Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Nikon Recalls The D100  
User currently offlineDSMav8r From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 579 posts, RR: 7
Posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3924 times:

Well, some suspicions about the D100 have now been confirmed...Nikon is recalling all first shipment D100s in the U.S. and Canada. Apparently, all D100s *currently* shipping have been corrected.

Here is the link:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1027703635.html


Aric Thalman
Omaha, NE


To most people, the sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the sky is home
48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3851 times:

Another Nikon sucess...why not just buy a d60 and be done with it Big grin

LGW


User currently offlineDSMav8r From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 579 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3853 times:

Why buy a D60 when you can buy an S2?  Big grin

Seriously though, this has happened with Canon as well...Remember the whole 1D fiasco?



To most people, the sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the sky is home
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3841 times:

Ah, 1D  Insane D30/60 forever  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Buy an S what?  Laugh out loud

LGW


User currently offlineAlaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3844 times:

How many MP will the D100 have, and how much is it?

-Dmitry


User currently offlineDSMav8r From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 579 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3826 times:

6MP (3008x2000) and $1,999.


To most people, the sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the sky is home
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3834 times:

You wouldn't have that problem with Kodachrome.


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offline5280AGL From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 414 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

Oh yeah --- and by the time my kodachrome slides get back to me I will be old and gray ...with inferior results to what you can get from even a consumer digicam.

User currently offlineFUAirliner From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 538 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3812 times:

"Oh yeah --- and by the time my kodachrome slides get back to me I will be old and gray ...with inferior results to what you can get from even a consumer digicam."

A Kodachrome K64 slide still contains more details than any of the high-end digital SLRs can capture. When a slide is scanned some data is lost, but a well-scanned K64 slide (or any other slide) has a better quality on the screen than most of the pictures produced by "consumer" digital cameras (prices lower than US$800).


Frank



Frank Unterspann - Hamburg, Germany
User currently offlineJoe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 53
Reply 9, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3792 times:

A Kodachrome K64 slide still contains more details than any of the high-end digital SLRs can capture. When a slide is scanned some data is lost, but a well-scanned K64 slide (or any other slide) has a better quality on the screen than most of the pictures produced by "consumer" digital cameras (prices lower than US$800).

Frank
=====================
simple solution Frank- shoot kodachrome and use a D60!  Big grin  Big grin

on the D100- i was just having a conversation with some of the guys here on email yesterday about Phil's review that says the D100 images are soft and now this- oh man, i can see things heating up again today with these guys
 Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Joe


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 10, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3775 times:

Well let them boil.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3778 times:

Good old digital...see why I'm staying with film until I have no other choice?


-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineJoe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 53
Reply 12, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3775 times:

Hey USAir757, I never had even one single problem with my digital camera- just amazing results (D60)

Joe


User currently offlineDSMav8r From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 579 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3756 times:

I think there are still misconceptions about film vs. digital. Film, in an unscanned state is more detailed than any digital shot. It is when a slide goes through the scanning process that things change. Unless you have an expensive drum scanner ($5,000-$200,000), you are going to lose quite a bit of the detail in your shots. This is where digital has a big advantage...It gets rid of the "middleman" and has one less process to go through before it is in digital state.

If you do some searching, there are tons of comparison reviews on the web. ALL of them conclude that digital is superior to any film for web and enlargement applications.



To most people, the sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the sky is home
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3728 times:

If you do some searching, there are tons of comparison reviews on the web. ALL of them conclude that digital is superior to any film for web and enlargement applications.

Not what I have read... For web images maybe (anyone can make a 72dpi image at 640x480 which is all that is usually required for the web) but for enlargements you want the maximum amount of data you can get.
Digital machines like the Fuji Frontier don't do very large sizes for a reason: they can't make them good enough, only a tradiational enlarger can...

Even a cheaper scanner produces more data than a digital camera. At 2900dpi, a Minolta Dimage II produces scans of approximately equivalent to an 11 MP digital camera. No current commercially available digicam comes close.
The more expensive units like the Nikon Coolscan 4000 produce 60-100 MP easily.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 3725 times:

Long live film cameras.

A took the decision last year to remain a film shooter.

Sorry folks, but in my opinion, digital is cheating. You take a shot, you see how it is, you don't like it? You delete it and take the shot again.

Doesn't teach you how to become a good photographer. While in film, you shoot, you wait a few days for your film to be developed and the results turn out bad. So you try even HARDER next time, and you improve your skills.

That's the way to learn if you ask me.

One thing that I do not like about digital is it's color accuracy. While some are better than others. I've noticed digitals are not nearly as good in color accuracy as Kodachrome or other films. Whites have in general a slight yellow tone in them, blue's have a tint of green or they turn out too blueish.

Also, you get the "digital grain" in dark blues sometimes. Blue is the hardest color for digital from what I have observed.

I'll be shooting my first slide roll next week (Sensia 100). Then once I get better, I'll move on to K64 or Provia 100F.  Smile

Don't forget that true professional photographers such as John Fielder (nature photographer with several books) still uses a traditional film SLR. Also the studios still use film and not digital.

I agree, digital is convenient. You don't have to pay for film or developing, and you have the photos instantly. But part of photography in my opinion is waiting for your photos to be developed and finding out the results AFTER a few days and not instantly after you take the photo.

My only complaint about film photogrpahy is the cost pf film and development. But that's life. You have to pay for things. I better get a job soon.  Smile

Just my humble opinion about film vs. digital.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineLOT767-300ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3730 times:

"Sorry folks, but in my opinion, digital is cheating. You take a shot, you see how it is, you don't like it? You delete it and take the shot again.

Doesn't teach you how to become a good photographer. While in film, you shoot, you wait a few days for your film to be developed and the results turn out bad. So you try even HARDER next time, and you improve your skills."

How is it cheating?

Ok with the second part i disagree totally. Digital cameras IMO are better for learning because you dont have to waste money or time on film and scanning. Also you can see right away waht your results are not wait 3-4 days or more. You can try harder right away on the next plane not the next time you go to the airport.

"One thing that I do not like about digital is it's color accuracy. While some are better than others. I've noticed digitals are not nearly as good in color accuracy as Kodachrome or other films. Whites have in general a slight yellow tone in them, blue's have a tint of green or they turn out too blueish."

You can usually fix colors with Photoshop if it craps up.


User currently offline5280AGL From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 414 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3726 times:

BA --- I disagree with most of what you said.

How is digital cheating? So, you don't have to buy film, pay the lab x-amount for developing, and then find someplace to store the prints/slides. If anything, digital is BETTER than a film SLR at teaching you to be a good photographer. Instead of having to wait to get your film processed to see your mistakes, you can see them instantly and adjust accordingly. You don't have that luxury when shooting film, plus you are still at the mercy of the developing process, what you see if may not be what you originally shot. With digital, what you see is what you get and you have complete control over the final image. It is kind of hard to tell what you did wrong when Joe Bob at the Walmart photo center is correcting your photos for you with his machine.

Your digital grain comment holds no truth whatsoever, you have obviously never shot a professional digital SLR (D30, D60, D1X, D1H, S1, S2, D100). Go take a look at a.net members shots who use professional digital bodies (Joe, Colin, Chris, Peter, Aric, Gerry, ...and many more) and tell me their shots are noisy and subpar compared to film.

True professional photographers only use film? Are you serious? What planet are you from? I only know a handful of true professionals who still use film, plus the world's best wildlife photographer, Moose Peterson is a Nikon D1H user. As for studio photographers, almost all of them use digital as well, unless medium format is needed. Professionals who use film have automatically put themselves at a disadvantage. While they are sitting around getting their slides processed, Joe Blow with the D1 has already processed his photo and has had it published. Most publications want digital images now. I know this very well, my entire family consists of professional photographers, including my wife who is a photojournalist for the Chicago Tribune, do you think they use film? No, they use Nikon D1Xs and D1Hs.

I agree that film still has its place, but digital is a better solution for most working professionals and advanced hobbiests.


User currently offlineDufo From Slovenia, joined May 1999, 800 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3718 times:

Take a look at these wonderful large format photos...

Dean Allchin @Airliners.net

Jernej



I seriously think I just creamed my pants without any influence from any outside variables.
User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3701 times:

Doesn't teach you how to become a good photographer. While in film, you shoot, you wait a few days for your film to be developed and the results turn out bad.

Oh yeh... With digital, you notice your mistake there and then, correct it, and learn by what you did and don't make the same mistake next time. With film, by the time you've waited a few days for your film to be developed, you can't remember what you did that was wrong. Good way to learn... NOT!  Big grin

Andy


User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3688 times:

Digital cameras IMO are better for learning because you dont have to waste money or time on film and scanning.

Who said learning is free?

You can usually fix colors with Photoshop if it craps up.

Then that's a problem isn't it?

Instead of having to wait to get your film processed to see your mistakes, you can see them instantly and adjust accordingly. You don't have that luxury when shooting film, plus you are still at the mercy of the developing process, what you see if may not be what you originally shot. With digital, what you see is what you get and you have complete control over the final image. It is kind of hard to tell what you did wrong when Joe Bob at the Walmart photo center is correcting your photos for you with his machine.

That is EXACTLY why I believe digital is cheating. It doesn't teach you patience, it doesn't teach you to accept mistakes. Because you simply delete those mistakes and don't take the time to learn from them.

Digital is taking the EASY way out. And the easy way out is not always the best way out. I like a challenge. Digital is not a challenge.

Your digital grain comment holds no truth whatsoever, you have obviously never shot a professional digital SLR (D30, D60, D1X, D1H, S1, S2, D100). Go take a look at a.net members shots who use professional digital bodies (Joe, Colin, Chris, Peter, Aric, Gerry, ...and many more) and tell me their shots are noisy and subpar compared to film.

Oh, a D60 isn't professional enough? I've handled many digitals before, plus seen examples comparing them with film. Digital grain shows up in practically ALL digital cameras depending on the exposure, and the color. Take a good look at the examples on Airliners.net. Many of them have these dark blotches in the blue sky. Not nice if you ask me.

True professional photographers only use film? Are you serious? What planet are you from? I only know a handful of true professionals who still use film, plus the world's best wildlife photographer, Moose Peterson is a Nikon D1H user. As for studio photographers, almost all of them use digital as well, unless medium format is needed. Professionals who use film have automatically put themselves at a disadvantage. While they are sitting around getting their slides processed, Joe Blow with the D1 has already processed his photo and has had it published. Most publications want digital images now. I know this very well, my entire family consists of professional photographers, including my wife who is a photojournalist for the Chicago Tribune, do you think they use film? No, they use Nikon D1Xs and D1Hs.

90% of professional photographers (any kind, not just aviation) shoot slides. You do the math.

I agree that film still has its place, but digital is a better solution for most working professionals and advanced hobbiests.

I entirely disagree there. Why don't you tell to that slide shooters?

Another thing, have you ever heard of something called a PERSONAL OPINION? You take things very personally and when someone says something you don't like, you get offended! That's how your post sounds.

Oh yeh... With digital, you notice your mistake there and then, correct it, and learn by what you did and don't make the same mistake next time. With film, by the time you've waited a few days for your film to be developed, you can't remember what you did that was wrong. Good way to learn... NOT!

It is a good way to learn. Because it's challenging. And the harder something is, the more you learn, because the more effort you put it.

I believe digital is good for quick, fast shots such as photos of family. But when it comes to professional photography as a job, or just as a hobby. Slides are the way to go on a traditional film SLR. This is why most professional photographers shoot slides. This is my own opinon.

Again folks. These are MY own personal opinions and there are others that share it aswell. NO ONE has to disagree with me. Why do you seem to take them so personally? Aren't I free to have my own opinion? You are free to have your own opinions, and I am free to have my own opinion.

Don't criticise me because I have a different view from yours.

That's all I have to say. I expressed my views about digital vs. film.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offline5280AGL From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 414 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3693 times:

BA --- Since when were you an authority on anything? You obviously are very lackluster in knowledge when it comes to photography, your rants and false information prove that quite well.

How can you logically sit there and say that digital is the easy way out and film is more challenging? Last time I checked, it was pretty easy to drop my film off at some 1 hour photo lab, only to have them develop and digitally correct my photos for me so I can have nice prints. At least with digital [b]I[/b] have the final authority as to how they look. How is that the easy way out? You tell me, you're the genius, apparently.

Also, I have no idea where you came with the notion that 90% of professional photographers use slide film. That is probably the funniest thing I have heard you say. Again, you tell me how you have obtained this vast wealth of knowledge when it comes professional photography? How many professionals do you know? I probably know 100, not including 12 members of my family that do this for a living. Out of all of those people, I probably know 3 or 4 who don't use digital. Why? Because those people either cannot afford the equipment or they have contracts with a film company.

Lastly, I am not offended by your post per se, it just irritates me a that a know-it-all, KID like you who obviously knows nothing about photography is trying to lock horns with people who were shooting before you were even a blastula. I am glad that you are loyal to film, congrats. But, you really need to re-evaluate your facts, because you are completely wrong.


User currently offlineMikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 54
Reply 22, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3690 times:

Hey Joe at least Nikon fixes the problems before the ship out 1000 bodies unlike Canon (D60) where a few months down the road you have upgrade the firmware. I've heard a few people had a bunch of problems with the firmware upgrade and shipped their (useless) D60 back to Canon. Hmmmmm scary I say.

Mike


User currently offlineDSMav8r From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 579 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3670 times:

Yikes! This topic started out friendly enough.  Smile

BA,

I also have to humbly disagree with many things that you have said, most of which were already covered.

90% of pro's use slide film: COMPLETELY untrue

Digital is less challenging than film: false

Digital is cheating: Prove it

Digital is grainy: Show me a Provia or KR scan that is clearer & sharper than a D60 image.

You learn more when using film: How so? Andy made a very good point about this...Seems the opposite to me.

Digital isn't a better choice for professionals: Tell that to a newspaper photog or to anyone on a deadline.

Digital has poor color accuracy: Come shoot my D1H and tell me it has poor accuracy. If you expose your shot properly, this won't be a factor. This applies to film as well.




To most people, the sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the sky is home
User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3662 times:

Since when were you an authority on anything?

What on earth are you talking about?
It seems like you like to stir up trouble.

You obviously are very lackluster in knowledge when it comes to photography, your rants and false information prove that quite well.

And you know better? Please.......

How can you logically sit there and say that digital is the easy way out and film is more challenging? Last time I checked, it was pretty easy to drop my film off at some 1 hour photo lab, only to have them develop and digitally correct my photos for me so I can have nice prints. At least with digital I have the final authority as to how they look. How is that the easy way out? You tell me, you're the genius, apparently.

It doesn't take a smart one to answer this one. In digital, once you take the photo is instantly there available for you to look at and decide whether it's good or not. If it's good, you keep it. If it's bad, you simply delete it.

When you take are using film, you don't see the results for a few days until after the photo is developed. You keep asking yourself "How will they turn out? What can I do next time to improve them?". After a few days when the photos are developed, you get them back and you see the final result. Whether they are good or bad, you can't "delete" them. And what's done is done. You CAN'T go back to the scene and take the photo again. What's done is done. You blew it, it's time to improve your skills and move on.

Now is that really difficult to understand Chris? Give me a break.....

Also, I have no idea where you came with the notion that 90% of professional photographers use slide film.

Statistics, surveys. Is it that hard?

Lastly, I am not offended by your post per se

You sure sound like it.

it just irritates me a that a know-it-all, KID like you who obviously knows nothing about photography is trying to lock horns with people who were shooting before you were even a blastula.

Excuse me? KID? Is that how you treat others on this forum? By calling them a KID? Did you bother to check my profile? If you did, you would've seen it says 16-20. That's not a KID. I assume someone who is 26-35 is also a kid according to you?

You assume things too many things. I don't know anything about photography? I've been into aviation photography for 3 years now. I've been using cameras since I was 5 years old taking pictures of family, and other things with a simple Minolta point-and-shoot. Don't tell me I know nothing about photography.

But, you really need to re-evaluate your facts, because you are completely wrong.

Interesting........

It's you that needs to re-evaluate your facts and CHILL OUT.

You take things so personally, it's incredible.

Your insults toward me simply show that you don't know much about this topic and that insulting me is the only way to prove that you are superior and know more about photography than me.

I'm not going to bother arguing with someone who behaves like this.

If you carried it out in a calm, polite manner then I would've continued this discussion with you. But that is it for me.

I'm not offended by your remarks at all. I'm just not going to waste my time with you anymore.



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
25 LOT767-300ER : Always thought Gerry used a F707..... "90% of professional photographers (any kind, not just aviation) shoot slides. You do the math." Did you just ma
26 Skymonster : Digital is taking the EASY way out. And the easy way out is not always the best way out. I like a challenge. Digital is not a challenge. [Film] is a g
27 Post contains images 5280AGL : Damn, if Gerry uses an F707, I am impressed ... They look like SLR shots. BA -- Whatever, you are obviously content on sticking to your "facts", which
28 Carlos Borda : From what I've read/heard.... when the the D60 debuted it had it shares of bugs and kept it hush hush from consumers. That's why Canon issued a firmwa
29 Post contains links BA : DSMav8r, 90% of pro's use slide film: COMPLETELY untrue Tell that to the people who concluded the study. Digital is less challenging than film: false
30 Post contains images Staffan : I shoot slides, and I have not one, but TWO Pentax Spotmatics, purchased in the late sixties. Wooohoo, I'm a Pro!!! Staffan
31 BA : Thanks for sharing that Carlos. I know there are a couple aviation magazines that will only accept slides if you want your photos published in there m
32 Post contains images BA : Staffan, My dad has a Pentax SPOTMATIC from the 60's also. That is one amazing camera. But it's HEAVY! If I want to start using it, I better start wor
33 Staffan : Considering what some people spend on film and development, the money spent on a DSLR pays back rather quickly, plus the fact that you can take as man
34 BA : One more note and then I'm going to to get some fresh air. I am NOT in ANY way attacking digital cameras and there users. I am SIMPLY expressing my vi
35 Carlos Borda : Me myself... I think Paul's digital shot looks better. And I shoot K64. ~Carlos "BA wrote" Here is a comparison for you between digital and film. Digi
36 BA : Staffan, Like I said, cost is my biggest complaint about film photography. Regards
37 Post contains images Staffan : My biggest complaint about film is that so few labs can develop without scratching the hell out of my slides... Hey, BA, wanna join my club DRD (Dare
38 BA : Carlos Borda, Detail wise, Paul's shot may be better. But I didn't like the colors in his shot like I said earlier. Also for some reason, Andy's K64 s
39 Post contains images BA : LOL Staffan. Regards
40 Carlos Borda : Let me make myself clear... I said for the "most" part Airways and Airliners use slides for the bulk of their print work, but I think the newest issue
41 Skymonster : Well, on the comparison, we had a debate about that some time ago. The K64 image is very contrasty, the colours on the digital not quite what I like.
42 Post contains images Carlos Borda : It's all a matter of personal viewing taste... in this particular example shown, to me on the web the digital image from Paul looks more appealing and
43 Post contains images Carlos Borda : Hey Andy.... from what I've read the firmware upgrades are for features that I'm sure we would never use for aviation photo related. Sometimes myself
44 DSMav8r : BA, I respect your opinion. I am just concurring with others on here that some of your arguments are not based in fact. Hell, I shot Kodachrome for 10
45 Dazed767 : 50mm sunny side-on shots on slides and artsy farsty stuff on digital. Exactly why I bought my F707....artsy fartsy type shots (flight deck, cabin and
46 L-188 : I should be getting a Spotmatic in a few days, to suplement my Zenit. Any tips from you guys. Now there is a proper camera:D
47 EGGD : ok lets clear one thing up: K64 = amazing slide, poor scan (I have yet to see a K64 scan that looks better than most digital images from digicams). Di
48 Joe pries : EGGD, youre wrong my friend- take a look at my uploads and some otheres here who have mastered kodachrome 64 AND digital- both can yield phenomenal re
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The D100 Battery Pack And The D70 posted Tue Aug 10 2004 03:27:59 by Cancidas
I Am The Proud Owner Of A New Nikon D80! posted Fri Jun 29 2007 10:41:05 by AussieAviator
Sam Chui's Nikon D100 Being Raffled! posted Sat May 26 2007 00:54:38 by Tomascubero
More On The Nikon 70-300 VR posted Wed Jan 3 2007 04:52:04 by D L X
Any News On The Nikon 70-300 VR... posted Sun Dec 3 2006 18:32:06 by D L X
Sony Alpha, Nikon D80, Or The Canon 30D? posted Sun Dec 3 2006 07:52:33 by Kaitak744
A Nikon D200 In The House! posted Sun Oct 8 2006 16:43:56 by Nucky
Nikon Announces New Flagship: The D2Xs posted Thu Jun 1 2006 07:52:41 by IAH777
Setting F-stops On The Nikon D50 posted Thu May 18 2006 03:28:26 by Cadet57
My Thoughts On The Sigma 80-400mm OS Lens (Nikon). posted Tue Dec 13 2005 21:49:48 by Yanqui67