| Moderated by: chrisbet, |
|
|
| Rumors again - D5? D400 | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted by TomOC: Thu Dec 26th, 2013 12:40 | 1st Post |
| Well, the 2014 rumor mill has heated up... What do you think of a D5? D400s or sx  http://petapixel.com/2013/12/26/rumor-nikon-possibly-launching-d400-d4x-january-17th/ http://nikonrumors.com/2013/12/25/nps-japan-stopped-selling-nikon-d4-cameras.aspx/
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
| Posted by Eric: Thu Dec 26th, 2013 13:07 | 2nd Post |
TomOC wrote:Well, the 2014 rumor mill has heated up... The D3 was launched in Dec 2007. It was updated two years later in Oct 2009. Then replaced with the D4 in Jan 2012. Based on this eventline it would not surprise me to see an updated D4 sometime ....now. But ...doesn't time fly? I had hardly got use to my D3 being a grandfather...now it will be a great grandfather...and still at the spritely age of c.50,000 exposures. But, there is life in the old dog yet!
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by jk: Thu Dec 26th, 2013 13:14 | 3rd Post |
| D5 not really interested. D400 somewhat interested or interested. I expect that the D400 will have very high take up so it will interest Nikon more as their last years financial reports were not very good.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Judith: Fri Dec 27th, 2013 01:34 | 4th Post |
| PLEASSSSSE - D400!!!!
|
| Posted by jk: Fri Dec 27th, 2013 07:56 | 5th Post |
| I think that if there is a new professional DSLR at the high end then it will be a D4X rather than a D5 but I may be wrong.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by TomOC: Fri Dec 27th, 2013 16:04 | 6th Post |
| I agree...D4x or D5 not interesting at all...if I need a tank, I pull out the D3, if I need hi res, the D800 D400...very interested (I still use the D300 a LOT) ...but I must admit I use the Fuji's even more...
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
| Posted by Eric: Fri Dec 27th, 2013 16:13 | 7th Post |
| On the basis that I have a history of making definitive statements that never come to fruition..... There will not be a D400 this year!!! 
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Robert: Fri Dec 27th, 2013 17:15 | 8th Post |
Nice one Eric! 
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by novicius: Fri Dec 27th, 2013 22:42 | 9th Post |
| What would be special about a D400 ?
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by Robert: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 01:04 | 10th Post |
| The DX00 series are very popular, The D100 was a bit basic, but it was a competent camera in it's day. The D200 which I use as my prime camera is very good. The D300 and D300s are said to be an improvement although I am unconvinced that it was such an improvement. To me it wasn't worth trading my D200's in and shelling out for new bodies given I am more than happy with the results from the D200's. The D400 is billed to be a significant improvement in line with and possibly exceeding the quality of the rest of the range, build quality and features, a sort of scaled down D4 without the D4 price tag. I don't believe the D300 was anything like a scaled down D3, it was just a slight upgrade of the D200, which in my opinion is why there is room for such a significant upgrade. All that said, IF I were to get another camera body it would be FX. I have always regarded the DX sensor as a temporary expedient while Nikon discovered how to make a proper sensor (FX). I see a D3 in my bag one day, perhaps wishful thinking but I am having lunch today with my buddy who supplies most of my gear nowadays and he tells me he has a 'rough' D3 in at the moment, so I may have a play... (Rough to him means it has a scratch on the bottom and the corners are rubbed.) I could live with a scratch on the bottom and rubbed corners for the quality of images from the D3! :thumbsup:
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Judith: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 01:44 | 11th Post |
| I also have a D200 and feel the same way as Robert about the D300. I like the size and weight of this range. The FX cameras are just too big and heavy for me and I hate the "feel" of the D7000. I borrowed one once and kept getting cramp in my hand from the size of it! I think the D600 must be a similar size to the D7000 as I didn't like it much when I had a play recently in a shop. I just want a much improved version of the D200, which is still a perfectly good camera but is rubbish in low light compared the the latest cameras. PS Thanks, Eric - hopefully your track record will stand us in good stead! Now, we just need Ray to buy a D300s...
|
| Posted by Eric: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 08:46 | 12th Post |
novicius wrote:What would be special about a D400 ? The D300 was always regarded as the pinnacle of the DX bodies. It had the durability, features and speed of use of a 'pro' body but with the DX sensor. It enabled those who needed extra telephoto reach to use FX lenses and gain the 1.5x advantage. The D300 was launched alongside the D3 and although it's IQ never matched the D3, it was for many a classic. It didn't surprise me that until now it's never been replaced. Although it did, like the D3, have an 's' upgrade. Why Nikon never launched a D400 when the D4 was launched, I don't know. Instead they seemed to prefer to release consumer DX bodies. I suppose the D7100 is the nearest we have gotten to a pro DX body. But despite having some of the features and performance of a pro body it still lags behind with buffer capacity and maybe a few other features. Whether Nikon believes that the D7100 is all that's needed for a pro DX body, remains to be seen. Most people wanting a D400...simply want D4 performance on DX sensor.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Eric: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 09:05 | 13th Post |
Robert wrote:The DX00 series are very popular, The D100 was a bit basic, but it was a competent camera in it's day. The D200 which I use as my prime camera is very good. The D300 and D300s are said to be an improvement although I am unconvinced that it was such an improvement. To me it wasn't worth trading my D200's in and shelling out for new bodies given I am more than happy with the results from the D200's. I actually thought there was a noticeable improvement in the D300 over the D200 in terms of noise reduction. Unfortunately it was over shadowed by the D3 which was significantly better ....because if it's FX sensor with same MPs. I always found that an equivalently cropped D3 image was as good as the image out of the D300. For this reason alone, I sold the D300, to decomplex my equipment choices. My experience with the D7000 has been a mixed bag. It was bought as a lightweight walk around camera and as such it's been used with lightweight DX lenses. The results are ok ...but not as good as the D3. Whether they would be as good or better than the D3 fast FX lenses, I cannot say. Using pro lenses with the D7000 would defeat the object of a less bulky, lighter walkaround camera...so don't intend to go that route. But arguably, as technology has moved forward, the D7000 and D7100 using the best lenses SHOULD by now, have better IQ than the D3. Trouble is....all things being equal the FX sensor with bigger pixels,will always have the edge. I am surprised more people lusting after a D400 haven't bought the D800 and cropped !
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Eric: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 09:08 | 14th Post |
Eric wrote:Robert wrote:
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by jk: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 12:06 | 15th Post |
novicius wrote: What would be special about a D400 ? Imagine a DX sensor with 24MP in a D800 body but smaller and you have a potential D400. In fact I want a D5300 spec (24MP, wifi and GPS) in a D800 type (EXPEED3/4 chipset and user controls and 10pin, USB, HDMI) but in a D300/D5300 sized body.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Iain: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 10:17 | 16th Post |
Eric wrote:Robert wrote: The D800 is just a bit too slow for sporty and wildlife. I know a few guys that use it for wildlife and wish it was a bit faster and they tend to keep it in crop mode all the time. I think that if Nikon bring out a D400 they better make sure they have good stock of them as most of the Nikon users I know would be in there ordering one.
|
| Posted by Eric: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 11:54 | 17th Post |
Iain wrote:Eric wrote: Slow in what way Iain? Is the buffer speed?
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by jk: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 14:16 | 18th Post |
| The size of the image on the D800 make it less responsive for sports use.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by TomOC: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 15:04 | 19th Post |
| I pulled out the D300s for a series of shots yesterday and I still love it... No, it's NOT D800 resolution, but it increases the reach of my tele's by 50% and it makes a nice printed image up to 16x20...more than enough for my uncropped prints. Happy New Year D300 !!!
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
| Posted by jk: Wed Jan 1st, 2014 03:06 | 20th Post |
Judith wrote:I also have a D200 and feel the same way as Robert about the D300. I like the size and weight of this range. The FX cameras are just too big and heavy for me and I hate the "feel" of the D7000. I borrowed one once and kept getting cramp in my hand from the size of it! I think the D600 must be a similar size to the D7000 as I didn't like it much when I had a play recently in a shop. I just want a much improved version of the D200, which is still a perfectly good camera but is rubbish in low light compared the the latest cameras. The D600/610 and D7000/7100 are very similar bodies. The D700 is very similar to D300 and D200.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Iain: Mon Jan 6th, 2014 06:23 | 21st Post |
Eric wrote:Iain wrote: It's frame rate and buffer Eric, it's better in crop mode but still a little slow. I've played with one a few times and also talked to guys that are using the D800 . They would have been happier if it had a bigger buffer,which could be done with a firmware up grade, and 7-8 fps.
|
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Sat Jan 11th, 2014 10:41 | 22nd Post |
| I regret getting rid of my D300 with 18-200mm lens, when I got the D800 as DX has some major advantages for travel. A bag full of lenses +D800 takes up lots of room and weight on travel.
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by TomOC: Sat Jan 11th, 2014 11:52 | 23rd Post |
| I agree, Graham. The 18-200 gets a lot of criticism but it really packs a lot for it's size and weight.
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 03:49 | 24th Post |
| I have also got the new 24-120 f4 AF-S for the D800 but it is not nearly as good as my other FX lenses and at 24mm there is serious vignetting in the corners. Sharpness is not as good as my 70-24mm f2.8 AF-S. So yes I could well be interested in a D400 and my old friend 18-200 for future travel pix. Perhaps I should not tell you that my latest camera is the new Sony RX100 M2 replacing my Nikon V1 as a small very portable with you all the time camera. The results from it are amazing quality and the full HD res AVCHD movie with steady cam is very good. It even has app connection to iPhone to control the camera remotely!
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by jk: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 04:00 | 25th Post |
| I have been looking for reviews of the 24-120 f4 AFS as it is a useful walk about focal lens range. I currently use a 35-105mm f3.5 AF but it definitely shows its age when you put it on a D800 but it performs well enough on all my other camera.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 04:30 | 26th Post |
| It is as you say a good walk about lens and I find the f4 rather than f2.8 is no problem for normal photography when you shoot f8-f16 most of the time. In that range sharpness is not a problem. The vignetting at 24mm is a pain and when I got the lens I complained to my local camera shop and we tried another lens and it did the same!
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by Eric: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 06:08 | 27th Post |
Graham Whistler wrote:I have also got the new 24-120 f4 AF-S for the D800 but it is not nearly as good as my other FX lenses and at 24mm there is serious vignetting in the corners. Sharpness is not as good as my 70-24mm f2.8 AF-S. You are not alone in deserting Nikon when it comes to lightweight 'travel' cameras. Several of us have fallen for the Fuji X series system. Although not as pocketable as the Sony, the Fuji XE1 produces image quality comparable to the Nikon D3. It has functionality quirks that are alien to hardened Nikon users, but with a camera and two lenses (18-55, 55-200) lighter than the 24-70 lens it's ideal for walking about.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by highlander: Mon Jan 13th, 2014 10:06 | 28th Post |
| Given they out the D4 bits and bobs in the Df body, and made it half the price of the D4 I would be very surprised if we don't see a D5 soon I'd love a Df but alas, no funds :-(
____________________ Blog https://blythestorm.com Website http://www.blythestormphotography.com |
| Posted by Eric: Mon Jan 13th, 2014 17:56 | 29th Post |
highlander wrote:I would be very surprised if we don't see a D5 soon The D4S is on its way.... for now.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by jk: Tue Jan 14th, 2014 10:02 | 30th Post |
| I think the Df in silver and black looks strange but in black it seems to be more acceptable. Maybe I just got used to having beautiful black cameras.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Eric: Tue Jan 14th, 2014 12:10 | 31st Post |
jk wrote: I think the Df in silver and black looks strange but in black it seems to be more acceptable. Familiarity breeds ....content! 
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by richw: Wed Jan 15th, 2014 05:44 | 32nd Post |
Graham Whistler wrote:I have also got the new 24-120 f4 AF-S for the D800 but it is not nearly as good as my other FX lenses and at 24mm there is serious vignetting in the corners. Sharpness is not as good as my 70-24mm f2.8 AF-S. I have an RX100 and love it!
|
| Posted by amazing50: Wed Jan 15th, 2014 05:51 | 33rd Post |
Graham Whistler wrote: I have also got the new 24-120 f4 AF-S for the D800 but it is not nearly as good as my other FX lenses and at 24mm there is serious vignetting in the corners.I have the f/3.5 version of that lens and had to put a very thin or no UV filter to eliminate vignette at 24mm. My ring flash has the problem below 50mm.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Fri Jan 17th, 2014 04:53 | 34th Post |
| Yes I agree the Sony RX100D2 is a great little camera the quality of video is very good and the steady-cam works well making even hand held shot usable. With the Sony software it is possible compose your pix and control the camera remotely with an iPhone. I plan to get one of the new Quad-copters with gps to use the camera for aerial filming!
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 04:54 | 35th Post |
| As I have now been retired from commercial photography since 2006, a D400 DX is of far more use to me but if I was still running a busy commercial studio I would love a D4x with a D800 sized chip!
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by jk: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 08:00 | 36th Post |
Graham Whistler wrote: Yes I agree the Sony RX100D2 is a great little camera the quality of video is very good and the steady-cam works well making even hand held shot usable. Take a look at the DJI Phantom units. http://www.dji.com/tech-spec/phantom-2-spec/ They look like a fantastic toy and are nearly silent. I read that there may be some future legislation in the UK to control their use.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 11:35 | 37th Post |
| http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24709180
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Eric: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 12:16 | 38th Post |
Robert wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24709180 I've seen that video clip before but hadn't appreciated the (perhaps obvious) point about restrictions on where you can fly them. I would imagine that could restrict or complicate its usefulness for hobby or casual use?
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by amazing50: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 13:40 | 39th Post |
| A friend of mine bought a smaller version hexacopter with a GPS and mounted a GoPro camera on it. You could fly it out of sight and shut off the control box and it would return and land within a meter of it's takeoff spot. There was no live view so all shots or video are on the fly but the camera is quite sharp and has a very wide angle lens and by hovering and rotating the copter good coverage could be obtained. Small copters don't require a licence yet and this type of setup costs about $2000. This is an arial of Waterloo Ontario grabbed from a video frame. Attachment: Honey H air 4.jpg (Downloaded 18 times)
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by Robert: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 13:45 | 40th Post |
| Haven't looked into it yet but there may be a combination of Health and Safety, CAA and insurance issues which may not apply in certain circumstances, size, use and range may affect. One chap near me had his fixed wing model aircraft confiscated when it went out of range of his controller and crashed into the nearby naval dockyard where they build the nuclear subs. It was fitted with a camera... Last I heard they were considering returning the model because it was considered to be a genuine accidental occurrence.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by MaxSouthOz: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 14:24 | 41st Post |
| There was a young American guy killed with one of these recently. He flew it into himself and the rotor blades cut his throat - in front of an audience. I'm trying to Google the story. Don't hold your breath.
|
| Posted by MaxSouthOz: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 14:27 | 42nd Post |
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1_TskvUwXM
|
| Posted by jk: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 14:28 | 43rd Post |
MaxSouthOz wrote: There was a young American guy killed with one of these recently. He flew it into himself and the rotor blades cut his throat - in front of an audience.OMG that is horrible. The ones I have seen have rotor guards but I guess that they can break. Nothing in life is 100% safe.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by amazing50: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 14:59 | 44th Post |
| The roto blades on his model were about 30cm long. The hexacopters have 6 smaller blades each with much less inerta. Not saying one couldn't slit your throat, but I think it would be less likely.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by jk: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 16:27 | 45th Post |
amazing50 wrote:The roto blades on his model were about 30cm long. The hexacopters have 6 smaller blades each with much less inerta. Yes the DJI Phantom has four sets of four smaller blades. I do fancy having a go with one but it seems like an expensive toy that I will probably tire of fairly quickly.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Wed Jan 29th, 2014 16:54 | 46th Post |
| Look at u-tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8bOJDLnBjU "Quadcopter flyss Blackpool Goldern Mile" Look at all of it you will be impressed at the quality! No doubt this sort of use will soon get changes in the law to prevent danger to the public? In UK it is possible to put a quadcopter and camera in the air to do this for about £1000.00.
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by jk: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 03:40 | 47th Post |
| Very nice. Guy has good control of the helicopter. I can imagine though that there will be reports of people crashing into things causing problems with the knee-jerk reaction of these units then needing to be licensed!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 05:18 | 48th Post |
| Yes I agree, I had been very keen to get one for my railway filming as Helicopter hire on last years WHR in Snodowdonia cost me £2500 for 1.5 hrs filming! My plans to get one are now on hold. The railways would not be very happy even with such small radio controlled object hitting one of their trains full of passengers! Also to follow a train travelling at up to 25 mph you could get out of radio contact very quickly.(With GPS control the Quadcopter will return on it's own to hover over point of take off if raidio control is lost!)
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by jk: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 06:40 | 49th Post |
| If you were on the train then you could have the helicopter fly off to one side of the train and be in visual control of the unit.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 08:38 | 50th Post |
| If you film track-side on railways you have to pass PTS (Personal Track Safety) safety training every year. I asked one of the training officers about radio Quadcopters and he doubted if I would be allowed to do it. Needless to say if you did it with out asking you would be banned from that railway very quickly! Also word would pass very quickly and no doubt the railways would stop stocking my DVDs in their shops! I know quite a few professional photographers are starting to use them, also they used one in a recent "Top Gear" BBC film. The slightly larger Quadcopters will carry a pro SLR with gimballed mount and full use of most controls on the camera.
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by amazing50: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 09:50 | 51st Post |
Graham Whistler wrote: I know quite a few professional photographers are starting to use them, also they used one in a recent "Top Gear" BBC film. Slightly larger is a lot more money. It takes practice even with the GPS guided machines and a slip on a big copter landing can easily cost more than a small rig. From my limited experience with a small copter I can envision lots of good shots that could be taken of trains and cut into your other footage. The latest sport cams have good quality video in Hi Def and some are offering lens choices.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by Eric: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 13:43 | 52nd Post |
| Really liked the images that the Blackpool Flyer captured. Raises two questions in my mind.... As has already been mentioned the ability to use it to maximum benefit on projects, without retape or Elf&safety blocking effective use. But secondly, there is arguably the invasion of an individual's privacy to consider. I am not normally one who worries about these sort of PC things but watching those people on top of the tower, I wondered how I would feel having some device like that peering at me anonymously?
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 14:09 | 53rd Post |
| The rate of climb at the tower was very impressive unless it was speeded up of course... 518ft is a long way up and it's very windy up there too which speaks volumes for the stability of the vehicle. I was more concerned about the roller coaster and pleasure beach area, again privacy questions arise. There is another video taken in London over the Houses of Parliament and it looked like other security sensitive sites in Westminster. I suspect if one were flown over Downing St. it would be shot down. It appeared the operator was apprehended after the London flights. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghDXBIy_BSM About 3 months ago at my local hobby shop I saw a tiny quadrocopter it was being flown in the shop, it had a small video camera, nothing fancy. That was retailing for £150. The battery power was limited and it lacked the sophistication of the more expensive models but I was attracted to it as a tool to photograph Rhododendron flowers which can be very high up and inaccessible. The best flowers always seem to be at the top! In my situation in a relatively deserted garden I think I could get away with it but not at Kew Gardens! It would have been invaluable in my work to survey chimneys, roofs and other inaccessible areas of buildings, reducing the need for scaffolding. Probably has applications for preliminary inspection of bridges and other high and inaccessible structures. This would reduce costs, disruption and disturbance to the structure, clambering on a roof can cause more damage than there was before the inspection.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Thu Jan 30th, 2014 16:51 | 54th Post |
| http://www.buzzflyer.co.uk/RC-Helicopters/c-1-70/ This is a UK firm who sell them, plenty of info on the above web-site. Also links to demos and tec info camera mounts for serious pro use etc. Follow the link to Quadcopters Aerial Photography.
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by jk: Fri Jan 31st, 2014 05:00 | 55th Post |
| Yes BuzzFlyer do the Phantom. I was thinking I might take a trip to the shop if I was close by when I was in UK. Graham there is a shop in Basingstoke http://www.buildyourowndrone.co.uk/DJI-Phantom-V1-1-1-Ready-To-Fly-p/dji-phantom-rtf.htm Base Phantom 2 is £395 then you need a camera and mounting For £755 you can have a complete unit ready to fly with a GoPro3 Black on the unit, and they do a Phantom 2 Vision for £832 which has a gimbal mounted camera that does HD video. Yes CAA rules apply. No flights over 5000ft and not in controlled areas or over airfields that have active (real) aircraft.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by amazing50: Fri Jan 31st, 2014 09:47 | 56th Post |
| Consider getting extra batteries and chargers that run off the car battery or an inverter to your charger voltage and a kit of spare parts. The flight time on the copter I experienced was about 15 min. and the recharge was 4 hours. Also depending on the camera, some type of viewer, laptop or small LCD monitor is useful in the field.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by Graham Whistler: Fri Jan 31st, 2014 10:53 | 57th Post |
| The Phantom 2 has larger batteries and will do 25min.
____________________ Graham Whistler |
| Posted by amazing50: Fri Jan 31st, 2014 16:16 | 58th Post |
| Thats long enough to get a stiff neck
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by jk: Fri Jan 31st, 2014 16:29 | 59th Post |
amazing50 wrote: Thats long enough to get a stiff neckOr for the machine to guillotine you. (Hopefully not). Sorry British humour. 
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by jk: Wed Feb 12th, 2014 03:56 | 60th Post |
| Well the latest rumours that I am hearing is that there will be no D400 in the near future and that there may be a D7200 (updated D7100 with what extra ?) released at Photokina in September. Another disappointment that the D400 is seemingly lost! Well it looks like if the D7200 comes with some nice extras such as built-in wifi and GPS that this may be an alternative.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Judith: Wed Feb 12th, 2014 05:25 | 61st Post |
| Grrrr....
|
| Posted by jk: Thu Feb 13th, 2014 04:41 | 62nd Post |
| BTW: A D4S will apparently have 24MP, 11fps, yes 11fps!. That should be fine for all. D800 is the MP cruiser and the D4S is the machine gun. D400 is pure (scottish) mist that envelopes Nessie. Lost in myth and time. :-(
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by amazing50: Thu Feb 13th, 2014 05:29 | 63rd Post |
| Update: the listing is now removed. I believe this was a mistake Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com#ixzz2tCVIjUV6
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by jk: Mon Oct 20th, 2014 08:45 | 64th Post |
| Just in case you thought that the D400 rumours were dead. http://nikonrumors.com/2014/10/17/nikon-d400-spotted-on-facebook-real-or-fake.aspx/
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Mon Oct 20th, 2014 09:07 | 65th Post |
| Think we need something more real than that! I suppose it keeps hope alive, although many users have passed and moved on to different, possibly better solutions. BTW. There is still nothing wrong with the D200!  
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Mon Oct 20th, 2014 11:28 | 66th Post |
Robert wrote:Think we need something more real than that! D300 is a little better than D200 but nowhere compared to the D3 or the Fuji XT1. We really do need an up to date DX format professional grade camera. The D7100, D5300, D3300 are OK but lack some features critical to professional use.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Eric: Mon Oct 20th, 2014 12:14 | 67th Post |
| The best way to get a D400 is to stop talking about it. Nikon always seem to do the opposite of what we think. Lol
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by jk: Mon Oct 20th, 2014 13:47 | 68th Post |
| Wish Ray was here, then all we have to do is induce him to buy some other camera and it would happen. Sorry Ray
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Iain: Sat Oct 25th, 2014 10:25 | 69th Post |
| It may be possible what with Canon updating the 7D, it might have pushed there hand.
|
| Posted by amazing50: Sun Oct 26th, 2014 01:51 | 70th Post |
| Don't feel that the release of a D400 would be all that successful. True there are a group of dedicated users that would support the model, but not the general Nikon market. Currently the Nikon lineup has 18 DSLR's 10 FX and 12 DX. That would make the D400 one in nineteen from which to chose. Also the mythical camera is a bucket list for the hopes and dreams of the faithful, and many will be dissatisfied no matter what features the D400 might or might not have.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by jk: Sun Oct 26th, 2014 18:14 | 71st Post |
| You are probably correct. I think that Nikon have too many current modeks there should be no more than 6 or 7 models. Maybe 4 FX and 3 DX.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Mon Oct 27th, 2014 04:02 | 72nd Post |
| I agree JK but I would have put it the other way round, 4 DX and 3 FX. DX: An entry level such as the D3xxx, a step up with better features the D5xxx, a serious amateur the D7xxx and a lightweight pro model, the D400. FX: A lightweight entry level D6xx, a more advanced D8xx and the pro D4. Whether there needs be a D4X with higher resolution is perhaps a moot point? Speed v resolution... Then there is that 'retro' FX model which I can't remember the name of, probably worth keeping that for the purists among us... Which would mean 4 DX and 5 FX. As for the 'E' versions I don't see why Nikon can't reach a compromise between moire and sharpness and go with that Anybody wanting the ultimate sharpness having to go with the D4X. Chances are, if they have the funds to buy the top lenses needed for ultimate sharpness then the extra for the top body isn't going to be an issue. Seems to me Nikon are spreading the butter too thinly, maximising their production costs and complicating their distribution and support infrastructure. Henry Ford had it right, "Any color you like so long as it's black!".
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Mon Oct 27th, 2014 06:29 | 73rd Post |
| Yes I agree that presents a more balanced camera range. 4 DX and 3 FX.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| This is topic ID = 818 | ||
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > Rumors again - D5? D400 | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.1490 seconds (70% database + 30% PHP). 426 queries executed.
Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.1490 seconds (70% database + 30% PHP). 426 queries executed.