Nuble Light, Cape Neddick Lighthouse, York, Maine.
AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
2 Stop Solid ND
Jump to content
Posted by Herman on 28 April 2014 - 12:01 PM
Posted by Islander on 02 April 2017 - 11:14 PM
I'm currently on a bucket list trip. South Utah shooting red rocks and ancient native ruins. Next on the list is a one month sailboat trip around Vancouver Island in July with Humpbacks, Orcas and whatever else besides gorgeous scenery!
Here is last night's sunset at Balanced Rock, Arches National Park, Utah
Posted by Black Pearl on 21 May 2016 - 03:44 AM
Just read that and I'm still sitting shaking my head at how sad it is.
There is no reason for Nikon to be struggling if they would just pull their fingers out of their ears and listen to what consumers want. A few years ago it may have been acceptable to trot out one mediocre camera after another with a few extra pixels and an extra toy or two and people would buy them - but not these days.
The iPhone has ravaged the compact market. I predicted this years and years ago when I started to use mine more than I used whatever compact I had at the time and I saw it day in day out at work with people coming back from holidays etc. and printing images from their phones not a camera. I've been out of Jessops for three years now so I dread to think how big the shift has become. Nikon currently have 16 (SIXTEEN) Coolpix cameras on the market - none of which I'd recommend, none of which are anywhere near the best in their class (I can't recall the last time Nikon made a class leading compact) and more importantly none of which the average compact buyer would look at because they want a Sony or Panasonic or Samsung because they are brands they're familiar with. The bold move - dump the whole product line before it devours any more money it can’t possibly recoup.
Where do I start with DSLR's?
A quick look at Nikon's product page shows they currently list 15 DSLR's, which seems an awful lot - and you know what - it turns out it is. They have a D5200 a D5300 and a D5500, now even for express purposes of writing this I can't be bothered to look at the differences so why a consumer would I've no idea. I'm now almost shouting at my computer screen in anger at them - why on earth are they listing a 2013 camera on their page and just as worryingly what on earth were they thinking releasing another two within just two years. Either the D5200 was so catastrophically under spec'd it failed to garner any consumer interest so Nikon desperately threw things at it in a hope of making it more appealing (possible) or they hoped that people would invest in an entirely new DSLR every year (are they mad) so poured millions of yen into design and marketing that could have been spent elsewhere.
If we move up a bit in the DX range you get to the D7200 (the 7100 is still listed but I'll blow a gasket if I dwell on that) which to be fair to it is a crackin' good camera body - but - lets look at where it stands in the overall market. Money wise it’s about the same price as my Fuji X-T1 and I did seriously consider getting one but several factors put me off. Personally I wanted something smaller and lighter, one of the trends that are having such an impact on DSLR sales of late though I also looked at the lenses available for someone spending that sort of money. They key is that last bit. Where Fuji and Olympus and Panasonic etc are romping away with market share is the lenses they offer. You don't have to re-mortgage your house to get a bag of glass that can produce top-drawer results like you do with Nikon. I love my 35mm f1.4 far more than is healthy for a middle aged, married man but I do so because the results it produces are absolute stunning. It cost me about £350, which is nearly a quarter of the price that Nikon charge for a 35mm f1.4 - a QUARTER of the price! Even if you argue that the Nikon is a FX lens its still impossible to justify that sort of price difference
That I think is Nikon's big downfall - they expect people to either make do with mediocre small aperture DX glass or go bankrupt and buy hideously overpriced FX lenses. I know what they're hoping, they're hoping people will then invest in a FX camera which Nikon have spent vast sums of money conning consumers into thinking is the holy grail that will transform the lives of those who use it but for the average consumer its a bit better at most and unless you have family cars value worth of lenses a bit of a waste. The bold move - start making lenses people want and that the average consumer can afford to buy. A look through the Fuji forums will show you two things; it’s all about the glass and it’s all about the film simulations. I don't care much for the latter but I'm passionate about the glass. The average consumer can actually afford to buy a bag of top-notch Fuji lenses to go with their Fuji camera. A very large proportion of people who own a Nikon will also own a good few third party lenses as they can’t afford the Nikon equivalent – the vast majority of people who own a Fuji own a bag full of Fuji lenses because they are affordable.
When it comes to top end DSLR’s then they are what they are. You’re not going to get a load of innovation as it’s a mature market and they are designed to appeal to a fairly narrow range of photographers. I still think Nikon could offer more in the way of modern conveniences and the issue with the cost of lenses is still there but I personally feel they’re holding their own.
Now we come to the elephant in the room that is mirrorless.
The Nikon 1 is a toy and while it has made a few sales it has made no real impact in the market but must have cost Nikon a fortune – it might even have caused Nikon their current predicament. Now some will argue that Nikon are a SLR brand and that SLR’s are the be all and end all of photography but like it or not they are a dying breed. Yes the top end stuff has its place but for the rest of the market the shift towards mirrorless is getting larger and it’s getting faster. If Nikon wants to survive and be able to release £3k niche cameras like the D500 that won’t even pay for the R&D they cost to produce they have to do something to claw back the sales they have hemorrhaged in recent years to Sony, Fuji and their ilk.
The bold move:
Pull their fingers out of their ears and listen to what the consumers want.
Build a mirrorless system that will be proud to wear the Nikon badge on its casing.
Start making affordable high quality lenses that stop people buying third party options.
Reduce the number of products in each line to a handful of class leading cameras that give the consumer a simple, obvious choice.
Posted by Ron W on 20 February 2015 - 08:59 AM
This is a shot from the same place as the one I posted earlier for Frank, at Marineland near Palm Bay. It was taken in 2013, but I just processed it for the first time yesterday. I noticed that there is a circular shadow on the upper left side of the image. This was caused by reflection of light around the SW150 filter holder. I've learned to put a cloth over and around the lens to prevent this. This is a major problem with the SW 150, but at the time, the SW-150 was the only filter holder available for the Nikkor 14-24 lens. There are better designs available now. I could probably remove the shadow from this image, but it would take a lot of time. So here it is, shadow and all. 5 minute exposure at f/22, ISO: 100 at 14mm. I wish now that I'd been using the camera with the "in-camera" noise reduction, turned off. I'd have a lot more images of this incredibly beautiful sunrise.
Nikkor 14-24 lens
Lee SW-150 filter holder and a Lee 3 stop soft edge GND filter.
Posted by Ron W on 24 January 2015 - 09:30 AM
This is a 5 minute exposure using a 6 stop Lee "Little Stopper" filter. The biggest drawback to this type of photography is that the whole shot takes 10 minutes to complete, if you use in-camera noise reduction. The in-camera noise reduction can be turned off, and the noise reduction done in post processing. I've tried using both methods and prefer using the in-camera noise reduction, even though it doubles the time for each shot. In this image, I "juiced" the saturation and vibrance just a little bit. Normally I don't touch the saturation, often, in fact, desaturating the image.
Nikkor 24-70 lens
Lee "Little Stopper" ND filter.
Posted by NCortez on 09 January 2015 - 11:39 PM
This was taken during our recent trip to Page Arizona. I would assumed that everyone knows this canyon, the famous one in Page Arizona, Lower antelope canyon. It is a very nice place and it totally blew my mind when walking at the bottom. The rock formations are awesome.
And of course , before leaving Page, we did not forget to swing by around the corner to Horse shoe bend. Another magnificent site to see and never to be missed while in Page.
Community Forum Software by IP.Board
Licensed to: Darrell Young, Author