Comments for Digital Photography

Comment on SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB, SDHC, UHS-1 Flash Memory Card SDSDXPA-032G-X46,Black by studysession

studysession — Fri, 18 May 2012 23:40:37 +0000

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful

fast data transfer, March 24, 2012

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB, SDHC, UHS-1 Flash Memory Card SDSDXPA-032G-X46,Black (Personal Computers)

Upgrading to this card has made a world of difference in the speed it takes for my camera to save both RAW and JPG formats. I was using the Sandisk 30mps 32GB card before this. What a difference the data transfer rate of this card can make.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comment

Comment on SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB, SDHC, UHS-1 Flash Memory Card SDSDXPA-032G-X46,Black by Gadget Geek

Gadget Geek — Fri, 18 May 2012 23:33:34 +0000

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful

Worth the xtra money!, March 26, 2012

Gadget Geek (Phenix City, AL) -

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB, SDHC, UHS-1 Flash Memory Card SDSDXPA-032G-X46,Black (Personal Computers)

I also own several SanDisk Extreme Memory Cards and the Extreme Pro wins 'hands down'! It is WAY faster than the Extreme card. I used this card in my D7000 and I don't have to stop taking pictures to wait for my memory card to catch up :)

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comment (1)

Comment on SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB, SDHC, UHS-1 Flash Memory Card SDSDXPA-032G-X46,Black by Mr. Romeo Sevilla Jr. "dcflip"

Mr. Romeo Sevilla Jr. "dcflip" — Fri, 18 May 2012 23:02:10 +0000

9 of 9 people found the following review helpful

FASTEST SD CARD EVER., January 18, 2012

Mr. Romeo Sevilla Jr. "dcflip" (New Jersey) -

This review is from: SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB, SDHC, UHS-1 Flash Memory Card SDSDXPA-032G-X46,Black (Personal Computers)

My third SD card and finally worked on my hacked GH2. Perfect combination. way over 100mb/s, 24H, 1080p, 24fps. Worked like a charm. I'm saving for a 64GB UHS1. Highly recommended.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comments (2)

Comment on Plustek OpticFilm 7600I SE Film Scanner by pghqa

pghqa — Fri, 18 May 2012 00:01:59 +0000

46 of 48 people found the following review helpful

Convenient film scanner, October 7, 2010

pghqa -

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Plustek OpticFilm 7600I SE Film Scanner (Office Product)

I have been scanning all my 35 mm slides using a borrowed scanner of another brand. I only got up to 1984 and had to return it, so I tried to buy my own of that brand only to find it was no longer made. Picked the Plustek based on other user comments, plus it is almost the only game in town at that price point.

I have been very pleased, starting with prompt delivery, and excellent packaging. The instructions for packing are printed on the box meaning the factory people will probably get it right, plus I know how to squeeze everything back in the box to store or to sell it when I am through with all my slides.

Slide holder holds 4 2x2 slides. I was worried about manual advance compared to auto on borrowed unit, but find this better and faster. I can move them at my leisure and retouch one at a time, rather than all 4. Quality of the scan appears excellent and there are many options for color and lighting correction.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comment

Comment on Plustek OpticFilm 7600I SE Film Scanner by Jack

Jack — Thu, 17 May 2012 23:22:33 +0000

58 of 58 people found the following review helpful

Great for what I needed, December 30, 2010

Jack -

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Plustek OpticFilm 7600I SE Film Scanner (Office Product)

I waited a long time to purchase a 35mm slide scanner. I know very little about photography but love anything technological. My father, long deceased, was an avid photo bug and believed only in 35mm slides. He meticulously cataloged every slide he took. As a gift to my mother, I agreed to digitize his collection but did not want to go with a commercial digital lab because I wanted the pleasure of going through each and every slide. Yes, there is a 400+ page manual that I haven't read it yet but plan to eventually. I watched the very helpful Quicktime videos that accompany each of the basic features as I went (I have the SE version, not the Ai) and they did the job. I use a recent Macbook Pro. After one day of playing with a few test slides, I dove in and started working with my father's slides. I am very impressed with the iSRD function on the auto setting (that's the dust and scratch removal function of the SilverFast software). I tried fiddling with the manual settings of the iSRD but was unable to get any better results than the auto iSRD. Maybe once I read the manual I'll understand that better. Over three days I processed just around 100 slides taken between Dec. 1968 and March 1969 (just a drop in the bucket for my overall project!). While not perfect, the difference between the original slide and the post production digital image (set at 600 dpi) with mostly automated software was remarkable. I have not made prints of anything yet, but I did burn the ones I completed to a DVD and played them as a slide show for my mother. Her expressions were worth the price. The only difficulty I experienced was with some night shots. In these cases where a person was the subject of the shot and the background should have been solid black, the subject of the shot scanned extremely well, but the black background would often scan as red. I tried fixing through color correction, but that also changed the tones of the subject. Overall, this was a small inconvenience for me and probably could be handled much better by those with more familiarity with the software or photography.

Pros: Quiet, Very good auto functions in the software, Easy to get started
Cons: For more serious users the 4-slide manual feed might be annoying (for me, it's no problem), as I understand, it reads ONLY 35mm film (again, that's what I wanted so it's no problem for me), Can't use the IntelliScan or QuickScan buttons on the scanner itself when using a Mac - that part is PC only.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comment

Comment on Plustek OpticFilm 7600I SE Film Scanner by Vernon Mount

Vernon Mount — Thu, 17 May 2012 22:50:59 +0000

133 of 135 people found the following review helpful

Restore and fix "lost" images superbly, August 25, 2010

Vernon Mount (Alexandria, VA USA) -

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Plustek OpticFilm 7600I SE Film Scanner (Office Product)

I was scanning my family's old slides and needed something that would fix the faded ones.
I also wanted enough resolution to capture the sharpness and contrast of Kodachrome. The inexpensive scanner I had was making images taken with a Leica look like snapshots from a Brownie.
The scan results from the Plustek are at times unbelievable. The resolution is very high. But it is the software that really makes this scanner special. Over-exposed, under-exposed and images that have faded with time, such as Ektachrome, Anscochrome or non-Kodak processing, can be reasonably restored. The program is intuitive and the learning curve was short and easy for me. I do have some experience with photo editing software.
As with all photo editing, it does take 3 to 10 minutes to properly restore a bad slide. I was impressed with its ability to remove spots and scratches. This scanner was worth every penny I paid for it. The major down side is having to take the slides out of Carousel trays and insert them into the holder 4 at a time, and wait for each to scan. It needs a "Stack Loader" and automated slide scanning.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comment

Comment on Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) by se

se — Wed, 16 May 2012 23:59:32 +0000

453 of 509 people found the following review helpful

Unbiased Review of 5DmkIII vs D800, April 4, 2012

se -

This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

I'm a Sony shooter with only a few lenses. I use to shoot Canon during the film days. I tested both the Canon 5D mkIII and the Nikon D800 and here are my results. I tested a 5DmkIII with a 24-70 f2.8 lens and a Nikon D800 (not D800e) with a 24-70 f2.8 lens.

High ISO:
About the same, except D800 has a lot more detail to work with. In Lightroom, I can save a higher percentage of ISO 6400 shots because the D800 has more detail. Canon seems cleaner initially in Lightroom but when the picture fits into a 24" 1920x1080 monitor or a 64" Samsung plasma TV, the Nikon looks a tad cleaner, noise less noticeable. I think the Canon looks cleaner in Lightroom because it is just a smaller picture. But displaying ISO 6400 shots on a monitor or TV, Nikon looks nicer in general. Both cameras at ISO 12,800 look awful and not recoverable in Lightroom. It might look acceptable as a really small pic but why the heck would you buy an expensive camera to display crappy looking pictures?

Frames per second:
Easy winner. Canon can shoot 6 FPS, Nikon 4 FPS. However, in practice I think 4 FPS is pretty good. None of these cameras are really Olympic style sports cameras.

Resolution:
Easy winner. Nikon's RAW files are more detailed, almost 3D like. I can't really explain it other than the pictures look more real. I can crop a photo to 1/3 it's size (12 megapixels) and it still looks stunning. I wonder how much better the D800e version is. I'll have to wait until my friend receives his to find out.

JPEG:
Easy winner. Out of the camera, the Canon JPEGs are phenomenal. The processing done is quite remarkable.

RAW:
Easy winner. If you shoot RAW, Nikon is it. Also there is an issue with the Canon with the color red. I think the color is overblown at times because all the details are loss and not recoverable in Lightroom. Not always but it has happened at least twice. The same photo on the Nikon kept all the details.

Autofocus:
About the same. Canon and Nikon have awesomely quick autofocus and I couldn't determine a difference. The only caveat is that Nikon focuses better in lowlight (without the autofocus assist lamp) and also the Nikon focuses when there is almost no light (with the autofocus assist lamp). Why the heck doesn't Canon include an autofocus assist lamp is beyond me. Also, Nikon's face detection is extremely useful because it focuses right on the eyeballs.

Flash:
Easy winner. Canon doesn't have built in flash. Nikon flash worked surprisingly well.

Dynamic Range:
Easy winner. Nikon knocked it out of the park. I got a lot less blown highlights with shots with white clothing and more realistic blue skys. Also, there is a lot more headroom on both the highlights and shadows on the Nikon when editing in Lightroom. How did Nikon have better shadows and highlights! They have to share some of that technology!

Video:
Suprisingly about the same. I would have thought that Canon's lead in video would maintain. Surprisingly, the Nikon's video was just as awesome as the Canon. Nikon's video has a bit more detail and is definitely a little sharper than the Canon. I didn't test Nikon's uncompressed HDMI out, although it seems to be a useful feature (this is like RAW HDMI output for video). Canon should adopt uncompressed HDMI out also.

Price:
Easy winner. Why anyone (who doesn't already have Nikon or Canon lenses) would buy this Canon for $500 more than the Nikon would need to think twice. I can see why the Nikon is selling so much better than the Canon, at least on Amazon.

Comfort:
Both about the same weight. Both feel nice in the hand. Canon possibly slightly more comfortable if you have bigger hands. Nikon maybe more comfortable with smaller hands. Both are fine though.

USB transfer:
Nikon wins with USB 3.0. Skipping the card reader altogether by just plugging in the camera to the computer is convenient. Also the transfer speed is much much faster than Canon's older USB 2.0. This saves a lot of time.

LCD Screen:
Canon has slightly better screen in direct sunlight (LCD facing up towards the sun). Nikon is better when the LCD is not directly facing the sun. Nikon's screen is crisper and more 3D like.

Weatherproofing:
My last day of shooting was in a light mist/drizzle. I was shooting both cameras again for about 20 minutes when the Canon 5D mkIII developed some fogging inside the viewfinder screen. I could not wipe it away as it seemed to be inside the camera. I could no longer take pictures normally without live view. Nikon didn't have this problem and I continued to shoot the rest of the day with the Nikon in the same wet conditions without issue. I had planned to shoot at least 2 weeks with both cameras so this was definitely a bummer.

Lenses:
Both Canon and Nikon's 24-70 2.8 lenses are great. I would say... Read more

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comments (46)

Comment on Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) by Emmanuel "ShutterMan"

Emmanuel "ShutterMan" — Wed, 16 May 2012 23:47:49 +0000

69 of 72 people found the following review helpful

Best in Class, April 26, 2012

Emmanuel "ShutterMan" (Seattle, WA USA) -

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

...
See that my purchase is verified by Amazon. Below are my observations after one month of ownership.

Pros:
+ Resolution: Beautiful detail, just make sure that your lenses are up to the task.
+ Dynamic Range: Incredible, when shooting in lower ISO's it is near impossible to ruin a photo. Do an internet search for: "fred miranda d800 review Yosemite" to see real life comparisons.
+ Color: Adobe profiles are horrible, create custom profiles using a MacBeth chart with Adobe DNG profiler and the colors will amaze.
+ AutoWB: Excellent, much better than the D3/D700. *** See Tip Below ***
+ Low ISO: Having a true 100 ISO is godsend for on-location studio lighting setups.
+ High ISO: The D800 and LR4 do an excellent job in controlling noise. Using PS plugins a properly exposed image can print acceptable 6x9's at 12800 ISO (max for D3/D700's is 6400).
+ LiveView: The live exposure preview is a new and pleasant feature.
+ Build and Weatherproofing: I shot three weddings with this camera and all three had slight to heavy rain. The camera performed excellent in all occasions, as did my D3.
+ Handling: The auto ISO is easy to engage and the new position of the ISO button is more intuitive when looking through the viewfinder than on the D700. Like the D700, the D800 is extremely customizable.
+ Autofocus modes: S(ingle) AF point is very good for stationary subjects at close and far distances; 9 point AF: works well with close range subjects that move, but in long distance shots it may select a contrasty pattern on the shoulder and throw the eyes a bit out of focus; 3-D: tries to follow the subject based on color and it works quite well; Auto: looks for what it thinks it the closest face. It comes in handy when taking action photos with the camera overhead.

Neutral:
~ Handling: I prefer the AF switches of the D700. The magnification + - are opposite from the D700, a small irritation.
~ Exposure: Better than D3/D700, but far from perfect. Contrary to Nikon's literature, it struggles with backlit scenes.
~ Frames per second: I rarely shoot in continuous, and when I do, I have my D3/D700 set to CL (continuous low-speed) of 3 FPS.
~ Battery Performance: It can get me through a full day's shoot if I avoid extensive LiveView or WiFi use, otherwise I need to use a backup battery.
~ Autofocus: The AF is very similar to the D3/D700, good but could have been better. The center sensors are quick and reliable, the extreme corners work well, but they are not as quick and require high contrast subjects. For example, when shooting with the razor-thin DOF of the 85mm 1.4, slight rocking back and forth movements will cause plenty of out of focus shots. Set the camera on a tripod and the outer sensor works perfect on subjects with contrast. The center sensors are quicker at micro adjustments and compensates quickly for movements.

Cons:
- Software: Nikon software can produce excellent results, but it is clunky and slow.
- Handling: The mode selector button is awkwardly placed. I prefer the D7000 U1/U2 style custom banks.
- JPEG: Nikon has the worst jpeg engine; competitors like Olympus, Panasonic, and Canon put Nikon to shame. Although I would never shoot JPG, there are those that do, and this camera will let them down.
- Autofocus: 1.) All 51 points are still too centrally located 2.) No increase in cross-type sensors over the D3/D700 3.) All the cross-type AF sensors are in the middle. 4.) Like the D3/700, the outer sensors are near useless in low lit, low contrast situations.
- LiveView: There is a well reported bug when using LiveView at 100% viewing, although I am still able to focus, I heard that is a deal-breaker for many landscape shooters. I have no idea how people survived 100 years of film or shoot $20k+ Hasselblad's.

D800 resolution on tested lenses:
* Nikon 24-70 2.8 G: Center is good at f/4, excellent from 5.6-9; Corners good from f/5.6-9, OOF CAs are very high from F/2.8 to 5.0; works well for studio/fashion work
* Nikon 35mm 1.4 G: Center and corners are good from F/1.4-2.8, all excellent from F/3.6-11
* Nikon 50mm 1.8 G: Center and corners are good from F/1.8-2.5, all excellent from F/2.8-11
* Sigma 85mm 1.4: Center and corners are good from F/1.4-2.0, all excellent from F/2.5-9
* Nikon 85mm 1.4 G: Center is excellent and corners are good from F/1.4-2.0, all excellent from F/2.5-11
* Nikon 85mm 1.8 G: Excellent center and corners from F/1.8-9
* Nikon 70mm-200mm 2.8 G: Center is excellent and corners are good from F/2.8-4, all excellent from F/5-11

*** TIP *** Remove the dreaded Nikon green cast by shifting the WB Fine-Tune (pg. 149) 2 points toward Magenta on each setting, (Auto, Daylight, etc..) and enjoy perfect skin tones.

Summary:
Using proper... Read more

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comments (4)

Comment on Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) by M. Billon

M. Billon — Wed, 16 May 2012 23:11:20 +0000

137 of 141 people found the following review helpful

A clear improvement over the already excellent D700, April 10, 2012

M. Billon (France) -

This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

I know that the D800 is not really the replacement model over the D700. Nevertheless, it did replace my old D700 and the D800 is, I believe, better suited for my photographic needs than the D700, i.e., studio, portraits, and landscape.

The D700 was and still is an outstanding DSLR. The D800 is of course better, but in a very perceptible way, which was quite a surprise to me.
I have done over 5000 shots since my purchase on 24 March. So far, no issues to report: no green cast from the LCD and no problems with the CLS system.
Nikon has really outperformed with this new DSLR and the clear improvements are:
- Much improved Dynamic Range, which was my main problem since my first DSLR
- Better colors straight off the camera: deeper and richer
- Better AF in low light
- Highly detailed photographs at full res, 100% magnification and also when down-scaling the photos.
Let's not forget a proper and useable HD video feature at broadcasting quality.

On the negative side (there has to be some):
- The zoom in and zoom out buttons are reversed from the old models, which is now more logical, but I am used to the old wrong way! it's a minor problem of course.
- D4 has backlit buttons, why not on the D800? This can't be that expensive to include.
- Very expensive Battery pack, this is a major drawback for me. But yes, the D800 is well priced at $3000. I just hate ridiculously priced accessories.
- still wonder the point of having 1 CF slot and 1 SD slot. 2 CF slots would have been superb. But I guess if you come from a SD card DSLR, that would be practical for you.

One crucial point that has to be considered when acquiring a 36MP DSLR: storage will be an issue. I just purchased a 4TB ext hard drive. A 14-bit RAW file (uncompressed) coming from the D800 will average 75MB.

I just shot a wedding, and I consider the D800 to be an excellent choice for the job. All the complains about shots being more blurry at 100% magnification are irrelevant. One has to be precise with his/her settings, at the right exposure and optimal shutter speed, results can be absolutely mind-blowing. And since most won't need 36MP for wedding photographs, down-scaling images will certainly eliminate slight camera-shake or noise.

One particular aspect that I appreciate is that my Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G is now tack-sharp at f/1.4. I had a front focusing issue with my old D700 even with the fine-tune option set to max. Since I'm no techie geek, I still don't understand why the D700 gave me problems with the 85mm.

Anyway, I used to be one of those people saying that digital photography will never replace film photography. The D800 has changed all that.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comments (5)

Comment on USA Gear Professional Series Weather Resistant Digital SLR Zoom Holster Case & Gadget Bag for Nikon , Canon EOS , Pentax and More dSLR Cameras – Accommodates Extended Battery Grips & More! by Cheryl W

Cheryl W — Wed, 16 May 2012 00:08:58 +0000

8 of 8 people found the following review helpful

Excellent camera bag, June 2, 2010

Cheryl W (Watertown Ma USA) -

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: USA Gear Professional Series Weather Resistant Digital SLR Zoom Holster Case & Gadget Bag for Nikon , Canon EOS , Pentax and More dSLR Cameras - Accommodates Extended Battery Grips & More! (Electronics)

This is a great camera bag for the money.
Well made and it holds my Canon digital rebel camera and stuff.
The hard case bottom is excellent and the sling inside keeps the camera from bouncing around.
I would recommend this camera bag to anyone.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you?

Comment