i only want the 24G & 85G ...

This post has been edited by eddy230379: Apr 6 2011, 10:15 AM

wow...
d box set is reali nice...
not availalble in malaysia rite..?

one question though. why would anyone want to shoot at 3200 or 12800?
well, for those who shoot at those iso (at least oftenly or constantly)

me unless emergency i will go to 3200 (since it's emergency so noise level is not something that i care)
if not, maximum is 400 only.
heck, the hasselblad H4D that i am trying now can go up to 200 max. lol

Coz they dunno how the generation of sensors are going.... D7000 16MP sensor is a step ahead of all those 12MP D5000,D90,D300s, D700 n D3s in terms of generation. Wait till FX comes up with the next gen sensors..... then pawn D7000 kao kao liao....

Picture spam

i dunno, the fact that u use "FX" instead of D800 really makes me smile..
no need to pwn d7k bah..

Sometimes dine in hotel, fine dining in wine house where flash will distract others.
I uses ISO 3200 with 1.4 lens still no enough

Waaa, cannot imagine when D4 , D400 , D800 come out. The noise performance

D3S waiting for you

this is true indeed. saw some pics at some flickr thatthe D7k's ISO performance is almost on par with the D700. so nikon must work on the D800 to be better than any of these. this is interesting. just like u said. oh nikon, pls put me out of my misery and show me the D800!

any1 know how much is the D3100 cost right now?

D800 then no more investment in photography gears
As if

Mainly for low light capability and when you don't want to use a flash.

My experience for instance, when I was using a D90 I usually go about ISO800 at maximum for low light, but with D700 I know I have buffer up to ISO3200. Like wise, if the new sensor can perform at 12800 similarly with what my D700 can do at ISO3200 I can opt for smaller aperture or faster shutter. It gives you more flexibility.

It will be better than D7000, its a bigger sensor with lesser pixel density.

LOL, the journey doesn't end

How could it end? Next time you can tell your children:

I used to own a D90, but now is already a dinosaur.

Next time can give D90 to ur kid as a toy. good learning tool lol

then later when they birthday the present will be DSLR stuff....pain oh every year give like that

Why not? If not then why improve the iso capability or buy camera with better iso capability?

If one is in a situation where he/she is not allowed to use flash (or some reasons), in lowlight, need to freeze motion with X shutter speed and already on wide aperture. Should he or she under-expose by using lower iso? This will just introduce more noise/grain when under-expose.

In latest Nikon provided beginner guide, it shows and explains very well on the usage of the ISO, why this shot uses ISO6400, etc. I used to limit myself at ISO, learned the hard way finding out how bad the noise/grain due to under-expose shot, affected all my shots.

Justg sharing, nothing wrong with using higher iso if you need it (e.g. when you need the fast shutter speed and certain aperture OR you need to expose the background in night shots and at same time need fast shutter speed, etc)

---

Added on April 6, 2011, 12:15 pmKent , i wonder do you count how much you spend on your gear

17-55
50mm
70-300
35mm
sb-900
battery grip


This post has been edited by SSY22: Apr 6 2011, 12:15 PM

EH pls la.... ppl 1 70-200 VRII cover all these cheap gears ok

Alright, im just asking only.

17-55 not cheap (especially NEW)