Blog Comments

  1. Dave_W's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by STM
    Honestly I have never had a dust problem with the D700 and because I only use primes I am changing lenses constantly. Which cameras seem to be the biggest culprits?
    So far it would seem that the D600 is the king of this dust/oil issue. So far it's just speculation that the spots are oil instead of dust however I've not yet heard a definitive call of these being oil. It could also be highly static-charged particles that are clinging to the "sensor". Beyond the D600 the D7000 had its share of dust/oil issues. I was forced to return my D7k for shutter/mirror box replacement around 5 months into it.

    And you're also right about the D700 and although dust certainly can get on the D700's "sensor" there is very little talk or complaints about it being overly dusty. I was into my D70s a good 6 yrs before I had spots and a quick turn of the blower removed them all. So this does seem to be an ever progressively worse issue.

    Then again, do we know if resolution is playing a role in the seeing of these particles? Might that be another potential reason the newer cameras are showing so much dust/oil?
  2. STM's Avatar
    Honestly I have never had a dust problem with the D700 and because I only use primes I am changing lenses constantly. Which cameras seem to be the biggest culprits?
    Updated 04-16-2013 at 03:06 AM by STM
  3. crycocyon's Avatar
    As I understand it, photodiodes build up charge and convert that to a voltage, then reset. So the more photodiodes, or the more photodiodes per unit area, the greater the overall charge buildup. CMOS sensors may be using less power each generation based on their efficiency, but the charge accumulation per unit area or over a larger area will lead to overall greater charge for dust particles to be attracted to. As you know, an analogy would be rubbing a comb on a cloth and then your hair sticks to it. Bigger comb or more teeth means hair sticks better.

    But I agree that there is something in the lightpath leading to the sensor that is showing mechanical wear or resolving itself from use after factory assembly that is yielding particles that stick to the sensor.
  4. stmv's Avatar
    if anything,, the voltage is dropping with each generation. so,, I doupt the charge is any different. but the shutter design has changed, so,, its more like mechanical engineering issues.
  5. Dave_W's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by crycocyon
    The sensors build up, store, and release charge so that can attract dust (which itself is charged). As sensors get larger, and higher resolution, there could be more charge and therefore more dust being attracted. But the D600 is an exception since the issue was I think with something in the area around the mirror that was yielding dust during mirror movement. So that is an issue coming out of the factory versus exposure to ambient dust. I don't actually recall reading something about a dust issue with the D800, and if there was a widespread issue I think we'd see more mention of it on the forum here?
    I was thinking something on these lines after I wrote this blog, that perhaps there's a voltage difference between the newer sensors vs. the older sensor such that newer sensors are have more static and therefore attract more dust. The nice thing about this theory is that it would be independent on sensor size. This is pure speculation on my part since I've no clue whether these sensors have more voltage or not. But such a change might explain the difference between older digital cameras vs. newer one.
  6. stmv's Avatar
    I did notice the continued decline in rating with each generation of camera release. and more with the cameras made outside of Japan.

    when almost a quarter of the reviewers are reporting serious issues, it makes you wonder.

    I remember when the D300 or D700 came out,, it was almost 100% postitive reveiws..

    but as corporations cut back, move production off shore, are we seeing the results?
  7. Dave_W's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by FredKingston
    I understand that. I think the terminology is ambiguous...
    Yes, I agree. The two are very ambiguous. That's the reasons I began this blog with what I believe are the main factors that differentiate as so-called "pro" lens from a "non-pro" lens. Since there's no official definition for either type, a term like this is defined by a consensus opinion and hopefully I was able to capture at least the bare minimum of what most would consider the difference between a pro vs. a non-pro lens.
  8. crycocyon's Avatar
    No the dust if it is on the sensor will show up independent of the resolution of the camera (unless the dust particle is much smaller than an individual pixel and they generally are not). So higher resolution per se won't mean being able to see more dust.

    I personally don't think it is a conspiracy by Nikon. Otherwise they would not add dust-off mechanisms for their sensors as well as dust-off reference photo feature.

    The sensors build up, store, and release charge so that can attract dust (which itself is charged). As sensors get larger, and higher resolution, there could be more charge and therefore more dust being attracted. But the D600 is an exception since the issue was I think with something in the area around the mirror that was yielding dust during mirror movement. So that is an issue coming out of the factory versus exposure to ambient dust. I don't actually recall reading something about a dust issue with the D800, and if there was a widespread issue I think we'd see more mention of it on the forum here?
  9. FredKingston's Avatar
    I understand that. I think the terminology is ambiguous...
  10. Dave_W's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by FredKingston
    I missed the original thread where the question was asked..."What distinguishes a "pro" lens ?" I don't recall that Nikon has a designation on their lenses that define all the above points... ???????
    I'm pretty sure I did not indicated this was in reference to a specific thread. This blog is in reference to the on-going conversation about "pro" lenses vs. "non-pro" lenses. Although the term "professional" lens is not officially used by Nikon, nor is the term "kit" lens or "non-pro" lens. These terms, however, are widely used by photographers, both professional and hobbyist alike.
  11. FredKingston's Avatar
    I missed the original thread where the question was asked..."What distinguishes a "pro" lens ?" I don't recall that Nikon has a designation on their lenses that define all the above points... ???????
  12. Rick M's Avatar
    I wonder if we see it more due to the increasing resolution? I think the accessory market is booming as DSLR's became more popular and affordable over the past 10 years. Nikon must be taking a hit on D600 sales as their user ratings all over the net are lower than average due to the dust issue. I think it's accidental, but these accessory companies are really "cleaning up" . Now if Nikon comes out with a new dust removing tool for $300 (only that cheap after the $200 instant rebate), I'll be worried.
  13. Eye-level's Avatar
    Well that depends on what kind of Civic you are driving...trust me there are some bad @ss Civics around...

    No it won't make you a better photographer but it *can* help...

    Using whatever lens you have a whole lot WILL make you a better photographer and more deserving of using a pro lens...

    Remember a pro camera and/or a pro lens doesn't make you some "elite" type of photographer only the practice of photography itself can do that.

    It is nothing like driving a car!
    Updated 04-12-2013 at 06:52 AM by Eye-level
  14. Rick M's Avatar
    I think perhaps yes, if your talent has exceeded the capabilities of the "non-pro" lens. Many unskilled photographers have pro glass, they just never live up to the capabilities of their gear. Pro glass in the hands of someone capable of maximizing it's potential leads to a better photographer. On the other hand, sometimes the unskilled photographer gets "lucky" and walks away with a great shot, all the better with a pro lens. In my opinion, great photography comes down to skill, gear and opportunity, we can control about 67%, the last 33% is the hard part.
  15. eurotrash's Avatar
    Wow, fantastic!
  16. Kias's Avatar
    Oh! Found the birds in the earlier shots. They were in the trees.
  17. Kias's Avatar
    Where the heck did those birds come from 11 photos in?

    Awesome pictures! Glad to see that thing go. Always did think that was one ugly plant when I lived out there.
  18. kklor's Avatar
    Nothing seems to be easy when trying to shop for gear and only a fellow photographer would know how difficult something so fun should be!
  19. STM's Avatar
    What a great way to spend a day, blowing something up! I miss the good old days in the Infantry and Sappers!
  20. pistnbroke's Avatar
    try the manfrotto 222 head ..nothing to compare ...
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast