Didn't realize that Nikon does in fact care about us

SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Can't think of a better sub to post this in, but I never realized that crop mode on FF bodies was almost exclusive to Nikon. Such a simple feature that lets you recycle your DX gear even after you make the FF jump, yet Canon totally screws it customers by saying no. That said, well, why do people go with Canon in a long run? Too much money? Not realizing what they're getting into?
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Haha, but still, to screw people right at that format jump stage that's pretty bloody expensive in itself, is just cruel.
 
J

jrleo33

Senior Member
With my FX D600, the DX mode helps even though I have no DX lenses. On my Nikkor 70-200 F/4, the DX mode lets me crop out at 300mm.
 
D

DraganDL

Senior Member
Well, it isn't the Nikon-only feature, really - if I understood it correctly, Sony's new mirrorless A7 line is capable of using the older "A" "and "E" lenses made for translucent mirror Alphas and NEX APSC cameras, in a 1.5x crop mode, (though, these older lenses require an adapter). "The camera offers three options for its APS-C crop mode - Off, Auto and On"

Sony Alpha 7R Review: Digital Photography Review
 
Last edited:
P

Pretzel

Senior Member
Yup, that offers me hope for an easier transition in the distant future, and YUP, Sony jumped on to that feature as well. Even so, most of my lens purchases since getting my DX have been FX lenses so I wouldn't have to stress all that much when the time does come.
 
N

Nathan Lanni

Senior Member
SkvLTD said:
Can't think of a better sub to post this in, but I never realized that crop mode on FF bodies was almost exclusive to Nikon. Such a simple feature that lets you recycle your DX gear even after you make the FF jump, yet Canon totally screws it customers by saying no. That said, well, why do people go with Canon in a long run? Too much money? Not realizing what they're getting into?
Click to expand...

I think Nikon does care about it's customer base - as much as any huge corporation can. IMHO their DSLR's are a pretty good value for the money. If you like older lenses that's a plus, too, although I'm guessing that may not be as big a factor as camera IQ continues to increase. I've read here that folks with good quality glass don't have much interest in the older lenses. My experience yesterday at the Southern California Nikon Service Center was pretty good.

I've looked at Canon and they're not bad. They have certain things such as video capability that seems to attract a lot of people, today, even if you're not the best at something if you get enough people to climb on board your standard that makes you the winner anyway. That new sensor and auto focus system in the 7d is pretty wild, but I understand it's optimized for certain lenses, and doesn't work as well for their "L" series lenses.

My best way to relate to is this: Back when I was a teenager, I liked a lot of different cars, which today we would call vintage and antiques. I was pretty good mechanically and did a lot of street racing. Although I had my own car, half-dozen other guy's had me wrenching on their cars anytime they blew an engine, transmission, rear-end, etc. They were all different makes and models - mine was one of the 2 or 3 AMC's on the street and they had Fords, Chevy's, Dodge/Chrysler's, and one friend had a crazy Volkswagen he raced at the strip. They had their loyalties and always talk sh*t about the other guys makes and models. I'd just listen, but felt why can't I just pick the best of each. There was no need to choose. I feel the same way today - sure it's a big investment to go all out Nikon or Canon, but that doesn't mean you can't sell it all and change course someday. It keeps these companies on their toes if they know their customer base would walk away. FWIW.
 
Last edited:
D

Dave_W

The Dude
Don Kuykendall said:
I was surprised that my D7100 had a crop mode. 1.3 carries it down the the same resolution as the D7000. Still I had rather just crop my photo as needed.
Click to expand...

I'm confused, both sensors are the same physical size (but different # of pixels) so cropping wouldn't give the same resolution. In fact, resolution is fixed by the sensor and cropping doesn't affect it. In order to match a D7000 you would have to down sample the image, no?
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Dave_W said:
I'm confused, both sensors are the same physical size (but different # of pixels) so cropping wouldn't give the same resolution. In fact, resolution is fixed by the sensor and cropping doesn't affect it. In order to match a D7000 you would have to down sample the image, no?
Click to expand...

My guess is it's a crop to the mirrorless size area and with it less MP being used.
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
teagueAMX said:
I feel the same way today - sure it's a big investment to go all out Nikon or Canon, but that doesn't mean you can't sell it all and change course someday. It keeps these companies on their toes if they know their customer base would walk away. FWIW.
Click to expand...

Sure, but when we're talking upgrading within the brand and camera type, why make it harder for the customers?

I'll use a crappy analogy of say, wanting to drop a slightly bigger LS into a Vette, but then hearing that in order to enjoy that slightly better engine you MUST get a brand new Vette as it's simply and completely incompatible with yours.
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
jrleo33 said:
On the D600, when set to DX, only 10.2 MPs on the sensor are used as oppossed to 24.4 MPs on FX mode.
Click to expand...

Correct. The files it produces are smaller. However, the resolution of both the FX and DX images are the same. Resolution is a function of pixels per inch and not dimensions of the image.
 
D

DraganDL

Senior Member
@Nikon cropped vs Canon cropped@
In this case, the main problem (which, many Canon's customers are not aware of until it's too late) is that, if they purchased a APS-C EOS camera, but want to be "future-proof" (that is, planning to switch to a full frame, or to add such camera to their gear one fine day) they should buy only full frame lenses, designated with "EF", not the "EF-S" lenses (covering only the 1.6x cropped sensor bodies). The EF-S lenses cannot be even mounted on ff Canons, thanks to a "slight" difference in mechanics.
 
Last edited:
N

Nathan Lanni

Senior Member
SkvLTD said:
Sure, but when we're talking upgrading within the brand and camera type, why make it harder for the customers?

I'll use a crappy analogy of say, wanting to drop a slightly bigger LS into a Vette, but then hearing that in order to enjoy that slightly better engine you MUST get a brand new Vette as it's simply and completely incompatible with yours.
Click to expand...


I totally agree with you on that point. Unfortunately, I don't have enough DSLR history to talk without fear of contradiction, but it seems Canon made a break in their lens line ups and compatibility a few years ago, such that Canon fans had to make some hard decisions to stay with the brand or not. Again not having the whole history but I've read a number posts in different places telling of Canon fan defecting to Nikon (and others brands no doubt) on this very point. So basically speaking Canon has priors in this arena of culling the heard for business reasons, forcing the most loyal fans to upgrade.

However, the same thing can be observed with the iPhone. This is by no means a statement about the iPhone or Apple because today Apple makes some fantastic products. However, I have just a tad of marketing background and have to say Apple has no fear stretching the limits of fan loyalty. I defected from Apple years ago - my MacPlus is a novelty item sitting in the back of my closet. Apple Mac's have matured tremendously over the years, but back in the 1980's it was Steve Jobs at his finest with marketing hype and very little to back it up. In those days, a major portion of my income was custom home design/drafting and I needed to step up to CAD. The MacPlus was near impossible to upgrade, and the newest model Apple offered with expansion capability cost a small fortune. I had purchased for my small business Macintosh compatible hardware, accounting software, database software, Excel, Word, etc., to run on my MacPlus, but after I polled the major CAD/CAM software developers, I walked away from Apple and bought a PC. By comparison they were like trying to make fire by rubbing sticks together but true production applications were available, allowing me to upgrade for 1/3 the cost vs Apple's marketing treadmill, hoping to get another ration of technology from Apple.

Seems what you're talking about is analogous to my experience with with Apple. Again, Apple makes some great products and their fan loyalty is justly deserved.
 
Last edited:
D

DraganDL

Senior Member
I'd say, Apple with it's iThis and iThat (pod, pad, pud, ped...) is more like counting on those who suffer from craving for a "status" (being a VIP, with the dark glasses, body guards and a nice little girl with the high heels & black stockings, a co-called "busyness escort" etc.). Pretty much like Leica, whereas Nikon, Canon and some others, too, are more like "let's do the job - that's why we're here, right?"...:rolleyes:
Recently, there were reports (no, it isn't a joke - it really happened) of some people (respectable owners of The Products) cried with anger when Apple publicly admitted it's planning to start the production of somewhat cheaper products, based on Android...
 
Last edited:
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
@ that crop mode on 7000/7100, I'm guessing its micro 4/3s vs DX. And FX is vs DX.

@ Canon, they began with condemning their vintage lenses to the modern cameras that makes little sense, and then yea DX|FX cut which makes seriously zero sense.

@Apple, since when was it true status/business icon before the newer stupid/consumerist generation? Status and business finesse has been Palm/Nokia > Nokia/Blackberry and still is today even though HTC started mixing in when Nokias slowly began to drop off and that carried into Android. There isn't even anything premium about Apple hardware, all they ever had was an OS that, for all its worth, restricted potential damage pr0n could cause to a computer for those too lazy to learn to set up the OS correctly/use some basic anti-virus software. All for a premium price of course.

Kind of similar to where DSLR era is heading, and I'm relatively against the notion of making high end equipment easily useable to those who'll never care to fully learn how to use it properly, yet will desire similar quality and results.
 
Top