Discussion in 'Nikon Cameras' started by Photo7360, Oct 10, 2020.
To me it sounds more like a lens issue. If you are shooting with a 75-300 at low shutter speeds without VR what are they shooting with and what shutter speeds? The D750 has 50% more linear pixels than the D3S and would be subject to more motion blur. The D750 is fine for moving subjects, like I said AF is certainly not horrible.
That is with the D750. 1/2500th ISO 720.
Again I’m not defending the D750, I didn’t really like it for my needs, but it is still a great general purpose camera and has great image quality.
They aren't professional photographers who have had a camera in their hands since they were a young teenager nor did they have a dad who's best friend was a National Geographic Photographer to learn from.
Their cameras aren't made for the situations my cameras are made for.
Some cameras are made for different things.
I can shoot hand held at even slower speeds. I don't like using a tripod. It usually just gets in my way.
I shot this with my aperture at 1/13th, f-stop was 18 using an ISO of LO 1.0. I used my D5 camera with the 18-200 lens.
I shot this one hand held with my aperture at 1/13th, f-stop at 4.5 with my ISO at 160 using my D5 camera.
You're the person that stated you couldn't shoot what you do without a D# series camera not me. I just pointed out that if that's true, you still have some learning to do. It's a fact not an insult.
Yes I agree, it's a good camera. My friends get wonderful shots with theirs. They just can't get the shots I can get.
Yes that D3s doesn't have near as many megapixels but it takes a much better shot with low light and movement with far less noise. That's what the camera is made for.
The D750 is a good camera but it's not made to do then same things that the professional line of cameras are made for.
I’m sorry but I don’t understand. You posted pictures that I could get with any camera. Your lens selection seems to be on the consumer side though. I just really don’t understand why you are saying that a sports and action camera can get shots of a waterfall but a prosumer model can not?
I never said I couldn't shoot what I shoot without the professional series of cameras.
I started shooting musicians on stage when I was 19 years old in 1979. I used my Nikon EM. I used it to photograph musicians on stage until 1989 when I got my FM2.
I didn't move to the professional line of cameras until 1997 when I got my N90s.
Of course I can shoot what I do with other cameras. When I do what I did for for that long, doing it becomes like breathing. Without thought. It's easy for me because I have been doing it since I was 19 years old.
I said my friends can't do what I can using their cameras.
Please get my statement correct.
I don't understand why you are misquoting me. I never said that a D750 can't get shots of a waterfall.
My friends try to take the same shots. Theirs ends up with a lot of noise and not clear.
They aren't professionals. They are very serious amateurs that I've been teaching for about 6 years now. They haven't been taking photos since they were a young teenager like me. They started maybe a decade or so ago.
I'm not saying that the D750 is a bad camera. It's a nice camera.
I'm saying that my friends have a hard time with their D750 cameras in some situations.
Why are you so defensive? And why are you misquoting me?
I believe that photography isn't as complicated and difficult as some people make it to be. I bought the lenses that work best for the type of photography I do.
When you're at a concert in the pit or back stage you can't bring a lot of heavy equipment or a lot of equipment with you. It just gets in your way. Two cameras with those lenses are perfect for the type of work I do. The 18-200 is cropped. I bought that one so that I could stop getting the end of guitars or instruments of the person next to whoever I was shooting in the side of the shot. The end of a guitar on the side of shot is bad in my work so a cropped lens is perfect. The 75-300 isn't cropped but allows me to get tight shots.
It may not be the same type of photography you do and that's fine.
The equipment should work for the person who is using it. That's what is important.
Sure seems like that's exactly what you said.
Shot this handheld with a D90/28-85 f3.5-4.5 in my yard. Sometimes it just happens.
Is this thread just boasting about I’m a pro and they’re not, I’m published and they’re not, my dads friend worked for Nat geo so I’m better?
Your logic is flawed and I agree with most of the others here, the photographer matters as much as if not more than the camera.
A pro grade camera does not and never will make anyone a better photographer.
If the reason for this thread is to blow smoke and congratulate yourself on what appears to have been a happy life well spent shooting and making a living, good on you, the whole thread to me just stinks of “I’m a pro and I’m awesome” if you’re a pro an awesome as you keep reminding everyone, you’d be able to mail the shots you speak of with a D750, most like any midrange d series and many other cameras, it may not be as easy to do it but it’s be possible 99% of the time.
I’d spend more time teaching / coaching those you are shooting with instead of rubbishing their equipment.
Anyway, that’s my 2c
Sent from my mobile device because I’m either outside or too lazy to get my MacBook..
I shoot a D5 and a d850 as well as a d4, 8-p, 7000 in the past. I still have them. I also have a Z7. I can get my shots with any of my cameras but sometimes you just need to reach for one over the other. For instance shooting a rodeo I reach for the D5. I have done it with the others but it is easier on the D5. For baseball or soccer the z7 or the 850 is strapped to the 500. Only when I want the buffer do I go to the D5 mostly. I will not get the d6 but will wait in the mirrorless version. I can get my shot pretty much with my newer bodies it is just easier sometimes with one of them and it is not lays the D5.
Separate names with a comma.