FOTO-TECHNIKA > Technika i sprzęt fotograficzny
D 300 a D 300s
kichu:
kazdy zobaczy to co bedzie chcial zobaczyc
rozumiem zachwyt d7000, bo tez mi sie bardzo pucha podoba... i bylem nia mocno pozytywnie zaskoczony... ale jak dla mnie to fanboy d7000 jest grany jak nic...
bo z tego co tu jimix opisuje i pomijajac kwestie czy komus w lapie lezy wieksza czy mniejsza puszka
to roznica nadal sprowadza sie do matrycy i filmow i tu jest clue calego zagadnienia
cala reszta, czyli af, budowa, 2 sloty na karty i tak dalej to jest wszystko to co d300s juz ma i to sprawdzone i bardzo dobre
spedzilem ostatnio troche czasu z d7000 i owszem sa tweaki ergoomiczne ktore mi sie bardzo podobaja, ale sa tez rzeczy ktore dla uzytkownika d300s sa oczywiste, a ktorych w d7k po prostu nie ma
ktos to ladnie podsumowal w jednej recenzji
--- Cytuj ---But let's not confuse something: the D7000 is not up to the level of the D300s in some critical ways: build-quality, feature set, buffer use, and more. Little things, like the material used over the color LCD, can make somewhat substantive differences in whether a camera manages to take full time pro abuse or lives only up to a lower level of consumer handling. The materials, durability, ruggedness, and other build-quality aspects of the D300s are executed at a slightly higher level. If you're bouncing your camera around in the Outback all year long, the D300s is going to stand up to that better than the D7000, though the D7000 will stand up to it better than a D90 would. Plus the D300s still has some performance advantages: 8 fps maximum frame rate and a critically larger buffer, for example. On the plus side, the D7000 has come mighty close to the D300s level in terms of build quality and features, so I'm sure there will be people who opt for a D7000 over a D300s. But I don't consider the D300s obsolete because the D7000 appeared. It's still an excellent camera, though starting to show its age a bit. I fully trust Nikon will address that next year and then the D300s/D7000 debate will just go away entirely. Until then, I think you have to pick the D300s if your camera handling is going to be abusive and rough, the D7000 if you value image quality and performance (other than frame rate and buffer size) over ruggedness.
--- Koniec cytatu ---
--- Cytuj ---Raw shooters will not be terribly happy with the buffer size. While you can theoretically get to 15 buffered images shooting raw, you're throwing away highlight data (Compressed NEF) and bits (12-bit) and avoiding a lot of features of the camera to do so (though they'd be applied only to the embedded JPEG). This isn't a sports shooting camera in raw, IMHO. You'll hit the buffer limit real fast. Set for optimal image quality, you may have only a one second buffer in raw. This, if anything, is one clear difference between the D7000 and the D300s. Even a short delay in hitting the buffer can be meaningful to the burst shooter.
--- Koniec cytatu ---
i bardzo wazna uwaga odnosnie doboru szkiel :)
--- Cytuj ---Resolution
Yep, 16mp is better than 12mp. Mostly. Poor lenses start showing just how poor they are with this level of pixel density, and you definitely need to watch to make sure that diffraction doesn't start robbing back much of what you gained. For a 19" print, for example, you'll see clear diffraction impacts starting at somewhere around f/9 or f/10, depending upon your viewing distance and eyesight. The 18-105mm kit lens is not quite as good a performer as the 16-85mm DX lens. You can't tell that on the 12mp cameras, but on the D7000 there is a small, but discernible difference. That's not to say the 18-105mm is bad on the D7000. It isn't. It's just that the 16-85mm delivers a tiny bit more performance (as does the 17-55m). I've got a couple of cheap third-party lenses still hanging around, and they look cheap on the D7000 ;~). So I'll just put it this way: don't buy the D7000 for it's resolution and then wimp out on lenses. You'll achieve nothing that you couldn't get on the 12mp cameras. If you're going to invest in more pixels, you need to invest in good lenses. The 18-105mm is at the bottom of the scale of what I'd use on the D7000. The D7000 is going to force me to go back and re-evaluate a lot of lenses. The 18-200mm starts to look more like a mediocre performer on the D7000, as do several other lenses. If you're buying the camera for resolution, you need to look seriously at your lenses, just as D3x users have to.
--- Koniec cytatu ---
Blister:
--- Cytat: Amon w Kwiecień 11, 2011, 12:25:06 pm ---grip+ładowarka+bateria = 1900zł, to lepiej kupić D300s i dodatkowy akumulator za 180zł :). Nie widzę problemu coby przy 1-2 kreskach baterii wymienić baterię na zapasową, co trwa jakieś 5-10s. Ale co kto tam lubi...
kichu - na prawdę to duży problem wymienić baterię na zapas?
--- Koniec cytatu ---
Ładujesz do koszyka 8 eneloop'ów i masz full speed ;)
JIMIX:
Oh, for fuck's sake, Kichu...
Not much of a discovery, is it? Looks like someone's shooting with a cheap set of glass and says eureka! - I found the pixel pitch to be as demanding or even exceeding the one to be found in the D3X. Goddamn... And all that bitching about the camera taking a good deal of physical abuse somewhere out there on location while shooting. C'mon! Are you all guys such freaks who don't give a flying fuck if they bang the camera against a wall or drag it over the tarmac just because it's a mgnesium fucking alloy? Don't give me such ball. Obviously, it may as well happen that you inadvertently drop it or smash it with something but... let's get serious: truth being told, most of us, (if not all) handles their cams with PROPER care. We know the financial load that's been put into it and so we treat our gear properly, and even wrap the enviromentally-sealled D3-series in a Hydrophobia-like coats! :D I didn't see anyone I know turn their D3-series into a hammer, nor anyone throwing it carelessly around or even down on the airstrip grass for it might get some dirt on the pentaprism housing :D So, please, don't blow the problem of the build quality out of proportions. I see this way overblown here. Like I said, it MAY happen that it accidentally slips out of your sweaty palms during an airshow, but other that that, we're all rather tripod-shooters (landscapes, astro) or portrait/studio shooters.
And one more thing. I can't get rid of the overwhelming feeling that the person you quoted was seriously in the amateur-tech-geek kinda league. Those guys are constantly whining about how bad this or that is. They're never fond of anything. The fact that they're so much concerned about the ruggedness of their equipment, while the truth may be they've never been in a ruggedness-demanding environment, let's me conclude that they know jack-shit about what they're actually complaining about. Five or more years ago I also KNEW that a camera must by tough, solid like a rock. But... get a life, will ya? How many times would you REALLY need an all-metal sealled body that can withstand a megatone explosion? I'll tel you: presumably never. Unless you are a war correspondent put by your editor in the midst of frontline violence. All those images of American-soldiers-photographers, equipped with their F1s and F2s come to mind now, huh? :)
About the buffer. It's really not as big as in the D300/300s - agreed. But if you know your trade, you know what you shoot and WHEN to shoot it, you'll never get annoyed even a bit, by the D7000 buffer. Unless... obviously, unless you really have to bring 30.000 snaps from, say, Moscow MAKS, with the Su-27 thus "filmed" at 5 or 8fps from the moment it retracted the gear to the moment it set the flaps for landing. Well, congratulations on that kinda thinking.
The D7000, my friends, is more than most of you out there will EVER need to shoot good pix and shoot them well. So, instead of crying over how my D7000 looses in the fps/buffer race with the D300(s), work on your skills, on you technique, on your artistry and craftsmanship.
Regards to you all :)
BNOVY:
tego jeszcze niebyło 8) :P
Co się stało JIMIX'owi, żę ma 3 posty? :o
JIMIX:
--- Cytat: BNOVY w Kwiecień 14, 2011, 02:00:22 pm ---tego jeszcze niebyło 8) :P
Co się stało JIMIX'owi, żę ma 3 posty? :o
--- Koniec cytatu ---
A nic. Tak fanaberia ;)
Nawigacja
[#] Następna strona
Idź do wersji pełnej