• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Pulled the Trigger on New Camera Body

P

PS-RagE

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 11, 2000
Messages
4,298
I've decided that I need a second body. I want to send my D2X out for cleaning and have the focusing screen adjusted and don't want to be without. I also frequently find myself missing shots while fiddling with lenses and have wanted a second body for some time.

I was "this" close to ordering a D3 but just couldn't fully convince myself it was what I need. I rarely use autofocus so improved AF was no big advantage (and the D2 is no slouch anyhow). The extended ISO range would have been nice but not $5k worth. I could care less about "full frame". Since I mainly shoot macro that actually would be a disadvantage as my pixel density would decrease since I'd have to crop more. So, the only real advantage was the big viewfinder.

Anyway, I talked myself out of it today and almost pulled the trigger on a D300 but changed my mind again and instead bought a second D2X from a fellow Nikonian! :D Just ordered an RRS L-bracket - see which one comes in first :p

.
 
lucky SOB...wish I could afford one d2x.....or even a d2h..., hell I'd be satisfied with a d1x...

sometimes the 2.7mp of my D1H isn't good enough no matter how clean they are :( :p
 
Congratz. The D3 was sexy I checked it out, but its not $5000+ sexy. The features you get from it are nice, but when it comes down to shooting, its a little more than I would need. The 5D from Canon is what I am aiming for right now. In the future I will end up with something like the 1Ds Mark III but for now its not worth it.

Just holding out to see what happens at PMA at the end of Jan. If a 5D or 3D and 7D hit the shelves I will have to make a choice. Personally if they can offer a full frame at a 2000 price point, then I am sold. I don't need fancy in camera function except MLU, and for the love of all things holy DEP and a good set of basic custom functions I'll be happy.

The D2X is a good body. What are you using for a macro set?
 
Noooooooooooooooooooooo! I wanted to see what you woulda done with a D3 Dale! Upgrade!!!!! =)
 
Kadath said:
Noooooooooooooooooooooo! I wanted to see what you woulda done with a D3 Dale! Upgrade!!!!! =)
Click to expand...

Why? What do you think I am going to miss out on?

Selling points of D3:

- Better AF - don't use
- Higher frame rate - don't care
- LiveView - :p - don't care
- Full frame - disadvantage since I use more long than wide
- Expanded ISO - would have been nice but not a big deal
- Bigger viewfinder - I wanted this
 
Sean said:
<snip>
...... The D2X is a good body. What are you using for a macro set?
Click to expand...

My most used lens is a Nikkor 200mm f/4. My other macro equipment includes a 90mm f/2.8, a 60mm f/2.8, assorted extension tubes (that I often use with the 90mm), a 6T diopter and a PB-6 bellows
 
PS-RagE said:
My most used lens is a Nikkor 200mm f/4. My other macro equipment includes a 90mm f/2.8, a 60mm f/2.8, assorted extension tubes (that I often use with the 90mm), a 6T diopter and a PB-6 bellows
Click to expand...

Nice gear! :D I only have a D80 Kit.
 
PS-RagE said:
My most used lens is a Nikkor 200mm f/4. My other macro equipment includes a 90mm f/2.8, a 60mm f/2.8, assorted extension tubes (that I often use with the 90mm), a 6T diopter and a PB-6 bellows
Click to expand...

Using avalible light? I mean what kind of macro photography do you do? EDIT: I saw your page. Really nice stuff there.
 
You are clearly applying logic in a situation that calls for emotionally charged gear lust Dale, curse you!
 
Kadath said:
You are clearly applying logic in a situation that calls for emotionally charged gear lust Dale, curse you!
Click to expand...


Yeah, I was a little pumped up about getting the new flagship but it was the "full frame" FX that was the deal breaker
 
Yeah but the D3 goes from Fool Frame to DX. Im saving my pennies to get one. Maybe by the time Im ready the D3X will be out.
 
Wow. Will you use both D2X at the same time? That's going to be some heavy lifting. :D
 
Cool! Twins!

2d2-1.jpg


2d2-2.jpg


This thing is in mint condition. Only has 4100 clicks on the shutter. The seller threw in his Kirk L-Bracket for $50 too.

So now tonight I'll go through all the settings and get the two to be exactly the same.

Bring on summer!!! :D

.
 
I don't think anyone here has had a chance to mention how much we all hate you ;)

Seeing your camera's and pictures makes it hard for people like me to pick out their first (affordable!) dSLR... :(
 
Latest links are broken Dale!

So when is the first annual great canadian [H] Workshop gonna be held and where do we sign up? =)
 
Odd, images worked on refresh. I actually got to use a D200 and a D2XS for the first time this fall through a PR promotional event with Nikon and Renegade Photo (Images are here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/sets/72157602482939680/). Really liked em both except for the inverted controls, which I know you can fix on the D300 and D3, but not sure about the ones I used, we didnt have any manuals... Havent really investigated the differences between the D2X and the D2XS, but the prices on both keep falling so maybe someday I'll pick one up to play around with all my old Nikkors with...
 
Kadath said:
Odd, images worked on refresh.
Click to expand...

Network Solutions' servers have never seemed 100% friendly with hot linking. Anytime one of my images shows as
broken.jpg
hit refresh and it will come up.


I actually got to use a D200 and a D2XS for the first time this fall through a PR promotional event with Nikon and Renegade Photo (Images are here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/sets/72157602482939680/). Really liked em both except for the inverted controls, which I know you can fix on the D300 and D3, but not sure about the ones I used, we didnt have any manuals...
Click to expand...

Inverted controls? How so? It is indeed a setting but its always aperture in front and shutter speed in back.

Havent really investigated the differences between the D2X and the D2XS, but the prices on both keep falling so maybe someday I'll pick one up to play around with all my old Nikkors with...
Click to expand...

There is no real difference between the D2X and the D2XS. The XS has the same LCD as the D200 and it applies a mask in the viewfinder when the high speed crop mode is engaged.

Lots of used gear on the market right now it seems as the pros and the wannabes upgrade to the newer models. Check out the "I Want To Sell" forum at Nikonians
 
The #1 feature of the D3 (for me) is the absolutely ridiculous ISO performance. On Genmay, user "methd" has two D3 bodies, and he posts quite a bit in photomay. He just posted a few pictures at ISO 25600. Looks like my D300 at 3200.
 
SEALTeamSix said:
Indeed - you should have gone with a Hasselblad H3D-39. :D
Click to expand...

I bet in less than 1 yr., Canon will overtake Hasselblad. In fact, I don't even know what Hasselblad is doing. Compares their 22 MB model w/ the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III (only $8K at B&H photo), Canon can do :

shutter speed (fastest) 1/8000
cont. shot 5 fps, w/ max burst 56 frames
screen monitor -- 3in
ISO 100 to 1600

Now, let's look at Hasselbald H3DII-22 (at a price tag of $25K at B&H photo)

shutter speed (fastest) 1/800
cont. shot: No continuous speed, 1.4 sec/capture
screen monitor--3 in.
ISO 50 to 400

and canon has a much wider range of lens, so who on earth who buy that Hasselbald for $25K? Nowadays, if your camera don't c/w continuous shot, don't waste our time
 
Nobody uses medium format for sports or lowlight shooting. So there's no sense comparing them there.
 
Except that Canon has the ability as this medium format camera. They can do the same thing w/ the canon offering more features

and I can't see why a single shot camera can't be use in low light setting.
 
It's not about features. It's about the look of the photos and resolution.

It's not about megapixels alone for resolution. And as for the look, can you see a difference between 5D/1Ds vs. any of the cropped sensor cameras?

If you don't have access to f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens and only can go ISO400, you won't be taking low light shots. It has nothing to do with being single shot.
 
The 5D from Canon is what I am aiming for right now. In the future I will end up with something like the 1Ds Mark III but for now its not worth it.
Click to expand...

Wait till Sep they are to announce the 5D replacement (if you can)
 
lan said:
It's not about features. It's about the look of the photos and resolution.

It's not about megapixels alone for resolution. And as for the look, can you see a difference between 5D/1Ds vs. any of the cropped sensor cameras?

If you don't have access to f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens and only can go ISO400, you won't be taking low light shots. It has nothing to do with being single shot.
Click to expand...

Alright then, tell me this--w/ the price of ASIC nowadays, how is it possible that Hasselblad need 1.4 sec. to take 1 photo? Is that quite absurd? That's the old days w/ NON-SLR camera. That kind of capturing speed is simply unacceptable.

This whole episode of Hasselblad reminds me of conventional car vs. sports car. You buy a Toyota, it has all the features you need, you go buy a Lotus, half of the simple features that a basic toyota have, they just don't have it
 
History and evolution is on the side of Hasselblad and the Lotus you mention. They are purely bred for the markets and specs they are now. Don't expect them to shoot 8fps and have high ISO or have air conditioning and power windows, etc.

Of course it's not that the technology isn't there.
 
Back a no. of yr. ago, people like me admire Hasselblad because I was very impressed w/ those super high Megapixel, that the cameras back then, is no match to Hasselblad. But there is clearly some advancement in tech. from brand like Canon, that put the distance of these 2 co. much, much closer.

Today, if I have to choose a 22 Megapixel camera, I'll pick the Canon in a heartbeat. The race is like Toyota vs. GM, Ford in the 70's. Back then, GM, Ford aer the king, and Toyota is playing catch up. Today, it's the other way around.

So just because "history" and "Evolution" is on the side of Hasselblad back then, it doesn't mean they will stay at the no. 1 seat in the near future. Since Canon has 22 MB camera today, in 1 to 2 yr., I would be expecting to see 39 MB from Canon, and your friend at Hasselblad will have to play some catching up.
 
lan said:
If you don't have access to f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens and only can go ISO400, you won't be taking low light shots. It has nothing to do with being single shot.
Click to expand...

I take low light shots with my camera. I do have a 1.4 lens, but depending on how much DOF I want, I'll be anywhere from 1.4 - 8 (usually 5.6 - 8 since 1.4 is a little soft) and I try to use ISO 100.
 
You admit to admiring megapixel quantity alone. I guess you can't wait for your APS-C sensor cam to reach 22 megapixels also? Comparing megapixels is like comparing horsepower or acceleration times. It's not the whole story.

These are not in the same class of camera and thus different markets so you can't say Hasselblad is no 1. But you are right that if companies don't follow the marketplace, they could fall or lose market share.

These cameras have different looks and capabilities bound by physics which have nothing to do with technological improvement. I wouldn't compare it anymore with cars.

I wouldn't want a 39MP 35mm sensor cam.
 
Well, megapixel is what attracts me to the name Hasselblad, but I didn't say that's the only "Alone" factor. Obviously the quality of the photo is a very high consideration.

But I'm trying to point out that Hasselblad has become a dinosaur lately. The features I point out at the top, such as ISO range, capture time, etc., hey, these are NOT "Options" for a manufacturer to follow, they are a "Must". Take capture time for e.g., w/ the money that any customer pay for, it takes that co. 1.4 sec. to capture an image? Well then, for the same 22 MB size, how did Canon do 5 fps? How did Canon do 56 frames in burst mode? What's the microprocessor that Hasselblad use? Some fly by night made in 1970?
 
going solely for MP is like thinking the more Ghz is better... it was years ago, but not anymore!

more MP = larger images (resolution), not necessarily better quality, that comes with the cmos sensor, or what ever X brand is using.
 
Happy Hopping said:
Well, megapixel is what attracts me to the name Hasselblad, but I didn't say that's the only "Alone" factor. Obviously the quality of the photo is a very high consideration.

But I'm trying to point out that Hasselblad has become a dinosaur lately. The features I point out at the top, such as ISO range, capture time, etc., hey, these are NOT "Options" for a manufacturer to follow, they are a "Must". Take capture time for e.g., w/ the money that any customer pay for, it takes that co. 1.4 sec. to capture an image? Well then, for the same 22 MB size, how did Canon do 5 fps? How did Canon do 56 frames in burst mode? What's the microprocessor that Hasselblad use? Some fly by night made in 1970?
Click to expand...

Megapixels is the only thing you keep coming back to.

Your point is taken but it's from the perspective of somebody who doesn't use it in the situation it's used mostly likely in. You're right that those features are not options, they are just not needed and thus not prioritized in development LOL. If you're in the studio or taking landscape, things don't need to move at 5fps.

How does Canon do 5fps? It has sports shooting experience. It takes experience and time to develop a set of features.

Having 22MP is already getting irrelevant for Canon or any 35mm DSLR. The system doesn't really work "better" at that res or higher. You are diffraction limited, many of the lenses won't give you that resolution, and the antialiasing filters are strong. You are better off using medium format where at least resolution is proven. Dynamic range is better also.
 
I am more than happy to acknowledge that Hasselblad's lens is better than Canon's lens. This is based on experience of Carl Zeiss lens, and that Hasselblad's lens must be just as good if not better.

But Hasselblad reminds me of the design of Ferrari's F40. One of the best car in the world, and yet, it doesn't even c/w a radio or side windows.

If Hasselblad want to sell their lens to photographer making snap shots of stuido models, be my guest. But if they want a reasonable share of the pile of the world's market, then their marketing dept. should do some survey, and get those basic functions that a half-decent camera have, and incorporate them in their camera.

Look at Samsung, 10 yr. ago, they are a clone co., they have no R&D, but in less than 10 yr. they put a lot of money on R&D, and nowadays, the people who come up w/ biggest LCD, biggest Plasma is always Samsung

As such, sooner than you think, you'll see review that Canon's lens surpass Hasselblad's lens, and Canon making 48x36 medium format camera
 
Happy Hopping said:
If Hasselblad want to sell their lens to photographer making snap shots of stuido models, be my guest. But if they want a reasonable share of the pile of the world's market, then their marketing dept. should do some survey, and get those basic functions that a half-decent camera have, and incorporate them in their camera.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think that you can get a reasonable share of the market given the camera is as big and heavy as it is EVEN if they have those "basic functions"? LOL.
 
Even If they don't want a reasonable share, for the price tag that they charge, they should still have most of those functions that Canon has. That's how it works in this world, you pay more money, you get more for what you paid for
 
Low demand and low production run means it costs more. These are not volume items. Getting more for what you paid for works usually for regular consumer things.

You will know if you need to use medium format and know exactly what you are doing. It's lack of features is not really relevent. You are paying for higher resolution and quality not features that you would less likely use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top