Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
D700 or D610?
Page <<first <prev 5 of 6 next>
Nov 24, 2022 19:59:11   #
bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri
 
Driving a VW van over the Rockies...you must be speaking from personal experience or someone very close. A friend had one of the later model VW vans, the more boxy looking jobs. She said going up the Rockies was 30-35 mph at best.

I considered the 600-610 but then a low mileage 800 came up locally for a really good deal. A person should be able to take a good photo with just about any camera under average conditions. It’s when specific obstacles come up that one model will pull ahead, but under differing conditions it can fall on its face.

Cameras are no different than motorcycles. A canyon carving sport bike will beat you to death on a 600+ mile day. A big heavy touring bike like mine is super comfortable, or at least until you hit a road loaded with sharp curves, then it works you to death. I suspect there are very few “bad” modern cameras but some are certainly better suited for particular conditions. And like bikes, some don’t do anything really well but neither do they do anything really bad. Those middle of the road bikes and cameras tend to be the ones easiest to live with year after year.

Reply
Nov 24, 2022 23:30:28   #
Wallen Loc: Middle Earth
 
bikinkawboy wrote:
Driving a VW van over the Rockies...you must be speaking from personal experience or someone very close. A friend had one of the later model VW vans, the more boxy looking jobs. She said going up the Rockies was 30-35 mph at best.

I considered the 600-610 but then a low mileage 800 came up locally for a really good deal. A person should be able to take a good photo with just about any camera under average conditions. It’s when specific obstacles come up that one model will pull ahead, but under differing conditions it can fall on its face.

Cameras are no different than motorcycles. A canyon carving sport bike will beat you to death on a 600+ mile day. A big heavy touring bike like mine is super comfortable, or at least until you hit a road loaded with sharp curves, then it works you to death. I suspect there are very few “bad” modern cameras but some are certainly better suited for particular conditions. And like bikes, some don’t do anything really well but neither do they do anything really bad. Those middle of the road bikes and cameras tend to be the ones easiest to live with year after year.
Driving a VW van over the Rockies...you must be sp... (show quote)


That sums it up pretty well.
It is just a matter of finding the right tool for the job.
What usually happens is a wrong or too high expectations(because of wrong info, hype & advertisement?). Then it gets thrown out the window and called trash when it really isn't.

I've re-read the OP's response and the mention of having old school skills and being confident with all manual camera got me into wondering, If he got the skills to focus manually, then the auto focus weakness of the D610 is a moot point. Mated with good long lens and "yeah, I think a he can make a D610 work fine". IMHO, still not the best choice for flying stuffs but sure, it could work.

In some way it was already mentioned, better cameras (for the most part)only make shooting easier. If the user has the skill and willingness to sweat it out, good photos can be made with (almost)any camera.

It is only at the extremes or specifics where some cameras become a better tool over the others, but it seems that there it is always a heavy weight and expectation for that capability to be there. We forget all the good traits for a shortcoming it really was not meant to do. Like calling a fish stupid because it can not climb a tree.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 01:14:05   #
User ID
 
therwol wrote:
I do understand the sarcasm here, but it doesn't necessarily apply when you're talking about a camera that is a piece of junk. There are some pretty damning assessments of this camera (D610) in this thread by people who have owned and used it. It has dismal autofocus, can't focus in low light and had mechanical issues. One person even mentioned batteries exploding. You could be the best photographer in the world, but you could also be struggling to get this camera to do what you want it to do while the person next to you is happily taking great pictures with their iPhone. The best option for a person on a budget who can't buy the latest and greatest would be to look at Nikon's next generation of cameras, D750 or D8xx, excluding the D850 for cost reasons. The number of Nikon lenses already owned pretty much rules out switching brands.
I do understand the sarcasm here, but it doesn't n... (show quote)

Clearly sarcasm escapes you.

As the author of the post that mentions three batteries catching fire, the black finish coming off all over my hands, and its reluctance to start up in damp chilly weather (like its an english sports car) I can definitely say that you really do NOT understand blatant sarcasm ... therefor plz stop claiming that you do !

Seriously, how could one camera have three battery fires ? Clearly, one battery fire would be the end of the road for it !

Reply
 
 
Nov 25, 2022 01:24:26   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
Wallen wrote:
I've re-read the OP's response and the mention of having old school skills and being confident with all manual camera got me into wondering, If he got the skills to focus manually, then the auto focus weakness of the D610 is a moot point. Mated with good long lens and "yeah, I think a he can make a D610 work fine".


In all honesty, I was not aware that the D610 had focusing issues. Or at least, I hadn't read any information to that effect.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 02:08:59   #
User ID
 
kb6kgx wrote:
In all honesty, I was not aware that the D610 had focusing issues. Or at least, I hadn't read any information to that effect.

Hold on while I go and test it.








OK, Im back.

Result is no hey problemo ... except acoarst for the exploding battery ;-)

D610 was my first really useful digital Nikon. Its no longer really up to date. However its very typical of its day and remains a useful SLR thaz commonly available on a mini budget.

For anyone having a clutch of Ai lenses theres no better way to reactivate them to their full functionality.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 02:15:58   #
Wallen Loc: Middle Earth
 
kb6kgx wrote:
In all honesty, I was not aware that the D610 had focusing issues. Or at least, I hadn't read any information to that effect.


From my own personal experience,
Not really an issue but a weakness if compared to the D7200 or other models afterwards, for the type of shooting aforementioned.

Because the sensors are all bunched up in the center, fast moving subjects that go all around the frame like birds in flight or when composing a subject you want to put in one of the corners, it becomes more work for the photographer.

For general photography it is actually good if not great. Weatherproof, magnesium body, Nice colors, good low light noise, focus is accurate and can run at 6fps, with good lenses.

For reference, these were edited of course but were captured with a D610:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-580096-1.html
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-757095-1.html
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-717553-1.html

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 07:26:46   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
kb6kgx wrote:
In all honesty, I was not aware that the D610 had focusing issues. Or at least, I hadn't read any information to that effect.


Because it doesn't ...

Reply
 
 
Nov 25, 2022 08:30:22   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Because it doesn't ...


Two votes against that statement in this thread from actual users.

Thomas 902: "The most unacceptable was the D610 which had the worst AF of the bunch... I sold it after it's terrible showing for shooting league soccer... It simply couldn't track the action (however my current D7200 can) and does! btw, the D610 was totally blind in low light scenarios...

I owned and shoot the Nikon D610 for Sports and yes it's crippled by old technology... I has the same Multi-CAM 4800 autofocus sensor module from the Nikon D7000 (39 AF points, including nine cross-type points.) What is even worst is those 39 autofocus sensors have to cover a huge area (read 1.5 time larger than DX Nikon D7000). Please unless you have actually shot both cameras maybe rethink advising others."


Wallen: "Its main Achilles' heel is focus. It is slow in finding focus and the sensors are bunched in the center, as if a low end APSC focus sensor was thrown into a full-frame camera."

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 08:33:03   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
therwol wrote:
Two votes against that statement in this thread from actual users.

Thomas 902: "The most unacceptable was the D610 which had the worst AF of the bunch... I sold it after it's terrible showing for shooting league soccer... It simply couldn't track the action (however my current D7200 can) and does! btw, the D610 was totally blind in low light scenarios...

I owned and shoot the Nikon D610 for Sports and yes it's crippled by old technology... I has the same Multi-CAM 4800 autofocus sensor module from the Nikon D7000 (39 AF points, including nine cross-type points.) What is even worst is those 39 autofocus sensors have to cover a huge area (read 1.5 time larger than DX Nikon D7000). Please unless you have actually shot both cameras maybe rethink advising others."


Wallen: "Its main Achilles' heel is focus. It is slow in finding focus and the sensors are bunched in the center, as if a low end APSC focus sensor was thrown into a full-frame camera."
Two votes against that statement in this thread fr... (show quote)


Being less than other cameras better suited to action does not make the camera's AF a failure. Surely you can understand this?

Moreover, a human failing to use a single high-precision AF point in continuous tracking is not the equipment's failing. That's the human failing, as per the usual UHH sequence of events when reviewed in detail.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 08:43:06   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
User ID wrote:
Clearly sarcasm escapes you.


Still working on it. Give me a pass this time.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 08:46:49   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Being less than other cameras better suited to action does not make the camera's AF a failure. Surely you can understand this?


I think it all depends on your goals and needs. If you need better autofocus, you shouldn't buy this camera. If you don't, then you probably won't notice the shortcomings. Given the OP's objectives and the fact that the D610 was mentioned, I think it has been fair to say that this isn't the camera to buy.

Reply
 
 
Nov 25, 2022 08:48:19   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
therwol wrote:
I think it all depends on your goals and needs. If you need better autofocus, you shouldn't buy this camera. If you don't, then you probably won't notice the shortcomings. Given the OP's objectives and the fact that the D610 was mentioned, I think it has been fair to say that this isn't the camera to buy.


Reaching the right conclusion for the wrong reasons is not a victory to savor.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 21:20:52   #
bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri
 
New technology is great stuff, although it oftentimes dumbs down us humans. How did photographers ever take sharp photos before auto focus came along? I use gps for construction surveys but most young technicians today have no idea of how to use a level you actually have to look through. The radar-automatic braking on new cars is great although the driver can now tailgate in relative safety, knowing the car will apply the brakes if needed. Anti lock brakes allow you to stomp on the pedal with both feet and never lock up a wheel. Young drivers no longer need to know how to drive safely on slick roads. And with all the apps and gps out there, how many young people today can read an actual paper road map?

Hi tech is great, but no matter what it is, just don’t depend upon it blindly. You never know when you might be in the middle of nowhere with no internet access and all you have is the old road atlas under the seat to get you back to civilization.

Reply
Nov 25, 2022 22:16:46   #
User ID
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Being less than other cameras better suited to action does not make the camera's AF a failure. Surely you can understand this?

Moreover, a human failing to use a single high-precision AF point in continuous tracking is not the equipment's failing. That's the human failing, as per the usual UHH sequence of events when reviewed in detail.

I especially like the "two votes" thing myself. Its a reeeeeeal hoot.

Im an actual D610 user so I know BS when I see it. Those two "voters" have never had any cred for me, and theyre not even entertaining (except for that whacky avatar ... ). I always just skip over their stuff. But, if someone else actually values those two votes, thaz purified distilled UHH, which acoarst is the backbone of the operation.


(Download)

Reply
Nov 26, 2022 13:29:40   #
User ID
 
Theres a a great deal on a 610 with lens over in the buy/sell section. $625 and youre all set. If you ignore the opinions of the lemmings and parrots you can easily produce great results for next to nothing $$wise. Just buy it.

But if you lizzen to lemmings and parrots youll get shiddy pix and then spend big $$ for no improvement :-(

If you ever outgrow the 610, that lens is the proper type for full functioning on an FTZ adapter. I know cuz I use it.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 6 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.