New toy

Strong Bad

This thing is total badass! It's the Nikon D200 Digital SLR. It's replacing my D70.

Wait till you see the pics this thing will produce! WHOA YEAH! Time to shoot some HOs at the club!

shepx2

Ok, I'm totally jealous:) I wish I had the $$$ to get the D200. For now I have to live with my D50, and my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8. I look forward to seeing what u do with it:)

Strong Bad

The D50 is a great camera! Look at that shot...sweet.

I'm going to head out tomorrow and shoot around for a little while. Won't be girly photos, but I'll post some.

The thing I noticed, even though the D70 is 6.1mp and the D200 is 10.2mp, the RAW files go from 5mb (D70) in size to 15mb (D200).

I have the extended battery grip and larger/faster CF cards on my list.

Happy shootin!

janmike

Congrats John. Very Nice!
That is a great shot shepx2.

I need to improve my photography skill set one day.

shepx2

Thanks:) I get more lucky than anything else with my D50. It's my first SLR of any kind. I had originally bought a Nikon 28-105 for it used from KEH, but it was a bad copy, with it's macro feature not focusing correctly. Decided to just get the Tamron instead as it will probably be my only lens for a while. Divorce is expensive!!!

Here's another of my favorites.

audiobliss

Whao, that's an awesome camera. When did Nikon come out with the D200? I'm soo behind...I was still drooling over the D100.

Great pics, shepx2

masanz1

very nice, I, too, have to live with a D50 with SigMA 18-55MM F2.8 lens. But I'm fine with that for now. Are you looking to sell the D70?

Mike682

Congrats on the new cam!!

MacLeod

Nikon rules!

I have a pretty standard 35mm Nikon point-n-shoot camera that my wife took on a cruise with some friends. Using the same film as her friend, my humble Nikon took much better pictures than her friends $400 Minolta!

Whenever I get a digital, it will be a Nikon also.

dorokusai

I bet that would take great pictures of my crank for the local rest areas.

MacLeod

dorokusai wrote:

I bet that would take great pictures of my crank for the local rest areas.

Well, that is the best thing about digital cameras!! You can take naked pictures of yourself and not have to worry about getting arrested when taking them to be developed!

brettw22

The only ones that get turned in are when the person naked looks underage. Trust, there's a LOT of people that are taking naked pics of themselves that should NEVER be naked, let alone having pics taken. (I haven't worked in a photo lab, but my old company does major money in lab processing)

Strong Bad

masanz1 wrote:

very nice, I, too, have to live with a D50 with SigMA 18-55MM F2.8 lens. But I'm fine with that for now. Are you looking to sell the D70?

I have 2 friends constantly asking that same question. I have 2 D70's and am getting rid of one. Let's see how things progress with them and if they pass, it'll go to the Polk Flea Market.

The D200 came out back in December I believe. It has more in common with the D2X than it does with the D100. The D2X is twice the price, but it sure doesn't have that big of a gap in abilities and features. Thats why the D200 is flying off the shelves and they're usually out or almost out of stock everywhere.

Nikon does kick ****!


John

brettw22

John, did you get my PM about the songs?

mrbigbluelight

dorokusai wrote:

I bet that would take great pictures of my crank for the local rest areas.

www.bensbargains.net over here at CP !

sucks2beme

Nice setup. I've been waiting for digital to catch up to old SLR quality.
I've been hanging on to my old Nikon FM for years waiting for a digital camera that could take a decent photo. One of my customers at work used to send me a care package of free film every year(enough to last all year) but now that that has stopped, I really need one of these. I've got some cheapie
digitals around (3 mp) that just piss me off by how useless they are. I guess it's time to do some research.

Strong Bad

sucks2beme wrote:

Nice setup. I've been waiting for digital to catch up to old SLR quality.
I've been hanging on to my old Nikon FM for years waiting for a digital camera that could take a decent photo. One of my customers at work used to send me a care package of free film every year(enough to last all year) but now that that has stopped, I really need one of these. I've got some cheapie
digitals around (3 mp) that just piss me off by how useless they are. I guess it's time to do some research.

Check out some local camera shops and see if you can rent one or a few to test drive.

sucks2beme

The quality on the digitals(and price) are finally getting there.
My FM was the first XMAS gift from the wife after we were married to replace the Nikon F2S I had while a GI. I had to sell that one and all the extras to help get my fresh start in the real world.
I once had a guy try a run and snatch on F2S. I smacked him up side the head with it. He let go real quick! Try THAT with a modern camera.
I guess its time embrace digital. It doen't seem to be going away.
Post us some pictures.

audiobliss

That's exactly why I never liked the D70 or D50, but instead preferred the less technologically advanced D100. The D100 has Nikon's signature magnesium body under the plastic casing, whereas the others don't. gotta love that awesome ruggedness of (most) Nikons!

brettw22

35mm cameras put out an image that's 19mp. I don't think you'd see any major difference between a 6-8mp and 19mp unless you're talking about blowing up a picture to the size of a poster.

sucks2beme

brettw22 wrote:

35mm cameras put out an image that's 19mp. I don't think you'd see any major difference between a 6-8mp and 19mp unless you're talking about blowing up a picture to the size of a poster.

Digital camera optics are crap until you hit the best SLR types.
They also seem to be prone to some odd artifacts and are easily fooled in exposure. That's why I went from a Canon AE-1 to manual Nikons. There's more to a good picture than megapixels.
I have actually used the FM with a dead battery, and just best guessed the settings. That roll turned out pretty good!

audiobliss

I started out on a Nikon FM-2 for learning purposes, then moved up to my dad's old N8008. Unfortunately, I think I got tired of the 'photography' end of things and moved up just to move up.

masanz1

I get better pictures as far as clarity on my old Yashicamat medium format than any camera I have own. I'm looking to get a 4x5 large format before too long

sucks2beme wrote:

Digital camera optics are crap until you hit the best SLR types.
They also seem to be prone to some odd artifacts and are easily fooled in exposure. That's why I went from a Canon AE-1 to manual Nikons. There's more to a good picture than megapixels.
I have actually used the FM with a dead battery, and just best guessed the settings. That roll turned out pretty good!

jcaut

Nice camera, John! I look forward to seeing some pictures from it.

This discussion is drifting sort of off-topic with the digital vs. film thing, but since this is something I'm interested in, I want to respond to a few points.

Having shot 35mm SLR's for a long time, I was very interested in trying to compare digital to film.. at first. I've come to realize that it's quite hard to compare the two because they're just so different, and there's so many factors involved that make up those differences. My first digital camera was a Canon G2. It was a very highly-regarded 4mp P&S digital, for it's day--my mom has it now and it still takes good pictures. There weren't really any affordable DSLR's out at that time. I hated the shutter lag and being limited by the AF system, but I can honestly say that I got better pictures - possibly because I was able to take so many, but I also got a higher percentage of good shots- than I ever got with 35mm. I even made 8x10's occasionally that were easily, noticably better than those I had made from 35mm print film, and thus I didn't feel limited by the "low" resolution. Color response from digital is much better than 35mm print film, and actually is more comparable to low speed slide film, IMO.
I never used medium format, and I figure that might be a different story- But I'm just relating my experience with 35mm. I should also add that, despite my "use" of these cameras, I don't consider myself to be a good photographer. And that's important, as I think that the skill of the photographer is far more important in obtaining a good photograph, than the medium it's captured on.

I'd have to take issue with Brett's statement that "35mm cameras put out an image that's 19mp", becuase I don't think there's a real way to draw a correlation there. I don't think film has a megapixel equivalent. I'd also disagree with sucks2beme's statement that all digital camera's optics are crap -- Indeed, I think many P&S digitals have excellent lenses--- With an SLR, you can range from crap to "however much money you want to spend" on a lens, in your choice of brands. You don't like the auto exposure or the auto focus, you can switch to manual. Best thing is you can keep shooting without having to worry about the cost of film and developing- Just the cost of bigger hard drives to store all those pictures.

It's hard to talk about digital camera image quality without bring up sensor size. It's just like talking about medium or large format film vs. 35mm. The sensor size is still the physical size of your image, no matter how many pixels are crammed into that area.

I don't think 35mm is going away, but nor do I think that it holds an image quality advantage over the 6+ mp APS-C size sensor DSLR's. Maybe the battery thing and the ability to shoot slides. And none of them are as rugged as some of the old 35mm SLR's. The feeling of ruggedness is mostly an illusion. Bang it around much, my money's on film.

Jason

Mike682

cool discussion thread..

For the record, I enjoy both film and digital.

Digital has come a long way. To me the benefits when comared to film are 1) Digital sensors are becoming less noisy at higher ISOs. Look at the D50, shoots 1600 ISO with minimal noise. Also have a look at the new Fuji F30, a compact digicam that will shoot, although not as clean as a DSLR, an acceptable 1600 ISO shot. 2) Digital has less color shift when shooting long exposures (forgot the technical term for this).

All in all, both are great formats. It looks like film is becoming a "specialty" format whereas the mass market is using digital. The recent news of Nikon backing out of new film bodies, Canon looking to just focus on digital, and Minolta's recent takeover by Sony illustrate this.

masanz1

Here's a good article from one of my favorite sites

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm

audiobliss

Mike682 wrote:

The recent news of Nikon backing out of new film bodies

What?! That's really sad. I'd love to have a F100. I can't believe Nikon would get out of film! That's just not right.

dorokusai

Get used to that feeling.

brettw22

There are Photo Kiosks that exist that you walk up to, drop your film into, it develops the images and burns them to a CD and then chemically destroys the negative and if you want pictures, then you print from the CD.

Film sales are not just down, but virtually nil compared to 5 years ago. 35mm is going by the wayside

Strong Bad

audiobliss wrote:

What?! That's really sad. I'd love to have a F100. I can't believe Nikon would get out of film! That's just not right.

They're not quiting film, just no R&D into new film bodies. They're sticking with their current lineup with no new bodies being developed.

When I first got my D70 in December 04, I purchased it as a package with some Sigma lens. They were fine for beginners, but it didn't take too long to realize i needed to step up for quality.

My current crop of lens are: Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VR, Nikon 28-70mm 2.8, Tokina 12-24mm f4, Nikon 85mm 1.4 (amazing quality!) and the Nikon 50mm 1.4. I did alot of research before buying each of these. At $300, the Nikon 50mm 1.4 is the least expensive of these. The 70-200...cough cough!!! There is no substitute for good glass!

I shoot almost exclusively in Manual mode. In the studio, manual all the way including preset whitebalance and the use of a lightmeter. For sports photography, same thing, but sometimes I do shoot Aperture Priority on some outdoor games.

I think alot of people feel they can pull a high dollar camera out of the box, turn it on and get pro level shots on full auto. Forget it!

Any of you camera buffs making it to Troys Polk Fest in October? Would be cool to talk shop with ya'll.

John

brettw22

brettw22 wrote:

John, did you get my PM about the songs?

????