a sea of white 400, 500 and 600mm lenses, now I am pretty much the odd one out in a mass of black lenses :)
There is a cycle of new cameras and at the moment the Nikon is slightly behind in that cycle, although I am sure that there is another excellent camera on the horizon.
No diving for 3 weeks-- work work work.
Web:www.tristanjonesphotography.com
Email:info@tristanjonesphotography.com
Blog:Visit My Blog

#23 loftus

loftus

    Blue Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4575 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Winter Park, Fl

Posted 27 August 2010 - 03:14 AM

I don't care for full time AF in video, because I'm accustomed to focus pulling myself for moving pics.

As a total video novice; I can't imagine using a videocamera without autofocus underwater. Have to admit I struggle with focus on the screen with my Sony HC9 and L&M Housing. Have to think it would be even more important for me with the more limited DOF of a full frame DSLR.
John you are right; we are pretty spoiled over here - all of our cameras are so damn good it's insane. If you think about how would we have drooled over a D3100 4 or 5 years ago.

Edited by loftus, 27 August 2010 - 03:47 AM.

Nikon D800, Nikon D7000, Nauticam, Inons, Subtronic Novas. Lens collection - 10-17, 15, 16, 16-35, 14-24, 24-70, 85, 18-200, 28-300, 70-200, 60 and 105, TC's. Macs with Aperture and Photoshop.

#24 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10708 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 27 August 2010 - 04:49 AM

I dunno about that. I was at a couple of matches and while it wasn't the white sea, there was more frothy white in the photog area in the FIFA world cup matches. I think Nikon's 6000 for exchange of pro Canon equipment for 2 D3s, 70-200mm and 400mm plus 2x SB900 did wonders for them in Europe. But it's by no means world domination like it was for Canon 2002-2007.
Every make has screwed up. Remember Nikon's promise to go DX and never look back. Then everyone with DX lenses were suddenly unable to use the FX cameras.

John, the point is neither of your cameras can do video. So that's moot. :) I've always wanted a proper stills and video camera since the 90s. The earlier attempts by Sony and Panasonic were poor compared to the canon offerings today.

Jeff, AF underwater is easily fooled and will hunt, which is why AF is frowned upon underwater for wide angle. With the smaller sensors, you could just lock the WA lens at 0.7m or 2 ft away and everything will be in focus. With 35mm sensors, it's a bit more difficult but then again you can use the 15mm fisheye and get everything in focus.
An example of good ViDSLR is the ability to shoot this:
Posted Image

Then shoot video:

[vimeohd]13949410[/vimeohd]

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#25 DeanB

DeanB

    Humpback Whale

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3073 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K

Posted 27 August 2010 - 10:36 AM

Take pictures. Spend your money on diving trips.


AT LAST !!! Excellent advice and hopefully you are not a 'wannabe' videoists with their VidSLR's ... :) :)

Dive safe

DeanB
Facebook me ;)
NOW ON SKYPE !!! ... deanb69
www.waterwolf-productions.co.uk

#26 Improving Silence

Improving Silence

    Brine Shrimp

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 30 August 2010 - 01:37 PM

Another consideration that seems to be overlooked a lot is simply the feel of a camera.

When upgrading from my old Konica Minolta (rip) gear before the new Sonys were available, I gave myself two options, a full Nikon kit and a full Canon kit (based on quality and quantity of lenses available).
So I went to camera stores and I handled them, and within my budget managed to work down to one or two available bodies and properly tried those.
In the end the Canon 40D just sat a lot better with me (only after the addition of a battery grip) than any equivalent Nikon did, and given the amount of time using the camera, it was possibly the most important decision to make. I can still walk around all day with the body/grip, 70-200 2.8L IS and flash without feeling any kind of discomfort or fatigue in my hands, something that the Nikons managed after only a relatively short period of time.

Of course, this changes when housings come into play, but for people who use their cameras above water as well as below, I still think it's a fairly important point.

P.S. fwiw I still shoot with my 40D after what seems like an age in the upgrade world and would only consider adding more lenses until the body dies, and only then will a new body be considered. So long as it feels right...

#27 Paul Kay

Paul Kay

    Giant Squid

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Wales, UK

Posted 31 August 2010 - 02:13 AM

Most 'quality' cameras are exceptionally good these days - variations are really about nuance rather than significant differences. My own take is to look at lens availability. Today both Nikon and Canon produce lenses which I would be happy to use, but when I opted for Canon, Nikon were DX entrenched and simply didn't (and still don't) supply the equivalent lenses that I use most for that format nor an FX format to support their existing lenses. To me the lenses which I use most are by far the most important aspect of equipment, the bodies will change but lenses are far less transient. So I'd be far happier spending on dive trips and lenses/ports that new bodies - and it looks to me as if both Nikon and Canon are in the process of uprating lenses to meet the demands of the latest sensors.

Paul Kay,Canon EOS5DII SEACAM c/w S45, 8-15, 24L,35L, 60/2.8 (+Ext12II) & 100/2.8 Macros - Sony A7II SEACAM 28/2 & 50/2.8 Macro - UK/Ireland Seacam Sales -see  marinewildlife