BriceJohnson From Canada, joined Mar 2012, 44 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1640 times:
Hey All!
I was wondering who of you guys out there uses a Nikon D3100... I am using one, and have failed to get any photos accepted here. I would like to see the work of those who shoot with a d3100.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7238 posts, RR: 32 Reply 1, posted (3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1637 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
I thought we established in an earlier thread that the problem with your lack of acceptances lay not with your equipment, but with your technique? A D3100 in the right hands is more than capable of producing images of acceptable quality for here, as is pretty much any dslr. If you have specific questions about the D3100, please feel free to ask, but if you're seeking advice about how to get images accepted, perhaps we should move this thread to the Feedback forum where you can post some examples of the images you have submitted.
DL747 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 273 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1629 times:
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1): If you have specific questions about the D3100, please feel free to ask, but if you're seeking advice about how to get images accepted, perhaps we should move this thread to the Feedback forum where you can post some examples of the images you have submitted.
I agree. I think it would be better off in the feedback forum where we can help you out with specific images. Like Dana said, the D3100 is perfectly fine for a.net. I have one and they are great starter cameras. I don't have images here (yet), but on the "other" site, you will find my images under John McGee. I am still working on getting shots god enough for here. It is about the person who is doing the shooting, not the camera, as long as it is a decent dslr or similar. I have a 55-300 and a 16-85 as my primary lenses and they work great. Technique wise, I recommend a tripod and a shutter no slower than 1/250 for moving aircraft if you are not panning (non-prop that is.) For my lenses, f/8 or so is usually where I try to shoot. Keep the ISO as low as possible, 100 is all you need in good weathe,r usually. Also, a good location that is as close as possible to the airport and with the right light is a must. Get to know the airport officials and let them know what you are doing so they are not suspicious. They appreciate it, and in all my experiecnes 99.99% of them agree to my photo taking. Keep practicing, that is what got my images accepted on the web and hopefully here soon!
DL747
Just like the shirt says, Boeing Builds It Better!
trvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1311 posts, RR: 11 Reply 5, posted (3 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 1567 times:
D3100 is more than enough for this site. Even if you shoot a bunch of photos in P mode atleast a couple of the would be aaceptable, if skill is an issue. the issue you may have could be related to post processing and cropping or if you think it is your equipment you better take it to Nikon and have it checked for calibration etc.
I am considering a Nikon capable of shooting 5 shots a second though, would that help for quick action shots?
The D600 comes to mind...........though I doubt if it would be compatible with my oh-so allround Tamron 18-270 Piezo Drive lens.
No Tax On Rotax
Als vader voorlicht, kan je merken dat hij achter ligt.
DL747 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 273 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1521 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 7): I just wonder- how is the filming settings on it?
I don't do a whole lot of video (assuing that's what you mean by filming) but what I have shot is very good. The AF, however is problematic, manual focusing is really the only good option, and I would recommend another camera or camcorder for video, if that is the camera's main purpose.
Just like the shirt says, Boeing Builds It Better!
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7238 posts, RR: 32 Reply 10, posted (3 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1483 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting BriceJohnson (Reply 9): I think that I am doing something wrong in photoshop cs5 and PSE10 though.
I thought it was made pretty clear - the problem lies not with your camera or processing, but with your technique. Some examples of recent submissions so people can at least have some idea what we are dealing with:
A different camera or better processing are not going to fix the flaws with these images.
PHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4959 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (3 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1475 times:
Quoting DL747 (Reply 8): I don't do a whole lot of video (assuing that's what you mean by filming) but what I have shot is very good. The AF, however is problematic, manual focusing is really the only good option, and I would recommend another camera or camcorder for video, if that is the camera's main purpose.
I guess my current camera is fine enough for filming, i just have to steady my film shots a bit. I'm going to try that rubber band technique someone PM'd me about.
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 10): A different camera or better processing are not going to fix the flaws with these images.
Ok i'm definitely not a pro(no photos on this site) but yeah that first one with all of the smog.... that's never going to be a good shot.
BriceJohnson From Canada, joined Mar 2012, 44 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1433 times:
Oh, thanks for the pics Dana. I don't have a membership yet (I plan to get one) so I can't put pics on the forum. And thanks for the encouraging advice. I thought that my quality was really bad... maybe not. I will work more on technique.
darreno1 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 214 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (3 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1356 times:
I have about 50 or so pics in the database taken with a D3100. I no longer own it but image quality was never a problem. As mentioned before, it is more than adequate for getting pics accepted here.
DL747 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 273 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (3 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1352 times:
As has been said, the problem is with technique, not the camera. Virtually and DSLR is adequate enough provided you know its parameters. Also essential is the knowledge of light, ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, as well as how they relate to each other. The D3100 isn't particularly great above ISO 400, but most camera need nr then anyway. If you know how to operate the D3100, it is very capable of getting images accepted here and on any of the other aviation picture sites.
Just like the shirt says, Boeing Builds It Better!
PHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4959 posts, RR: 14 Reply 16, posted (3 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1345 times:
Quoting Ideekay (Reply 13): I got the D3100 also but I have only got 2 shots in the database from it, im also not very happy with the results.
Quoting darreno1 (Reply 14): I have about 50 or so pics in the database taken with a D3100. I no longer own it but image quality was never a problem. As mentioned before, it is more than adequate for getting pics accepted here.
I want to know why you guys decided to get rid of it. I'm getting a D3100 soon when I go to Japan and I usually buy cameras every few years, because I seriously have no money
If I'm going to invest in a camera and lens, it better last me a while.
DL747 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 273 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (3 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1343 times:
I can absolutely assure you that the D3100 is 100% FINE. It will last and is absolutely sufficient enough. I can guess they got rid of them for a bigger and better camera like the D7000. It has better low light capabilites, among other things.
Just like the shirt says, Boeing Builds It Better!
darreno1 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 214 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (3 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1343 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16):
I want to know why you guys decided to get rid of it. I'm getting a D3100 soon when I go to Japan and I usually buy cameras every few years, because I seriously have no money
For me it was strictly a matter of features. I wanted a body with a built-in focus motor (so I can autofocus a greater number of lenses), and wanted more dedicated buttons with dual dials. Image quality, white balance (daytime) and ISO were all great on the D3100.
avion660 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1324 times:
I agree, the D3100 is a great handling camera, and I love mine
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16): I want to know why you guys decided to get rid of it. I'm getting a D3100 soon when I go to Japan and I usually buy cameras every few years, because I seriously have no money
I'm not getting rid of mine, BUT, if I was buying a similar camera now I would buy the D5100. I also haven't got the cash for the 7000 or other higher spec versions.
Hey, I was just wondering which 55-300mm lens you use, I looked online and there appears to be a couple of variants, I am looking for a new zoom lens for my D3100 but wasn't sure which one to get, any advice? Thanks
DL747 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 273 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (3 months 13 hours ago) and read 1261 times:
Quoting 7jdrabble (Reply 21):
Hey, I was just wondering which 55-300mm lens you use, I looked online and there appears to be a couple of variants, I am looking for a new zoom lens for my D3100 but wasn't sure which one to get, any advice? Thanks
Well I was going to take this up as a Personal Message, but I can't, because you have to pay for that. Anyway, there is only 1 variant of the 55-300. There are 2 of the 70-300, which is not the same lens. If you are going to buy one, get the $589 70-300 version, it has the best AF, sharpness, and image quality.
DL747
Just like the shirt says, Boeing Builds It Better!
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Mar 2012, 44 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 273 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2011, 371 posts, 
From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4959 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Jun 2012, 183 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 196 posts, 
From Slovenia, joined May 2001, 985 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
