Nikon to Canon?

[Derrel]

I should probably point out that I shoot soccer games with a sluggish D800 and it works more than fine. (To Derrel's point)

With a D800, a person can throw away HALF the frame and STILL have an 18MP image! That's a HUGE advantage on a long- and wide-field sport like soccer. It allows you to shoot closer-in action with a 70-200 and not crop off the feet all the freaking time, 'cause it's FF, and it gives huuuuge crop-in capability. This is sort of like having more lens flexibility; one can take a 200mm shot and crop it, and get a good, tight shot. One does not utterly,totally "need" to always fill the frame right up. One can shoot portraits a bit more loosely framed when needed, then crop without a visible quality drop-off.

I started shooting sports for a couple papers in 2005: at that time, I had a Nikon D1h....a 2.7 megapixel camera...talk about needing to FILL the frame! Very limited crop capability with that tiny pixel count. Good color though, and good noise performance at higher ISO levels than the D2x ever had.

I'm okay with the D3x and 4 FPS combined with a pro-grade build and fast lock time, fast mirror-return time, and a killer battery. Used D3s bodies are widely available...I could go for one of those too for some uses. D800 and D800e bodies are gonna' flood the market in about five,six months I expect, once the word of the 810's 50 new improvements becomes widely known and hyped up. Like runnah said, if you want FAST, ya' gotta buy the flagships these days.

As far as what Nikon is doing, have you read Thom's photokina 2014 expectations piece? The Photokina Prognosis | byThom | Thom Hogan

 

[hamlet]

Glad I don't like soccer then so no big deal.

I dont know, it isn't so black and white always because doing, seeing and recording are separate things. I don't like the ocean or deep water because i have a phobia of it, but i do like to photograph it because i think it is beautiful. These two are the same but they are also not. Maybe you would enjoy taking pictures of soccer? I mean i don't like to play soccer at all personally, i just like to watch.

 

[OnTheFly7]

I should probably point out that I shoot soccer games with a sluggish D800 and it works more than fine. (To Derrel's point)

With a D800, a person can throw away HALF the frame and STILL have an 18MP image! That's a HUGE advantage on a long- and wide-field sport like soccer. It allows you to shoot closer-in action with a 70-200 and not crop off the feet all the freaking time, 'cause it's FF, and it gives huuuuge crop-in capability. This is sort of like having more lens flexibility; one can take a 200mm shot and crop it, and get a good, tight shot. One does not utterly,totally "need" to always fill the frame right up. One can shoot portraits a bit more loosely framed when needed, then crop without a visible quality drop-off.

I started shooting sports for a couple papers in 2005: at that time, I had a Nikon D1h....a 2.7 megapixel camera...talk about needing to FILL the frame! Very limited crop capability with that tiny pixel count. Good color though, and good noise performance at higher ISO levels than the D2x ever had.

I'm okay with the D3x and 4 FPS combined with a pro-grade build and fast lock time, fast mirror-return time, and a killer battery. Used D3s bodies are widely available...I could go for one of those too for some uses. D800 and D800e bodies are gonna' flood the market in about five,six months I expect, once the word of the 810's 50 new improvements becomes widely known and hyped up. Like runnah said, if you want FAST, ya' gotta buy the flagships these days.

As far as what Nikon is doing, have you read Thom's photokina 2014 expectations piece? The Photokina Prognosis | byThom | Thom Hogan

Would you recommend continued all around shooting with the 800 and wait for a true "fast" body purchase?

 

[Derrel]

I wrote my above last post while several of the posts before it were being typed out. SO, I now know you do some rodeo, flyfishing, other stuff, and I now know you're shooting the D800 yourself. I dunno...Thom has been saying for two years now that the D800/D800e is the best all-around d-slr on the market. As he mentioned last week, there are compromises to every single camera choice. He wrote a whole article on compromises and choices.

I dunno...I made my compromise 2 years ago. I went with 24MP FX, the best viewfinder image for me as an eyeglasses wearer, and the best compromise of every single thing, like resolution, ergonomics, battery, and how familiar I was with the controls and layout...I bought my fourth pro-body Nikon...D1,D1h,D2x,D3x...

I shot and processed files from the D4,and the 5D Mark III. I rejected the D800 outright for several reasons. I did not like the feel or the ergonomic shifts in the D4 or D800 from my prior eleven years with the Nikon flagship layout cameras...the camera I liked the most, feel-wise was the 5D Mark III, but I really did not have the full lens set for it, but I did for Nikon. So...I bought a used D3x and payed less for it than for ANY of the other cameras and got it $1,800 BELOW THEN-current market price in a fabulous deal.

I really was disappointed that the D4 was "only" 16 MP...that was not enough leverage over what I already had! As far as your wish for a camera slotted between the D800 and the D4--I think the D810 is closer to that than the D800 was...it has the new D4s focusing algorithms, and Thom says that slight D800 lagginess in focusing on tough targets that the D4 does not have has been eliminated, so...

His article makes me wonder: will the D300s successor be delivered? Well, let's hope so! It SEEMS like it'd be an easy thing to produce. Canon's 7D Mark II might be what it takes. But I really do not have a lot of confidence in Nikon knowing what people really want. I see Canon as equally poor...the awesome 1Dx, but then a huge megapixel gap/drop off a cliff to the 5D-III vs D800e/D810, then a low-end FF 6D that's equal to the Nikon D610. I dunno...the camera makers have just screwed up royally, IMHO. Just a weird, weird bunch of choices.

But from what Thom has written, the D810 improves on firing rate, and buffer, and focusing and he says it kind of moves the category closer to being a "fast shooter". I would wait though for a true fast body purchase if you are of a mind that you absolutely need 7,8,or 9 fps, AND you need a modern, high-MP sensor, and so on. Unless you want a Canon 1DX or a D4s, the speed you want is not really quite there, but I dunno...5 FPS at 36MP in the D810 sounds good to me. But I am not you. I expect the D400 or D9300 will be a 10 fps camera. But who knows!

 

[OnTheFly7]

I wrote my above last post while several of the posts before it were being typed out. SO, I now know you do some rodeo, flyfishing, other stuff, and I now know you're shooting the D800 yourself. I dunno...Thom has been saying for two years now that the D800/D800e is the best all-around d-slr on the market. As he mentioned last week, there are compromises to every single camera choice. He wrote a whole article on compromises and choices.

I dunno...I made my compromise 2 years ago. I went with 24MP FX, the best viewfinder image for me as an eyeglasses wearer, and the best compromise of every single thing, like resolution, ergonomics, battery, and how familiar I was with the controls and layout...I bought my fourth pro-body Nikon...D1,D1h,D2x,D3x...

I shot and processed files from the D4,and the 5D Mark III. I rejected the D800 outright for several reasons. I did not like the feel or the ergonomic shifts in the D4 or D800 from my prior eleven years with the Nikon flagship layout cameras...the camera I liked the most, feel-wise was the 5D Mark III, but I really did not have the full lens set for it, but I did for Nikon. So...I bought a used D3x and payed less for it than for ANY of the other cameras and got it $1,800 BELOW THEN-current market price in a fabulous deal.

I really was disappointed that the D4 was "only" 16 MP...that was not enough leverage over what I already had! As far as your wish for a camera slotted between the D800 and the D4--I think the D810 is closer to that than the D800 was...it has the new D4s focusing algorithms, and Thom says that slight D800 lagginess in focusing on tough targets that the D4 does not have has been eliminated, so...

His article makes me wonder: will the D300s successor be delivered? Well, let's hope so! It SEEMS like it'd be an easy thing to produce. Canon's 7D Mark II might be what it takes. But I really do not have a lot of confidence in Nikon knowing what people really want. I see Canon as equally poor...the awesome 1Dx, but then a huge megapixel gap/drop off a cliff to the 5D-III vs D800e/D810, then a low-end FF 6D that's equal to the Nikon D610. I dunno...the camera makers have just screwed up royally, IMHO. Just a weird, weird bunch of choices.

But from what Thom has written, the D810 improves on firing rate, and buffer, and focusing and he says it kind of moves the category closer to being a "fast shooter". I would wait though for a true fast body purchase if you are of a mind that you absolutely need 7,8,or 9 fps, AND you need a modern, high-MP sensor, and so on. Unless you want a Canon 1DX or a D4s, the speed you want is not really quite there, but I dunno...5 FPS at 36MP in the D810 sounds good to me. But I am not you. I expect the D400 or D9300 will be a 10 fps camera. But who knows!

I like the 800 and when shooting crop mode, 12 bit and reducing some things, I fires off at a pretty good clip. Not super fast, but not slow and I have been happy with the results. I think the 810 may be too close to the 800 for me to consider it as a second body. Perhaps I will wait for a true "fast" camera purchase. The 7D Mark II may be the deal, and I am not too deep on lenses as to where I could not make the switch. However, I simply do not like the feel of the Canon bodies in my hand, at all.

I think I may stick with what I have, build up my lens collection and wait for the so called "perfect" body for what I want.

 

[DarkShadow]

Heck give me a D800 all day long even if it had 3 frames a second, I would be smiling like I hit the lotto.

 

[greybeard]

It all depends on who is making the tool you need to do the job at a price you can afford. My picture taking days started with cameras you wound with your thumb so burst shooting is relatively new to me and not a feature I even consider but, if it was, I'd get what I needed no matter who made it.

 

[DarkShadow]

Old School^^:thumbup:

 

[Tailgunner]

I like the 800 and when shooting crop mode, 12 bit and reducing some things, I fires off at a pretty good clip. Not super fast, but not slow and I have been happy with the results. I think the 810 may be too close to the 800 for me to consider it as a second body. Perhaps I will wait for a true "fast" camera purchase. The 7D Mark II may be the deal, and I am not too deep on lenses as to where I could not make the switch. However, I simply do not like the feel of the Canon bodies in my hand, at all.

I think I may stick with what I have, build up my lens collection and wait for the so called "perfect" body for what I want.

The D810 has 5fps and 6fps in 1.2X crop and 7fps with a grip not to mention an improved auto focusing system developed for the D4s. You still have the use of the 36mp sensor...improved sensor at that. The D4/D4s is super fast but you're talking about a 16.2mp sensor which is about half that shooting in crop mode. The D800/D810 gets you 18mp in crop...more than the D4/D4s in standard mode.

 

[OnTheFly7]

I like the 800 and when shooting crop mode, 12 bit and reducing some things, I fires off at a pretty good clip. Not super fast, but not slow and I have been happy with the results. I think the 810 may be too close to the 800 for me to consider it as a second body. Perhaps I will wait for a true "fast" camera purchase. The 7D Mark II may be the deal, and I am not too deep on lenses as to where I could not make the switch. However, I simply do not like the feel of the Canon bodies in my hand, at all.

I think I may stick with what I have, build up my lens collection and wait for the so called "perfect" body for what I want.

The D810 has 5fps and 6fps in 1.2X crop and 7fps with a grip not to mention an improved auto focusing system developed for the D4s. You still have the use of the 36mp sensor...improved sensor at that. The D4/D4s is super fast but you're talking about a 16.2mp sensor which is about half that shooting in crop mode. The D800/D810 gets you 18mp in crop...more than the D4/D4s in standard mode.

You bring up one thing I forgot to mention, the grip. I will be adding the battery grip.

 

[OnTheFly7]

Well, now I'm pissed. Spend a lot of time this weekend working on the photos that I had posted here. I did them on my new laptop and they looked great. I look at them on my phone and they are orange. The laptop was calibrated too! What good are mice looking photos on the laptop when they look like **** when published.

 

[Tailgunner]

I like the 800 and when shooting crop mode, 12 bit and reducing some things, I fires off at a pretty good clip. Not super fast, but not slow and I have been happy with the results. I think the 810 may be too close to the 800 for me to consider it as a second body. Perhaps I will wait for a true "fast" camera purchase. The 7D Mark II may be the deal, and I am not too deep on lenses as to where I could not make the switch. However, I simply do not like the feel of the Canon bodies in my hand, at all.

I think I may stick with what I have, build up my lens collection and wait for the so called "perfect" body for what I want.

The D810 has 5fps and 6fps in 1.2X crop and 7fps with a grip not to mention an improved auto focusing system developed for the D4s. You still have the use of the 36mp sensor...improved sensor at that. The D4/D4s is super fast but you're talking about a 16.2mp sensor which is about half that shooting in crop mode. The D800/D810 gets you 18mp in crop...more than the D4/D4s in standard mode.

You bring up one thing I forgot to mention, the grip. I will be adding the battery grip.

I think it's worth checking out. The extra battery is supposed to help keep a steady flow of juice where as a single battery sees a slight drop in power during a burst. This allows for an extra fps. I'm thinking about adding a grip to my D800 to help with my time-lapse videos...more battery life.

 

[coastalconn]

The real-world value of high frame rate is wildly overestimated by most people. And today, buying a D300s? Umm, no. You do not mention what kind of business you are thinking about starting, but I can say that 4 to 5 frames per second is actually adequate for most subject matter. Even at 8.2 FPS, it's difficult to just spray and pray and magically get great shots; it's better to shoot when the timing is RIGHT, and fire off one good frame, rather than one almost-the-right-time and then seven duds...

Sure, high frame rate can give you a second shot on split-second sports, where there is by the way only ONE, single really best moment, but if the firing rate is at say 10 fps, you can mis-time the first frame, and maybe get a second usable frame; note, I am talking about one,single best moment, and a single, second shot as an almost-best...that's about the way it really shakes out. Not talking about 10-frame 1-second bursts, but ONE, single frame where things have come together, either you nail it then, OR you're a bit too early, or you're a tad bit late...that is about the only way an 8- to 9- to 10-fps camera can help you out on action work. It's better to shoot ONE single good frame than 7 or 8 so-so frames.

Of MUCH bigger concern to me is BUFFER depth and write-to-card speed!!! Not frame rate, but how long can I keep plugging away at say, 4 FPS!!! Now that is the real issue.But the general public does like its high firing rate. But the D300s sensor...no...no way...I will never go back to that generation's performance. It's just NOT good enough; the new Nikons, with the 24 million to 36 million pixel sensors...those are better than what Canon can offer for those who need high image quality at an affordable price.

I'm not interested in a 16 MP D4 or D4s...I want the 24- or 36-MP FX quality images more so than anything. I want the ability to throw away 50% of a frame and still have a good frame; that is what the 24- to 36-MOP sensors do. BIG crop-abilkity. That is more important to me than firing rate.

NOBODY has a CLUE what Nikon is thinking these days. They have never,ever told people what they are planning. But the camera business is constricting, severely, so...they sell a crap-ton of D3xxx and D5xxx bodies, both current models, and also new old stock NOS, at heavy discount. The camera biz is not catering to the $1699 body crowd any longer; they want touy to go FF, or buy the mid- and entry level stuff. The Canon 7D has stood since 2009, unchanged and UN-IMPROVED with a great body but a sensor that is significantly inferior to that in a $399 NIKON. Canon has belched out 5,6 DX bodies with the same outdated 2008-era sensor that premiered in the 7D in 2009; what the hell is Canon thinking? ABout the same thing Nikon is, I think!

Oh Derrel, you always forget about me and my Osprey... I would love 8-10 FPS for the dives and liftoffs.. In fact I shot a D3S today and loved the speed, it's a shame the resolution is so low, it just doesn't compare to the detail I get from the D7100. The D7100 seems to have a more accurate AF system too.. I was pretty surprised...

 

[goodguy]

I really dont shoot much at 6FPS that my D7100 can but when I need it I find that it is more then enough for me, I would much rather get a bigger buffer then more FPS but even that is easy to deal with, I simply move to JPEG and I get more pictures into the buffer before it fills.

 

[keyseddie]

If you advance enough in your skills and vision, you won't really give a f**k about the latest or greatest equipment advances.