It has been months since I have done a rant and something got me gong that I just had to RANT today. What subject could work me up so much that I dedicate a full video to it? Today I am ranting on OVER ANALYZING of camera gear!!!! How many test charts do you need to shoot until you decide that a lens is sharp or not sharp? I far do you have to zoom in on your monitor to see if the background is slightly purple around the edges or has hallowing in the corners? How Hi must you push the ISO beyond where it really should be until you see dead pixels? How many people must sit in a forum creating threads about theoretical issues with new gear?
My feelings on testing gear is go shoot it, test it by using it in real situations not pushing it beyond belief than saying it fails because of it. Camera companies are not going to put out faulty lenses and bodies especially on the pro end. For example Nikon puts out the 70-200 2.8 VR II and people complain that its not as long as the version 1. I have had both lenses and yes the version II does seem slightly shorter but maybe the version I was slightly longer! In my mind it comes down to using your gear, if its pro gear and there is an issue the companies will have a way to fix it.
What really set me off into making this rant is this dead pixel issue in the Nikon D7000. From what I have read people are pushing the camera beyond its recommended settings while shooting video and seeing what they call dead pixels. I have seen something like this is my old D3 and D3s when you push the camera to the extremes, to me its the nature of pushing something to the limits. Shooting video at 22,500 ISO is so far out of the norm that I am amazed that it works and would be thrilled. But people are saying that there is an issue when they shoot that hi and red pixels are showing up. Nikon smartly has acknowledged that this is happening and says they will be out with a firmware fix soon. I see this firmware fix being something that suppresses red pixels at hi iso’s.
The last part of this written rant has to do with forums. This is where most of the trouble starts, one person finds something they think is an issue and than everyone else tries to replicate it and it spreads like wildfire. The bottom line is just use this gear to shoot, stop the over testing and analyzing to death of everything.
Watch the video for my response to these issue and I plan on ranting a little more from here on out.
I have never understood why people buy new gear, read about a problem that some are having with said piece of gear, and then try their hardest to replicate said problem. Then, once they have replicated the problem, they complain about how horrible their new piece of gear is … the same piece of gear they were so happy about when they first bought it. Oh well! Thanks for the rant Jared.
Well said!
This is exactly why I follow you online. You keep things simple and use your equipment for its intended purposes. People need to realize that if you buy a Hyundai and try to off road it with a Land Rover you are going to have issues. Use your equipment for its intended purposes and don’t pay a dime and expect 1,000 dollar quality.
Amen.
Hey, I just bought a Santa Fe yesterday, and do not expect to take it offroad… no need to….. been owning them for a while, they are good cars… I do put a lot of KM on them, so that is why I buy cheap… but now a days, their quality is good….. let me tell you… that way I can rotate them more often… now with Cameras… thats another story… Just bought the D3100.. wanted the D7000… but I still need to invest a lot of time on the D3100 in order to deserved the D7000, or what ever replaces it at the time of my new purchase…… I need a lot of time watching Jared…
i really like this rant!i always read about this extreme issues that you are talking about,they always talk about technical stuffs w/o using it with its capabilities maybe they don’t enjoy what they are doing.WELL DONE MR.FRO
very well put Jared….totally agree with you…u know what these are the kind of people who confuse the potential buyers who are doing research on internet before buying. the reviewer would say all good things about that product but in the end talk about this kind of petty issues so horribly that the buyer gets scared, forgets all the good points and get very very confused…. As Jared said, keep it simple guys and talk about more practical stuff rather than ‘that one line’ in the chart
Very good points, Jared! Again you have a very practical viewpoint on equipment evaluations. It is very difficult to find this kind of take with the huge amount of pixel peeping websites and forum contributors out there. I think it is so easy to shoot for exceptions to the rule than it is to make exceptional images. Thank you!
Love it! hahaha I always noticed that people are not happy unless they complain about something so they will always go to extremes to find something wrong. I say for the guy who found the light leak should do a drop test. Take the lens go to a 5 story building and drop it. If it breaks he will call it a POS and if it still works then he will call it a gift from god. I love that a lot of people follow you and MAYBE this message will get out.
Yes, pixelpeepers rally peeve me off.
Hey J… agree largely with what you say, but there is a reason everyone does this – Nikon said that the camera could be used at 22,500… Canon say the same thing… in reality, who are they trying to kid… if you give a reviewer a bit of gear, it’s his duty to test that kit at iso *whogivesatoss* and tell the wider photographic community… err, actually, it can’t….
Canon / Nikon… (and anyone else…) stop talking crap and start making realistic gear that works… iso 22,500… who, why?
@sime: it’s called marketing hype, without it none of us would buy anything.
@Jared, right on target!
Here here. Well done. I totally agree. Navel gazing (over analysing your belly button) drives me crazy, especially when morons complain that a new release of camera can’t wash their socks and sweep the floor at the same time, or when they say things like ” .. well I was expecting them (the manufacturers) to change the colour of the knob on the left side …. blah blah blah”. Use the gear, if it doesn’t work for you, use something else don’t keep complianing about theorectical stuff which in a billion to one chance my intefere with one shot in millions.
what forum?
Folks are always looking for something to knock a product. Almost no one I know shoot in extremes. For those that do, pay the money and buy the equipment for the extreme. I agree, keep it simple!
I like the colour of the new shirt. Any chance you’ll put out an “I shoot Jpeg” shirt?
No I shoot JPEG that would be blasphemy
Ok – so I agree that it’s amazing that the high ISO video of the D7000 works at all. That said, if I get one, I absolutely will shoot video at high ISOs – it’s majorly excellent to be able to shoot video in the dark.
If you watch the Zacuto DSLR shootout between the D3s and the Canons that do HD video, the nikon is the only one that can go to super high ISOs (25k, 50k, even 100k), and that’s not down to the sensor by the in-camera noise reduction. People really like that in-camera noise reduction, it is (or was recently) a major reason to shoot nikon over canon for video. So presumably what will happen with the D7000 is the firmware will improve the in-camera noise reduction.
Fro, fantastic site and even better attitude to the whole thing.
I would temper your rant with some observations though.
I am a Canon “MkIII” owner, the MkIII was the tool that I felt would work best for me, the AF has not been an issue, so I bought one despite the appalling reputation the forums gave it. Lens sharpness, I agree, if it does the job it is good enough, I have Canon’s MkI 70-200 f2.8 IS, when the MKII came out testers and owners were saying it was SO much better than the MkI, even if it is, I have never had an image quality issue with my 70-200, they won’t get me upgrading on that one
. BUT if I was used to a certain reproduction ratio from my lens I’d be pretty disappointed if the new version was much worse in that one area if it was an important area to me, sure all these high quality zooms are balancing acts of optics, weight, cost, features etc, for some people the compromises go the wrong way in some upgrades and for those affected they have a legitimate gripe. The Canon 16-35 is pretty dismal for landscapes, your shot from behind the drummer with the 14-24 would simply not look like that with my lens, without pixel peeping my wide zoom just does not give the results.
Are people realistic about their camera bodies capabilities though? Absolutely not. There will always be people more interested in the gear than using it, I remember when the groundbreaking 5D MkII came out and despite its absolutely amazing video performance, highlighted by Vincent LaForet, the pixel peepers were soon pointing out that some pixels next to bright ones were incorrectly rendered! Three weeks after everybody was saying what an amazing short he had made, individual pixels from individual frames were being examined to demonstrate the “problem”, a software upgrade “fix” was demanded and delivered, even though Canon obviously struggled to reliably replicate the “problem”, just as in the MkIII AF fiasco.
The manufacturers are in a constant race to bring us “features” before the competition, some people (the measurebators) will jump on those items, if it has H3 they will test it. For the rest of us, I believe, as photographers, we are at a golden age, the technological emphasis remains, only just, on still images, and the capabilities of the current bodies is far beyond what we could ever achieve on film.
Don’t waste your breath shouting at the shouters, they really don’t have anything better to do. Just keep keeping it ‘Fro for the rest of us
.
Hi all,
This is an actual issue.
I noticed this when I bought the camera on the first day about a month ago.I asked for a replacement the next day, and got one in 3 weeks.
For me, I had 3 hot spots in video mode which was very noticeable even on low ISO.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to get a replacement for what I would consider a major defect. I paid a lot for a camera which could film 1080p video and I would expect that it does it without a major fault like this.
That said, I love my d7000. it’s an amazing camera to shoot with and my replacement has no red spots in video mode.
Cheers All
Gray
Spot on Jared,
‘Just shoot the god damn picture!’
Dude, rant more!
And make some I Shoot Jpeg shirts!
People are NOBS and always will be, taht’s the fact! Complaining is our nature and is as old as the world is. Firetruck this and we shall live in peace :].
EXCELLENT POST FRO!!!
Well said!!
Q
Well said !
Just like John in post #2 said…
This is exactly why I pay attention to what you say above all other photo pundits online.
@Tristan:
Dude get off the Nikon vs. Canon fight as well. It’s just as ridiculous. I have found users on flickr that are shooting with P&S Superzooms and Holgas getting better pictures than most pseudo photographers out there. It’s not about the camera or the gear…thats the first thing you should have learned about photography.
here’s an example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bishybarneybee/page7/
Shot with a panasonic fz38.
WTF. why are people asking for “I shoot Jpeg” shirts?? I thought you spent an entire week explaining why JPEG is rubbish compared to raw.
Y’all need to go to Ken Rockwell’s site if you’re such big fans of Jpegs that you want a freaking shirt
When I heard about these issues I decided to check the relevant forum on a Digital Photography Review site. People are looking for *anything*, seriously. One guy did two photos, both spot metered with flash, both the same scene, but one metered on a lamp, the other metered on dark stuff outside. P-mode with auto-ISO. The D7000 has had a revamp of auto-ISO with flash, and it will now vary the ISO to bring out the background. Nikons used to default to base ISO with flash. Anyway, what he got was two well exposed images, the dark one came out ~ISO-3000 f/5, the light one ~ISO-200 f/3.3 or something.
So he decided the D7000 was faulty because it chose a larger aperture for the brighter scene. Sheesh! He got two nicely exposed images with a wacky camera setup.
Hi Jared
Couldn’t agree more! I wish I lived close enough to discuss it over a beer or two!
My favourite current example of this is the Nikkor 85f1.4. Right up until the G version was released a few months ago, the “old” version was described by just about everyone as “legendary” – and it is very very very good.
Now there is a new one and all of a sudden fora are full of people agonising over whether they should by the new one and get rid of the old one – despite the fact that the majority of them are shooting cameras that cannot resolve the “old” one to the maximum of its ability, much less the new one.
It’s got crazy.
I agree with what you’re saying but I fear you’re onto a loser.
With manufacturers so eager to replace current models with the new “better” model things like this will continue.
Cameras have become like pc components where the latest, fastest graphics card is the only one to have…and if it doesn’t “work” in some ways you get to complain on the net.
Thank you so much for your site. I have been going to different sites of professional photographers and they don’t like to share information about their gear.
Thank you for the rant! I have spent days reading reviews and I have been more confused. I want to upgrade from a Rebel EOS. I am looking at CanonT2i, Nikon D5000 and Nikon D7000. I am a mom just wanting to be able to take good family photos and document travels. I am leaning towards the D7000 because of the rugged magnesium body. The question is what lens do I get? I would like to have one all around lens because based on experience, I didn’t use the telephoto lens all that much.
Please recommend the lens.
For anybody saying that the reasons for this are the companies saying it can shoot at that extreme, you need to look up what ‘can’ means, it means it’s able to =/= do well.
Good post Jared, I admit to falling for this type of BS before and am much more cynical of reviewers who don’t show real life shots
i got my d7000 1 week ago and yeah i can see a lot of dead pixels very annoying one in the middle of the screen . and i am not talking about iso h1 h2 but 200 300 600…
but who cares, I am not a video maker , I only need the cam for low light photography and in this field it is just a perfect perfect cam !
i own the d7000 and have been having great succes with my photos and as for video: if i wanted to shoot video i would have bought a video camera. the fact that it takes amazing veideo is a bonus but not the primary reason for buying this unit. this weekend i did my first photo shoot to hone my skills as i am new to digital photography and want ot be very serious with my images and have found your site so helpful, informative and fun. my wife and I will watch your videos and laugh and she even quotes. “jared Polin… Fro knows Photo” randomly which makes me laugh, as she tries to sound like the Fro. thanks for the RANT and i agree with you 100% keep up the good wrk, and make somemore of the charlie brown yellow “I shoot raw? shirts. so i can buy one in large and a small one for me and the misses.
—”The last part of this written rant has to do with forums. This is where most of the trouble starts, one person finds something they think is an issue and than everyone else tries to replicate it and it spreads like wildfire.”—
YES! And the worst thing about it is that this ‘stuck-pixels-in-video-mode’ is an actual, real honest-to-god issue. Subesequently the issue gets confused and clouded when people scream, “Hey I just took a shot with the lens cap on at ISO 6400 and got a spot!!!”. NOT THE SAME ISSUE BUDDY! lol.
Anyways personally I’m loving my D7000 and I think that for the most part this is a simple pixel-mapping issue, (because its a stuck pixel, not a hot pixel or dead pixel), and therefore can be fixed with Nikon’s firmware update which is on it’s way. If it is a pixel mapping issue it should be easy.
Which leads me to another thing: I think Nikon knows by now that this is a pixel-mapping issue and doesnt want to publically address it as such because other cameras offer the user pixel-mapping tools and utilities in-camera. Not really abig deal, but I thik that’s why they’re quiet on exactly what the issue is, even though I’m sure they must know already if they’re making a fix for it.
the internet is full of issues from the d7000
i got 3 bodys already and more then 10 hot pixels in video on each body. also the pictures i took seemd not as sharp as on the d90, i tested the d90 and d7000 with same adjustings and lenses.
same with a friend of mine, he works in a photo store, got a d7000 , video mode full with hot pixel and back focus problem on all his lenses up to 15 cm!!
and yes there is also problems with my sigma 10mm fisheye lens wich is not getting sharp in live view mode. i had to do that manualy.
im from europe – austria btw
so dont say there is no problem or its cause the camera is new bla bla bla
it looks like the cam is a beta version and this sucks a lot!
regards from austria
I’ve only been shooting with my newly aquired 450D for a few months, but have definitely come to the conclusion to ask for advice from professionals (either photographers or people who work at reputable camera shops) and that if you think a picture looks good, then it looks good.