| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/16/2013 01:04:32 AM · #1 |
| I think from what I can find the 7100 is the best value right now. The Pentax K-3 looks interesting as well. I like to hand hold and that image stabilization has me interested. It will probably be one of those two. |
|
|
|
12/15/2013 07:49:41 PM · #2 |
If you are looking for something lightweight then it is worth a look at the micro four thirds mirrorless cameras by Panasonic and Olympus.
Lenses are interchangeable between systems.
Olympus has built in IBIS.
Beautiful sharp images.
Lots of different bodies so that you can choose what suits you most - evf or not etc.
Lenses and bodies are smaller and lighter so easy to carry all day.
I sold all my canon gear to dive into m43 - I went with Olympus. My sister is now doing the same after comparing images from both systems and loving the light weight of the system.
Two girlfriends are in the process of selling off Canon and Nikon gear to go full m43.
Worth a look.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2013 11:55:07 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
At the end of the day, the majority of these "issues" that you hear documented about any new camera essentially equates to several people in a microcosm that have created their own soapboxes built out of inconsequential crap and nitpicking that in the real world makes little difference and isn't a fraction as odious as they'd want you to think. This inane bickering over this and that is really just a bunch of crap content created by the user base in order to justify its own spending habits and scapegoat against its own shortcomings with the false idea that equipment is the sole determiner of quality output.
So what do I mean by this?
Sure, carefully consider your camera choice. But make a choice and be happy with it. Don't "grass is greener" yourself and get caught up in the hype of this or that shortcoming. The fact of the matter is that most of the products out there are truly VERY good and most of these "huge issues" folks go on about are really more aptly described as "quirks" or "annoyances." The oil spot issue was rather blown out of proportion (like all of these "issues" always are) on all of the Nikons, but it's hardly (imo) something that should dissuade you entirely, especially considering it generally subsides through use. |
Originally posted by Ann:
Thank you. Wise words.
The other thing to remember is that camera and lens technology has gotten to the point where all the current models (including the better compacts) are capable of producing excellent images, so we (me included) get hung up arguing about nitpicky details, when the truth is that you're probably going to get similar results from anything you buy. The main difference between cameras is in features, not image quality. Since Jason's not needing any particular features except good image quality, he's probably best off just buying whatever's on sale for a good enough price that he can still afford a good lens. |
Another thing to remember......for the most part, when you hear about a problem, that's *ALL* you hear about. You have to retain perspective. Does Nikon have some oil issues? Yes, but it's certainly not all of them, and remember that you are buying a quality product with the backing of one of the best camera companies in the world. Not all of the folks that have those cameras have those issues. You don't hear a peep out of the millions of people who have *zero* problems with theirs.
I work in a John Deere dealer and have to deal constantly with those people who come in and start their complaint off with, "Just Google it......it's a known problem.". Yeah......everyone who wants to bitch is very vocal about it, and if the (insert issue here) doesn't suit them, or meet their expectations, it's a "known issue" if they can find a half dozen other people who think the same way they do. Yes, doing your homework, and seeing who has in fact brought a legitimate issue forth is a good idea, but just remember to keep a perspective. With manufacturing, there will always be bad runs, bad lots, and the occasional outright disaster. That should not, however, tar a whole model if six people get a bad one.
I have two D600s and a D700, and haven't had one iota of trouble with either of them. Technology is still screaming along, too, as I find myself now with "obsolete" units as the D610 & D7100 are out. But my units are still extraordinarily good. And I love them.
The D50 is *still* a good camera......with a refurbishment, and quality glass, you can still take wonderful images in ideal conditions. Today's cameras allow you to get away with a lot more, and shoot where before you could not. So really what you need to do is to carefully figure out what you want to do with your photography and select the camera & lens combination that suits those needs.It does not matter whose name is on the body/lens either......I was amused to have found out the other day that back in the film days,  Bear_Music was a Nikon guy......back at the same time period, I was shooting with a Canon A-1. Brand loyalty really isn't such a big deal; what's important is how the camera feels in your hand, if the controls are easy for you to work & understand, and that the accompanying lenses are what suit as well.
Personally, I advise anyone looking to get a kit started to stay with Canon or Nikon, but that's based on ease, convenience, price, and availability relative to other brands.
Just be as sure as possible before you pull the trigger.........you'll be living with your choice for a while.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
12/15/2013 10:59:07 AM · #4 |
| I haven't read everything here but you might want to check out this thread FS: Nikon D7000... Neil is only asking $525 plus shipping. |
|
|
|
12/15/2013 06:03:47 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
This will get everybody started I am sure, but I don't have much invested in lenses, should I look at something not Nikon? |
I recommend a Phase One P series... ;-)
Seriously though, what do you want to do, and what's the top end of your total system budget? |
Yeah, think about where you intend to go lens wise if you can. That isn't always possible, and many of the lenses are somewhat equivalent price wise, but getting an idea of your expectations is good. There's nothing wrong with changing brands, particularly if you've not got much invested in glass. Honestly a big thing to me is ergonomics and what works for me. I just wasn't into the Canon's I tried out, so if you're able to, I always suggest you go try them out. I know I'm glad I did, but brick and mortar shops are increasingly hard to come by these days. |
|
|
|
12/15/2013 12:00:38 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
This will get everybody started I am sure, but I don't have much invested in lenses, should I look at something not Nikon? |
I recommend a Phase One P series... ;-)
Seriously though, what do you want to do, and what's the top end of your total system budget? |
|
|
|
12/14/2013 10:14:23 PM · #7 |
| This will get everybody started I am sure, but I don't have much invested in lenses, should I look at something not Nikon? |
|
|
|
11/25/2013 04:12:10 PM · #8 |
| I'm with you on the whole cleaning the sensor thing Cory but I wouldn't touch that D600 with a 10' pole. Now the D610, on the other hand, is probably a safe bet. |
|
|
|
11/25/2013 01:53:51 PM · #9 |
|
|
|
11/24/2013 03:21:25 PM · #10 |
| Your Kodak disc is a vintage classic. Hold on to it but so you can have a little more fun with your hobby go out and buy that 5300. It's a damn good camera. |
|
|
|
11/24/2013 01:01:02 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
At the end of the day, the majority of these "issues" that you hear documented about any new camera essentially equates to several people in a microcosm that have created their own soapboxes built out of inconsequential crap and nitpicking that in the real world makes little difference and isn't a fraction as odious as they'd want you to think. This inane bickering over this and that is really just a bunch of crap content created by the user base in order to justify its own spending habits and scapegoat against its own shortcomings with the false idea that equipment is the sole determiner of quality output.
So what do I mean by this?
Sure, carefully consider your camera choice. But make a choice and be happy with it. Don't "grass is greener" yourself and get caught up in the hype of this or that shortcoming. The fact of the matter is that most of the products out there are truly VERY good and most of these "huge issues" folks go on about are really more aptly described as "quirks" or "annoyances." The oil spot issue was rather blown out of proportion (like all of these "issues" always are) on all of the Nikons, but it's hardly (imo) something that should dissuade you entirely, especially considering it generally subsides through use. |
Thank you. Wise words.
The other thing to remember is that camera and lens technology has gotten to the point where all the current models (including the better compacts) are capable of producing excellent images, so we (me included) get hung up arguing about nitpicky details, when the truth is that you're probably going to get similar results from anything you buy. The main difference between cameras is in features, not image quality. Since Jason's not needing any particular features except good image quality, he's probably best off just buying whatever's on sale for a good enough price that he can still afford a good lens. |
|
|
|
11/24/2013 10:07:08 AM · #12 |
|
|
|
11/24/2013 04:56:19 AM · #13 |
At the end of the day, the majority of these "issues" that you hear documented about any new camera essentially equates to several people in a microcosm that have created their own soapboxes built out of inconsequential crap and nitpicking that in the real world makes little difference and isn't a fraction as odious as they'd want you to think. This inane bickering over this and that is really just a bunch of crap content created by the user base in order to justify its own spending habits and scapegoat against its own shortcomings with the false idea that equipment is the sole determiner of quality output.
So what do I mean by this?
Sure, carefully consider your camera choice. But make a choice and be happy with it. Don't "grass is greener" yourself and get caught up in the hype of this or that shortcoming. The fact of the matter is that most of the products out there are truly VERY good and most of these "huge issues" folks go on about are really more aptly described as "quirks" or "annoyances." The oil spot issue was rather blown out of proportion (like all of these "issues" always are) on all of the Nikons, but it's hardly (imo) something that should dissuade you entirely, especially considering it generally subsides through use. |
|
|
|
11/24/2013 12:48:57 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by Trotterjay:
Hi Cory,
Thanks for the detail of your response, much appreciated. I'm going to take your word on the knife/glass analogy. If I started attacking the windows in our house with a kitchen knife my wife just might have that last piece of evidence she needs to have me committed. (laughing)
This camera has no anti-aliasing filter so I'd actually be cleaning the sensor itself and not a filter in front of it as you know. Secondly there is a tin oxide coating on this sensor. You seem to think any coating would be on the back of the sensor. Not sure I understand that but I'll take your word for it.
Curiously I wonder if you'd feel the same way if this was a $6,000.00 body as opposed to a $1,000.00 body. The magnet advice is clever. I suppose it would be a precarious task at best with the metal parts surrounding it but something I'm going to give further thought to.
BTW I'm more inclined to go for it on a $1,000.00 body than a $6,000.00 body despite these shortcomings....just saying.
Anyone that has the unfortunate displeasure of having to hear me rant on incessantly about this camera over the past several months knows that I really do want this stinking camera. So Cory, my friend, I only needed a nudge to live with oil and metal shavings. I do believe that you may have just given me that nudge.
Thanks much and I welcome any further comments/advice you may have! |
Well, from what I can tell, even Tin Oxide should be pretty hard/tough. 6.5 or so in hardness, which is beyond metal. The big question would be 'how well adhered is the coating' and 'is the coating on the front or back side of the first bit of glass?'.. By the way, that is still a filter. It's just not an AA filter. Digital sensors need several layers of filter to keep them from receiving IR and UV light, plus an AA filter to avoid moire optionally... So even with the AA filter removed, there are still a few filters in front of the sensor.. (Exception: They do have a conversion service that will remove all filters from a DLSR's sensor, and then it's up to the user to filter the spectrum as they see fit... But that's not the case with your body...)
I really can't imagine they'd put a tin oxide coating as the first layer, but even if they did, it's still a darn hard material at moh's 6.5. I say I can't imagine they would because the engineers understand that you/they will eventually need to clean this, and that things like sand, metal shavings, oil, hair, etc, will fall on that sensor and need to be cleaned off. It wouldn't make ANY sense to put a delicate coating on the outside of the glass - although, the 5D original was known to have a fairly delicate coating... (I have yet to have ANY trouble with mine, and I clean it often and vigorously)...
So, as always, do some research, maybe call Nikon and ask what side the coating is on, or something.... Or just make your own call on the worth of the 'risk'.. It seems to me that it should be a fairly low risk, but, certainly not a real zero-risk scenario.
And here's the thing. If you do go off and scratch it, that's a modular unit - they can just replace that first bit of glass... Sure, it'll be a $300 mistake, but it's not like you're really going to bork a $6k body just by nicking a coating on a bit of filter glass.(call Nikon, get a quote, I'm curious what this would actually cost... I KNOW what Canon charges, and I'd have it back in a week or less).. In any case, I don't think the cost of the body would change my tendency to try this - the material science remains the same, no matter what sort of gadget the metal, glass and tin oxide coatings happen to be in. ;)
Message edited by author 2013-11-24 00:59:41. |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 11:05:55 PM · #15 |
Hi Cory,
Thanks for the detail of your response, much appreciated. I'm going to take your word on the knife/glass analogy. If I started attacking the windows in our house with a kitchen knife my wife just might have that last piece of evidence she needs to have me committed. (laughing)
This camera has no anti-aliasing filter so I'd actually be cleaning the sensor itself and not a filter in front of it as you know. Secondly there is a tin oxide coating on this sensor. You seem to think any coating would be on the back of the sensor. Not sure I understand that but I'll take your word for it.
Curiously I wonder if you'd feel the same way if this was a $6,000.00 body as opposed to a $1,000.00 body. The magnet advice is clever. I suppose it would be a precarious task at best with the metal parts surrounding it but something I'm going to give further thought to.
BTW I'm more inclined to go for it on a $1,000.00 body than a $6,000.00 body despite these shortcomings....just saying.
Anyone that has the unfortunate displeasure of having to hear me rant on incessantly about this camera over the past several months knows that I really do want this stinking camera. So Cory, my friend, I only needed a nudge to live with oil and metal shavings. I do believe that you may have just given me that nudge.
Thanks much and I welcome any further comments/advice you may have! |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 10:00:58 PM · #16 |
I'm flattered, thanks Jay.
So... Short answer... No risk.
Long answer:
The only realistic risk from those metal shavings is that of electrical shorting, since aluminum and steel conduct electricity really well,.
When it comes to scratching the sensor, the only worry would be if there is a coating on the front side of the sensor..
(look here for an image of the sensor taken apart.. Seems there is a coating, but it's probably on the rear of that glass)
Assuming it is a glass front surface (a reasonably safe assumption), we can deduce it must be harder than basically any metal in that camera. (in point of fact, most coatings now are harder than the metal would be, but that's more variable)..
So, let's just PROVE to ourselves that this must be true.
Go to your kitchen, grab your very best knife. Or grab your pocket knife. These will be MUCH harder steel than anything in your camera (and I did go for a geology degree, so I really do have some expertise on hardness, especially differential hardness like this)..
Next, go find a window, or a glass object. Make sure it's clean, and scratch free. (dust can be amazingly abrasive, so be sure to get it clean)...
Now, take that super hard metal knife, and try to scratch the glass... No really, TRY to scratch it.
You'll find that even that hardest steel won't touch window glass, and it's important to note that window glass is MUCH softer than many of the better quality glasses used for optical applications.
..
I say relax, and clean that baby up... Try a super magnet first, just on the off chance you can remove some metal shavings which might otherwise migrate to a location where they could short stuff out. |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 08:22:06 PM · #17 |
[/quote] Don't quite understand why you'd leave over oil spots. Clean the thing up once a month, no big deal. [/quote]
Hi Cory,
So glad you made this comment. Now I'll tell you why. Then you can tell me if I'm nuts or not (because at this point I'm not sure). :)
I totally agree with you. I've cleaned the sensor before on my Sony and it was fast, simple and did a great job. I have no issue with cleaning the sensor monthly or weekly for that matter.
Here's my issue. The Nikon D600, (which as you probably know was inundated with oil spot issues on the internet), not only suffered from oil spots splashing onto the sensor from the shutter but metal shavings from the shutter. It's those metal shavings that give me pause. First of all why should I deal with a manufacturer that has a shutter system in which metal shavings land on my shutter? However, let's just say I'm ridiculous enough to deal with metal shavings. I have to believe that if the rocket blower didn't remove all the shavings that a wet clean may scratch the sensor permanently.
Please give me an honest opinion about what you think because I do value your opinion after having read your posts for the last (8) months. |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 07:19:31 PM · #18 |
Maybe I will just shoot with my Kodak Disc camera that I found in the closet.
//lowres-picturecabinet.com.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/43/main/13/92333.jpg |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 12:17:34 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Trotterjay:
Hi Sue,
Yeah real bummer. My problem is I absolutely LOVE the D7100. Don't want any other camera. I found people complaining about the oil spots on this model after I bought it and searched Google specifically for "D7100/oil spots". However prior to purchase I did not see anything by just researching the D7100 (test reports, reviews etc.)
Could it be that a lot of folks don't test like I do and step down to F22 etc. & they don't even know they have this condition? I also ask myself if this could be the same shutter that's in the D600 which the vast majority of folks were affected by?
So yes, I'm tempted to try another purchase from another distributor. I'm having a hard time walking away from this and going Canon. Great equipment but I just would prefer Nikon.
I was so happy to see that you worked out problem with the D7100. Hoorah!!! |
Don't quite understand why you'd leave over oil spots. Clean the thing up once a month, no big deal. |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 10:33:18 AM · #20 |
Hi Sue,
Yeah real bummer. My problem is I absolutely LOVE the D7100. Don't want any other camera. I found people complaining about the oil spots on this model after I bought it and searched Google specifically for "D7100/oil spots". However prior to purchase I did not see anything by just researching the D7100 (test reports, reviews etc.)
Could it be that a lot of folks don't test like I do and step down to F22 etc. & they don't even know they have this condition? I also ask myself if this could be the same shutter that's in the D600 which the vast majority of folks were affected by?
So yes, I'm tempted to try another purchase from another distributor. I'm having a hard time walking away from this and going Canon. Great equipment but I just would prefer Nikon.
I was so happy to see that you worked out problem with the D7100. Hoorah!!!
Message edited by author 2013-11-23 10:33:53. |
|
|
|
11/23/2013 08:45:16 AM · #21 |
@ Jason_Cross...I didn't do any research into the D5300 so can't help there. In no particular order, using the D90 for comparison, I wanted more fps (6 vs 4.5), more mps (24.1 vs 12.3), more AF (51 vs 11) points and superb low-light performance (yay! Now I can shoot at 1600 ISO without having to use a crapload of NR!) Stuff like two card slots are cool too but don't know Now that my weird little snafu of a short time ago has come and gone, I'm ready to get back to entering.
BTW...those back-to-back top tens?...both were shot large JPG format, and will be until I get my damn Mac up to speed.
@ Trotterjay...Jay, I am so sorry to hear that not just the first but the 2nd D7100 from B&H also had oil spot issues. That truly blows. Don't know if it would make a diff, but maybe go through another dealer? |
|
|
|
11/22/2013 08:39:16 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
Originally posted by snaffles:
I recently had two back-to-back top tens shot with the D7100...so that tells me all I need to know...and I don't miss the D90 at all. As with you, video is unimportant to me, I go for stills. Kick-ass low ISO performance which is crucial for me. Hope all this helps. |
I am reading the 5300 will have better low light performance? That is what keeps me looking at it. |
Every current model has good low light performance. That isn't much of a differentiator anymore. Regardless, i suspect you'd notice the difference in the autofocus engine and handling before you'd notice any difference in low light performance.
Not sure if the D7100 and D5300 have the same sensor or not. If it's not exactly the same, it's very close. |
|
|
|
11/22/2013 06:50:09 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
I recently had two back-to-back top tens shot with the D7100...so that tells me all I need to know...and I don't miss the D90 at all. As with you, video is unimportant to me, I go for stills. Kick-ass low ISO performance which is crucial for me. Hope all this helps. |
I am reading the 5300 will have better low light performance? That is what keeps me looking at it. |
|
|
|
11/22/2013 06:45:14 PM · #24 |
Jason,
I've been researching DSLR's for months. I can tell you, without listing all the reasons, that the Nikon 5300 is an excellent choice.
Last week I purchased TWO D7100's and some very expensive glass. I thought the oil on the sensor problems were limited to the D600. Oh was I wrong.
I shot at F22 into the clear blue sky when I first got the camera and the sensor was clean. I then put on the AFS 80-400mm, VR lens and went shooting birds in flight. I shot about 600 shots and then went home. When I got home I shot the sky again at F22. Now bear in mind with BIF shots I constantly use burst mode. So the shutter is getting a workout. I looked at the results and counted 25 oil spots which is where the lubricant from the shutter most likely scattered onto the sensor. Yes I tried to replicate nearly clean room practices when installing the lens before the shoot.
I returned the camera and they sent me another one. I put this 2nd camera through the exact same paces. Gues what? The exact same results before and after. I then returned that camera.
I now don't know what to do. I'm willing to spend as much as $3500.00 on a body but after examining sample shots between Canon and Nikon I feel that Canon produces a softer image (this ought to get some folks in an uproar but I mean no disrespect, just what I saw in tests).
Because I allocated $3500.00 for new bodies I intended to buy the Nikon D600 and the Nikon D7100. Both have oil spot issues. So now I'm in a holding pattern and continue to shoot with my Sony Nex 7.
I read nothing but good things about the 5300 and have not heard anything about oil spot issues with that camera but, if I were you, I'd do some google searches before purchase.
By the way I've owned many Canon DSLR bodies back in the day so I have nothing against Canon. It's just that IQ is paramount to me and I believe the D600 produces sharper images than the Canon 6D and the D7100 than the Canon 70D.
Good luck.
Message edited by author 2013-11-22 23:41:50. |
|
|
|
11/22/2013 05:29:18 PM · #25 |
Here, just read this to understand why I would strongly consider the Fuji... It's all about that leaf shutter.
//strobist.blogspot.com/2013/05/leaf-shutter-nd-flash-fuji-x100s.html |
|
