Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 7, 2007, 8:40 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Kendal, Cumbria UK: the English Lake District
Posts: 60
Default

I absolutely understand about the need for high iso in sports/action photography, but surely not everyone who obsesses about the subject is an avid sports snapper?! I sometimes think that people fixate on iso numbers because getting hot under the collar about resolution, white balance etc is too complicated....

Maybe I just need a coffee....
slioch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 9:11 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 18
Default

LOL you could very well be right!

Having a cup of coffee myself right now.
seanile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 10:54 AM   #13
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

On the high ISO front:

I think there are3 reasons why this comes up so much:

1. Target market. The d300 seems marketed toward the sports/wildlife/photojournalist (higher frame rate, pro focus system, high iso performance) - so it's only natural those topics are discussed so much. ISO performance is discussed because it's very easy to see and test. AF precision and performance is not easy to see and test. So it's more difficult to discuss. You'll see a LOT of that discussion when sports shooters review the camera.

2. People in general are using cameras differently then with film. There are a LOT more people taking available light shots. The difference now is you have people that want the quick/easy solution - they don't want to take the time to learn proper flash techniques so the flash shots they do take look poor. And they don't want to deal with tripods and other supports. So cranking up the ISO allows them to take their snapshots wihout flash or tripod use. I'm not saying they're totally wrong.

3. Finally - people need easy comparison metrics. They need quick easy categories by which to compare selections. Megapixels was one - Camera A is better than B because it has more MP. Same here. Camera C is better than D because it has better high ISO performance. It's something quick and easy to latch onto and compare. It's much tougher to compare & debate ergonomics, color rendition, quality of focus, and the thousand other little things that really make a difference.

So, bottom line? THere is a target audience for the camera that does indeed care about high ISO. ANd then there is a number of other users that just want SOME metric that convinces them camera A is the best camera on the market (i.e. they're terrified of buying a camera that isn't the absolute best). And then of course there are Canonites and Nikonians that absolutely must try to prove that their manufacturer has the best camera:G
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 11:33 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 18
Default

Right you are John.. But I am loving this camera for its high speed focus ability, its color rendition, ease of programming, WB function, etc etc etc... used to shoot strictly Nikon.. IE film to a CP995 - then switched to a Canon 20D.. Now back to Nikon D300.. Expensive mistake I made going to that 20D.. :?
seanile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2007, 3:04 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

My perspective on the WB issue comes from a need to do fast shutter photography without flash. I appreciate that there are a number of people out there who must have the latest toy and use less than one quarter let alone one half of the available functions but not me. I am trackside at 6am or 9pm during endurance racing and the best shots are at daybreak and dusk. Having a WB that is effective prolongs the period in which I can take photos and my chances of getting a really good photograph. Flash isn't an option since it is banned - too dangerous for the drivers. Here's just one example of the type of work chosen at random. It isn't just at this time of day either; low heavy cloud combined with cars going by at 180mph require a high shutter speed which means upping the iSO to levels that, at the moment, do not give a pleasing (nor saleable or printable)end result. Hence my joy on seeing the results from the new D3. I still haven't yet seen any photos on the internet of, for example, indoor basketball which indicate whether the D300 is as effective, but given the sensor size I doubt that it is.
Attached Images
 
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2007, 6:43 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 18
Default

You are right in tht the D300 will not equal the D3.. The D3 is a pro camera, whereas the D300 is a prosumer - suitable for those advanced amateurs, and pros who do not need all the bells and whistles a D3 has to offer. You can check out more on the D3 at www.sportsshooter.com where they have complete reviews, and a forum thread on the new D3. Sortsshooter is for sports (pros) shooters, and students only, and you need a sponsor to join, however, anyone can go in and read up, or view the shots.
seanile is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:50 AM.