Nikon D7xxx owners thread

I have two of the same cards, I always format them in the camera, I just can't be sure they have always been in the same slots. I might set the camera up to use Slot 2 as backup and if it happens again, hopefully it will be just one card affected, or, as you say, it's back to Nikon....
 
Just done a search on Lexar Pro card errors and it seems quite a few people are unhappy with them, corrupt files, banding at the bottom of images or just general errors.
Think I'll use them for a while in another camera and see if I get any errors. If I do, I will send them back.
Allan
 
I had problems with Lexar x600 on my Fuji's, they wouldn't download the firmware updates, camera wouldn't recognize them. Changed to Sandisk and no problems. I also have a couple of cheap PNY from Currys and they seem to be performing fine as overflows/backups.
 
I bought two PNY cards from Currys also and now the little lock keeps 'locking' when i insert them into the camera and computer. Probably 8 out of 10 times.

Bought a Sandisk Extreme 60mb/s 16gb card from Amazon for £11.50. Much better and quicker to upload to the PC.
 
Thanks all, I have a couple of Sandisk cards, I think I will use them for a while. I contacted Mr Memory, who sold me the cards, they are requesting that I send them back for testing.
I'll send them back next week when we get home ( currently in France) and see what they say.
Allan
 
allanm said:
Took a few photos today and when I downloaded them to LR , they all seemed fine as thumbnails, but, when I viewed this one full sized, the lower third was completely black. It was fine viewing on the camera LCD screen too, but just putting the card back in the camera, I zoomed in 100% and the bottom third was just green horizontal lines..
So, Is this my camera or SD card? I use Lexar Pro 32gb class 10 600x speed cards.
I have had something similar to this a couple of weeks ago but thought nothing of it and deleted it.

Not a very exciting picture though, I'm afraid.

AllanView attachment 36399
Click to expand...

I had exactly the same problem with a brand new D610 a few months ago, could not sort it with a different formatted card (Sandisk to Lexar Pro) so the D610 went back to Amazon.
 
How often did it happen with your 610? I've taken about 300 shots since I got the corrupted file but with a different card on slot 1. No problems yet, I'll keep going with this card for a while. Won't be home till next Sunday so plenty of opportunity to take more
Allan
 
Anyone using the D7200 for Wildlife Photography or any action photography, if so how are you finding it? Is it a large step up from the D7100 and can it be comparable with the Canon 7D Mark II?
 
We have a member on another forum who has just added one to his D7100 using a Tamron 150-600,not said a lot yet as its early but he posted a shot of an owl inside a rotten tree,he said he could only just see its eyes it was so dark but the D7200 snapped straight into focus,cant tell a lot by the image result as he had to use ISO 10000.
 
shapeshifter said:
When you get your D7200 could you give a comparison with the D4s regarding the auto focus please.
Click to expand...

Of course, won't be out again before the end of the week though :)
 
Joeturner11 said:
Would be highly interested to hear also how they compare when you get the chance :)
Click to expand...

Me to. The D7200 AF seems very good to me but I don't really have anything to compare it to.

Btw, £655.50 at Panamoz at the mo.
 
Well, weather was dull as dishwater today but the D7200 performed really well - I am sure that there are far more 'keepers' today than a normal day, even allowing for the dullness and including when using the D4 and D4S ... I am very pleased with it.
The D7200 seemed to get solid focus much more regularly ... I am used to getting the flickering focus spot quite regularly but for the most part the focus spot on the D7200 remained constant. Tracking of birds in flight went really well ... there was the odd occasion where I couldn't lock focus onto a very busy Little Tern but I suspect this was more due to me than the camera. In the main, once focus was locked on, it would stay on and produce a good image.
It seems that the D7200 is giving me better results from my Nikon 500 f4 than any other camera I've used with it.
I am really looking forward to using this camera in good light as I am expecting to get some good results ... having said that, though the low-light performance is good and definitely an improvement over the D7100, it is not as forgiving as the D4/D4S and certainly doesn't have the buffer/write speed of either but no one would expect it to.
I would class this as a very capable wildlife camera, if you don't need to spray-shoot :)
 
minnnt said:
Some good prices out there! I think this is how Nikon have decided to fight Canon in the TOTR APS-C battle instead of releasing a ground breaking new camera. Seems like a nice upgrade tbh.
Click to expand...
Checking prices? :snaphappy:
 
Still messing with the set-up, but I thought I'd give high ISO a try :)

So I opened my son's door to find him lit only by his Playstation TV and fired of this one. I won't pretend it'd be great as an A3 print, but I'd be happy with it as an A4 :)

Well impressed with this new toy :D

Dave



12800 ISO 1 WEB TP by DG Phototraining on Talk Photography
 
paulcamcas said:
Dave, was that a jpeg or raw? Noise reduction applied?
Click to expand...

It's an "as I'd use it" image - so shot in raw (I never use jpeg) and put through some NR in Lightroom

I know some people show images as - here's the noise level SOOC - but I can't see the point if you're going to apply some NR then just show the end result :)

If I was baking a cake I wouldn't show you an image of the goo before it went int the oven :D

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
It's an "as I'd use it" image - so shot in raw (I never use jpeg) and put through some NR in Lightroom

I know some people show images as - here's the noise level SOOC - but I can't see the point if you're going to apply some NR then just show the end result :)

If I was baking a cake I wouldn't show you an image of the goo before it went int the oven :D

Dave
Click to expand...

Understand your point (& not totally disagreeing) BUT, if you're posting an image to show the capabilities eg high ISO, I would at least expect to see a `before & after`, otherwise it's just down to PP'ing.
 
DG Phototraining said:
I know some people show images as - here's the noise level SOOC - but I can't see the point if you're going to apply some NR then just show the end result :)
Click to expand...

If the point of showing an image is to show how good, or bad, the high ISO performance is, then I would expect no Noise Reduction to be applied. I can compare a similar image of mine at the same ISO (if my camera were to go to such high ISO levels :( :rolleyes:) or see what level of my noise matches any posted images. Otherwise, as mentioned above, it is just this is how high I can push the ISO and still get a usable image. Without a before and after, it could just be a demonstration of your NR software, and how well you can use it.

My camera can only go up to ISO 3200, and I try not to go past ISO 800 if I can help it. ISO 12,800, even if it is with NR, is very impressive. Without NR would give me a more accurate comparison though. :)
 
redhed17 said:
If the point of showing an image is to show how good, or bad, the high ISO performance is, then I would expect no Noise Reduction to be applied. I can compare a similar image of mine at the same ISO (if my camera were to go to such high ISO levels :( :rolleyes:) or see what level of my noise matches any posted images. Otherwise, as mentioned above, it is just this is how high I can push the ISO and still get a usable image. Without a before and after, it could just be a demonstration of your NR software, and how well you can use it.

My camera can only go up to ISO 3200, and I try not to go past ISO 800 if I can help it. ISO 12,800, even if it is with NR, is very impressive. Without NR would give me a more accurate comparison though. :)
Click to expand...

I understand this point of view but the interesting thing for me is how much detail and dynamic range is there after noise reduction.
 
Guys - I can't see the point of showing an image without processing, when no-one would use an image without processing it

You can't actually post a 14 bit raw file only a processed version of it as a jpeg, might as well be a jpeg with the sort of NR that'd be used then surely ???

Anyway, the short answer is - I'm liking this camera already :)

Dave
 
paulcamcas said:
I understand this point of view but the interesting thing for me is how much detail and dynamic range is there after noise reduction.
Click to expand...
Then for comparison it would be nice to see before and after images. You can only see how much remains after NR if you can see what was there before NR. :)

DG Phototraining said:
Guys - I can't see the point of showing an image without processing, when no-one would use an image without processing it
Click to expand...

I thought I'd put my point for an image without NR when demonstrating a high ISO image above. :thinking:

DG Phototraining said:
You can't actually post a 14 bit raw file only a processed version of it as a jpeg, might as well be a jpeg with the sort of NR that'd be used then surely ???
Click to expand...
Then any review showing the effects of noise at high ISO values could just put up images posted with NR applied and say this is what you can get out of it at such and such ISO. :confused:

I know your image was not a review as such, but because there was no mention of NR in the details on the image, I wrongly assumed that this was straight out of camera, so I'm glad paulcamcas asked the question. :) Not everyone has LR, and not everyone uses the same NR. And some may not even use any NR or processing. :thinking:

You could obviously always take a RAW and just process and save it with no adjustments applied to see what the camera actually gives Noise wise at such high ISOs. You can look at DxO charts to your blue in the face, but nothing beats example images imho.

Anyway, not wanting to make a big thing out of it, I just didn't expect an image demonstrating the Noise performance of a camera to have had NR applied.

DG Phototraining said:
Anyway, the short answer is - I'm liking this camera already :)
Click to expand...

I'm glad you like the camera. :) Nothing worse than spending a lot of £££s and having regrets or misgivings.
 
Last edited:
DG Phototraining said:
Guys - I can't see the point of showing an image without processing, when no-one would use an image without processing it

You can't actually post a 14 bit raw file only a processed version of it as a jpeg, might as well be a jpeg with the sort of NR that'd be used then surely ???

Anyway, the short answer is - I'm liking this camera already :)

Dave
Click to expand...
You should have told us that noise reduction had been used.
 
allanm said:
Just done a search on Lexar Pro card errors and it seems quite a few people are unhappy with them, corrupt files, banding at the bottom of images or just general errors.
Think I'll use them for a while in another camera and see if I get any errors. If I do, I will send them back.
Allan
Click to expand...
Using one of the Lexar cards on my X30 and got a read error. Looks like one of the cards might be faulty then.
 
Just a quick 2 penn' orth about the earlier noise reduction and high ISO posts, I would have thought images without noise reduction applied would show better how the high ISO performs, in fact I think most camera reviews do this, but to show what a final image looks like at high ISO with the D7200, I think Daves post and resultant image is spot on.
Allan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top