D800 rep[lacement ;)

[jeremy rundle]

So we can expect the new D800s (ish) in June/July, only again as with the D4s, just a "few" small upgrades.

 

And if to be believed the D9000 or 9xxx in September the long awaited D300/s replacement.

 

But as I said, and as stated on many a website like Nikon Rumors, "small" upgrades, so have DSLR manufacturers finally met a brick wall in what to offer.

 

Do we no longer want 100Mp sensors, 10-1000mm zooms, 20fps.

 

I was going to get a D4s, but have over a month, and having tried one out decided that all it would be to me would be snob appeal, and not worth the cost.

 

I would get a D300s replacement IF it had 8fps and a larger sensor say D7100 ish, but it appears innovations are now few and far between.

 

And yet another boring 50mm lens

 

http://nikonrumors.com/

[Black Pearl]

The D7100 doesn't have a larger sensor than the D300s and you can get 8fps out of the D300s by using the D3 battery, even on its own battery it ticks along a 7fps which isn't bad so it's very likely the D9300 will do 8 - probably without a fancy battery.

[jeremy rundle]

No but it does have many more MP allowing for much better cropping

[Black Pearl]

If the D9300 is about to launch it isn't going to be an incremental release like a D300 to D300s or the D3 to D3s it is going to offer a significant increase in quality - something that many birders (myself also for that matter) have been wanting for a while.

 

Expect a big increase in pixels (not a bigger sensor though as it will still be a DX) along with much better control at high iso's, an increased DR and Full HD.

It might go from 7fps to 8fps but that is only useful if the buffer is big enough to let you use that speed - the sticking point for many with the D7100 which has a useless buffer capacity - and as I mentioned above you can get that out of a D300s already.

 

Other than that there doesn't need to be big differences in the body as the D300s is already a pro machine with all the expected pro features. 

We have reached a point where newer bodies (one's that follow on) are going to see small jumps in performance as the current ones offer just about anything users need. There will always be moaners, dpreview is full of them, but they just need to get out and take pictures instead of sitting photographing test charts and pixel peeping. 

 

 

When it comes to bodies like the D4s then those that say it isn't worth it simply don't need it.

It is a full sized pro body aimed at a very specific set of users. Users who need the incredible speed, rely on the incredible AF and who use ISO performance to get a shot where it otherwise wouldn't be possible. If that isn't you then Nikon make a D800 and to some expert the Df.

[jeremy rundle]

I use sandisk extreme pro cards and have as yet not found a problem with the buffer of the D7100, except on rare occasions

 

 

I prefer the better weather sealing on the D7100 over the two D7000s I also have

 

So it will either be the D300s replacements in September or I will get a 1Dx

[Black Pearl]

The D7100 shooting RAW can only manage up to 9 shots at 6fps before the buffer is full.

 

The D300s shooting RAW can keep going at 7fps for up to 20 shots. Thats a big difference and one that annoys the hell out of people who have switched to the D7100 until the (up until recently mythical) D9300 arrives.

 

Another point is the D7100 has a sensor with 24.1 million pixels while the sensor in the D300s (only) has 12.3 yet the file sizes are very close so it can't be argued that is it recording more information to the card. This is because ONLY the pro bodes will record an uncompressed RAW file while all of the amateur bodies are limited to compressed RAW....The D300s can directly record TIFF files too which gives it a little extra scope.

[jeremy rundle]

Don't shoot RAW for sports andI have yet to find anyone who shoots sports where I do on the P1 circuit who does, or cars

Edited May 25, 2014 by jeremy rundle

[Black Pearl]

WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

[pdcpic]

I use sandisk extreme pro cards and have as yet not found a problem with the buffer of the D7100, except on rare occasions

 

 

 

I am looking for a card like this,.. have you got any idea what speed yours is? I find more than one speeds

[Black Pearl]

What camera do you use?

[pdcpic]

What camera do you use?

d7100, and I certainly agree on the buffer it is annoying when you try to take photos of a bird diving!

 

every time I see these and I miss the shot, there are more diving while I have to wait for the buffer

[Black Pearl]

A really fast card might (might) help the buffer clear but only if the camera can write that fast. The issue is the buffer itself which is tiny, daft really RAM is cheap as chips, so it's still going to stop dead at 6-9 shots depending on bit depth and compression type.

I would search dpreview for recommendations on the card as the weird-beard nerds will have it worked out to the micro second.

[jeremy rundle]

"Iam looking for a card like this,.. have you got any idea what speed yours is? I find more than one speeds"

 

 

95 mbs

Edited May 25, 2014 by jeremy rundle

[jeremy rundle]

People often moan about the buffer capacity and yet are using rubbish cards No one comment on the fact that this is not a "scientific" experiment, no it is REAL life.

 

Simple test

 

D7100 tripod, pc and a stopwatch, release shutter at the same time as clicking start, just 2 cards tested, Sandisk 95mbs Extreme pro and a good standard class 10 Sandisk Ultra.

 

See the number of recorded shots for yourself.

 

Don't tell me the D7100 buffer is small

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2014 by jeremy rundle

[Black Pearl]

Just tested my camera - Nikon D300s - uncompressed 12bit NEF @ 7fps:

 

Sandisk Extreme CF UDMA 16 GB Card = 17 shots

Unbranded & unrated SD 2GB Card = 17 shots

 

Because when you are shooting high MB RAW files it is the buffer capacity you are testing not the write speed of the card - yes the basic SD took an age to then write the files whereas the the CF card started clearing the buffer almost immediately meaning I could have then taken another shot but that has nothing what so ever to do with maximum buffer capacities.

 

JR you were shooting jpegs which might fine in your case but not for the rest of use who use RAW files.

With RAW files the buffer capacity of the D7100 is tiny - Google it and you will see it is one of if not the most major complaint by anyone who uses the camera for shooting bursts.

[pdcpic]

I have seen a video test about the buffer which confirmed the camera dealt better in crop mode and only jpeg... not sure if it was digital rev or another one

[jeremy rundle]

But when you are shooting JPEG as most people do, in sports, the card IS the important component as shown, I know of no one shooting sports who shoots RAW

[ChrisLumix]

But when you are shooting JPEG as most people do, in sports, the card IS the important component as shown, I know of no one shooting sports who shoots RAW

 

I can well understand that. A fraction of a second is everything in motorsport, and if your camera takes 3 times as long to write a RAW as it does a JPEG, you could miss the money shot. Besides, I imagine that a lot of sports photography involves SP mode, fast speeds @ open aperture or close to, high ISOs in good lighting - the need to use RAW to 'rescue' a shot wouldn't come into it, hardly ever?

[jeremy rundle]

I have never shot RAW, well ok, tried it, of no use to me, 100 JPGS continuous would also never be used so a good card makes all the difference.

 

Get a sandisk extreme pro and believe me you will be amazed

 

I will be getting a few of these

 

http://www.sandisk.co.uk/about-sandisk/press-room/press-releases/2014/sandisk-announces-world%E2%80%99s-fastest-sd-card/

 

 

About £55 each

Edited May 25, 2014 by jeremy rundle

[Guest]

But when you are shooting JPEG as most people do, in sports, the card IS the important component as shown, I know of no one shooting sports who shoots RAW

try this guy that shoots for sports illustrated http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/2371