Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 87 of 87

Thread: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

  1. #81
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Planet Nikon
    Posts
    21,905

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Quote Originally Posted by Prismatic
    64 flashes in one group or in 64 groups? I don't think there's a limit to the numbers of flash in a group.
    There's only 4 groups, 3 channels, I forgot how I arrived at 64 flash sets already.



    Quote Originally Posted by Prismatic
    Among the Nikon flashes I've used with a D100, I have a pretty low rating for the SB-80DX. The SB-28DX was a pretty good flash though.
    Actually, I'd have preferred very much the 80DX over the 28DX having used both, the 28DX don't make me feel too confident with it's build & design.

  2. #82

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Dunno if this has been added before but, I think one of the pros is :

    Value for Money for body models d70 /d200/ d2X.

  3. #83

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Hi Guys, thanks for all the posts. Just a friendly reminder that this is a NIKON Only thread. Please discuss the Pros and Cons of Nikon. Lets try not to make this a N Vs C thread. Thanks.

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Since ESPN has discussed on the flash, I'll take the rest

    Quote Originally Posted by mpenza
    Just read that The worlds first binocular with an internal image stabilising system was Fujinon's Stabiscope introduced in 1980. The Fujinon breakthrough was based on stabilising not the entire binocular but just the optics.. Not too sure how similar this is to Canon IS or Nikon VR though.
    IIRC, first on camera (a P&S) was 1994, with the Nikon Zoom 700 VR.

    Quote Originally Posted by mpenza
    This Sigma lens is slow and big though... quite a bit slower than Canon and Nikon EF-S and DX equivalent and pretty expensive. Still it's an innovative bold move.
    Hardly. Big is impossible to ignore unless someone manage to change the laws of physics or come up totally with a revolutionary design. Slow? Again debatable. Expensive? When it was 1k (now increase to 1.2k?), it is no more significantly expensive than EF-S, with significantly larger circle of light.

    In any case, he said:
    Quote Originally Posted by yanyewke
    DX lenses.. I would say it's more mandatory than an innovative lead, unless Nikon wants to go full frame
    Mandatory? That is a totally false statement; they can produce ultra-wides without resorting to a reduced circle of light; even the Nikon lens catelogue had mentioned it. Don't forget that before DX came out, there was no one producing "for digital" lenses; no EF-S, no Di II, etc. Ironically, with the new assumed definition of DX (Nikon never did define what it means) by those on DPR, 1.0x crop cameras need DX more than crop frame cameras...
    Last edited by Watcher; 28th February 2006 at 10:45 AM.

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    IIRC, first on camera (a P&S) was 1994, with the Nikon Zoom 700 VR.
    Probably, it's to test water or the thought then was that SLR lenses don't really need VR cos of the (generally) wider aperture After seeing the success of Canon's IS lenses, Nikon decided to follow suit with their VR SLR lenses (nothing wrong - Canon might have started thinking abt IS after this Nikon Zoom 700 VR too and KM started on AS after seeing the success of Canon and Nikon).

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    Hardly. Big is impossible to ignore unless someone manage to change the laws of physics or come up totally with a revolutionary design. Slow? Again debatable. Expensive? When it was 1k (now increase to 1.2k?), it is no more significantly expensive than EF-S, with significantly larger circle of light.
    Yup. It's cheaper than Nikon DX "equivalent" in focal lengths too (the Sigma DC equivalent is cheaper than this 12-24 though)! I believe the big advantages of DX and EF-S lenses are smaller size and lower cost.
    Last edited by mpenza; 28th February 2006 at 12:00 PM.

  6. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Quote Originally Posted by mpenza
    Yup. It's cheaper than Nikon DX "equivalent" in focal lengths too (the Sigma DC equivalent is cheaper than this 12-24 though)! I believe the big advantages of DX and EF-S lenses are smaller size and lower cost.
    Actually, the price of Sigma 12-24 went up not because of cost, to me, they see an advantage of able to maximize profit since the crop frame lenses is around the same price and they can sell the "advantage"
    Last edited by Watcher; 28th February 2006 at 06:18 PM.

  7. #87

    Default Re: All the Pros and Cons of Nikon

    Wow its a huge load of info that i really didnt know about nikon. Thanks alot for posting guys. ESP thanks to all the masters and shifus of photography.

    Cheers

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •