byJoeyBaker - Latest Comments

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

scott — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:39:43 -0000

Nikon please get rid of the pop up flash. I'd get a D700 if it had a decent finder like the D3.

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Andreas Buchmueller — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:03:15 -0000

My biggest annoyance is dust (and cleaning of it) inside the camera and on the sensor. Can't Nikon design a camera where I can open the back so that I can easily clean the sensor? Although most people will claim, that dust does not matter that much, I can't agree with them. I'm only using fixed focus lenses and need to leave my camera open very often. Results are obvious.
If this was an amateur camera that only uses one or a few zoom lenses, dust would not bother me that much. But on a professional camera?

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

carlo guerrero — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 19:57:31 -0000

One of the things I like about Nikon is that there are some manual controls that do not require any visual confirmation. While I never noticed the problem with the focus switch, I think that the tactile confirmation it gives should be enough. Just feel the position of the switch in relation to the base.

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Sterling — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 11:05:31 -0000

Joey:
I've been shooting with Nikons (probably before you were born) and when I saw your blog in my Google search "why the D3 sucks" I was thinking, "here is some darned kid, a gadget freak-- ranting about my favorite line of cameras.

I read your blog and well, I was only partly right. You hit the nail on the head and everything you point out is very credible. Good job, especially I like the GPS part. I am a GPS freak... have a nice one in my airplane, but when I fly and shoot, I am too busy to log the Lat/Long of where my photo was captured, thus the GPS for metadata would be a great tool.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/southwestusa/39411...

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Miles — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:05:55 -0000

Hey Joey—we miss you. And it is odd to see you commenting online. Get in touch?

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

joeybaker — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 16:27:27 -0000

Your point is somewhat valid – a device that does everything doesn’t do anything well, but allow me to expand on why video is necessary in DSLRs.

Convergence is coming. Video cameras have been able to take stills for a long while now, finally we’re seeing still cameras catch up. And, they must catchup. As Red has demonstrated, video cameras are capable of 30 FPS at 12 MP at 16-bit capture. That’s more that enough to put the D3 (and likely the D4) to shame. As soon as we collectively solve the storage problem, the idea of shooting just stills will see ludicrous.

These technologies are converging. Sticking your head in the sand and denying that is only an option if you want to be left behind. Which really makes this whole process a question of workflow. I’ve shot both still and video – and I firmly believe that the still workflow is superior.

The way the cameras are laid out (lots of buttons), interchangeable lens, flash memory storage, and workflow software are all things that still cameras get right that video cameras lack.

If you grant that convergence is happening, then you have to wonder which side is going to get it right first. If the video side wins out we’ll be stuck with that workflow and style. Granted the still camera video method isn’t great yet – but we’re only seeing generation one products. Give them some time to catch up and I think you’ll find that video on ‘still' cameras is a huge boon to your creativity.

Also worth mentioning: have you tried out any of the cameras that do video? They are still cameras first and foremost. The video capability does NOT get in the way.

And of course, if you’ve seen the DOF from these cameras, you’ve got to be impressed.

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Name — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:38:20 -0000

The biggest complaint I have about this post... you want video in the D4? If you want video, go buy a video camera! I do not want video in my high end still camera. It takes away from development and functionality that can be put towards taking photographs. I HATE these gadgets that have to have everything in 1 thing. If I want to shoot video, I will get a video camera and shoot motion. Otherwise, leave it out of my camera.

Re: AppleInsider | Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software and SDK Beta

lopas — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 09:30:12 -0000

Thanks!

Re: A Web Design Critique of the Newsweek Redesign

daleclara — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 05:27:59 -0000

web design
If you have decided that you need a good website for your business, the next step is to decide who should create it. This decision is one that needs a lot of attention because if on the one hand, a well-organized and attractive web design can help you tremendously in making more money; on the other hand, a poorly designed website can cost you money, drive away customers, and can hurt your company reputation. Following are the few basic steps you need to keep in mind, while choosing a Web Design Company

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Alan — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 11:01:25 -0000

Good notes.. I have been lucky to have owned many top Nikon cameras over the last 20 years and have now been using the D3 for about a year, i will say that this by far the best they have produced, while i too have a minor wish list but the ability to take good quality material at high ISO's, build quality and camera perfomance is excellent. The D3 with the 2.8 24/70 is my dream come true. This pair has been with me to the Amazon in the rainy season, water running over it covered in mud, taking pictures in the middle of night. In the middle of the desert covered in sand and i have never had a leak or dust problem.
My wish list for the D4 would be.

Possibly 16MP ( like you not vital )
Larger clearer ISO and WB idicator, with viewfider conformation
More usable live view, (swivel screen would be too much to ask)
In camera VR system
Default button,( step back ) where the last setting used are
removed
Improvement on the Auto W/B ( not a lot better than the D2X )

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Name — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:08:29 -0000

new to all this, not sure of the restraints but how about an SD card that when using video this goes onto the SD card leaving your CF cards for the Photo's i.e one for RAW and the other fro Jpeg etc..

Re: China ‘Gold Medal’ For Executions – BBC

Hankjamtt — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 08:36:25 -0000

Iran was the only country to have more reported capital punishments than China.

Re: How I Want My Data: Locality & Cloud Aware

Hankjamtt — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 08:35:27 -0000

I am a huge believer in Google, and it seems like such a logical next step to include something like this.

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

ilaaan — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:48:38 -0000

A couple things I wish could change (mostly software, so maybe Nikon is listening?).

- Have a way to block the ISO never to go below 200. When I quickly move down from a high ISO, I want to stop at 200. If I go too far (in a hurry) to 100 for example I get no benefit from it only a degraded dynamic range. It's like being able not to go into "digital zoom" mode on compact cameras.

- Have a "RAID 0" like writing to memory cards, i.e. one picture to card 1, the next to card 2, the following one to card 1 etc (you get the point). This will empty the buffer faster and will enable to last longer at 9 FPS.

- A hardware one: the memory cards door is actually the spot where much of the weight of the camera is supported when hand holding it. This is a fragility as the door is not that well engineered to support pressure (D3 + 24-70 is 2.5kg, with a heavier lens and/or flash it doesn't get better).

And about your grip on the AF/AE-L button not available in vertical. Not an issue for me (although that won't help you), as I by default disable the autofocus on the release button on all my cameras and use the AF-ON instead (which is replicated in vertical).

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

joeybaker — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:28:42 -0000

You're right of course. The difference in AF point coverage between the FX and DX sensors is noticeable in AF point selection. The reason I didn't include it: I actually prefer the D3 to the D300. I rarely want to go too far to the side of the frame anyway. It's just not something that bothers me too much.

That said, I do have a problem with it when I use 3D AF tracking and my subject gets too close to the edge of the frame.

So… it's a point well taken. I'll add it to the list!

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

pjadams — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:20:15 -0000

I'm surprised you left off a rather large pet-peeve of many -- the limited area covered by AF sensors. Compare the D300 to the D700/D3, and you'll notice the AF sensors on the D300 (DX) cover more of the sensor than on the FX-sensor cameras. I know, there's good reasons for this, but it would really make many photographers' lives easier if they didn't have to do the old "focus-and-recompose" two-step.

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

joeybaker — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:25:47 -0000

Street price for a new D3 is about $4600~ish. A refurbished one is around $4000. 3000 frames is a very low count for a camera that's spec'd to last a quarter or a half million (I can't remember which).

I'd aim to pay $3500 and go as high as $3800. But unless you need this camera now, I think I'd wait. Nikon usually announces new products in the next few months. We've had the D3 for 2 years now. It might be up for a refresh, in which case you can get the D3 for much less.

re: the 200mm: sure! People love old lenses like that. The optics won't be all that good on digital cameras, but some folks like the old glass. I don't know how much you can get for it (unless it's a f/2.8, likely not too much), but you're better off selling it on craigslist or ebay than holding on to it.

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

joeybaker — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:09:05 -0000

Hey Pete–

I've really only been able to use the D700 in testing. I've never put it through its paces on a shoot, but I will say there are some differences that I noticed.
• Speed. Time to clear the buffer, LCD display time, etc… all are faster on a D3. A great test. Switch to 14-bit RAW files. The D700 slows wayyy down. The D3 keeps plugging along like nothing happened.
• Build quality. The D3 is a tank. Not that the D700 isn't durable, but… pick up a D3. You can feel it.
• That bottom LCD screen. As much as I knock it, having a second small screen down there is handy. If it would work in concert with the top LCD, we'd be set.

I clearly can't make the choice for you, but if the question is, "should I spend another grand on the D3 vs a D700+grip," then my answer is: can you afford it?

There's a reason why the D3 is top of the line. It's an extra 5% that you may or may not need.

I hope that's some help for you!

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

peter — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:59:39 -0000

Hi Joey, would you be able to put the D700 through yout current working situations, what would the draw backs be if any? Would you recommend the D3 above the D700?

Cheers
Pete

Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)

Matt Kirwan — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:12:04 -0000

Joey,

nice article - I pretty much agree with it all.

The ISO button placement is a BIG problem for me...it seems Nikon still treat it like a throwback from the film days - only ever adjusted when changing or pushing (rarely) films.
I wrote an article about this on my blog - check it out.

Regards,

Matt Kirwan

Re: Dear Bill Keller

joeybaker — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:55:19 -0000

Robert – I appreciate you taking the time to read the post, it obviously stirred up some strong emotions for you. I'd be happy to debate the merits of this post.

It's certainly arrogant of me to assume that I might give a gentleman with 40 years of experience some advice.

On the other hand, I strongly believe that I do know something about the way this new paradigm is working. My goal in this post was to encourage Mr. Keller to take the time to look some of that new information.

Re: Dear Bill Keller

Robert Peebles — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 08:43:50 -0000

You're an arrogant little know-nothing, and a poor writer at best. Do the world a favor and stop publishing your thoughts.

Re: Dear Bill Keller

jeffsonderman — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:12:26 -0000

Great post. The NYT would do well to stop telling everyone how important and essential they are, and start showing us.

Re: Dear Bill Keller

joeybaker — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 12:20:11 -0000

Well phrased Cody. The NYT newsroom is gorgeous — the image of a journalistic palace indeed.

I myself struggled with the idea that the older generations were ruining the business for the rest of us. To my mind, you can either a) completely forget about the 'old media' and start fresh, or b) reform the old system to work in the new.

The advantage to reform, is that you get a huge infrastructure that is nothing to sniff at. Everything from accounting departments, gorgeous newsrooms, people who know people, server rooms, and so on. It's really inefficient, (and emotionally hard) to throw all that away.

Of course, all this infrastructure comes with all the downsides of this post.

I want there to be a way for us to get both advantages, but I will admit, I'm increasingly coming around to your point of view.

Re: Dear Bill Keller

CodyBrown — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:19:19 -0000

The window for The Times to re-invent themselves closes a little more everyday.

I've been invited into their offices a few times as well and while it is clear that they have a lot of smart people working for them and that they are trying, they just do not sense the urgency. Its hard to when you are working from a palace.

I disagree that The Times is ruining the business for the rest of us. What they are actually doing is opening it for those who have the drive and insight to replace it.