Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

d700&d300 vs D800

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Attention!

This topic is locked.
Reason: At OPs request
B_Real
B_Real  9126 forum posts United Kingdom
4 Oct 2012 - 9:05 PM


Quote: I simply shoot in the full FX format and crop (often to considerably smaller than DX format) in processing. Shooting in DX might be helpful for those with tiny memory cards or a need for the fastest frame rate, but, for my modest requirements, shooting the full FX size and cropping afterwards makes much more sense.

Bingo. That's the info I've been looking for, but couldn't really be bothered starting a new thread for. I'm interested in the D600 tho; I'm assuming this logic still applies, but to a lesser extent given the lower resolution of the D600.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
4 Oct 2012 - 9:05 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Leif
Leif  9722 forum posts
6 Oct 2012 - 6:14 PM


Quote: I must have ordered several arguments, given the way Len Shepherd has a go at me whenever I post here. I hate the man.

It is not unknown for Len to disagree with some of my observations and opinions. But I never feel he is "having a go" nor do I feel obliged to hate him. His views are always worth considering even when they differ from one's own.


Sorry but his posts have in the past left me feeling quite angry. He will argue for the sake of it, picking apart my posts in a cold, emotionless and patronising manner. They were a reason I stopped posting here for ages. A recent discussion on grey market lenses is an example. I posted an official statement from Nikon that they will not honour the warranty on grey market goods and he said Nikon were wrong. He did not post any evidence to support his view. Just his opinion that he is right, and everyone else is wrong. How can you deal with someone so conceited?

I recall one very tedious argument where he took exception to a comment I made about focus on the two Nikon 60mm micro lenses. I use these lenses all the while, so I knew what I was talking about. He went on and on and on. And another argument about hand held macro photography in natural light. I repeatedly asked him to provide photos to support his claims, but he did not do so. The phrase 'all mouth and no trousers' came to mind. Sometimes it is not worth arguing with someone who thinks they know everything. And his posts are quite confrontational. He basically says "You are completely wrong, here is the truth ...". Imagine talking with some people in real life, and one person always tells you are wrong, and then delivers a long lecture, in a condescending tone, as if talking to an idiot. Sometimes his posts read as if they are written by a robot, just a a sequence of 'facts'.

On this occasion his comment on my post had nothing to do with the subject of this thread, and nothing to do with the question/point in my post. It was just a argument for the sake of it. And I knew when I wrote that post that Shepherd would argue, he just has to argue. I'm sure he also argued with my recent post about duty free shops. Except I had just flown to Scotland, so I posted from first hand experience. He was wrong about the VAT. But lack of knowledge never stops him posting. I just don't think he is the expert he thinks he is.


But back to the thread, I am holding back on the D800 because there is an issue with the auto-focus on some cameras. Nikon have acknowledged this, and have said that the problem, which occurred during assembly, has been fixed in cameras coming off the production line. And my guess - opinion, not supported by fact - is that the D800 will come down a bit more over the next few months. Just watch the price go up now. ;Wink

LeftForum: How easy is it to focus and compose with the D800 in DX mode? I prefer DX for macro-photography, so it would be a significant issue to me. Thanks.

User_Removed
6 Oct 2012 - 9:42 PM


Quote:
LeftForum: How easy is it to focus and compose with the D800 in DX mode? I prefer DX for macro-photography, so it would be a significant issue to me. Thanks.

I don't know Leif. I have never used my D800 in anything other than FX Raw. As I said, I don't see the point of shooting in DX mode when it gives you more scope to shoot FX and crop to taste afterwards. (Unless you are using tiny memory cards or need a faster frame rate).

But I can't see any reason why focussing should be any different in DX mode to FX. When I shoot macro, I always manually focus anyway (using a Nikkor 105mm lens with, of course, the VR switched off).

I am not going to jump to Len Shepherd's defence and I can't comment on some of the arguments you have had with him - but on the one you mention about Nikon warranties and consumer rights in UK, he was not expressing an opinion; he was stating a straightforward fact. There is a difference. (But I agree there is a nice way and a not so nice way of engaging in discussions.)

Stay cool.

.

Last Modified By User_Removed at 6 Oct 2012 - 9:47 PM
Leif
Leif  9722 forum posts
7 Oct 2012 - 9:08 AM


Quote: LeftForum: How easy is it to focus and compose with the D800 in DX mode? I prefer DX for macro-photography, so it would be a significant issue to me. Thanks.

I don't know Leif. I have never used my D800 in anything other than FX Raw. As I said, I don't see the point of shooting in DX mode when it gives you more scope to shoot FX and crop to taste afterwards. (Unless you are using tiny memory cards or need a faster frame rate).

But I can't see any reason why focussing should be any different in DX mode to FX. When I shoot macro, I always manually focus anyway (using a Nikkor 105mm lens with, of course, the VR switched off).

I am not going to jump to Len Shepherd's defence and I can't comment on some of the arguments you have had with him - but on the one you mention about Nikon warranties and consumer rights in UK, he was not expressing an opinion; he was stating a straightforward fact. There is a difference. (But I agree there is a nice way and a not so nice way of engaging in discussions.)

Stay cool.

.

LenShepherd's claims did not match my actual experience of importing many lenses, and they did not match official Nikon statements. He was also unable to add any supporting evidence e.g. a court case. Also his claims about VAT on lenses bought in duty free did not match my actual experiences, and were wrong. Just because someone writes something in a style that suggests it is fact does not make it fact.

Regarding using DX mode, you probably know this, but if you shoot in DX mode rather than FX mode (composing to fill the frame in each case), you get about 1 more stop depth of field at a given F stop. That is why I prefer DX for macro. What you are suggesting I guess is to use the whole frame, then crop afterwards. The problem with that, in my opinion, is that I compose when I shoot, to minimise the amount of post processing I do. I can't see the point of knowingly shooting to crop, then cropping in Photoshop. You might disagree, but that is my way of thinking, hence my question. Smile Anyway, thanks for taking the time to answer.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62450 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
7 Oct 2012 - 5:31 PM

DX crop mode does not affect manual viewfinder focus on a D800.
All there is is a black rectangle around the DX frame - otherwise the screen is normal brightness.
For the same magnification FX shows a stronger out of focus effect than DX, improving manual focus compared to DX.
In addition the D800 screen is easier to manual focus than any other FX camera I have extensively used - mainly D3s.
The D800 viewfinder is at least a stop darker than D300 though as the human eye and brain is not good as distinquishing bright light levels the difference is not noticed with a sunlit sceen.
Summing up manual close and distance focus on a D800 is easier than on a D300, and a little easier than on a D700, except in low light.
There can be good reasons to use LiveView for static macro subjects working from a tripod.
The depth of field you get after cropping and enlarging by the equivalent of going in closer with FX is another matter - this changes the circle of confusion and you get the same DOF as shooting on DX.
Turning to grey imports what I have said is
1/ some are dispatched without a UK VAT payment; when this happens the terms and conditions usually make the buyer responsible for VAT; there may be a VAT charge on delivery; and in law customs and excess are entitled to take possession of imported goods on which tax payment due has not been made.
2/ If a lens comes with Nikon Japan's one year international warranty saying Nikon UK will carry out warranty work, this warranty is "an inducement to buy" and binding on Nikon UK.
I appreciate Nikon's web site implies otherwise, but I have had specific verbal confirmation from Nikon Pro UK that the International warranty is recognized.

Leif
Leif  9722 forum posts
7 Oct 2012 - 6:22 PM

LenShepherd: The comments on DX with the D800 are useful/helpful.

My statement that you do get roughly 1 stop more DOF allows for the CoC, and assumes a DX image with the same subject framing as an FX one. This web site provides a DOF and CoC calculation:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

I like to shut lenses down to F16 with a DX camera, and Nikon micro lenses usually perform well at that aperture. Using F22 on FX is not an option as most Nikon micro lenses go to pot at that aperture. This is my experience with the lenses that I own, I cannot speak for others. There is also the issues that some subjects are too hard to approach with an FX camera, hence DX mode.

Regarding point 2), your earlier post was extremely misleading/unclear, and you appeared to be stating that all grey import lenses come with a "Nikon Japan's one year international warranty ". It seems from the above post that you were in fact saying "If a lens come with Nikon Japan's one year international warranty ...", not the same thing. I have no idea what a "Nikon Japan's one year international warranty " is, having never seen one, and I don't know the relevance to that thread. The thread was discussing grey imports in general, and the Nikon document I linked to refers to typical grey imports, the sort of thing the OP in the thread was asking about, and the lenses I have imported from HK.

User_Removed
7 Oct 2012 - 8:03 PM

Leif,

On that warranty question, the fact to bear in mind is that under UK consumer protection legislation, no manufacturer's warranty or conditions of sale can reduce the statutory rights that UK purchasers have under the legislation.

That, by the way, is why Nikon prices often seem higher in UK than in USA - Nikon, in their pricing, have to take account of the fact that UK legislation gives the purchaser far more protection than their own warranties do.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62450 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
7 Oct 2012 - 8:49 PM


Quote: A recent discussion on grey market lenses is an example. I posted an official statement from Nikon that they will not honour the warranty on grey market goods and he said Nikon were wrong.

I posted the likely legal reason why Nikon are unlikely to be right.
You can check with Trading Standards if you wish.

Quote: he took exception to a comment I made about focus on the two Nikon 60mm micro lenses. I use these lenses all the while, so I knew what I was talking about.

I do not recall the comments - but still own and use both 60mm macros. I keep the 60D for bellows work which needs an aperture ring, but prefer the G for other work.


Quote: I repeatedly asked him to provide photos to support his claims, but he did not do so.

I post photos from time time.
If you send me your email via a private message I will send you hand held with the 70-300 and 6T at greater than 1:1


Quote: Except I had just flown to Scotland, so I posted from first hand experience. He was wrong about the VAT.

The law is above the tax free limit (it used to be 119) you should go through the red channel and declare what you are importing.

Quote: I am holding back on the D800 because there is an issue with the auto-focus on some cameras. Nikon have acknowledged this

Whether there is a problem or not is known only to Nikon.
Some say Nikon have verbally admitted a problem, but nothing similar to D200 banding (instigated in 6 weeks) has been done by Nikon - despite 6 months since D800 launch.
A point I make on another forum is there was a lot of web noise about the problem; as there was about "sparklies and peeling paint" with the 70-200 VR II or light leaks on the 24-70, which turned out to be untrue.
On that forum 83 have posted images showing they ignored Nikon's guidance on using AF on page 100 of the D800 instructions, and none seem to have posted an image with a high quality (for testing) AF target. I am not saying there are no defective D800's - but most complaints seem unfounded when a test target image is posted.
Maybe more than 15 dpreview members now have a D800 (including me) and I do not think any member has posted about an AF issue.
I got Nikon emails about the defective 200-400 soft case batch, and the defective D7000/D800 battery batch - but nothing on D800 focus.
Adding to LeftForum's last post with 10 days exchange for any reason if bought UK mail order, a right to a refund or exchange at the buyers option if there is a fault (often for up to 6 months) if bought in a shop, and plenty of D800's around I can see no reason for putting off buying a D800 for fear of an AF issue where there is much more web talk about a fault than there seems to be a fault to talk about.

oldblokeh
oldblokeh  3782 forum posts United Kingdom
7 Oct 2012 - 8:58 PM


Quote: I posted the likely legal reason why Nikon are unlikely to be right.
You can check with Trading Standards if you wish.


I'm afraid you are quite wrong here, Len. The statutory requirements imposed by the Sale of Goods Act are on the retailer, not the manufacturer. Any guarantee or warranty provided by a manufacturer is in addition to your statutory rights with the retailer with whom you made the contract of sale.

User_Removed
7 Oct 2012 - 9:26 PM


Quote: I posted the likely legal reason why Nikon are unlikely to be right.
You can check with Trading Standards if you wish.


I'm afraid you are quite wrong here, Len. The statutory requirements imposed by the Sale of Goods Act are on the retailer, not the manufacturer. Any guarantee or warranty provided by a manufacturer is in addition to your statutory rights with the retailer with whom you made the contract of sale.

You are missing the point here, Oldblokeh, although you are correct in saying that the redress under most UK Consumer Protection Legislation is against the retailer rather than the manufacturer or distributor.

The real point is that, under UK legislation, the protection given to the consumer is far greater than that given by most manufacturers' warranties. The added bonus is that the UK consumer never has to deal with the manufacturer or distributor - all he has to do is return defective goods to the retailer from whom he purchased them. But Len is right - in UK we have far better protection than Nikon might seek to imply.

oldblokeh
oldblokeh  3782 forum posts United Kingdom
7 Oct 2012 - 9:42 PM

However, Nikon are still within their rights to refuse to provide warranty cover on grey imports, and despite what you say, the warranty they provide may actually exceed what UK legislation provides. The Sale of Goods Act does not lay down in black and white the period of cover, except that a claim must be made within six years of purchase (five years in Scotland), but if a fault becomes evident after 6 months, then the onus is on the purchaser to prove that it was not simply a matter of wear and tear.

Last Modified By oldblokeh at 7 Oct 2012 - 9:44 PM
Leif
Leif  9722 forum posts
7 Oct 2012 - 9:54 PM


Quote: A recent discussion on grey market lenses is an example. I posted an official statement from Nikon that they will not honour the warranty on grey market goods and he said Nikon were wrong.
I posted the likely legal reason why Nikon are unlikely to be right.
You can check with Trading Standards if you wish.


Sorry but I do not understand what you are saying as your posts are contradictory. You referred in your last post to Nikon Japan's International Warranty (NJIW). I have no idea what that is. None of my grey lenses came with one. Are you claiming that ALL grey market lenses come with a NJIW? Or just some? And are you claiming that Nikon UK is obliged to honour the warranty on NJIW lenses, or all lenses? It is hard for me to comment when I do not understand what you are claiming. Incidentally, one of my US lenses came with a third party (Mack) warranty and I believe my Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro lens from Hong Kong came with a Mack warranty. Some importers provide their own warranty. So clearly the importers do not believe that Nikon UK and other lens/camera manufacturers are obliged to do warranty work on ALL grey imports.

If you claim that Nikon is obliged to honour the warranty on ALL grey market lenses, then YOU can find proof, not me. You are making the assertion that the official Nikon document is not valid, not me. I don't have the time to 'prove' claims I do not believe. I do not like wild goose chases.


Quote:
he took exception to a comment I made about focus on the two Nikon 60mm micro lenses. I use these lenses all the while, so I knew what I was talking about.
I do not recall the comments - but still own and use both 60mm macros. I keep the 60D for bellows work which needs an aperture ring, but prefer the G for other work.

I repeatedly asked him to provide photos to support his claims, but he did not do so.
I post photos from time time.
If you send me your email via a private message I will send you hand held with the 70-300 and 6T at greater than 1:1


What are the photos demonstrating?


Quote:
Except I had just flown to Scotland, so I posted from first hand experience. He was wrong about the VAT.
The law is above the tax free limit (it used to be 119) you should go through the red channel and declare what you are importing.


I was referring to a recent discussion on dpreview (if my memory is correct). You contradicted my post, stating that if someone buys a camera in a duty free shop at an airport, then when they enter the UK, they must pay VAT. That assertion was incorrect.


Quote:
I am holding back on the D800 because there is an issue with the auto-focus on some cameras. Nikon have acknowledged this Whether there is a problem or not is known only to Nikon.
Some say Nikon have verbally admitted a problem, but nothing similar to D200 banding (instigated in 6 weeks) has been done by Nikon - despite 6 months since D800 launch.
A point I make on another forum is there was a lot of web noise about the problem; as there was about "sparklies and peeling paint" with the 70-200 VR II or light leaks on the 24-70, which turned out to be untrue.
On that forum 83 have posted images showing they ignored Nikon's guidance on using AF on page 100 of the D800 instructions, and none seem to have posted an image with a high quality (for testing) AF target. I am not saying there are no defective D800's - but most complaints seem unfounded when a test target image is posted.
Maybe more than 15 dpreview members now have a D800 (including me) and I do not think any member has posted about an AF issue.
I got Nikon emails about the defective 200-400 soft case batch, and the defective D7000/D800 battery batch - but nothing on D800 focus.
Adding to LeftForum's last post with 10 days exchange for any reason if bought UK mail order, a right to a refund or exchange at the buyers option if there is a fault (often for up to 6 months) if bought in a shop, and plenty of D800's around I can see no reason for putting off buying a D800 for fear of an AF issue where there is much more web talk about a fault than there seems to be a fault to talk about.

As you say there is a lot of web noise online, but issues do occur. Thom Hogan has examined many D800 cameras, and concluded that there is a problem. He has also concluded that many of the cameras that were said to have an AF problem, didn't. But, overall in his opinion a significant number of those shipped were faulty. I consider him to be a very intelligent, and coherent individual, and on technical issues such as D800 AF, I take his views seriously. For that reason I am quite happy to believe that a significant percentage of D800 cameras were shipped with an AF issue, at least in the American market. My guess is that stock is allocated to markets on a random basis, but that is only a guess, and may be wrong. Nikon claim to have fixed the issue, but it will take a while for faulty stock to work its way through the supply chain.

I have seen you squabbling with people on dpreview, claiming that there is no AF issue, or something like that, I can't say I know what you were claiming. You seemed to be very stubborn, and annoying many people. I can't say I can make a judgement on an argument between people I do not know, and do not consider to be trusted sources. Anyway dpreview is one of the worst forums in terms of noise. There are a few sensible people who post regularly, and some of those are extremely knowledgeable. But otherwise there is too much childish squabbling.

Incidentally, there were some very real problems with earlier cameras, where banding was seen. I can think of one person who had 3 Nikon cameras with banding (the original, and two replacements). He jumped to Canon out of disgust, and then had 2 Canon cameras with banding. Both cameras were brand new models.

Leif
Leif  9722 forum posts
7 Oct 2012 - 10:02 PM


Quote:
The real point is that, under UK legislation, the protection given to the consumer is far greater than that given by most manufacturers' warranties. The added bonus is that the UK consumer never has to deal with the manufacturer or distributor - all he has to do is return defective goods to the retailer from whom he purchased them. But Len is right - in UK we have far better protection than Nikon might seek to imply.

Given that the discussion relates to grey imports, yes, the buyer returns the lens to the seller, which in the case of a grey import bought from a Hong Kong seller, means sending it to Hong Kong. I don't think anyone disputes that. I forgot that some years ago I bought a lens from a company in central London, and it was a grey import. It was my Nikon 200mm F4 AFD micro. It came with a warranty provided by the shop. In other words Nikon UK would not honour the warranty. I suspect they would simply send it to a local repair shop, and pay the repair cost.

And you have to ask if it would be fair for Nikon UK to have to honour the warranty on a grey import. After all, they did not share in the profits from the sale, and yet they would be expected to pay for the repair. That seems completely unjust. You might argue that Nikon Japan should pay, but labour costs here are not the same as in for example China. So you buy a lens priced for the Chinese market, with Chinese overheads, and expect Nikon UK to pay up as if you had bought it here, at UK prices. UK consumer law is pretty damned good, but I would assume it has to be fair to manufacturers and distributors.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62450 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
7 Oct 2012 - 11:17 PM


Quote: You referred in your last post to Nikon Japan's International Warranty (NJIW). I have no idea what that is.

There is one included with every official lens imported into the EEC.
Posters in USA say there is one in every lens imported into USA, plus the USA only 2/5 year warranty.
About 11 years ago I bought a gray import which came with an international warranty.
The warranty says it is issued by Nikon Japan. The one for my 24-120 f4 lists Nikon UK and 3 independent UK repairers among the world wide repairers who carry out warranty work under this warranty.

Quote: Are you claiming that ALL grey market lenses come with a NJIW?

Many do.
Some might be stolen property, some might be from countries where Nikon does not have a repair facility.
And are you claiming that Nikon UK is obliged to honour the warranty on NJIW lenses
I am saying what I say - if you get a Nikon International warranty it says Nikon UK will repair it under the warranty terms.
As I said in my last reply if you ask Trading Standards you should get the same answer.


Quote: one of my US lenses came with a third party (Mack) warranty (snipped) Some importers provide their own warranty.

If you get a Mack warranty you probably get less than a Nikon International warranty.
Digressing you are perhaps confusing another companies warranty with your legal rights often to a refund or replacement at your option on a UK based sale.


Quote: If you claim that Nikon is obliged to honour the warranty on ALL grey market

Please - try to understand what I have written.
I have said if there is a Nikon Japan warranty that says Nikon UK will carry out warranty work then under English Law there seems nothing to discuss.

Quote: I was referring to a recent discussion on dpreview (if my memory is correct). You contradicted my post, stating that if someone buys a camera in a duty free shop at an airport, then when they enter the UK, they must pay VAT.

If above the tax free threshold - why not ask Customs and Excise?


Quote: Thom Hogan has examined many D800 cameras, and concluded that there is a problem. (snipped)He has also concluded that many of the cameras that were said to have an AF problem, didn't. But, overall in his opinion a significant number of those shipped were faulty.

Thom does not quantify how many he has seen, or what percentage were tested only with his own basic test rather than Nikon's AF guidance.

Quote: My guess is that stock is allocated to markets on a random basis, but that is only a guess, and may be wrong.

You are wrong.
For DSLR's Nikon use the first number to designate the warranty territory.
3 is USA, now over about 46,000, and increasing by about 1,000 a week, UK/EEC is 6, now over 45,000 from my 33000 inJuly. Japan etc have separate sequences.


Quote: I have seen you squabbling with people on dpreview, claiming that there is no AF issue or something like that,

I have never said there is no D800 with an AF issue.
I have counted images posted on dpreview and currently make it 83 ignored Nikon's AF guidance, and none followed it.
There is little to discuss without an example. You have forgotten to mention more are now posting on dpreview it is possible to get the same issue with other Nikon DSLR's. If as some say say 20-40% of D800's were defective there should be at least one image out of 83 using Nikon's AF guidance.

Quote: Incidentally, there were some very real problems with earlier cameras, where banding was seen. I can think of one person who had 3 Nikon cameras with banding (the original, and two replacements).

How interesting Wink
Research at Nikonians estimated no more than 3% of the first 6 weeks production had the issue.
If you asked the service manager of Nikon at Focus UK the following February (as I did as a Nikon Pro User) you would likely have been told the same as I was - less than 2.5% of D200's had been returned for all issues.

Quote: And you have to ask if it would be fair for Nikon UK to have to honour the warranty on a grey import.

Why?
If the box comes with a warranty issued by Nikon Japan saying Nikon UK will carry out warranty work, Nikon Japan own Nikon UK.
How costs are allocated between Japan an UK is a corporate decision.

User_Removed
8 Oct 2012 - 3:27 PM


Quote: You contradicted my post, stating that if someone buys a camera in a duty free shop at an airport, then when they enter the UK, they must pay VAT.

This is one of those instances where fact and unfounded opinion seem to be getting confused.

The FACTS of the matter (check with HMRC) are that if you bring any goods into the UK that you have bought in an EU country, and paid the full tax in that country, then you do not have to pay VAT when you bring them into the UK.

If you buy goods in any country outwith the EU or if you buy them in the EU but do not pay tax in the EU country of purchase (as would be the case if purchased in airport duty-free shops), then you have a duty-free allowance of 390 on goods other than separately specified alcohol and tobacco. You have to declare and pay both Import Duty and VAT on any such goods valued over 390.

Attention!

This topic is locked.
Reason: At OPs request