Good versus bad debate

In Standard by Patrick

Over the past week I have been amusingly reading comments by various sources and people over the internet about the newly released Nikon D6. Inevitably, there are those that welcome advancements in cameras and there are those that are more critical.

Those that welcome the release seem to dwell more on the positive side of things like the built in WiFi, Bluetooth and GPS. Features that have been long lacking in the FX body. They seem to welcome the increases in FPS now 14 versus the 12 on the predecessor the Nikon D5. They are looking forward to the advancements in the auto-focus system as well.

Those that are shall we say, more critical, lament over the fact that the resolution of the camera remained at 20.5MP, the FPS did not jump to 16FPS and went down to 10FPS with mirror locked up. I have also heard them complaining about the AFD system and how they are now just grouped together more tightly and nothing really changed.

A condensed version of the highlights and specs can be found in the downloadable D6-brochure. Although, just highlights it does provide insight into the newest features that for some, will be the reason to buy and for others, reason to point to the fact that, in their opinion, Nikon has not lived up to the hype.

In response to some of the more critical comments, I would ask what exactly are your needs in a camera. Are the comments based on a dislike of Nikon? Are they stemming from the fact that you don’t shoot with Nikon cameras? Now, having said that, some of the comments and rants are based on legitimate comparisons of competitors specs on comparable camera bodies. I think this is a debate that is productive and provides forward thinking on tech. Back to the critical comments. Lets address the first , the resolution. How much is enough and how much is needed? I have stunning prints in my home I have taken with a 20MP Nikon D5 that are 36×48 and tack sharp. I probably could have gotten that result with a 16MP camera as well, so I would argue that more is not always better and the resolution of the Nikon D6 is a non-issue for the everyday professional and serious amateur.

The second feature that I see being scrutinized is the frames per second. At 14FPS you can capture a lot of information. Granted the Canon 1DX MKIII shoots 20FPS, but are those additonal 6 frames ultra critical to getting the shot? Maybe, but I submit for any professional photographer who has knowledge of the subject and experience shooting the peak-of-action, this will not make a difference in getting the shot.

One final point that is being scrutinized is the new auto-focus system. Those that criticize this baffles me. There arguments seems to be on the fact that the individual focal points are grouped closer together than the Nikon D5 and therefore they are basically the same. I could not disagree more and I think this is the most significant overhaul in the camera. The sensor is completely new and the entire system is based on what is widely recognized as one of if not the best focusing system in the industry, the Sony A7 RII so those that want to detract from the benefits as compared to its predecessor leave me wondering what the criticism is based on.

Overall the introduction of the Nikon D6 is like any other tool that allows me to convey my story photographically as well as getting clients what they desire in terms of outcomes. I am all about the photographs rather than the specs of any new gear, so when I read reviews and see videos online, I listen objectively and make my own decisions. I have heard rumors that the D6 may be Nikon’s last full-frame camera and they are putting there resources into a full-frame mirror-less. Perhaps that is why there are so many downplaying the D6 release. Honestly, the Nikon D5 has done well for me monetarily and I have no reason to believe the advancements in the Nikon D6 won’t do the same.

Share this Post