Відео

there's no D7x00 without the screw drive AF motor I'd get a D80 and D60 over both the D70 and D40 Cameras like the D5200, 5300, 5500 and 5600 are great cameras and worth picking up relative to their price. Same with the D3200 and D3300.

more like "you can trust them but check your hear cause they clearly don't check it properly"

Um... this isn't a GFX camera? And sorry to expect something this expensive to *work* at all with every lens listed on the compatibility list.

@@uncertainreleaseI stand corrected. That makes it even more pointless, both have plenty of good value native lenses so why even bother with adapting.? sell some your gear and get a decent native lens instead

@@MrPetebuster1 Because you don't see the value in it doesn't mean nobody does. At the time of making this video, I was shooting with both Nikon DSLRs and Fujifilm mirrorless, an adapter like this would have allowed to use a single set of lenses for both systems, saving a ton of money considering Fujifilm X mount lenses are much more expensive than Nikon F mount equivalents. Everything is said in the video, did you watch it?? It was also made pretty clear it was for X mount and not GFX in the first minute of the video itself...

@uncertainrelease well I did address my mistake in the previous comment. Didn't you read it? When you buy into fuji nikon or whatever you're buying into a system . Running two systems and then looking for an adapter to use one set of lenses is a rather strange way of doing things. Especially as no adapter will work as well as native lenses. Each to their own, but you'd better off running one system. Don't get me wrong, adapters are useful but not as an alternative . Just stick to an affordable system

@@MrPetebuster1 Is it me or you're trying to tell me what I should do with my money? You say it's a strange way of doing things, but there's entire companies that are built on that very principle (fringer, metabones, urth, to name a few) If I want to have 1, 2 or 12 camera systems, that's my concern. Not yours. In any case, that doesn't prevent me from testing things that are making bridges between systems. You;re clearly not the target demographic of those things, I don't know why you even bothered commenting on this video.

you can't fined them new lol, the camera is from 2010 I bought mine €109 on MPB earlier this year, and the day before thais video was posted tehre was one for €99 on MPB as well. There was one yesterday on the same website for €104 I can't say for the states but you can definitely find them for around €100 in Europe.

@@uncertainrelease obviously they're not new, I collect cameras. my point being that you can only rarely get them for $100. Due to people making youtube videos, tiktok videos, and what not, the aftermarket for vintage digital cameras is expensive and prices rose. Right now on MPB for a good or well used condition model, it's either $274 or $209. on ebay, they're priced even more.

That doesn't fit in a $500 budget though. D700 - around $300, maybe 200 if you get a really beat up one with 250k clicks on it AF-D 35mm f/2 - at least $200, if not more (couldn't find the samyang you're talking about) 70-210 f/4 - around $80 Sigma 17-35 f/2.8-4 (I couldn;t find a single 17-35 f/2.8 constant) is around $130 used. All coming at around $610 to $710. And then you still need spare batteries, cards, and maybe the vertical grip. This is at least a $750 setup.

@@uncertainrelease just seen d700 for £110 yesterday, beaten up but alive

@@Moonrakerd I'd rather get a clean D300 if I was recomending a camera to someone 😅

@@uncertainrelease Id rather have less lenses and d700 the quality jump is just huuuge :D

@@Moonrakerd I have both, the quality jump is only really visible in lozer light. If you use both in good light, you'll get sensibly similar results, outside of the depth of field of course. And in low light, the D300 is far from bein hopeless (just way more than the D700 for sure)

... then don't watch it? What am I supposed to say? The duration is indicated on the bottom right of the miniature before you even click on it. If you find that too long, don't click on it period. There's plenty of other, shorter reviews I'm sure.

I think that there's some qualities to CCD sensors, but oftentimes it's the byproduct of how the image was processed by the camera rather than how the light was captured by the sensor. Case in point, the most "filmic" camera I've ever used so far is the Canon 5D from 2005... because of the things you mentionned : it's not especially color accurate, the dynamic range is limited and highlights clip to white really quickly... and yet the sensor is a CMOS ! In the case of the D60 in this video, there was some differences in the reds and browns compared to the CMOS D300, but in the end the difference was fairly minor for both noise and DR, and the colros can be very easily corrected to make one look like the other, with minimal tweaks

@@uncertainrelease Pretty sure the color science has more to do with the differences between the types of sensors used than the sensors themselves…!

@@superkrell actually no, it has more to do with the processing done by both the ADC, and the image processor after the image was taken. The colors you see are the colors that the camera interprets from the sensor. Remember the sensor doesn't capture full coloron each pixel, only about a third of the color and has to do demosaicing of the Bayer filter to obtain a usable image. This is all done by the processor, not the sensor. In the past we;ve seen cameras using the exact same sensor obtain wildly different colors sciences. The reason? A new processor.

@@uncertainrelease Isn’t that color science…?

@@superkrell Yes. Color science is litterally how you interpret the data that your sensor outputs. Digital cameras don't work like film, the color doesn't come from the sensor. It's only photodiodes that are only sensible to photons (no matter their color / wavelength) filtered by a CFA and some other filters (like IR/UV cut, etc). What the processor does with that data, that's color science. The difference between the different types of photodiodes might lead to very small color variations, as the photosites could be less sensitive to low energy photons (like shown here, the reds are more muted on teh CCD vs CMOS, but the blues are basically the same when it comes to saturation), but the "color science" part happens with the processor.

thanks !

D60 = CCD D300 = CMOS AF issues have been fixed a while ago (not in this video obviously) Turn your volume up?

depends for what

As I pointed out in the video, the D60 is a pretty great camera when you look at the iamg quality itself, but its biggest weakness is teh ability to be able to find D80 and D200 cameras with the same sensor for about teh same price, and those cameras re better in my opinion, on pretty much every front except size and weight. It's also about the same price as the D3000 which keeps the form factor and sensor, but upgrades the autofocus system.

@@uncertainrelease Great tips for when the D60 lets me down... Thanks UR

Actually, I do at 4:10 Color-wise the sensor of the LX5 isn't anything special as the sensor type would suggest. It's a very standard color response, and it can have a little bit of a nostalgic look... but no more than my Nikon D300 or D700 or even my Fujifilm cameras... that are all CMOS.

@@uncertainrelease If you don't find the color characteristics of this camera, such as the vividness that is unique to CDC, particularly appealing, I will drop this camera from my shopping list. Thank you.

@@hiroakitakagi7724 it's a good camera for what it costs. The sensor is nothing special in my opinion. The dynamic Black and White profile is nice. I made a whole video comparing CCD to CMOS, the difference are more down to the image processing engine in the camera than the actual sensor itself. 2010 is pretty late for CCD cameras, and you can see that in the processing that Lumix gave to this camera, compared to earlier cameras (like the LX3), or even CMOS cameras that are older than this (like the Nikon D700, D300 or Canon 5Dc)

yes, but make sure to chek everything when it gets to your door. Some things are bound to get through the net, but I have the feeling that MPB's net is not that tight...

I have never had any problems with the Brooklyn NY office of MPB.

@@tonykeltsflorida Yes it seems to be really region dependant. In Europe the service is a bit spotty, but in the UK and US it seems to be a little better? That's my sentiment at least

You don't need a D700 specifically to learn photography, you only need a camera that has manual controls and interchangeable lenses.# I have (and absolutely love) a D700, but with a $500 budge, the camera body would already eat $300 of them, leaving very little room for lenses, mamory cards, spare batteries and other accessories like I've shown in this video. Same happens if I replace the D700 with a camera I think is a little better for beginners (which would probably be a D600 or D610). Also being able to carry your lenses to mirrorless cameras in the future is key for someone starting out I think, and that's the only weakness of AF-D glass : you will never have autofocus on anything else than a Nikon F mount camera, whereas I can adapt my AF-S lenses to Nikon Z, Fuji X, Sony E, etc (I know there is the monster adapter that allows for screwdrive AF F mount lenses on Sony E, but it's out of stock, very expensive and has a tendancy to brick cameras because of over-current. I wouldn't even try it tbh)

thanks :)

I guess now we need to compare image quality and autofocus accuracy !

Execlant autofocus good picture quality. Think still on Amazon under $300. Yes no wi-fi need buy card & reader and neck strap. I bot tripod too. Think total $340. 42x optical zoom is impressive

@@jameshchetwyndjr9739 that was a rethorical question. The P510's sensor is not only very small, you also have no RAW format at all, and no phase detection autofocus. The superzoom is great but for under $500 you can... I dunno buy a Lumix FZ1000 used? that will obliterate the P510 in every way shape and form?

DSLRs are not dead as long as there is a fool willing to fight for them ;) (and since everyone is getting rid of theirs... it's the perfect time to get them ! Also as I elided to at the end : the camera here is almost the cheapest piece of gear here. Get an FTZ adapter and you can use all of those lenses on a mirrorless Nikon Z camera !) Looking at NEX cameras or MFT... in this budget there is nothing that can match the autofocus accuracy and speed of the D300. They're fine cameras to get, but probably not if you're making a full kit under 500€

Really appreciated the video: excellent. In MFT, I think the best you could do at the budget would be a Lumix G7, the 12-32 f/3.5-5.6 kit lens plus a 25mm f/1.7 standard lens. A pretty formidable kit but I like the one in the video just as much.

"Thinking of the future of the mount" is not really an argument. First because as long as the DSLR works I don't see a compelling reason to change, and since they are still sold new, for someone who wants to take pictures in the present and doesn't want/can't splurge 1k€ on those magnificient mirrorless, they are more than good enough. As for recommanding a Sony NEX camera... lol. Good luck finding quality lenses for the budget. MFT fares a little better, but the cameras that have a good AF (to me the minimum would be the GX80/E-M1) will eat up most of those 500€.

Also wanted to say, I have plenty of knowledge on mirrorless and DSLRs to know their advantages, and while mirrorless is certainly the future, I don't see myself spending 4k€ just to have the latest and greatest. An important side note to remember is that besides the need to rebuy a lens set, there will also be the need to update the storage and the computer to cope with those 20/30/40fps...

@@uncertainrelease yeah, but i mean, there are no more new affordable DSLR lenses released, so you have to do with what is already on the market. As you invest in a "new" kit (camera+lenses) it's neat to find new affordable lenses to play with them. i think of chinese cheap manufacturers as ttartisan, brightin star and so on... it permits to stay in a thight budget and play with novelties (as high aperture manual lenses, macro,...). There are now on the 2nd hand market plenty of affordable mirrorless camera compatible with those cheap manual lenses... which is not true with dslr. i own both dslr & mirrorless and i enjoy playing with both, but for experimenting, i think mirrorless are better nowadays... appart from this, as you play with manual lenses, focus peaking is more important than modern AF.

Still have my 5D, I had a 50mm f/1.8 at some point but I only use it with adapted M42 glass nowadays, even more lenses for less money !

That's a possible kit too, however I think 6MP would be too low for most people. Though not the safest recommendation, I think the D300 makes more sense 😅 Also $100 for a K100D seems high compared to what it can do. Why no a K10D instead?

@@uncertainrelease Because I own the camera and I know its limitations and how well it performs. I have shot good wildlife pictures with it. And I feel it would be a good camera to learn photography with. And it does not have the aperture block problems the K30, K50,and K70 have which have better sensors and can be bought within your price range. . I have had aperture block failure in two K50 and one K70 cameras so I can't recommend them. I now have Pentax cameras in the K3 series which do not suffer from the aperture block problems as well as the older cameras before RICHO took over the company

I understand you point of view, and as I said in the video, it's not meant to be a kit for absolutely everyone. This is a kit made for someone that wants to get started shooting action, sports, wildlife, photojournalism, that want a dependable camera body and lenses. If you wanted to get a kit under 500 bucks, I'm sure you could fit a Canon M50 with a kit lens and it would be better for an absolute beginner that don't know what they want to do. This wasn't really my goal here. Also, I wanted to include more glass, as this would make the difference for me, I understand if you'd prefer to get less lenses but a more advanced (or newer) camera body.

I guess it depends the pricepoint. With my 5D, I would probably take advantage of the focusing screen (that I can swap pretty easily for a Nikon FE screen with a split prism) and the great adaptability of the EF mount to make a nice and cheap kit using vintage lenses (mostly M42), and the whole kit would be around $250. A D600 or D700 kit would be much more expensive for sure, and sometimes, depending on the budget, an APS-C camera might be better when it comes to value for money. I guess I need to think this through before making a video about it.

I do a little bit of paid work from time to time, all the gear I use is bought used. As long as you know where to look and what to look for, you really don't need to buy anything brand new (except maybe storage cards, but that's a very small expense compared to cameras and lenses, isn't it?)

@@uncertainrelease True and I do agree with you. I should have worded my answer a little better. For example I'm a wedding photographer. I really wanted a camera with dual card slots. When the Olympus OMD E-M1ii came out I bought new. Just did not want to risk a card failure. Plus I'm more comfortable shooting Olympus for weddings. Olympus has a feature that works better then any other brand. My Olympus OMD E-M1ii after I take a photo it displays it for 0.3 seconds. This just lets me know if the photo is ok. Sometimes you change settings and forget to change them back. This feature is a safety net. The other example for buying new is when the Sony A9 came a lot of golf photographers jumped on that. In golf with a DSLR you can only take a photo when the club hits the ball. Some golf photographers have been kicked out because sometimes their timing is off. Then there is opengate a lot of content creators jumped on Panasonic because with opengate you only have to do one take. But I did see a photographer with a Canon mirrorless camera showing how to do one take without open gate. He said put the frame lines on and film what you want in the middle. I guess filming in 4K is the way to go. 1080p I think should still work. So buying new I think it's only necessary in very pacific situation.

I considered getting something like a D3200 or D3300, but really, looking at the specific, I think a kit with great autofocus, good burst rates and weather sealing + great control layout, lots of buttons and a large viewfinder is a better deal than a better sensor in a cheap plastic body lacking controls, weather sealing, burst rate and autofocus performance. But when we're talking about photography, everything is a matter of preference, so your choices are valid (in our budget, with the lenses I included though, maybe a D3300 would be a bit too expensive to still fit under 500)

Indeed it does. To me they simply don't train their tech properly, and they have surface level knowledge, not specialist level knowledge like they seem to claim. They miss a lot of things that they shouldn't

The D7000 is a great camera ! Everyone seems to hate it when you step on Nikon forums, I really can't understand why. Sensor is good, AF is decent and the feature set is excellent for the price !

if you give me the money to buy them, sure ! I can't afford Sigma Art glass.

I mean f1.4 vs f2.0 sounds like an enormous difference, but the slightly larger sensor compensates a bit and the difference is more like f1.4 vs f1.8

@@JC-XL I don't think the difference makes that much of a difference. The sensor sizes themselves are really similar (we're talking about a move from a 9.8mm diagonal to a 9.3mm...), and absolutely not enough to make a 1/3rd of a stop of difference. On top of that, the LX5 is CCD, while the LX7 is CMOS, leading to lower noise levels and slightly higher dynamic range in average. In my opinion, both sensors will give about teh same results. As for the f/1.4 lens, it seems to be very sharp in the center at 24mm equiv / f/1.4, but sharpness decreases a little bit in the corners. It seems to have a bit lower flare resistance than the LX5's lens but i think that's about it. All of those things taken in account, + the straight up upgrades (autofocus is better, it can record 1080p video instead of 720, it has a built-in ND finter in the lens as well as an aperture ring, the optional EVF is highier resolution, etc...), I think the LX7 is a better camera than the LX5. Maybe not as good of a value though, as the LX7 still hovers around the 300€ mark while the LX5 is a third of that.

@@uncertainrelease I agree the LX7 is a much better camera, especially AF, operation and the LCD. What I meant is that compromises were made with the sensor size, 5% smaller sensor (linear) is 10% smaller area (squared). So on the LX7 you lose 10% light from the sensor size, but gain 33% from the faster lens (1/3rd stop). A bit better, but you lose the CCD colors, which I like, and the photos will have a slightly smaller sensor look (small 5% difference I agree), but is it worth it, especially at the current used price? The iPhone 13 Pro has 1/1.65" main camera sensor and 1/1.6 max aperture, and then phase-detect AF, miles better image processing, operation, screen, etc. And these are selling used under 300 pounds in the UK ebay. Even a used full frame A7 is just over 300 bucks. You can have much more fun with this and a manual focus vintage prime. I mean LX5 for 150 makes sense, LX7 for 350 does not.

@@JC-XL I 100% agree with you that the LX7 is not worth it for the price, and that a modern smartphone will genrally outperform both of them anyway. Staying in compact panasonic camera world, a Lumix LX10/15 with a 20MP 1" sensor, and a 24-72mm equiv f/1.4-2.8 lens will be around the same price and a much better image taker than both the LX7 and any smartphone in my opinion. Though, the wider aperture is a 100% light increase, not 33% (f/2.0 to f/1.4 is 1 stop difference, not 1/3rd of a stop. 1/3rd would be at f/1.8). If you want to go int eh ILC route, there's much better deals for the money than an A7 I guess (you could get a 5D classic for about 100 bucks, to which a lot of lenses can be adapted too, I use mine a lot with M42 glass), but then we're not talking about a small ECD you can slip in your pocket anymore, it's a whole other debate.

@@uncertainrelease Try to show raw from LX in the capture one program with the proposed sharpness settings (about 180) and then there will be doubt about the smartphone's superiority. The result is much more detailed than in the raw or lightroom profile. I also output the result +25% to the frame size. I have lx3 and 7 . The picture on the lx3 seems denser and sharper throughout the frame (apparently it's a less variable lens). Another interesting point is that this program opens the file much wider than you see in the camera (which aligns the corners of the image), that is, you get a focal length of about 20mm without editing, and the lx7 is almost a fisheye lens. I hope I made myself clear in a non-native language)