Must be the new Nikon 'product diversification' strategy. Some kind of commercial management technique.
So what keeps you all from buying a Nikon.
 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 46
Must be the new Nikon 'product diversification' strategy. Some kind of commercial management technique.
So what keeps you all from buying a Nikon.
Last edited by richardb; 23-02-2013 at 10:52pm.
LOL! .... reading his diatribe reveals an even more humorous aspect to his level of competence(as a photographic commentator).
He claims that D800/D4/D600 all have the same AF systems ... based on what information(I hear you ask) ... the fact that they all share the same new styled Auto-Manual switch.
With the newer Nikons the old style CSM switch at the front lower LHS, used to switch between Continuous/Single/Manual focus modes.
So based on this important new feature that Nikon has adopted across the board on the upper end DSLRs(D7100 now included) .. they all have the same AF system!!
Never mind that the D600 uses the older tech CAM4800 AF module first seen in the D7000, and then the D5200 .. nor the fact that the D800 and D4(and now the D7100) use the CAM3500 AF module.
And the fact that the D600 only has 39 AF points, where the D800 and D4 have 51 AF points!! .. No, no, no .. because they all use this new styled Auto/Manual switch, it's only logical that they must all use the same AF sytems!
Good one Ken ... most perceptive of you there old chap.
FWIW: this new styled Auto-Manual switch is much better once you get used to it, so it's only logical that Nikon adopts it across the board.
Oh, and there's propbably no need to make mention of the fact that he blathers on about MP/s processing rates across the range of cameras he lists!
His analysis of the similarities of certain camera internals is based on how many megapixels are transferred to the memory buffer every second!
and then there's this doozey of incomprehensible garbled diarrhea (which I need to place in a quotation):
If someone can explain .. in plain ol English what this is supposed to be trying to explain?16, 24 or 36 MP is all the same. Nikon's simply varied them to segment the market. 10 MP is more than enough for anything. Nikon got the frame rate up in the D4 by reducing resolution instead of putting more processing in the D4, and put way too many pixels in the D800 to attract computer guys who love processing. Honestly, 24 MP is ideal, and we only get that in the D600. I always set my D800 down in resolution; throughput goes to pot trying to work on hundreds of 36 MP images, unless of course you're a guy who builds computers.
firstly we read that 10Mp is more than enough. Somewhere down the track we read that 24Mp is ideal, but that Nikon's idea of enhancing performance from the D4 was to down res the camera to 16Mp instead of adding processing power.
So which is it.. is 10Mp more than enough, or is 16Mp too little now .. obviously 24Mp is the ideal number, so 16Mp is not actually as over inflated as a 10Mp reference is supposed to be telling us that it is .. and as for those more than enough 10Mp .. why the hell would you purchase a camera with 36Mp if anything over 10Mp is starting to get beyond reasonable management issues?
Surely he knew that the D800 that he purchased had 36Mp .. didn't he?... but to down res a 36Mp camera deliberately simply because he's not a computer building geek!!
He's obviously having difficulty trying to work out what he wants in the space of only a minute or so ..ie. in the time it takes to write a simple short paragraph ..... would you trust someone to offer you advice when they're confusing themselves to this level?
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
Thank you knumbnutz. I am envious though that he got to use a D4 and I haven't ....but I am relieved I don't need to sell a kidney to buy a D4 now - A D600 will do as it is now officially identicalOriginally Posted by knumbnutz
Last edited by MattNQ; 24-02-2013 at 12:31am.
Hmmmm, I'm happy to find myself in a position where I don't have to disagree with Arthur
If you want a name to add to your stable of decent information contributors, then wrt Nikon, I can recommend 'ThatNikonGuy' - Matt Granger, cheers Deb
Well proof right there that you're .... ummm ..... one of a kind!Hmmmm, I'm happy to find myself in a position where I don't have to disagree with Arthur
(even I disagree with myself more often than not, so you're currently trailing the field here).
Oh my!!!!
After having googled that name I am of the opinion that he may just be KR's illegitimate 1/2 brother.
As an indication of the pearls of wisdom this guy is capable of just have a look at two pages from his web site.
This one where he urges you to buy your gear from overseas ( think KR click through revenue earning ) and then this page from his site where he extols the virtues of buying gear locally to have warranty and NPS support to aid the recovery from his self confessed stupidity.
Last edited by I @ M; 24-02-2013 at 9:33am.
AndrewNikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.
I don't mind Matt. He's not the best reviewer out there, but he gives you concise info and at least it's not convoluted nor contradictory from one line to the next.
See edited post above, self contradictory just took on a whole new meaning.
Ah! OK .. I haven't seen all that much of his stuff, nor even his site .. until a few moments ago. I've only ever seen him on some youtube videos explaining this and that and comparing that against this and that.
Only just now had a quick look at three of his video reviews/info pieces directly from his website.
The D4/24-70 escapade is hilarious .. didn't screw down his tripod head!(why was it even unscrewed in the first place!!!)
Watched the X300 bag review in pieces here and there ... I needs me one of them!
And also watched the D7100 informational video. A bit premature me thinks, but everything he's explained in that video seemed logical.
One indiscretion doesn't make for a lifetime of negativity me thinks ... and if he's previously espoused the virtues of buying cheaper o/s and only recently seen the worth of buying the expensive stuff locally, I can't see any problem with this.
We've all done it to a degree, where we may purchase one item from o/s due to the price difference, but then purchase something else locally due to the risk factor in something going wrong.
In simple terms.. he is a dill.
I am a noob but I know the difference & I certainly havent got time to read someones rubbish that only shoots saturated JPGS
- - - Updated - - -
Matt is ok.. yes he has said himself he is clumsy and he has also stated that they adds help (think he meant as in supplement his time for making video's).Oh my!!!!
After having googled that name I am of the opinion that he may just be KR's illegitimate 1/2 brother.
As an indication of the pearls of wisdom this guy is capable of just have a look at two pages from his web site.
This one where he urges you to buy your gear from overseas ( think KR click through revenue earning ) and then this page from his site where he extols the virtues of buying gear locally to have warranty and NPS support to aid the recovery from his self confessed stupidity.
I will say this though, I have learnt alot from Matt compared to other reviewers.. he tells it like it is and does make a verbal note that its his opinion on certain things only.
Cheers
Wazza
---------------------
NO!! He is much worse because people quote him as a reliable source, and he is not.
I just edited out all KR references used on a Wikipedia page to justify some points about photography,
then posted the link from above of the talk page of the article to explain my actions.
KR is very dangerous to the uninformed.
regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff
I met him yesterday in Brisbane, a great bloke.. his channel that focuses more on technique and how to shoot well has been very helpful and interesting.
Perhaps because he has an incredibly large following overseas and especially in America? It would make sense to recommend an international camera store as a good place to buy from.. I have purchased a lot from B&H as I couldn't get the gear here in Australia at all. I don't see any contradiction by Matt recommending DCW for Australians. Indeed if I may, Ausphotography has B&H as a site sponsor and I'd imagine some local Australian camera stores too and that doesn't give rise to any 'contradiction'. In any case, I don't see why his 'recommended' page is the appropriate way to judge him - make your own mind up after watching his videos.
Last edited by Sifor; 24-02-2013 at 12:47pm.
Cheers, Troy
D800; AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G; AF-S 50mm 1.8G; SB-910; ||
120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM 'S'; APO Teleconverter 2x DG ||
Phantom 2; H32D Gimbal; 5.8Ghz FPV LCD GS
matt's sold out
KR is a danger as far as im concerned...when I first got back into the photography and was looking at DSLRs...I found his site and was seriously taking note of his recommendations ( Ill admit what many other wont)..its not until more experience and learning that you realise that his opinion can be taken with a dose of salt...his lens database does have some merit though..even for looking at previous incarnations of various lenses
Cheers and my name is Steve
OMD Em1...Now with two lenses !
http://www.flickr.com/photos/steve_tompsett/
http://tommo.smugmug.com/
Warren, it was only today that I really learned of him and after a look at his various sites/video channels I was rather struck by the incongruity of his posts.
It rather reminded me of KR in the way he was stating two rather distinctly different ideals.
I'm sure that there is value for some in his reviews and videos as well as his workshops and I certainly don't blame him for having click through advertising revenue on his site, after all as you said, he deserves to have something in return for his efforts. I guess he is just like all of us where we have to balance our time and budgets between or day jobs, hobbies and home and family.
Troy, as I said above ^ --- and I certainly have nothing with people purchasing items from overseas as many of the prices are far better than Australia, I just found it ironic that the ads for o/seas stores abound on his site and then he recommends that Australians should buy local but I can't see any links anywhere to local suppliers. I did go back and look at quite a few of his pages on his sites and a couple of his videos, I am sure that some will find them helpful and I am definitely not judging him purely on one or two pages.
It was all simply in the context of the discussion about KR and I found similarities between KR and MG in their approaches to their presence on the web..
All good, but do take the time to watch some of his videos, you might come across something helpful or interesting.
Such as?
I see plenty of his videos in the playlists , many about gear but when I need to know about gear I rather like to read the tech specs and then try them out for myself if I am in the market for something.
I see plenty of videos seemingly full of glitz and glam portraiture and that aint my scene and without spending valuable photography time pouring over all his offerings I don't see anything that jumps and hits me as a "must watch".
Do you have any favourites that you can recommend?
Well, if you feel like watching a 20 minute video, I found this one interesting as being able to see how the strobes are set up and positioned for a desired effect - from start to finish - helps a lot in the learning process for someone who has never done it before.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0TItX5uCCI
Fair enough, but others do appreciate and enjoy watching these kinds of videos.
We're probably going too far off topic discussing TNG though. Regarding KR, I have only really used his information for looking up the specs of older lenses like weight and filter thread size.
Last edited by Sifor; 24-02-2013 at 4:26pm.
I thought his comparison between the 24-70/2.8 lenses was very reasonably done.
His final verdict was about what one would predict anyhow .. in that the Sigma and Tamron both have very good ability given their price points.
Many other reviewers would simply ridicule the two non OEM lenses simply because the name doesn't match the camera's branding
I'm not convinced with MG's bokeh video tho. The Nikon 50/1.2 is an ok lens, and it's advantage is simply in the fact that it's 1/3-1/2 stop faster than the f/1.4 lenses. But it's bokeh rendering is actually one of it's weak points. Bokeh is not about blur itself, but about the quality of the blur .. the little details that make bokeh .. well, bokeh(and not just blur).
Sigma 50/1.4 has better bokeh, if my failing memory serves me well ... I think the 50/1.4G also has better bokeh rendering.
So in this case I'm not entirely convinced by his reviewing system.
I first noticed TNG when he did his Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC review/comparo about a year ago.
I don't find him hard to watch or read(if he ever concentrated on writing stuff too).
In fact I've bookmarked his site to watch him a bit more if I ever find the free time to do so.
As for this idea that he's sold out(to cameras in general) position .. I can totally understand this realignment away from a singular manufacturer. With the general consensus that it's not what you shoot with, but how well you do it, there should be no reason for him to simply review Nikon gear.
I can see his point as well Arthur...but I doubt he would have been as successful if he wasn't at first called the Nikon Guy.. I've no doubt that the channel has opened up new opportunities for him and he see brand diversification as the way forward..and of course that "Nikon Guy" title is a bit limiting
I liked the 24-70 shoot out as well as the 50mm and the 70-200mm shoot outs
I watch far too may Youtube vids and not doing it myself....its counter productive
The highlighting in the quoted text is mine.
I fully realise what others may like to watch and if they find his style of photography interesting and his videos help them then all is good but seeing as you were advising me that I might find something interesting I was merely replying about my viewing habits
I will have a look later and report back, thanks for the recommendation.
I don't think it is too far off topic given the similarities between their "styles" of web presence.
May I suggest that instead of having a look at KR and his summation of lenses, the specifications of which I feel that he may have "borrowed" from elsewhere rather than actually have used or even seen, that you have a look at Roland Vinks page which is a very handy factual resource.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
