Nikon SLR/D-SLR fans

[Overclocker]

Going on a somewhat related rant about Nikon's mirrorless cameras, the Nikon 1 series: I believe that they've made a large mistake going with the 1" sensor that they've done. Why in the world would they go with such a small sensor? They've alienated folks looking for a large sensor camera like some of the newer offerings from manufacturers like Fujifilm. Nikon Rumors has a comment about a rumored D2300 camera, a mirrorless (presumably) DX factor camera that uses Nikon F-mount lenses. What Nikon should have done was to make the Nikon 1 use a DX sensor to begin with and retain the shorter lens to film distance like they had done with the 1. Sell a separate adapter to allow AF (and even MF) lenses to be used and they'd have a winner on their hands. Yes, I know, they went with the smaller sensor to allow for a smaller camera system. Maybe a Nikon 2 series with DX sensor? Even better, make the Nikon 2 series lenses with an image circle large enough to allow a larger FX sensor and a Nikon 3 series camera with full frame sensor.

well i really love my Nikon 1 J1. i used to be an olympus PEN user but i'm never going back to micro-4/3

yes the 1-inch sensor is small but it was never intended to compete w/ aps-c or even micro-4/3. it's "good enough" for me and i have no intentions of buying a real DSLR. last year i took the J1 around nine US states. i really appreciated the small size. even the lenses are so small! the f/1.8 50mm-equiv prime lens is tiny and so lightweight, great for carrying around both detached or attached to the camera. and it's $186 at adorama, just a great price

 

[will]

This may be dated somewhat - but - it should be looked into. Some of the older DSLRs, when in movie mode, did not have all the same capabilities as a 'real' movie camera. IF memory serves me, auto focus or zoom was fixed at the initial setting.

Like I said, this may be old information and no longer correct. I use a Nikon DSLR, but I have never shot movies.

 

[Steve K]

One thing I liked about the 5200 was that it could do HD video. It's worked out well enough. Here's a short video of some planes taxiing...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kurtsj00/14760733330/
Flickr does compress the video a bit.. it looks better on my computer.

I am a bit slow in other areas of technology. Just got an iPod which does HD video too. This might be more practical for quick videos of kids, since it's easier to keep laying around and there's not much to mess with. The main advantage of the DSLR would be the ability to use different focal length lenses and zoom in.

If you do a lot of videos, a proper video camera would be better than the 5200. The 5200 requires that you use the monitor on the back of the camera to shoot video (since the mirror is locked in the up position). This produces a less steady shot, I think. It certainly becomes apparent when using a long lens. The 5200 doesn't seem to maintain focus as well when doing videos either.

 

[BloodLust]

Nikon user here since 2007.

Nikon D80
Using a Tamron 28-75/2.8.

Need to have my shutter replaced.

I was hoping for a D300s successor but they came out with the D7000 instead. My mom has the D7100 which I'm teaching her how to use. Still seeing if I like the feel of it since I love the D80 controls.

 

[martinaee]

Oh heck yeah. Never saw this thread.

D800 as my main. D90 which I have loved for so long as it's like a light D300/s. And my trusty D50 which I still have but haven't really even used in forever. I actually got it used but learned so much on it when I first started. The D50 is actually still a sweet DSLR as it has an electronic shutter unlike basically any newer cameras and can achieve at least 1/500th flash sync. Didn't really use it much, but cool for some super fast macro stuff without needing crazy broncolor strobes or something.

I wish I had the D810 as from what I hear it has a really good auto-focus system, but it's no biggie.

 

[Overclocker]

just received my amazon basics remote. hope it lasts longer than the ones on the right, Photive and Fasttech cheapo

 

[rayman]

Got myself a D80 about 5 years ago and really got to love it. I'm not professional in any sense but you really see the difference to normal point-and-click cameras. I bought it to get more into the subjects but that never actually happend yet .

rayman

 

[BanditoPete]

I just retired my venerable D40. Sad it just expired after providing some good years together. Funny how a camera can become part of you and your vision. "Sophie" and I had been to Europe, India, and Hong Kong together. She never had let me down and her 6MP photos are still some of my favorites.

 

[Steve K]

hmmm.... I put my D40x aside when I picked up a D5200. Haven't decided what to do with it. I think the sensor is dirty because some weird spots were showing up in some photos. Is there a market for a camera this old, or should it get donated to Goodwill?

 

[BanditoPete]

hmmm.... I put my D40x aside when I picked up a D5200. Haven't decided what to do with it. I think the sensor is dirty because some weird spots were showing up in some photos. Is there a market for a camera this old, or should it get donated to Goodwill?

The sensor on mine went kaput. I doubt if there's any value on mine, but if you have a somewhat dirty sensor it probably can be cleaned and prolong it's life. In another month or two I might look into a refurbished D5200. For now, the camera on my Samsung Note 3 will have to do.

 

[will]

I just picked up a refurbished D5200. I wanted something with a few more features than the D90 I use. I'll still keep the D90 - I have a few lenses that will only work with the autofocus 'screw' on the D90

As a second part of this - Has anyone gone into the picture setting to change the focus, or the saturation. I started to fool around a little with RAW, trying to get a more vivid picture. It looks like you can alter the camera settings, or get a post production software tool ( like Adobe Lightroom ) to fix. the image.

 

[martinaee]

I just picked up a refurbished D5200. I wanted something with a few more features than the D90 I use. I'll still keep the D90 - I have a few lenses that will only work with the autofocus 'screw' on the D90

As a second part of this - Has anyone gone into the picture setting to change the focus, or the saturation. I started to fool around a little with RAW, trying to get a more vivid picture. It looks like you can alter the camera settings, or get a post production software tool ( like Adobe Lightroom ) to fix. the image.

This is something that nobody ever explains to people learning digital photography, but picture controls like "vivid, saturation, contrast, sharpness" are for in camera .jpg processing. To my knowledge they don't alter raw files (Nikon .NEF) in any way. That would assumedly require an extra .xmp file being created alongside the raw files *in the camera* . Configure them for when you just want to shoot only .jpg files that you don't want to have to edit much later.

Yeah the D90 is a great camera. It's still my backup to my D800. It's kind of a shame they stopped putting physical focusing drives in the lower end Nikons. Not a must, but definitely nice especially for people starting to get lenses. I think it's been replaced but the 50mm 1.8D is a fantastic lens and like 130 bucks now. Yeah the 1.8g is the newer version and it's about 220 bucks. Lenses like that won't auto-focus on cams like the D5200 now.

 

[martinaee]

I just bought my first, a Nikon d5200. I'm still tinkering and learning when I get the time. Also picked up the Nikkor 105 mm micro lens and a 12-24 1.4

I assume you mean a 12-24 f/4. The 12-24 1:4 means a max iris diaphragm opening of f/4. There is no 12-24 f/1.4 (yet) unfortunately. The 14-24 f/2.8 is about the best wide angle lens you can buy though. I wish I owned it. Crazy good lens.

 

[will]

Interesting you mention the 50mm 1.8 - that is one of the two lenses I still carry for the D90, the other is a 60mm macro that is crazy good for close ups. I got the macro off ebay, it was damaged and it took a risk for the $50 I paid. Turns out the damage was to the front filter ring, slightly bent in. I took a pair of pliers and a small wooden block and straightened it out, put on a UV filter and life is good.

I was not sure about the camera setting for vivid - what they actually changed. I had taken a picture of a sign, both jpg and raw, the raw was clearly not focused as well as the jpg. Now that I know a bit more about the vivid settings - I'll fool around with those for a bit. I still might get lightroom and do some post editing.

Time to do some reading and spend time taking pictures with different settings. I don't use the various scene settings on the dial. I'll have to look into those as well. I am an old school photographer. I like to do my own settings.

Looking at most of the original pictures I took, most have been tweeked a little to enhance color. If I can do that in the camera, that might be the best.

I use the cameras for taking pictures only, no movies, no on camera editing.

I have downloaded the different user manuals for the cameras from the Nikon site. I have all the PDF files on my laptop and I have them available to me at any time. I also have hardcopy

 

[martinaee]

Hey Will, yeah I'd not worry about the various "scene" modes. Even given the chance when I want to just let the camera do most of the work just put it in A, S, or P. With digital these days your "negative" basically is the raw file. I encourage everybody to process those more using photoshop and/or lightroom (I use both) (or aperture---but I haven't ever used that program at all... only for os x I think).

The 5200 should have basic in camera processing. You could shoot in raw and then use the process functions to tweek the image a bit then output a processed .jpg file that you can then download alongside the raw file if you wish. I use that sometimes if I know the photos aren't for a job or for my own art, but you still want to have control over how the look a bit. Shooting in only raw all the time is just too much for most people and I get that, but I basically do it no matter what now because you never know when you'll get an image you wish you didn't shoot in .jpg. There just is so much less info to recover and work with if you want to really process the image exactly how you want later.

I think full size .jpgs out of my D800 are about 15mb. Raw files that I shoot on it on the lossless compressed 12bit mode are about 30-40mb. That's what I use most of the time just so it doesn't make my computer cpu and file storage burst into flames. If you shoot in 14bit uncompressed raw on the D800 the raw files are over 70mb.

Off topic, but It's so weird to me that they got rid of the top lcd on "lower" end Nikons and Canon cameras. I guess I'd just get used to it and use the info button way more, but I could never not have it. I guess it makes the cameras physically a little bit smaller, but overall I suspect it's just something they realized over time they could do away with and just relegate to "info" buttons to save on cost.

 

[martinaee]

For anyone interested in beginning learning or even just learning more about photography check out Mark Wallace on youtube. I think he did a lot on the adorama channel, but "Snapfactory" has his digital photo 1 on 1 series which is super awesome. It has a playlist of over 100 videos here:

https://www.youtube.com/user/snapfactory/playlists

This reminds me I want to go watch more of those. Great stuff. There are lots of more beginning videos covering everything about DSLRs all the way up to way more advanced stuff.

 

[will]

Off topic, but It's so weird to me that they got rid of the top lcd on "lower" end Nikons and Canon cameras. I guess I'd just get used to it and use the info button way more, but I could never not have it. I guess it makes the cameras physically a little bit smaller, but overall I suspect it's just something they realized over time they could do away with and just relegate to "info" buttons to save on cost.

I thought I would miss the lcd, but, I prefer the full screen image. In reality, I did not use it that much.

My understanding of Lightroom is that you can pre-set values that will be used when you import raw files to the PC. I take a lot of pictures and I would guess that 1 out of 30 I would want to really tweek up. the rest I could delete the raw file and just keep the jpg.

Thanks for the info - greatly appreciated.

Somewhat unrelated to todays modern cameras. It reminds me a little of working with the 'zone system' for Black and White. This was a method used to improve the resulting picture by adjusting the exposure and developing times to get pure blacks and whites. I think that Ansel Adams used this.

 

[will]

I did a lot of reading on the Nikon Picture Control trying to find out what the camera is actually doing. The picture control settings are user set while in A, S, P, or M modes. I have not been able to find what picture control setting are changed while in the various scene mode settings ( on the dial ) for example landscape states it will increase the contrast and increase the color saturation. My assumption is that it will change the various picture control settings. This only affects the jpg image.

I had hoped to find a chart that showed what the settings would be in each of the scene modes.

I also found out the camera would do in camera HDR - this takes 2 pictures and then combines them.

It almost seems like the camera will do what I want by just using the different modes available

So - after all this - time to get out the tripod and do a bunch of test pictures.....

 

[martinaee]

I did a lot of reading on the Nikon Picture Control trying to find out what the camera is actually doing. The picture control settings are user set while in A, S, P, or M modes. I have not been able to find what picture control setting are changed while in the various scene mode settings ( on the dial ) for example landscape states it will increase the contrast and increase the color saturation. My assumption is that it will change the various picture control settings. This only affects the jpg image.

I had hoped to find a chart that showed what the settings would be in each of the scene modes.
I also found out the camera would do in camera HDR - this takes 2 pictures and then combines them.
It almost seems like the camera will do what I want by just using the different modes available

So - after all this - time to get out the tripod and do a bunch of test pictures.....

Yup. That's why I recommend just staying in either A, S, P, or M. The scene modes on the dial of a cam like the D5200 are more "full auto" it's often really obscure how the settings are actually chosen. With ASPM you can relenquish some control, but still get exactly what you want. The picture control settings in the menu let you tweak how the jpgs will be processed and saved in camera. You can actually custom adjust those settings if you want. If you are going to shoot a lot of just jpg I definitely recommend testing this out so you can see what you get. For sure, I still have to do this every once in a while with a setting--- sometimes you literally can only really get a feel for what something does by testing it out. Good thing digital is free once you have the gear (I say that a bit sarcastically since photo gear is a bottomless pit that eats money)

I had to refresh myself on the zone system a bit (this video and this guy's art of photography series is amazing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_k2iAgZfGs) I did a bit of B+W film photo in art school a few years ago, but only shoot digital now.
For how I shoot I basically always shoot for the deepest shadow detail. Raw files have amazing depth for processing and recovering info which is why they are like unprocessed film negatives. Jpgs are more like final prints so you can't really go back and tweak nearly as much. A camera like the D800 has amazing shadow detail and you can cleanly recover several stops of shadow info from a raw file. It's good but not as good with recovering highlights so I almost never let an image overexpose to complete white if possible. After the fact you can easily adjust the image in the basic "pre-post-processing" to get the shadows and highlights where you want them. I guess this is what the zone system has become if you want to equate it to film photography. That's obviously not possible always depending on subject like when shooting people, but if you are shooting your own art work you can take your time much more.

How I look at it is always shoot to retain as much tonal range as possible with digital raw. You can process later in the "zone system", but if you under/over expose you can't process exactly how you want later. For this reason I end up shooting a little under what a "correct exposure" is according to the in camera meter with no EV compensation engaged.

I have utter respect for people who are truly into still shooting film and are very particular about developing film and prints. It's very involved and it definitely is an "art" in itself even before the actual subject matter of the images in the film/prints. I love digital though these days because the quality potential is there and immediate if you know what you are doing and certain steps are taken out of the equation. Also no dangerous chemicals at all if you never do any printing yourself with digital lol.

 

[will]

I still have the old B&W enlarger, the brown bottles, the tongs, the trays. I did just dump all the chemicals - years past the expiration date. I found some old Autographic negatives. they are like 2 1/2 inch by 4 inches ( size is approx. ) I wanted to print them - so - they are too big for the enlarger. I did a contact print with other negatives a few years back. This time I used a scanner and did a reverse image on the PC - worked like a charm.

One of these days I'll finish off the film I have in my freezer. I also found a lab that still does process 120 film. I have a twin lens camera that I have used on occasion. All manual, have to use a separate light meter.