The Nikon Thread: The D400 Will Literally Never Exist

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Nikon Thread: The D400 Will Literally Never Exist

«‹›2 »

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

8th-snype posted:

If you own an F mount camera (or adapter) and don't own a 105mm f/2.5 (AI or AIS), then you are missing out. Great focal length on 35mm or APS-C, small, and sharp as a tack wide open. McCurry's famous afghan girl photo was taken with a 105mm f/2.5 and an F100 in case you need an example.

Seconding this. I had the non-AI version and it was pretty spectacular. I upgraded to the 105mm f/1.8 when I was putting together an AI-s set and that's great too, but not worth the extra money now that cameras can shoot at ISOs over 200 and not look like a goat's breakfast.

# ¿ Dec 11, 2014 16:32

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 14:11

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Where are you seeing tests that show the Canon resolving corners better? DxO makes the Nikon look better in the corners wide open, and The Digital Picture (where I would normally go to peek resolution charts) hasn't evaluated the Nikon's FX 35mm f/1.8 yet.

# ¿ Dec 19, 2014 05:36

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

The Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 is at the high end of your price range, but it's significantly sharper and faster than any of the other APS-C wide zooms. If 18mm is wide enough for you, it's probably worth a look.

# ¿ Jan 6, 2015 22:46

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

842 posted:

This has probably been good and covered in this thread but I just noticed the terrible focusing problem with my D7000. I haven't really touched my Nikon since I got a X-pro1 but I did some test shots today and on both my 35mm and 50mm prime the focus was absolutely terrible - although with live view it was perfectly in focus.

The Nikon service center's charge for the repair is $224 which I can't really afford at the moment. Are there alternative solutions to the problem. I've heard mixed results with the 'fine-tuning focus' feature.

I've got 6 or so lenses for the D7000 so I'm rather invested in the Fx mount. I feel a bit lost on what my next step is....

It sounds like your back focus is off. I'm pretty sure the D7000 has AF fine tune capabilities, which can fix the problem if it's not too far out of whack. Nikon has a guide on how to do this:
https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/51633/~/how-to-use-the-af-fine-tune-function

# ¿ Jan 11, 2015 03:15

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Kenshin posted:

Does anyone feel strongly about official retail vs. gray market? I have a bunch of great lenses already so I'd just be buying body-only.

Nikon is more of a pain in the rear end for gray market stuff than most brands. From their website:

quote:

Nikon Inc. USA cannot provide any technical support or warranty service on Gray Market items. Additionally Nikon Inc. USA cannot perform any fee-based repair work on Gray Market items. Please do not contact Nikon Inc. USA for help with any Gray Market products. Please contact the reseller or importer of your Gray Market items for warranty and service information as well as software updates and downloads.

If I'm not mistaken, Nikon stopped selling parts to third party service centers in the U.S. a while back, so getting your product serviced could require sending it to an international service center.

# ¿ Feb 9, 2015 21:01

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Kit Walker posted:

I'm thinking long-term. The 7D is awesome, so is the 5D3, but maybe the D800 would be even better? I'm not deeply invested yet. I haven't spent more than a grand so far and I can probably recoup most of that if I sold it.

I don't blame you. As much as I like some things about Canon, they seem to have just shrugged and given up on sensor development while Sony just announced an increase in sensor R&D. I've been shooting with the D800 for the last year and a half, and it's a fantastic camera for the ~$1800 price tag that used copies carry now. My only real complaints boil down to:
-The placement of the ISO button is annoying
-The autofocus can't track small objects moving at high speed toward me
-It's hard to clean up images shot at over ISO 1600 for large or heavily cropped prints (although I'm not using any advanced noise reduction plugins, so mileage may vary)
-The 4fps shooting isn't ideal for sports/wildlife, although it does teach you to be good with timing your shots
-The video gets significant moire with rough fabrics and textured surfaces

If none of those are going to seriously impact your work, then I'd definitely consider the switch.

Kenshin posted:

It's rumored that Sigma is going to update their 70-200mm 2.8 to a 'Sport' model, so there's that option (if it comes to exist. It probably will, with how they have been revamping their lineup for this 'Global Vision' thing)

Tamron's newest 70-200mm is pretty drat good, too.

Moon Potato fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Feb 25, 2015

# ¿ Feb 25, 2015 03:04

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

1st AD posted:

I was shooting Canon crop before the D800 came and the leap in tech over the mk3 was so dramatic I knew I had to switch.

I just wish there was a decent 24-105

The Sigma Art one is pretty much on par with or marginally superior to the Canon version (depending on what your judging criteria are). There are rumors that they've stopped making it, but they still have it for sale at major resellers for less than the Canon 24-104 f/4 or the horrendous Nikkor 24-120mm.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2015 07:00

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Kenshin posted:

I've just preordered the D7200 myself, it'll be a hell of an upgrade over my D3200 for birding.

I was going to suggest this to you in the bird photography thread. The AF on the D7200 looks really nice - you're going to be a lot less frustrated with shooting at 600mm once you get everything fine-tuned.

Edit: My D800 is looking like it needs a back focus adjustment - all my lenses require a fairly large negative AF fine tune value to work well now and if it slips any more, I won't be able to use AF with some of them. I've never sent in a Nikon body for this kind of servicing before, and I'm wondering if there are any third party service centers that can do this cheaper with faster turnaround than the Nikon U.S.A. facilities. Does anyone have any recommendations for specific service centers or warnings about which ones to avoid?

Moon Potato fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Mar 2, 2015

# ¿ Mar 2, 2015 21:40

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

I had an issue like that when the AF motor in one of my lenses started failing. By default, NIkon cameras are set so that they'll only take a picture once the AF confirms, so the camera is probably just refusing to snap a photo when your lens craps out on you.

# ¿ Mar 3, 2015 04:42

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Kit Walker posted:

Okay, so after reading both the Canon thread and this thread completely, I'm leaning more towards switching to Nikon. I just wanted a few last opinions.

What would you all recommend at this point? The d800 or the d750? The d800 seems to be the overall better choice, for me, but what's the verdict on their sensors? Which has better video capability/quality? Video doesn't matter THAT much to me, but I'm curious.

As for lenses, I've largely figured out the ones I'd want to eventually get on a Nikon (50mm f/1.8G or eventually the Sigma 50mm ART, 85mm f/1.8G, 105mm f/2.5m, 135mm f/2 DC and probably a fisheye at some point way down the line) but I wanted to know what the best Nikon alternatives are to Canon's 85mm f/1.2 and 70-200mm f/2.8.

Any input would be appreciated, thanks.

If the higher resolution isn't crucial to your work, I'd go with the D750. It has better autofocus performance, marginally better high ISO image quality, better video capabilities (60fps in 1080p, the "flat" image profile and less moire/aliasing), and 6fps shooting as opposed to 4fps. If none of that is very important to you, or if you do a lot of high detail landscape/studio photography, the D800 is probably the better choice and a used copy will save you a few hundred bucks over the D750.

There isn't an 85mm f/1.2 for F-mount, but there are a lot of good f/1.4 ones out there - Nikon's is the best one out there short of getting an Otus, but it's fairly expensive compared to ones that are nearly as good like the Sigma and even the cheapo Rokinon/Samyang/Bower ones perform pretty well. Nikon's 70-200mm VR II doesn't quite go toe to to with the Canon version, but Tamron's newest one is very close.

# ¿ Mar 7, 2015 04:10

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Fraction posted:

Is there any alternative for a good long zoom that won't break my arms?

Have you tried using a monopod?

# ¿ May 8, 2015 20:02

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

somnambulist posted:

There's a groupon deal for a d800 for only 1899. I thought someone might be interested. It's refurbished but whatever.

https://www.groupon.com/deals/gg-ni...fb6027641964443

If you do a lot of video work or action/sports/wildlife shooting, I'd shell out for the D810, but otherwise this is a great camera that you can get for crazy good prices now.

# ¿ Jun 22, 2015 20:54

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Mightaswell posted:

Don't bother with that old Tamron. Buy the new one, or buy a Nikon.

Don't buy the Nikon 70-300mm VR. That lens is a dud.

# ¿ Jun 29, 2015 08:30

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

ShadeofBlue posted:

What? That lens is amazing for its price. It's the non-VR ones you want to stay away from.

Anyway, I'd choose the nikon over the Tamron in your case. It's a solid lens, it should be way better than the Tamron that you linked.

Maybe I had a bad copy but mine was really soft wide open, had wonky bokeh and the AF motor died. If you're getting a stabilized 70-300mm, I'd get the Tamron or save your money for something better.

# ¿ Jun 30, 2015 05:39

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Musket posted:

Remember that at 200mm 2.8 you have more control over shutter speed in bad light than at 5.6 aperture. Get the 80-200 2.8 you won't regret it. You also can get better isolation of subject from the background at 2.8 than at 5.6.

Definitely get the 80-200 (the AF-s version) if that's a possibility. It was Nikon's flagship telephoto zoom for a while, and has been rehoused for use in high-budget cinema productions because it makes very nice images in the right hands.

This, on the other hand, is a 100% crop with the 70-300mm VR on a D90 at 220mm and f/5.6

# ¿ Jul 5, 2015 08:20

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Caryna posted:

The Nikkor 105mm f2.8 may be pricy, but dear Lord it's an amazing lens for macro as well as portrait photography. It's so sharp you should be wearing protective eyewear when using it.

Sigma's newest 105mm is actually a bit sharper than the Nikon. It came out before they started doing the Art/Sport/Contemporary branding, but it's definitely on par optically with their new high-end offerings.

# ¿ Jul 7, 2015 22:45

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Geoff Zahn posted:

Just remembered to check and whoops, it is the D lens. I guess I should wait on FX until I can budget for some new lenses then?

All of Nikon's 50mm lenses are FX. It's the 35mm f/1.8 that has a DX version.

As far as the camera body goes, Kenshin nailed it with his recommendations for each field of photography. The D7200's AF system is far superior for anything that will be moving quickly, but the larger sensor on the D610 will probably serve you better for any of the situations where a client will be paying you for photos.

# ¿ Jul 10, 2015 01:41

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Leperflesh posted:

Macro questions

The Sigma is definitely the better lens in terms of optics (even the older of the two discussed is in the same ballpark as Nikon and Canon's best offerings), and will give you a little more working distance than the 85mm. Unless you really need image stabilization, I'd go with the Sigma. The exception to that is if the nature macro shots you're doing are in dimly-lit areas (under forest canopies, etc.). Shooting macro handheld with no VR/OS can be a bit much for an APS-C camera unless you have plenty of light to work with.

# ¿ Aug 5, 2015 23:47

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

The D5500 has a bigger buffer and less shutter lag, which is nice for fast action photography. Battery life is a bit better, too. Other than that, you're just trading the D5300's GPS for the D5500's touch screen, which really depends on your preference. The D5500 has a higher max ISO setting, but your photos will look like a goat's breakfast once you get into the high settings on either camera.

# ¿ Aug 7, 2015 00:52

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

McCoy Pauley posted:

So I just upgraded to a D7100 from a D5100. Should I worry about a screen protector for screen? Nikon doesn't seem to make some kind of plastic cover for it, so I guess the only options are covers that adhere like for a smartphone, right?

The Invisible Shield ones are pretty good, as long as you don't gently caress up while applying it. Mine's been working well for a couple years except for the corner where spruce sap got smeared on my camera and I cleaned it off with rubbing alcohol.

# ¿ Oct 17, 2015 06:23

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Refurbished D7100s are going for $499 now, in case anyone's thinking of upgrading from an older DX body
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA63G3GN4997

# ¿ Nov 2, 2015 20:49

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Compared to the price of a camera body, 64GB cards are pretty inexpensive. The only time I've filled one up on my D800 is when I had an otter drag its catch onto a bank right in front of me at the end of a day out, and I just kept shooting as fast as the buffer would allow for like 15 minutes.

# ¿ Nov 3, 2015 23:42

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

thetzar posted:

I went from a D70 to a D800, and am curious about what people's gripes about the interface are. Not defending it, just wondering where the big issues lie.

Having gone from the D90 to the D800, the placement of the ISO button annoys the gently caress out of me. Other than that, my experience with the interface has been great.

# ¿ Nov 4, 2015 17:32

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

EL BROMANCE posted:

Can anyone think of a reason why selling my Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX lens now that i have my Sigma 18-35 1.8 might be a bad idea? I know the Sigma is stronger at the wide angle and is a lot heavier than the Nikon, but it just seems to be duplicating a lens for the sake of it. I haven't been able to find anything that says the Nikon can outshoot the Sigma anyway.

I'm moving and could do with the cash... seems a non-brainer right? I found myself taking out the 50mm 1.8 more anyway after I bought it.

The Sigma is a pretty fantastic lens. If you like the look of it, there's no reason to keep the Nikon.

# ¿ Dec 7, 2015 19:43

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

TheAngryDrunk posted:

It's true: D400 will never exist.

The D500 however...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/8529664044/here-at-last-nikon-announces-d500

Hot drat. If the high ISO performance and AF point coverage is good enough, this is probably gonna be my next camera.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 21:18

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

timrenzi574 posted:

The AF point coverage will be pretty much the entire frame L-R , but not T-B.

Nice.

Ika posted:

E: Oh and it has max shutter speed of 1/8000th, don't all the other Nikon's only have 1/4000th?

I think it's 1/8000 for the D4/D4s/D5, the D500, the D810/800 and the D7200/D7100, then 1/4000 for everything else.

Moon Potato fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Jan 5, 2016

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 22:28

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

VelociBacon posted:

What would you guys recommend?

Do you shoot landscapes or wildlife more often? I've been shooting wildlife with the D800 and I would rather have the higher frame rate and improved AF system on the D750.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2016 06:08

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

A review of the D500 is out by someone who shot with a prototype for a while:
http://petapixel.com/2016/01/09/i-shot-with-the-nikon-d500-here-are-my-thoughts/

High ISO performance sounds very promising. AF Performance sounds great. I want this camera.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2016 22:44

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

StraightFace posted:

Looking at getting a used D800, but I read many bad reports about it though. Focus hunting issue, green tint issue, left focus points issue etc. Any D800 owners with hands on experience had these issues?

I've been using one for about three years and pretty much all my complaints can only be solved by trading up to something more expensive. Unless you need consistently accurate focus on a bird flying directly at you, fast frame rates or a huge buffer, the D800 will probably be a great camera for you.

Moon Potato fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Apr 2, 2016

# ¿ Apr 2, 2016 08:15

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

StraightFace posted:

Thanks, probably going to get the D800 then. Thinking of using it with the new 80-400 for wildlife. Will that be a good combo?

Nikon's 200-500mm or Sigma's 150-600mm Sport lens would probably be a better lens choice for wildlife. Nikon's updated 80-400mm is really underwhelming for its price.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2016 20:45

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Saddamnit posted:

So I'm ready to upgrade from my ten year old Canon PowerShot S5 to a DSLR. After doing a bunch of research and reading this thread, I think I'm going to go with the D7200.

I'm currently looking for deals on used bodies and lenses. Keeping an eye on B&H but also on the lookout for other deals. It looks like Amazon has a ton of bundle deals that seem too good to be true. This is one such offer: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0127W4I9M/ref=mp_s_a_1_5?qid=1463089946&sr=8-5&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=nikon+d7200

What's up with this? Are these scams? Stolen items? Counterfeit? I saw mention that they are imports which can't be warrantied. Anyone have more details?

Pretty much the only things in that bundle worth the material they're made from are the camera itself, the 18-55mm and maybe the 55-300mm. You're much better off starting with a small kit and carefully choosing your additional lenses and accessories as you have a need for them.

# ¿ May 13, 2016 06:50

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

Saddamnit posted:

Any if you guys ever deal with Factory Official? They have the D7200 for $670 ( http://factoryofficial.com/digital-cameras/603-nikon-d7200-dx-format-digital-slr-body-black-018208015542.html). Not much info on the site. Tough to tell if it's legit. Abe's of Maine has a decent deal on it too and I think they're more reputable. Any experience with either of these vendors?

EDIT: Did some more research on both these vendors and it sounds like they are basically scan artists. Won't be purchasing from either one. Guess I'll just keep my eye on B&H for a good used deal.

A lot of the cheap deals on Nikon cameras out there are legit, but they're grey market products (not built for sale in the U.S.) and you won't be able to get them serviced in the U.S. because NIkon has terrible policies in that regard. If you're willing to ship your camera to an international service center, nikonrumors.com publishes deals on grey market cameras pretty regularly.

# ¿ May 15, 2016 19:15

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

vote_no posted:

Things I am considering:

70-300 4.5-5.6G VR
24-120 4G VR (just for versatility, but I hated the 28-300 VR so...)

Do you lot have any advice?

I had the 70-300 VR for a while and the image quality was pretty rough until you stopped down a ways. Sadly, Nikon doesn't offer anything better in that focal range until you hit about 3 times the price point of the 70-300. If you can afford the purchase/rental price, the 200-500mm is definitely worth a look for your telephoto. I've been very happy with Tamron's 24-70mm, and I'd recommend that over the 24-120 unless you really need that 70-120 range.

A used D500 popped up on B&H last week, so I took the plunge. I'm still playing around with the settings and getting the AF fine tune dialed in, but so far I'm very impressed. The AF system is a huge step up from the D800 I've been using. It's able to get a focus lock on flying birds a LOT faster, and it was able to pick out a diving Peregrine Falcon in front of thick foliage with a fair amount of heat distortion in the air for two frames. In some situations where the D800's focus system would just give up and start hunting, the D500 has been able to pull off some in-focus shots. This is the first time I've been able to get a swallow in focus while it was flying toward the camera.

# ¿ Aug 21, 2016 20:49

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

If you shoot a lot of birds in flight or fast action, I'd definitely go for the D500 over the D7200. The new autofocus system is leaps and bounds better than the previous generations for tracking fast, erratic subjects.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2016 04:16

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

It's not quite as wide, but Tokina's 14-20mm is sharper and faster than their other offerings.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2016 16:29

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

If the 80 had 4K video, I would have bought it. The ultra-wide fisheye lenses on other action cams just don't do it for me.

# ¿ Sep 21, 2016 04:09

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 14:11

Moon Potato: May 12, 2003

powderific posted:

What's another good source for used lenses now that KEH has gone downhill?

B&H and Adorama both have a pretty extensive selection of used gear. I've had good experiences with B&H's used department - the only time I decided to return something, the process was quick an painless.

# ¿ Sep 22, 2016 21:08

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Nikon Thread: The D400 Will Literally Never Exist

«‹›2 »