I have to say, the rumored D-800 and similar look very impressive, but...

Discussion in 'Photography' started by ScotchBright, Oct 8, 2010.

  1. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    For right now, I can't imagine needing a camera for monster
    poster sized prints. I won't need mine for anything larger than
    standard page size, and my D-3000 does shots up to that res rather
    nicely.
    If everyone didn't clamor for the latest gadget, it would
    force prices down you know...
    There oughtta be a consumer's union. There's a union for
    nearly everything else.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 8, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ScotchBright

    peter Guest

    I agree, well almost. I like to mine images and will make 12x18 from a
    fraction of the original image. Obviously for my insane type of work the
    extra pixels are helpful.
     
    peter, Oct 8, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ScotchBright

    peter Guest

    It's easy to rationalize either way. I like the concept of FF for my WA
    work. I would need a new WA lens, but I don't see that as a major issue.
    With our 50th coming up, the Treasurer already is prepared. ;-)
     
    peter, Oct 8, 2010
    #3
  4. ScotchBright

    Noons Guest

    ScotchBright wrote,on my timestamp of 8/10/2010 12:51 PM:
    and if it all fails, you can always buy a Canon?

    Oh boy, there go the salaries in China out the window yet again...
    Yes. To do what? "create a consensus" with the multi-nationals?

    Just kidding. Agree with you. The d800 has taken too long to come out. It's
    gonna be useless for most people by the time it surfaces.
     
    Noons, Oct 9, 2010
    #4
  5. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    Yep. I'm still glad when new stuff comes out because then the
    older stuff comes down.
    Composition is still the first thing that photo schools teach
    (although I think if you don't have some sense of what will make a
    good photo to start with you'll have to do a lot of learning) because
    it's the most important, and with any decent camera, a good
    imagination, and a willingness to work at it, a person can get great
    shots even with many older cameras.
    The way things are now, cameras that are considered "older"
    are the stuff of a couple years ago, if not less, so it's a boon to
    someone who doesn't want to, or can't spend thousands on the latest
    whiz-bang.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 10, 2010
    #5
  6. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    Sure, and there are other advantages too.

    If you have a 10 megapixel camera and you zoom in at about 3x
    in fairly low light on, say, a concert stage, you're going to have to
    do some brightening after the fact.

    If the camera's 30 megapixels, you don't have to zoom in; you
    can just get the part of it that you want and it's the same as if
    you'd taken the shot with a ten megapixel camera at 3x zoom.

    It isn't that it's always "better", it just lets you do
    certain things you wouldn't be able to do otherwise.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 10, 2010
    #6
  7. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    I'm pretty happy with my Nikon. Together Nikon and Canon have
    80% of the DSLR market, I've read.
    Salaries there are already low, but so are living costs. The
    DVD we pay $30.00 here comes out in some cases the same day the movie
    shows at the theatre there, and costs $2.00 or $3.00.
    Yeah. When the Pentagon had the idea to buy low cost/mid range
    capability fighter aircraft it was a good idea.

    But if you purposefully design something as second tier,
    you're taking a risk that if you've planned a little too far ahead, by
    the time it comes out it'll really be 3rd tier.

    I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist by nature, and I have to
    wonder since some people have questioned the validity of the rumor
    that this camera is on the way if maybe it's not; maybe Nikon is just
    planning to not introduce it at all, but get someone else to introduce
    a 2nd tier camera... at the wrong time?
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 10, 2010
    #7
  8. People can test the market to see if there's demand, or throw a few feints
    to misdirect others. No need for fantastical conspiracy theories because
    that's how people can be at times. Can't say it's very honest or nice but
    things are as they are rather than how we'd like them to be.
     
    Charles E Hardwidge, Oct 10, 2010
    #8
  9. ScotchBright

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 12:26:28 -0400, peter
    :
    : >On 10/7/2010 11:11 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    : >> On 2010-10-07 19:51:20 -0700, ScotchBright <> said:
    : >>
    : >>> For right now, I can't imagine needing a camera for monster
    : >>> poster sized prints. I won't need mine for anything larger than
    : >>> standard page size, and my D-3000 does shots up to that res rather
    : >>> nicely.
    : >>> If everyone didn't clamor for the latest gadget, it would
    : >>> force prices down you know...
    : >>> There oughtta be a consumer's union. There's a union for
    : >>> nearly everything else.
    : >>
    : >> Agreed.
    : >> ....and, ...er, there is a Consumer's Union,
    : >> <http://www.consumersunion.org/ >
    : >>
    : >> I don't particularly need to produce wall filling prints. For now I am
    : >> quite happy with my D300s. The D800 is going to have to demonstrate some
    : >> additional improvements and/or feature(s) other than a fat sensor, to
    : >> place somewhere between the D700 and D3X in the Nikon pecking order.
    : >> (I can see the CF/SDHD slots from the D300s being added.)
    : >>
    : >> ....but now we might get some bargains on new or used(refurbished)
    : >> D700's. Maybe somewhere between $1600-$2100. (or, wishful thinking, better)
    : >>
    : >> Roll on the New Year!
    : >
    : >I agree, well almost. I like to mine images and will make 12x18 from a
    : >fraction of the original image. Obviously for my insane type of work the
    : >extra pixels are helpful.
    :
    : Sure, and there are other advantages too.
    :
    : If you have a 10 megapixel camera and you zoom in at about 3x
    : in fairly low light on, say, a concert stage, you're going to have to
    : do some brightening after the fact.
    :
    : If the camera's 30 megapixels, you don't have to zoom in; you
    : can just get the part of it that you want and it's the same as if
    : you'd taken the shot with a ten megapixel camera at 3x zoom.
    :
    : It isn't that it's always "better", it just lets you do
    : certain things you wouldn't be able to do otherwise.

    What you say makes sense only if you're not using a constant-aperture zoom
    lens. Affordable CA zooms have been readily available for several years, so
    the problem should be avoidable. Or am I failing to understand your point?

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Oct 11, 2010
    #9
  10. ScotchBright

    Robert Coe Guest

    : I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist by nature, and I have to
    : wonder since some people have questioned the validity of the rumor
    : that this camera is on the way if maybe it's not; maybe Nikon is just
    : planning to not introduce it at all, but get someone else to introduce
    : a 2nd tier camera... at the wrong time?

    Didn't Tony Polson tell us a couple of days ago that he's already put down a
    deposit on one?

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Oct 11, 2010
    #10
  11. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    I have a D3000 with the kit lens that came with it, so I'm
    going to have to guess that it isn't constant aperture. Then again,
    the manual says that you can set it to shutter priority or aperture
    priority, so I'm guessing the aperture must be able to change
    constantly in relation to other settings.
    Can you tell that I'm still a novice?
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 12, 2010
    #11
  12. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    I studied marketing, and that image makes me excited. I hate
    to admit it, but it does.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 12, 2010
    #12
  13. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    I rest my case. Wheels within wheels my friend... HE'S IN ON
    IT!
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 12, 2010
    #13
  14. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    The D-700 seems pretty good from what I've read about it.

    Heck, even film would still be worthwhile if you had anyone
    around who had a drum scanner.

    I was in a print production class in college a few years back
    as part of an advertising course, and we were watching a short
    documentary on the print production process.

    This was made before digital cameras were big, and mostly film
    was still being used (actually, I would have seen this film in about
    '04 I think... and that makes a little more sense).

    There was this one scene where they showed how they convert
    prints from 35mm film into a digital image, and they had this tube
    that looked about 7 feet long, and someone taped the print inside it.

    They get fantastically detailed images out of that too, and
    wonderful colour.

    Technically, it's still better than many digital cameras
    today, but those drum scanners cost around 100k each. NOT cheap.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 12, 2010
    #14
  15. ScotchBright

    peter Guest

    My following comment does not apply to you, or any other person who has
    participated n the SI.
    I wonder about the motives for some who post here. Are they real, or a
    scraper. just trying to gather information for sale.


    <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...44381288117888.html?mod=WSJ_Tech_LEFTTopNews>
     
    peter, Oct 13, 2010
    #15
  16. ScotchBright

    tony cooper Guest

    There is, or used to be, a lady who works for Adorama who monitored
    some of the photo newsgroups. She used her own name and identified
    herself when she responded to a post, though. I never thought that it
    was objectionable.
     
    tony cooper, Oct 13, 2010
    #16
  17. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    She probably got quite a bit of information for trouble
    shooting from the pros in this group.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 13, 2010
    #17
  18. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

     
    ScotchBright, Oct 15, 2010
    #18
  19. ScotchBright

    ScotchBright Guest

    Darn right they are.

    Still, I can take print worthy shots with this one depending
    on the conditions in which I'm shooting, so I'm going to make the most
    of it.
     
    ScotchBright, Oct 15, 2010
    #19
  20. ScotchBright

    Robert Coe Guest

    : I'm still here! And delighted to report that not only are there fewer
    : - actually, for months now ZERO - complaints from this group, but that
    : our long-term goals are bearing fruit.
    : For example, back in 2005 we had a miserable rating of 3.75/10
    : (6.21/10 over 6 months) at resellerratings.com. Now, we have reached
    : an amazing 9.36/10 (9.01/10)
    :
    : Still a way to go, but headed in the right direction.
    :
    : I plan to be here at least until we score a perfect 10.........
    :
    : Is there anything I can help you with?

    Since you ask, yes! What's with your absurdly user-hostile Web site? At one
    time it wasn't very far behind B&H's site; but I was over there this morning,
    and it was appalling. Did you recently outsource it or something? (It was OK
    earlier this year, as I recall, when I bought a T2i for my wife there.) Not
    only was it ridiculously hard to find what I was looking for today; the site
    was very slow to come up.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Oct 15, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.