Now that the D3100 has been released, D90 replacement!

[NateS]

I use a D40x go to my Flickr and tell me that my photos are "pieces of garbage" go ahead. I have sold all the photos that are on my Flickr page.

Exactly. People are so eager to blame their gear when they can't get good photos. You prove that wrong with your flickr account and I could post a plethora of incredibly detailed, excellent quality photos from a measly D70s. I've seen users post jaw dropping photos from the Canon 18-55 kit lens, etc... gear is not the problem 99% of the time, but get's blamed 99% of the time.

The D40 has been the single largest-selling camera model Nikon has ever made. Ever. So, you know they must be garbage. Even though there are more D40's than Nikon F's, F2's, F3's,F4's F5's, FM's, FM2's, FE's, or FE-2's....yup...garbage...everybody knows the D40 was a piece of crap compared to a Canon Rebel XTi...the Canon's were offered in that superb silver-colored finish that proclaimed, "I'm a putz!" for all the world to see,and the Rebel had that super-cool Direct Print Button, so you could hook your Canon Rebel up to your Canon printer--directly!!!! Woo-hoo!

Well said Derrel.

 

[cfusionpm]

I use a D40x go to my Flickr and tell me that my photos are "pieces of garbage" go ahead. I have sold all the photos that are on my Flickr page.

Exactly. People are so eager to blame their gear when they can't get good photos. You prove that wrong with your flickr account and I could post a plethora of incredibly detailed, excellent quality photos from a measly D70s. I've seen users post jaw dropping photos from the Canon 18-55 kit lens, etc... gear is not the problem 99% of the time, but get's blamed 99% of the time.

Well yeah, any camera can produce nice images; under good conditions, most people probably wouldnt be able to tell if a picture was taken with a D40 or D3s. What bugged me was slow clunky startup time and the massive wait between being able to take successive shots. Nothing scientific in the least bit; just a brief observation from toying with his camera over 2 years ago.

 

[Markw]

I use a D40x go to my Flickr and tell me that my photos are "pieces of garbage" go ahead. I have sold all the photos that are on my Flickr page.

Wow. You sold those hunks of junk? Those are a waste of metadata. :meh:

Kidding, of course. Great shots.
Mark

 

[Idahophoto]

I still have my old D40 and really enjoyed it. Don't really use it anymore but have not plans on giving it up...ever. I list it as one of my all time favorite cameras.

 

[Bram]

Thanks Markw.

 

[Markw]

Woow. the D90 replacement is looking mighty fine to me (nikonrumors.com):

The new Nikon glass and flash are looking mighty fine, too. All except for that $2k price tag on the 35 1.4!:

:mrgreen:
Mark

 

[MrLogic]

Woow. the D90 replacement is looking mighty fine to me (nikonrumors.com):

Looks that way, but I'm a bit worried about the high ISO performance of this camera. I didn't like the noise handling in the D3100 sample pics that were pulled.

The D3S already has fairly aggressive in-camera noise reduction. More than enough, if you ask me. Anything more than that is definitely overkill, IMO.

 

[Markw]

...this is a replacement for the D90, not the D3S..
Maybe Im misunderstanding what youre saying here..?

Mark

 

[MrLogic]

...this is a replacement for the D90, not the D3S..

Maybe Im misunderstanding what youre saying here..?

Huh? I never said it was.

The D3100 and D3S are new and relatively new Nikon cameras, respectively... which is why I mentioned them. I began to notice a pattern. Pro or amateur body... it doesn't seem to matter. In-camera noise reduction is UP from the cameras they replaced. IMO.

Why would it be different for the D7000 vs the D90?

 

[cfusionpm]

Well it's probably going to have to be up with that ridiculous hike in megapixels. It's got 1.2MP more than the Canon 50D, which was already at a ridiculous and useless level for APS-C sensors. Since it's completely impossible to have a sensor deal with things at that kind of pixel density, the only solution is super aggresive in-camera processing, right?

</satire>

 

[Derrel]

http://www.neutralday.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/crop-1-iso-25600.jpg

Nikon D3s - Canon 1D Mark IV - Canon 5D Mark II

Yes, the higher the pixel density, the higher the noise level tends to be. The 50D's poor high-ISO noise performance might have been one of the reasons it was such a poor seller. Or, it could have been the under-specification of the body relative to the competing cameras on the market. Or the bad reviews the 50D got from so many on-line sources, like dPreview, which bashed it for its noise level and it inability to perform well enough with anything less than the absolute best Canon prime lenses. Of course, what Nikon calls an APS-C sensor is larger than what Canon calls APS-C, 370 square millimeters for a 1.5x Nikon and 329 square millimeters for a 1.6x Canon.

As far as noise performance: anybody with half a brain can look at the performance of the Nikon D3x and the Sony A900: BOTH cameras use the SAME, identical sensel, but the AA filtration, image processing and circuitry are entirely different; even though Sony makes and sells the sensels to Nikon, the ancillary parts that turn a sensel into a completed imaging sensor are crap at high ISO in the Sony A900, and quite a bit better in the D3x...so,yes somebody's smart-alecky sarcasm does have a basis in fact...noise reduction know-how IS a huge advantage that Nikon has over say, Sony...

 

[cfusionpm]

I know! I'm totally looking forward to see how Nikon defies the laws of physics with this new 16.2MP sensor!

 

[hightower]

I use a D40x go to my Flickr and tell me that my photos are "pieces of garbage" go ahead. I have sold all the photos that are on my Flickr page.

Exactly. People are so eager to blame their gear when they can't get good photos. You prove that wrong with your flickr account and I could post a plethora of incredibly detailed, excellent quality photos from a measly D70s. I've seen users post jaw dropping photos from the Canon 18-55 kit lens, etc... gear is not the problem 99% of the time, but get's blamed 99% of the time.

Well yeah, any camera can produce nice images; under good conditions, most people probably wouldnt be able to tell if a picture was taken with a D40 or D3s. What bugged me was slow clunky startup time and the massive wait between being able to take successive shots. Nothing scientific in the least bit; just a brief observation from toying with his camera over 2 years ago.

Hmm, I have NEVER noticed this in my D40. Maybe it had a slow SD card in it or something? Some reviews point out such behavior in the D3000 but my D40 is always very snappy in start up and successive shots, etc.

 

[Stephen.C]

I'm really excited because I'll be saving to upgrade my D3000.
39 auto focus seems REALLY nice.
Heck, ill be upgrading just for the motor to be inside the camera.

 

[Markw]

This is very exciting to me as well. I cant wait to get the extra focus points. The 11 the D90 has is extremely limiting. Helpful where they are positioned, but still liminting.

Mark