Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)

Rob, Kenji has been talking about the 7D's issue for a while now that's why I said those things he actually has some very nice macro shots when he is not complaining about his gear

monk3y wrote in post #13129354
Rob, Kenji has been talking about the 7D's issue for a while now that's why I said those things he actually has some very nice macro shots when he is not complaining about his gear

Ahh. I see. okie dokie.

I could tell you guys some scary D300 stories from a few years ago.. loll

monk3y wrote in post #13129271
But appreciating your camera's capabilities is more fun than criticizing its flaws... So I usually just shut up and use it more hehe after all We all know everything is a compromise

I have been pretty happy with my gear... I haven't even tried doing Micro adjust on any of my lenses... Basically coz I don't know how that's maybe why I don't have any focus/sharpness issues too hehe

I am doing this as a hobby though unlike some of you... So I try to enjoy it as much as I can with the gear I have

Great post. Go Pinoy!

Im leaving Nikon for now *sighs* I'm going to miss my D700 but damn Nikon's prime glasses are hella expensive. For example, Canon's 35L can be had for $1200, Nikon's 35 1.4G is right around $1500-$1700. 135L can be had for as low as $800+, Nikons 135 DC's lowest price is at $1100, Nikon 24 1.4 is near $2000, Canon's 24L II is priced at $1400.00 Nikon makes the best bodies IMO but damn their glass is just too much for some hobbyists like me and Monk3y.

monk3y wrote in post #13129354
Rob, Kenji has been talking about the 7D's issue for a while now that's why I said those things he actually has some very nice macro shots when he is not complaining about his gear

At least it's not just me who complained about the 7D!

tim wrote in post #13129397
At least it's not just me who complained about the 7D!

Not just you, Tim.

I thought the 7D was ok but not what I expected or wanted and based on all the hype I found it to be a disappointment.

TMR Design wrote in post #13129358
Ahh. I see. okie dokie.

I could tell you guys some scary D300 stories from a few years ago.. loll

Haha no thanks... The less i knkw the better

eye2i wrote in post #13129363
Great post. Go Pinoy!

Im leaving Nikon for now *sighs* I'm going to miss my D700 but damn Nikon's prime glasses are hella expensive. For example, Canon's 35L can be had for $1200, Nikon's 35 1.4G is right around $1500-$1700. 135L can be had for as low as $800+, Nikons 135 DC's lowest price is at $1100, Nikon 24 1.4 is near $2000, Canon's 24L II is priced at $1400.00 Nikon makes the best bodies IMO but damn their glass is just too much for some hobbyists like me and Monk3y.

Haha thanks

Wow I did not look at it like that from the usual trio workhorse zoom lens it looks pretty even but when it comes to primes it looks like Canon is indeed cheaper

tim wrote in post #13129397
At least it's not just me who complained about the 7D!

It looks like the 7D is a no middle ground camera... Either you love it or you hate it

I'm glad I'm not the only one with Nikons opinion. Canon has more options for glass at more price points. 70-200 f/4 for $500 or $1000 with IS vs nada for Nikon. Well I guess you can go with an 80-200 for Nikon. I'm not impressed with any of the Canon bodies except for the 5DMII.

monk3y wrote in post #13129438
It looks like the 7D is a no middle ground camera... Either you love it or you hate it

True. Before I bought one I asked a few people I knew that were shooting with it and getting absolutely beautiful results. I got great feedback.

When I got the camera I was excited because it had the new camera feel and smell and by the second day I started to realize that I wasn't liking it. I do two shoots with it and while the images were ok I wasn't excited about performance and I quickly saw that I was having the low ISO noise issue.

TMR Design wrote in post #13129358
Ahh. I see. okie dokie.

I could tell you guys some scary D300 stories from a few years ago.. loll

As you said, recognize the cameras flaws and work around them, For me, it just means i have to use more live view (Which chews up one of my two batteries very quickly) or "guess" sometimes... I've never been too upset with the IQ on my 7D though, i dont have the low ISO noise problem i guess...and at high ISOs i consider it "Clean enough" IE heres a 1600 shot i did...and i frequently work at 1600 with the camera without any complaints (And hell, 3200, But i dont like using 6400)

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​157600404/

monk3y wrote in post #13129438
It looks like the 7D is a no middle ground camera... Either you love it or you hate it

The 7D is a VERY focused tool, It has its uses, but if you step outside of those specific uses you do find the 7D is "out of its element"

The 7D is really made for wildlife and sports, Its not a landscape camera, it does not shine for landscapes and architechture and that...

Razeus wrote in post #13129501
I'm glad I'm not the only one with Nikons opinion. Canon has more options for glass at more price points. 70-200 f/4 for $500 or $1000 with IS vs nada for Nikon. Well I guess you can go with an 80-200 for Nikon. I'm not impressed with any of the Canon bodies except for the 5DMII.

Personally id rather have one of the older Nikon 80-200s, Which you can find with a little searching for around $500...but i do see your point i guess

TMR Design wrote in post #13129555
True. Before I bought one I asked a few people I knew that were shooting with it and getting absolutely beautiful results. I got great feedback.

When I got the camera I was excited because it had the new camera feel and smell and by the second day I started to realize that I wasn't liking it. I do two shoots with it and while the images were ok I wasn't excited about performance and I quickly saw that I was having the low ISO noise issue.

Indeed, I started to really notice the flaws with it a bit later at least after i had a lot of time shooting it and such...I am not sure there is a better camera for me out there right now however...So I'm staying put until i feel there is...

The D7000 has the IQ and everything, but the build i am unsure on, and the D300s has the build i want but i do not think i want to give up the IQ....

The closest camera to what i really want is the A77, But I am not going with a Sony system, However, the A77 is likely a good indication of what Nikon is cooking up for a D300s replacement

monk3y wrote in post #13129312
Did you receive your D7000 MKIII already?

lol...It's supposed to come tomorrow.

I'm an ex-7D owner as well. Couple that with the 24-70L and I couldn't wait to make the switch to Nikon.

KenjiS wrote in post #13129611
The closest camera to what i really want is the A77, But I am not going with a Sony system, However, the A77 is likely a good indication of what Nikon is cooking up for a D300s replacement

That's a lot of pixels for a small sensor. I need to be able to see and edit the raw files for myself. Even the D3x at 24MP is only designed to go up to ISO 1600. What happens when you cut the sensor in half? Hopefully the tech has overcome some of the physics problems involved.


Ahhhh...triple post....my bad.

TMR Design wrote in post #13129555
True. Before I bought one I asked a few people I knew that were shooting with it and getting absolutely beautiful results. I got great feedback.

When I got the camera I was excited because it had the new camera feel and smell and by the second day I started to realize that I wasn't liking it. I do two shoots with it and while the images were ok I wasn't excited about performance and I quickly saw that I was having the low ISO noise issue.

yeah and I bet people who loves it are saying you guys who don't love it probably don't know how to use the camera properly

dgrPhotos wrote in post #13129687
lol...It's supposed to come tomorrow.

nice...

dgrPhotos wrote in post #13129705
I'm an ex-7D owner as well. Couple that with the 24-70L and I couldn't wait to make the switch to Nikon.

glad I did not buy the 7D then when I switched I was looking at the 7D, 5DMKII(too expensive) and D700. and the price difference between the 7D and D700 back then was like $200-$300 here where I am now the difference is almost $1000

TMR Design wrote in post #13129555
True. Before I bought one I asked a few people I knew that were shooting with it and getting absolutely beautiful results. I got great feedback.

When I got the camera I was excited because it had the new camera feel and smell and by the second day I started to realize that I wasn't liking it. I do two shoots with it and while the images were ok I wasn't excited about performance and I quickly saw that I was having the low ISO noise issue.

Low ISO noise issues looking at images at 100% in photoshop, or on a 8x12" print? Most of the time it's pixel peepers that had problems.

I found the image quality fine from ISO100 - ISO20K, when judged by prints. This is assuming the shot in question was in focus...

I saw it on screen. I'm sure it wouldn't reveal itself in print but I can't fall back on that. These days many clients are viewing on screen and never going to print.

I'm only a pixel peeper when I see a problem so it has nothing to do with sitting at the computer and viewing at 100% for the sake of pixel peeping, but I do retouch at 100% and when it stares you in the face and gets in the way of retouching then it's an issue.

We can make excuses or label each other pixel peepers but the reality is that my Nikon D700 doesn't have noise issues under the same conditions, and the 7D was hideous by comparison. I didn't need to pixel peep to see that and once I was at 100% it was disturbing to look at.

Poor transitions and noise make for a murky image and poor microcontrast. If it's fine for some, that's cool. Not for me, thanks.