Nikon D 90 Brochure

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by G, Aug 27, 2008.

  1. G

    G Guest

    G, Aug 27, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. G

    That80sGuy Guest

    That80sGuy, Aug 27, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. G

    G Guest

    If you look more closely you will see its "the estimated selling price" so
    no actual price has been released.
    ..
    Nikon also said in their press release it will be available in the Fall of
    2008.



    Uh, what's that $999.95 doing here, then?
    http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25446/D90.html
    D700 announced July 1, available July 25.

    D90 announced August 27, available "late September" according to:

    http://dcuser.net/nikon/nikon-d90-announcement.html
     
    G, Aug 27, 2008
    #3
  4. G

    SMS Guest

    A lot of companies don't want to use artificially high MSRPs anymore as
    it will be used in reviews, so they use "estimated selling price" or
    "projected street price" or some such wording. The $999.95 is probably
    what you'd pay at a full-service camera store, and is $100-150 more than
    what you'd pay at Amazon or a reputable NYC e-tailer.
     
    SMS, Aug 27, 2008
    #4
  5. Brian Sullivan, Aug 27, 2008
    #5
  6. G

    SMS Guest

    SMS, Aug 27, 2008
    #6
  7. G

    That80sGuy Guest

    Look at Amazon, B&H, Ritz, and Calumet, genius. They ALL have "actual
    prices". And guess what? The "actual price" is $999.95. Imagine that!

    Why do you want to display your stupidity so clearly?
    On this planet, "late September" is Fall. What is it on YOUR planet?

    I note your silence regarding the twenty-one-day period for D700. Silence
    is recommended for you. Go away.
     
    That80sGuy, Aug 27, 2008
    #7
  8. G

    That80sGuy Guest

    In message SMS
    I see you're still blowing smoke out of your ass, idiot.

    Amazon, B&H, and Calumet all have the D90 available for pre-order at
    $999.95.

    It's amazing you haven't been hit by a bus yet. One can hope....
     
    That80sGuy, Aug 27, 2008
    #8
  9. G

    That80sGuy Guest

    That80sGuy, Aug 27, 2008
    #9
  10. G

    SMS Guest

    I've noticed, at least with Amazon, that the pre-order price is almost
    always higher than the price once the item is actually in stock.
     
    SMS, Aug 27, 2008
    #10
  11. G

    SMS Guest

    At least with Amazon, the price once a new camera in stock for 3-4 weeks
    is almost always less than the pre-order price. I found that to be the
    case for the 20D, 40D, D80, and SD800 from Amazon. Not different than
    many products where the early adopters pay the most.
    How mature. Yet another clueless newbie for the kill-file.
     
    SMS, Aug 27, 2008
    #11
  12. G

    Pboud Guest

    Not so up here in Canada.. Current pre-listing are at 1150 or so.

    Ah well.. My D80 will do for now :p

    P.
     
    Pboud, Aug 27, 2008
    #12
  13. G

    SMS Guest

    In the U.S. Amazon has even been criticized for the wide price swings on
    some items, which change sometimes by the hour based on demand. Books,
    DVDs, etc. go down in price when they become hot sellers because they
    sell best sellers for less, even though they're in higher demand
    (probably because big box retailers also price new releases and best
    sellers lower). Electronic items that aren't on the market yet will be
    listed at prices that are what the manufacturer says it should retail
    for, but when the product actually is available it almost always falls
    in price.

    Amazon states: "Generally speaking, once you place an item in your
    shopping cart, you're guaranteed that price for one hour. If you've
    placed an item in your shopping cart for purchase at a later time, and
    the price for that item *declines*, you automatically get the new lower
    price for the item. If the price *increases* between the time you place
    the item in the cart, and the time you're ready to purchase, we notify
    you of the new higher price (which is the messaging you've seen). You
    can then determine whether or not you want to make the purchase at the
    new price, or remove the item from your shopping cart."

    When I bought a higher-end camcorder a few years ago from Amazon they
    were $400 less than the closest competitor, yet an hour after I placed
    the order the unit went up by several hundred dollars.
     
    SMS, Aug 27, 2008
    #13
  14. Trivial to resample when you are editing - it's 16:9 after all.

    My congratulations to Nikon for this "first".

    David.
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 27, 2008
    #14
  15. G

    Paul Furman Guest

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328929,00.asp
    "1280-by-720 at 24 frames per second"

    That's still pretty good. 16:9 aspect ratio.
    24fps seems odd.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p

    I don't really have a need for video that my cell phone won't serve but
    assuming that's the full width of the DX sensor, it would be quite a
    nice device. Bigger sensor than any video camera normal people could
    afford meaning shallow DOF would be possible (sorely lacking for video
    cameras).

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 27, 2008
    #15
  16. G

    ASAAR Guest

    Two other counts in its favor according to Thom Hogan. Despite
    the significant new features, it's more of an evolutionary upgrade
    over the D80, so there shouldn't be the 'teething' problems of more
    revolutionary cameras such as the D200. The firmware also has had
    time to be tested in case any really serious bugs surface, since he
    claims that the D90 production lines started rolling last June.
    What I like about it is that the D90 has supposedly been made more
    efficient, allowing for *many* shots (CIPA testing, 850 per charge)
    using the same EN-EL3e that can also be used in the D300, D80, D50,
    etc. For non-flash shooting, a couple of thousand shots per charge
    should be possible.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #16
  17. G

    ASAAR Guest

    If you can't beat it, criticize it. Where have we seen this
    before? Oh yes, something about why cameras that shoot at high
    frame rates aren't really needed, and models that provide only half
    measure implementations are all that are needed by most of us. :)

    I'd guess that it'll produce sharper, clearer movies than many of
    the better P&S cameras, but possibly at the expense of requiring
    many more megabytes per minute. This is suggested by the shorter
    clip length (5 minutes, max.) when shooting at the highest
    resolution (1280x720). Without significantly enlarging buffer
    memory, 1080p movies might have not even be able to produce clips as
    long as two minutes, hardly a step in the right direction. Anyone
    that really feels limited by the 720p spec. probably would have more
    issues with the D90's other video limitations. For them, the D90
    won't be able to take the place of for *real* video cameras. For
    those that need their still cameras to produce great video, wait for
    the D4v, Nikon's future Swiss Army Knife model. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #17
  18. G

    ASAAR Guest

    You seem to have a perpetual "the glass is half empty" attitude,
    and it this instance used it to turn an amazing advance into "not
    good enough for me". At the time I wrote my reply, I didn't know
    the actual reason for the resolution limitation (which probably will
    not be much of a limitation for most D90 owners), but it seemed
    reasonable to assume that the limitation would be real, and not a
    throttling back, as some other manufacturers are known for.

    No, data throughput wasn't the reason.

    Nope. Per David Pogue's article in today's NYTimes, it's a real
    physical limitation, and possibly one that can't be somewhat worked
    around by making several videos quickly, one after the other.
    I can't say for sure, but it seems quite possible that trying to
    get more than twice as much data from the sensor in the same amount
    of time would overheat the sensor in even less time.

    No longer in that market. You may have something there with that
    assumption though. Here's some more from Pogue's article :

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/t...ue.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

    As I said previously, the D90's video mode clearly won't allow it
    to take the place of the better video cameras, and wouldn't even
    come close if it provided the higher resolution you want. The
    article mentions some of the other limitations that were evident
    before Pogue's article was published. Even if the D90's video was
    1080p compliant, I doubt that you'd be enticed to get one. You
    might even have complained about some of its other limitations.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #18
  19. ASAAR wrote:
    []
    []

    I don't see the prime job of the D90 as replacing video cameras - to me
    the video mode allows for capture of the atmosphere (or sound) of a scene
    or an event in a way not possible for still pictures. As we often see
    stated: "If you want video, use a video camera!". I don't want video, but
    I do see the benefit of short audio or video clips, so I welcome this
    addition to the DSLR.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2008
    #19
  20. G

    DG Guest

    "David J Taylor"

    Sports shooting... Pull down the clip and then pick your shots.


    -= http://www.flickr.com/photos/rosepetal236/ =-
     
    DG, Aug 28, 2008
    #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.