Dave Williams
Well-known member
It was meant to be no comments but as you have I will.
I think if you read it again Jourdaj was more than aware that the 400f4.6 is the number one choice !
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Tell Nikon what you want (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Duke Leto
- Start date
I think if you read it again Jourdaj was more than aware that the 400f4.6 is the number one choice !
|).Chachulski
New member
1) Electrical connections through macro devices (tubes & bellows)
2) Re-launch of earlier 2,000mm mirror lens
3) Re-launch of earlier 80-200mm AFS
2) Re-launch of earlier 2,000mm mirror lens
3) Re-launch of earlier 80-200mm AFS
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
Okay without over complicating the response I've listed below all those that scored 2 or more votes, I've not weighted them in accordance with peoples priorities
Here's the BF members top 8, anything else had only one vote (IMHO).
No. 1 10 votes 400/5.6 I'll assume with vr
No. 2 7 votes better noise characteristics
No. 3 6 votes 300/4 vr
No. 4 3 votes 600/5.6vr
No. 4 3 votes 400/4
No. 4 3 votes newer models!
No. 4 AF-S 80-400vr
No. 8 Nikon bodies that accept Canon Lenses
Personally I find a two of these amusing, No 1, get a 300mm/4 and stick on a 1.4, you get a 420/5.6 lens..
No.4 newer models, wait 6 months and you'll get your wish
Anyhow a bit of fun
Here's the BF members top 8, anything else had only one vote (IMHO).
No. 1 10 votes 400/5.6 I'll assume with vr
No. 2 7 votes better noise characteristics
No. 3 6 votes 300/4 vr
No. 4 3 votes 600/5.6vr
No. 4 3 votes 400/4
No. 4 3 votes newer models!
No. 4 AF-S 80-400vr
No. 8 Nikon bodies that accept Canon Lenses
Personally I find a two of these amusing, No 1, get a 300mm/4 and stick on a 1.4, you get a 420/5.6 lens..
No.4 newer models, wait 6 months and you'll get your wish
Anyhow a bit of fun
Chalky W
Well-known member
just for fun my 3 would be
1) lower prices
2) lower prices
3) and lets not forget lower prices
really though
I have wondered why 'digital noise' is an issue with any manufacturer, surely the technology is there to make 'noise' redundant these days but I admit I'm ignorant of the technical issues, but you'd have thought......
I also think that (Duke, in response) 6 months between upgrades is too short a period, lets have a really decent upgrade every 18 months - 2 years so that we (the customer) don't get that over whelming feeling of 'bugger, if only I'd waited 2 months longer', I've got a D200 sat here that is gathering dust - if only I'd waited 2 months longer... If you can upgrade in 6 months then you knew you can upgrade in 6 months. I know, profits to be made.
Just my 2 pence worth.
1) lower prices
2) lower prices
3) and lets not forget lower prices
really though
I have wondered why 'digital noise' is an issue with any manufacturer, surely the technology is there to make 'noise' redundant these days but I admit I'm ignorant of the technical issues, but you'd have thought......
I also think that (Duke, in response) 6 months between upgrades is too short a period, lets have a really decent upgrade every 18 months - 2 years so that we (the customer) don't get that over whelming feeling of 'bugger, if only I'd waited 2 months longer', I've got a D200 sat here that is gathering dust - if only I'd waited 2 months longer... If you can upgrade in 6 months then you knew you can upgrade in 6 months. I know, profits to be made.
Just my 2 pence worth.
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
Couldn't agree more, my last slr was a Contax 167mt, bought it in the late 80's and used it until it was sold in 2006. Never did I consider upgrading it.....
Saying that though the biggest upgrades were in the film so I suppose that there were updates.
Ha maybe we should have D-SLR's that you can upgrade components such as the CMOS device etc.......
Saying that though the biggest upgrades were in the film so I suppose that there were updates.
Ha maybe we should have D-SLR's that you can upgrade components such as the CMOS device etc.......
Yes, you get a 420/5.6 lens, but with the 1.4x TC AF-speed will decrese and you will get a slight loss in sharpness. Not much but there is a small difference, specially with the speed. And don´t forget that such a lens are probably weather-proofed and with a TC that is not possible.
// Daniel
Dave Williams
Well-known member
The D300 was discounted in exactly the same way. Remember, the UK market opens at an higher price than say the US price. The discounters start to open their bids here and before long you have a stable price.
Without a doubt the D300s is a tweek rather than a new model but I think it will be the latest DX model for at least 12 months . It was enough to encourage me, a D200 owner to upgrade but was never aimed at current D300 owners I'm sure.
Time will tell though !
gvca1
Well-known member
That's what's fascinating with the move from analog to digital, and not just in photography. The same is true in audio, for example. The laws of physics apply pretty much the same regardless of whether you are working with analog or digital hardware. Noise in digital detectors mimics noise in film, although the characteristic look is a bit different than film grain. Yes, as CCD's or CMOS imagers improve, the SNR gets better, but you can't cheat mother nature.
The fathers of information theory like Shannon and Nyquist did their seminal work decades before digital photography was even imagined, but their mathematics still applies.
Jim
Jim,
Are you saying atmosphere conditions can affect digital recording?
Noise in photography is exactly what you say, its ‘old film grain’, but produced by the sensor in poor light conditions, under/over-exposure and excessive enlargement. It is an inherent digital fault.
Noise should not be apparent to the human eye if reproduced/viewed within the parameters of resolution and enlargement of the sensor and output device.
Your digital sound sentence is fascinating, because I’ve just bought a classic Zappa album DVD, in which they dissect the sound tracks, and some of the analogue sounds still cannot be reproduced digitally.
Digital colour still has problems matching certain film colours.
Are you saying atmosphere conditions can affect digital recording?
Noise in photography is exactly what you say, its ‘old film grain’, but produced by the sensor in poor light conditions, under/over-exposure and excessive enlargement. It is an inherent digital fault.
Noise should not be apparent to the human eye if reproduced/viewed within the parameters of resolution and enlargement of the sensor and output device.
Your digital sound sentence is fascinating, because I’ve just bought a classic Zappa album DVD, in which they dissect the sound tracks, and some of the analogue sounds still cannot be reproduced digitally.
Digital colour still has problems matching certain film colours.
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
not noticeable, I think that most people with a 300/4 will normally have a 1.4 bolted on as its a negligible addition
Agree if you were producing A3 prints that it may be detectable but for web / A4 reproductions you won't be able to tell.
The 300/4 doesn't have a weatherseal on the mounting ring so the addition of the TC wouldn't change its capabilities
stoop
Well-known member
Actually bought a Nikkor 300 f4 on Monday. Had been umming and arghing between it and the 80-400. Have to admit I was a bit jealous of the Canon 400mm f5.6 for about the same price in the display case across from Nikon (It was sitting next to the chunkier Canon 300 f4 -which was also 30000yen more exy, but they both looked nice). I don't really want to spend 50000 yen on a TC. I'm yet to really test my new get but when I do I think I'll stick to it as a 300mm and wait for that AF-S Nikkor 400mm F5.6 IF-ED VR next year. Anyway I hope I'll improve on the quality of my overhead shots for the time being.... It's nice and new and I really like the big box.
Last edited:
Dave Williams
Well-known member
Inside information ???!!!!
Some say it is noticeable and some say it is not...and as you say for web and A4-sized prints maybe it is not so important, but I would´t buy a lens for only that use, often I like to go up to A3 and sometimes A2. I think image vice there are small to very small change in quality, but it definatly slow down AF speed and accuracy, not much, but there are a significant change.
And for the weather-seal, I haven´t used the 300/4, so that was new to me, but who knows what Nikon has up their sleeves with the new 300/4 VR?
// Daniel
Similar threads
