If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
On 3/8/2015 6:23 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: While there was a very noticable jump from the D70 to the D300 there seems to be an even bigger jump from the D300 to the D750. that's because the d70 and d300 different product tiers and the d300 and d750 are not only different product tiers but also dx/fx. There is a marked improvement in dynamic range which gives rise to improved low light shooting at even moderate ISOs. no ****. the sensor in the d300 is much better than what was in the d70, plus it didn't have the electronic shutter that hobbled the d70. It ain't the camera. this discussion is. As I have posted before, my daughter has sold her images, taken with a D70 and a kit lens, for over $700. She has been offered one per shows, but turned them down. what your daughter has sold has absolutely nothing to do with the sensor, it's resolution and dynamic range or how nikon classifies the various models. Uhm! She still uses it, and her images are still selling. still missing the point. ten years ago, a lot of people sold photos from a d70. it was a very good camera in its day, but those days are *long* gone. even a lowly d3200 blows it away. It's still the photographer, not the camera. it's a bit of both. There is no question hat a better photographer will take better images with a lessr camera, than a lessor phtographer will, with a ,ore expensive camera. not always. better cameras make things much easier in non-ideal conditions. give an iphone to a better photographer and a d4s with a telephoto lens to a lesser photographer and have them shoot hockey or soccer. guess who is going to get the better photos. give two photographers of equal skill a d750 and d70 and have them shoot in low light or fast moving subjects. guess who is going to get better photos. give two photographers of equal skill a non-stabilized lens and a stabilized lens and have them take handheld photos. guess who is going to get more keepers. otherwise top photographers would use cellphone cameras. http://tonysweet.com/category/iphone/ so what? Now you are arguing nonsense. I response to your comment I gave you a link to a well respected photographer that uses an iPhone. will you be selling your d800? Only if I am offered the right price. Art is equipment neutral. -- PeterN |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
On 3/9/2015 12:29 AM, nospam wrote:
snip a wider angle flash and a wired remote are functional improvements. there are situations where you would not otherwise be able to take a good photo without them. Only if the wider angle does not cause a dropoff in light reaching the sensor. And there are also circumstances where a point source light help create an image that would be impossible with a wider angle flash. -- PeterN |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
PeterN wrote:
On 3/8/2015 5:04 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote: PeterN wrote: On 3/7/2015 9:16 PM, nospam wrote: In article , PeterN wrote: As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to the D300s. What's your take? In my case, it's the successor to the D300, which in turn was the successor to the D70. it may have been what you bought after owning a d70 but that doesn't make it a successor. the d300 was *not* a successor of the d70. it was the successor of the d200 which was the successor of the d100. the d70 was a consumer slr, which was succeeded by the d80, d90 and then the d5000 series. While there was a very noticable jump from the D70 to the D300 there seems to be an even bigger jump from the D300 to the D750. that's because the d70 and d300 different product tiers and the d300 and d750 are not only different product tiers but also dx/fx. There is a marked improvement in dynamic range which gives rise to improved low light shooting at even moderate ISOs. no ****. the sensor in the d300 is much better than what was in the d70, plus it didn't have the electronic shutter that hobbled the d70. It ain't the camera. this discussion is. As I have posted before, my daughter has sold her images, taken with a D70 and a kit lens, for over $700. She has been offered one per shows, but turned them down. what your daughter has sold has absolutely nothing to do with the sensor, it's resolution and dynamic range or how nikon classifies the various models. Uhm! She still uses it, and her images are still selling. still missing the point. ten years ago, a lot of people sold photos from a d70. it was a very good camera in its day, but those days are *long* gone. even a lowly d3200 blows it away. It's still the photographer, not the camera. it's a bit of both. There is no question hat a better photographer will take better images with a lessr camera, than a lessor phtographer will, with a ,ore expensive camera. Only if the quality is judged as an average of all pictures. On a one by one basis, either photographer will get better images with a better camera, just that the better photographer will get a higher percentage of better pictues. On a bright sunny 16 day, a better photographer will creating interesting permutations of the shadows and highlights, that a less skilled photographer would not even see. A more expensive camera is capable of taking decent pictures under circumstances where a lessor camera simply doesn't have the capability. And hence good photographers gravitate towards the best equipment, because it does make a difference. And that difference is huge. If the images are evaluated on the basis of composition and impact the better photographer will have a significantly higher percentage of keepers, regardless of the equipment used. Last year I was watching a well known bird photographer working. He was discarding images that if they were mine, would be hanging on the walls. And yes, he does use the 800mm lens, that I don't have. But it's more than the lens. He also has a stronger sense of anticipation, and creative use of existing lighting conditions, that I lack. So this guy spend nearly 20 grand on an 800mm lens that doesn't really do him any good at all, eh? I don't think so, and obviously he doesn't think so either. No matter how much ability a photographer has, with the wrong equipment the job won't get done as well as it could be. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Report: Nikon's New Sports-Focused Full-Frame Will be Called the... | Sandman | Digital Photography | 0 | August 20th 14 10:26 AM |
DXO Report | PeterN[_3_] | Digital Photography | 0 | May 31st 13 04:53 PM |
Multiblitz Report | loionan | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | March 6th 06 07:29 AM |
Nikon D2X Test Report: Preliminary Image Analysis | deryck lant | 35mm Photo Equipment | 2 | March 15th 05 05:10 PM |
Nikon D2X Test Report: Preliminary Image Analysis | deryck lant | Digital Photography | 1 | March 14th 05 10:34 PM |