|
I'm really curious about the video capabilities of the D7100. Specifically if it will be able to change aperture setting in live view mode. I'm guessing we won't know the answer until they are released but if someone comes across a site that talks in detail about shooting video on the D7100 I'd be interested to see the link.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Legdiian posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's 1.3x on top of the standard 1.5 crop. This is correct. The D7100 crops the DX-sensor so that instead of 24,1 mpx you get 15 mpx. One neat effect is that suddenly all of the 51 AF-points fills the whole image.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:I'm really curious about the video capabilities of the D7100. Specifically if it will be able to change aperture setting in live view mode. I'm guessing we won't know the answer until they are released but if someone comes across a site that talks in detail about shooting video on the D7100 I'd be interested to see the link. The pre-production model that I tried today couldn't change while filming (if that was what you asked).
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
azathosk posted:The pre-production model that I tried today couldn't change while filming (if that was what you asked). Rats. I'm guessing if you couldn't change it while recording, it wouldn't matter if you were just idle in live view mode. I'm sure there is some technical explanation as to why it's so difficult to do that because it's a pretty common gripe with dslr video shooters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
D800 does it just fine though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
D600 has the same limitation. Fortunately I only use my manual focus/aperture glass when shooting video, but yeah it's pretty annoying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
krooj posted:Cool - so street pricing ought to be around $1000 ~ $1100 for the body. This has to put even more pressure on Canon to get the 7DmkII out, especially when you consider that Nikon has had them whipped for the past year or so (D800/E, D600, D71k). How are Canon's entry level SLRs compared to Nikon's? If it's anything like the D7000 launch there will be no such thing as "street pricing"  I had to drive 2 hours to pick mine up.1st AD posted:D600 has the same limitation. Fortunately I only use my manual focus/aperture glass when shooting video, but yeah it's pretty annoying. What annoys me about it is that you can't even change it when you're not recording -- you have to turn LV off to change it, even in M.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
Kazy posted:Nikon D7100 this March, $1200, no AA filter, 24MP, stereo mic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
This is how the viewfinder looks when D7100 have the 1.3x crop-mode enabled. 51 focus points all through the image frame. I love it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
Man, this 1.3x crop mode sounds super cool. 16MP is still more than enough, and the extra 'length' would be cool for shooting telephotos at events, while not blasting through your raw buffer and card space. 1.95x crop 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Miko posted:51point AF with 15 crosstypes. Wowzers, and I thought my D7000 was good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Should we be expecting a D400, or is this really going to be the top of the line DX model for Nikon? As a D7000 owner I just can't get very excited about the D7100. Nikon Rumors thinks the D300s and D7000 have been merged to make this, but I feel like Nikon would still benefit from having heavy duty DX camera like the D200-D300.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:The main thing that strike me, as a wildlife shooting Canon user, is the 6fps and an 8 RAw buffer isn't exactly pushing boundaries for top-level APS-C. By comparison the 7D does 8fps and 25 RAW, and the latest rumours are that the 7D2 will manage 10fps. That and skimping on the buttons for back-button focusing. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Feb 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:The main thing that strike me, as a wildlife shooting Canon user, is the 6fps and an 8 RAw buffer isn't exactly pushing boundaries for top-level APS-C. By comparison the 7D does 8fps and 25 RAW, and the latest rumours are that the 7D2 will manage 10fps. That and skimping on the buttons for back-button focusing. Why would the 7100 have a smaller buffer than the 7000? I'm 99% sure my 7000 does 10 shots in buffer, though I don't have it in front of me. Edit: Yep, D7000 does (minimum) 10. http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7000/features03.htm Edit2: and yep, D7100 bottoms out at 6. What the gently caress: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/spec.htm On the upside, I don't see a good reason to upgrade now, so yay money. Krakkles fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Feb 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Also no 100% VF on a 1200 euros camera is pure trolling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 12:07
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:The main thing that strike me, as a wildlife shooting Canon user, is the 6fps and an 8 RAw buffer isn't exactly pushing boundaries for top-level APS-C. By comparison the 7D does 8fps and 25 RAW, and the latest rumours are that the 7D2 will manage 10fps. That and skimping on the buttons for back-button focusing. This may be a dumb question but how does the buffer work? Does it fill the buffer and then try and write them to the SD card or is it trying to write to the SD card the whole time and just using the buffer when the SD card can't keep up? I assume using a faster SD card would help a little? In real world usage if the say the camera has an "8 RAW" buffer, how many pictures could you get before the buffer is full? This is assuming that it writing to both the buffer and SD card at the same time, if it doesn't do that I would guess the answer is 8.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 14:55
|
|
|
azathosk posted:This is how the viewfinder looks when D7100 have the 1.3x crop-mode enabled. 51 focus points all through the image frame. I love it. What's the difference between this 1.3x crop-mode and just cropping in post?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 15:17
|
|
|
echobucket posted:What's the difference between this 1.3x crop-mode and just cropping in post? Smaller file size and you can shoot at 7fps instead of 6fps.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:This may be a dumb question but how does the buffer work? Does it fill the buffer and then try and write them to the SD card or is it trying to write to the SD card the whole time and just using the buffer when the SD card can't keep up? I assume using a faster SD card would help a little? In real world usage if the say the camera has an "8 RAW" buffer, how many pictures could you get before the buffer is full? This is assuming that it writing to both the buffer and SD card at the same time, if it doesn't do that I would guess the answer is 8. The latter, the buffer is where the pictures end up straight after being read off the sensor. The camera begins processing the buffered images immediately to produce a raw/jpeg file and write it to the memory card. When one picture in the buffer is processed it's cleared off, and the camera then starts on the next, all the while you can keep shooting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:Smaller file size and you can shoot at 7fps instead of 6fps. Yeah, and I can imagine it helping you compose. Does it black out the border or just draw a line on the viewfinder?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:Smaller file size and you can shoot at 7fps instead of 6fps. It should also fit more pictures in the buffer then! Since it actually reads less data off the sensor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
nielsm posted:It should also fit more pictures in the buffer then! Since it actually reads less data off the sensor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
Eh, I don't think you can read part of a CMOS line. You can discard the date before processing though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
echobucket posted:Yeah, and I can imagine it helping you compose. Does it black out the border or just draw a line on the viewfinder?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
azathosk posted:That's negative side: It doesn't black out the border, but just draws a red line in the viewfinder. Actually, that's not really a downside. Being able to see what's about to enter the frame can be very valuable, especially for moving wildlife/sports, where the 1.3x crop is most likely to be used. If Canon really is bringing out a 7D2, I'll bet Nikon is making a D400. Those two companies pretty much move in lockstep nowadays, when it comes to camera bodies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Shooting in compressed 12bit raw gives you a 14 file buffer which isn't too bad. If you really need a huge buffer just shoot jpgs? That being said I do expect Nikon to come out with a D400, as there is still a sizable gap between D7100 pricing and D600 pricing. Also interesting is the fact that Nikon first launched the D7000 with 16mp, and then later on an FX cam with the same pixel density (D800 with 36mp) If they do the same with the D7100 we will be looking at a 54mp FX camera somewhere down the line (D4x anyone?)
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
D4x would probably just use the d800e assembly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
^^ Yup. Updated D3xRemo posted:Shooting in compressed 12bit raw gives you a 14 file buffer which isn't too bad. If you really need a huge buffer just shoot jpgs? I don't know if it will be an explicit product created by Nikon so much as a drop in the price of the D600 over time. I get the feeling that if Nikon could get MSRP at $1500 or so, it would be a small enough gap for people that were previously on the fence between APS-C and 35mm. AFAIK, the D4 is a totally different beast which is intended for speed, not necessarily raw resolution, and I think this is the reason Nikon keeps the D3x around: people that want a high(er) resolution sensor in a full size body. Maybe the D3x becomes the D4x with a D800/e sensor inside?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
I feel that the design philosophy of the D4 is not just speed, it is also more consistent performance throughout the entire ISO range, as opposed to the other current gen Nikon cameras. Surely there is a place in the DX line for such a camera as well?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 04:44
|
|
|
The difference isn't very pronounced if we're just going off that chart. There's still a 1 stop drop in DR with every 1 stop increase in ISO past 1250. And depending on the application, I'd take the higher MP count of the D800 over the slight improvements of DR for the D4. It's not like the Canon C-series video cameras where the DR remains at 12 stops throughout the entire ISO range.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
You are right that it is not a very big difference and for most people I'd imagine that the D800's specs will be more suitable. It is only for the small subset of people who shoots a large volume of pictures at high isos (events? weddings? sports?) that will prefer something like a D4. Perhaps Nikon may decide that the market for these is just too small for them to bother with a dx D4.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
I love my D600, but the moire is unbelievable. We were shooting some music video footage downtown the other day and any stuff I got that had an office window with blinds or any sort of power line in it is absolutely unusable. Considering selling it and getting a 5D Mark III or BMCC.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
tbqh if I didn't need a FF stills camera I'd ditch the D600 immediately, but it really loving excels in that function and I can deal with the other issues.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Been using a D800 for sports and between that and a D4 the compromise comes really on the fps, the D800 is slow, even with the grip in raw. I find anything up to ISO 6400 completely usable even for print. Compared to the D300s at the same ISO the D800 is way way ahead, but the D300s with the grip does all the fps I need. You just got to take that compromise. I was at a camera club meeting a couple of days ago and the royal navy was in showing off there D800e and D4 modded up with a 400mm f/2.8, they use them for covert operations, helicopter to ground shots, desert ops etc. They could have anything and they chose Nikon over Canon due to the low light, high ISO, and the VR performance, vibration in the helicopters is madness and it copes with it well. So the answer is you need both if you really need that fps for what ever purpose requires it (night surveillance in a helicopter)
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
doodle_duck_dandy posted:Been using a D800 for sports and between that and a D4 the compromise comes really on the fps, the D800 is slow, even with the grip in raw. I find anything up to ISO 6400 completely usable even for print. It's mind-boggling that they use stock equipment like that. I'd always guessed that anything used for reconnaissance would be totally custom. I mean, there are companies that are wholly dedicated to stuff like that, such as ELCAN - formerly Leica Canada - and Teledyne Dalsa.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
Nikon: for when FLIR isn't enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 14:44
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Nikon: for when FLIR isn't enough. There's a new thread title somewhere in there. So apparently wikipedia says Nikon's parent company is Mitsubishi.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
krooj posted:There's a new thread title somewhere in there. Its true. If you paint racing stripes on your camera you can push the iso higher.  http://reviews.photographyreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/pimp-cam-D4.jpg Can shoot a million ISO. Musket fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Feb 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
krooj posted:It's mind-boggling that they use stock equipment like that. I'd always guessed that anything used for reconnaissance would be totally custom. I mean, there are companies that are wholly dedicated to stuff like that, such as ELCAN - formerly Leica Canada - and Teledyne Dalsa. Main complaint was that the tripod screw mount in the bottom is not strong enough, when they were lanyard mounted to the helicopters, sometimes heaving G manoeuvres, with all that mass unsupported (free swinging) could rip the thread out. Clearly not designed for that. They had lost 4 units complete with 400m lens already that way. On the ground desert Ops the lens and cameras were bomb proof to the dust storms and sand apart from the main lens glass which is protected with filters but they only last 5 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
So I have a D3200. It's great, I love it so far. I want to start experimenting with fill and off-camera flash. I also think I'm going to upgrade to a D7100 within the year. To confirm my understanding: I was thinking about getting the SB-700 now. I can use it in off-camera mode if I use the built-in flash as the "master" and set the SB-700 to the "slave," correct? I would then have to set the on-camera flash to it's lowest setting because it has to fire to get the "slave" to fire. I can avoid having to use the built-in flash by purchasing a cheap radio unit that attaches to the hot shoe and to the SB-700 (with some sort of adapter). In any case, will I be able to use TTL mode with the SB-700 serving as the off-camera flash? It is my understanding that if I set it to "slave" (i.e., I don't purchase the radio transmitter), I can only use it in manual mode. If I do purchase the transmitter, can I use the SB-700 in TLL mode? Or is my understanding about flashes and TTL sort of confused as a general matter? When I upgrade I can then use the D7100 and the SB-700 in "Commander" mode (i.e., I won't need to use the on-board flash or wireless transmitter at all). So this strikes me as a decent upgrade-proof option as opposed to purchasing a, say, cheaper off-camera flash and then not having it be compatible with the "Commander" mode. Any clarification is appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2013 09:33
|
|