Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Did Nikon lay another egg?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3
Sep 2, 2018 11:47:02   #
Kuzano
 
camerapapi wrote:
Do not worry very much about the self cleaning sensor in Nikon cameras.
To me it is totally useless.


Wrong!! I have never needed to clean a Sensor in an Olympus DSLR since they came out in 2003, when I purchased both the E300 and the E-1 Pro. Olympus started the self cleaning sensor craze and still puts it in all 4:3 and mirrorless camera's. Fuji also includes it. I am against user cleaning of camera sensors, when it's patently unnecessary with todays technology.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 11:48:37   #
burkphoto (a regular here)
 
Kuzano wrote:
I still believe a "refurb" D3300 is a better camera and better value, than the D3400 and now the D3500. Largely because of the removal of self cleaning sensor.




My wife has a D3300 two lens kit she uses at work. It cost about $500. It makes very good stills and video, good enough for the web site development she does. For new users on a tight budget, I’d recommend finding a used one.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 12:50:37   #
WayneL
 
IDguy wrote:
I never heard an explanation of why they dropped shake cleaning on the D3400. I doubt it has to do with battery life.

We can be sure they did customer research before doing so. And continuing to leave it out suggests they are happy with the decision.

My guess is that their research shows it doesn’t do much. And the target market for this line isn’t likely to look for it or care if it is missing.

I understand no Mirrorless cameras have it.


Fuji has censor cleaning

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 12:57:45   #
JD750 (a regular here)
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Most of us have advised him of what we think of his "discussions" and are now on his ignore list, many times mutually ....


I resemble that remark!

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 13:05:16   #
olemikey (a regular here)
 
burkphoto wrote:
Try http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com and http://photosol.com

MTBF seems unrelated. Years ago, Canon’s EOS 20D was good for 60,000 to 75,000 exposures in our business. It had no sensor cleaner. Our 30D, 40D, and 50D bodies had the sensor cleaning feature, and were good for 115,000 to 140,000 clicks.


Interesting, it was a curiosity from my view, as I had no data.....just a feeling that all that shaking could cause something to happen (as mentioned by some as "flinging stuff around inside"). I defer to you folks with "heavy use/business/industrial" data and history, my digital usage is all hobby, so maybe a few hundred shots per month, per camera (some more than others - I rotate them). Do treat my equipment very well, I'm sure that helps.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 13:40:23   #
DaveO (a regular here)
 
olemikey wrote:
Interesting, it was a curiosity from my view, as I had no data.....just a feeling that all that shaking could cause something to happen (as mentioned by some as "flinging stuff around inside"). I defer to you folks with "heavy use/business/industrial" data and history, my digital usage is all hobby, so maybe a few hundred shots per month, per camera (some more than others - I rotate them). Do treat my equipment very well, I'm sure that helps.


I would defer to some authoritative analysis on the actual value.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 14:50:00   #
IDguy (a regular here)
 
Kuzano wrote:
I still believe a "refurb" D3300 is a better camera and better value, than the D3400 and now the D3500. Largely because of the removal of self cleaning sensor.


And I prefer the infrared release they also took off the 3500.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 16:21:40   #
burkphoto (a regular here)
 
DaveO wrote:
I would defer to some authoritative analysis on the actual value.


Our experience with over 440 various midrange Canons over a seven year period correlated well with industry data.

We had a few bodies fail early, but most outlasted Canon’s estimates, some by a huge margin. Our photographers tended to average 35,000 frames per body per year.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 16:26:22   #
BebuLamar (a regular here)
 
burkphoto wrote:
Our experience with over 440 various midrange Canons over a seven year period correlated well with industry data.

We had a few bodies fail early, but most outlasted Canon’s estimates, some by a huge margin. Our photographers tended to average 35,000 frames per body per year.


I think the more you use it the more frames it would take before it fails. My average is only 1000 frames per year so I may not make the manufacturer rating.

| Reply
Sep 2, 2018 17:58:20   #
fishone0
 
Nikon is a cheap skate remember the D40 without an auto focus had to buy one of there lenses to get it and only a few had it

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.