PDA

View Full Version : Dumb newbie question (Nikon D70s)



maverick3
07-03-2005, 06:55 AM
Hello. I just bought the D70s and am really enjoying it so far. This is my first digital SLR.

One problem I'm having is figuring out how to get the back monitor to display when I'm taking photos (and not after the fact). My last digital camera was a Canon Powershot and I'm used to taking photos by using the back monitor as opposed to the viewfinder. How do I get the monitor to work on the D70s? I've read the manual and can't seem to find any information about this.

Thanks,
Maverick

Ray Schnoor
07-03-2005, 09:02 AM
Hello. I just bought the D70s and am really enjoying it so far. This is my first digital SLR.

One problem I'm having is figuring out how to get the back monitor to display when I'm taking photos (and not after the fact). My last digital camera was a Canon Powershot and I'm used to taking photos by using the back monitor as opposed to the viewfinder. How do I get the monitor to work on the D70s? I've read the manual and can't seem to find any information about this.

Thanks,
Maverick
That's because dSLRs don't work that way. You cannot get a live video on the LCD on most dSLRs. They are only used for viewing what you have taken, or menu adjustments. The only exception, I believe, is the Canon 20Da.
Ray.

thesween
07-03-2005, 10:14 AM
I'm afraid that this is indeed the case. When I first started shopping for a dSLR, I was a bit surprised that you couldn't use the LCD to compose. Seemed then, as it does now, that with the incredible technology jammed into that little box, this would be a feature.

Warin
07-03-2005, 12:19 PM
The Fuji S3 also has a mirror lock up and allows a live-ish (under 30fps) black and white priview of what the CCD is showing, but only for less than 30 seconds.

I believe the lack of live preview is an issue with the imager overheating when being run constantly. The imagers in P&S camera are considerably smaller and more energy efficient than those in dSLR's, so they dont overheat when being used to compose the picture.

Personally I prefer the viewfinder. It allows me to focus more on the subject, and so I concentrate on composition more than when I am taking "snapshots" with a point and shoot camera.

Grog
07-03-2005, 10:43 PM
The above post or right that the LCD is not a view finder on most DSLR cameras. Holding a camera up in the air with one hand does not make for good pictures, camera shake. It is much better and more stable holding up to your eye to use the view finder.

maverick3
07-03-2005, 10:52 PM
Thanks to all for responding. Much appreciated. Was banging my head trying to figure out why I couldn't get the monitor to work.

That said, I have to admit that I'm quite disappointed. Being able to take photos via the LCD monitor was something I guess I took for granted. I also really loved being able to take 1 minute videos. I wish these two features were included with the Nikon D70s (which cost me 10x more than my Canon Powershot). Of course, it's not fair to compare the cameras. The D70s is power packed with all sorts of features that will probably take me years to master. And who says I have to give up my Canon?

Maverick :-)

Ray Schnoor
07-04-2005, 08:59 AM
Thanks to all for responding. Much appreciated. Was banging my head trying to figure out why I couldn't get the monitor to work.

That said, I have to admit that I'm quite disappointed. Being able to take photos via the LCD monitor was something I guess I took for granted. I also really loved being able to take 1 minute videos. I wish these two features were included with the Nikon D70s (which cost me 10x more than my Canon Powershot). Of course, it's not fair to compare the cameras. The D70s is power packed with all sorts of features that will probably take me years to master. And who says I have to give up my Canon?

Maverick :-)
That is correct, there is no reason to give up your Powershot. I also still own a couple of Nikon Coolpix cameras along with my D70. On the other hand, if you bought a D70s and were unaware that you would not be able to use the LCD as a viewfinder or take videos, did you do any research into the camera before you bought it?
Ray.

maverick3
07-05-2005, 01:08 PM
Yep, did research. I knew the video wasn't something that came with the Nikon (I can live with that). However, I assumed that because the Nikon came with an LCD monitor that it would work the same way the Powershot's (and all the other small digital cameras I've seen) monitor works. Never crossed my mind that it wouldn't work the same way.

In any case, the more I use it the more I'm adjusting to using the viewfinder. I recently purchased a Nikkor 70-300mm lens and the SB-600 flash. It's been many years since I've used a SLR.

I've no regrets about this camera (well, so far anyway!). Just wish it had those two features. Maybe future versions?

Maverick :-)

Warin
07-05-2005, 02:56 PM
I've no regrets about this camera (well, so far anyway!). Just wish it had those two features. Maybe future versions?

Maverick :-)

Unless the nature of the APS format imager changes drastically, I doubt you will see video mode on a dSLR.

I use a Coolpix series camera, and for a point and shoot I agree, the LCD is nice, since you can see it far easier than the cheesy little optical viewfinder. It is, to me, a different sort of way of shooting to use an SLR, and I would ever use the LCD for composition over the viewfinder on an SLR. But that's just me!

D70FAN
07-05-2005, 04:25 PM
Yep, did research. I knew the video wasn't something that came with the Nikon (I can live with that). However, I assumed that because the Nikon came with an LCD monitor that it would work the same way the Powershot's (and all the other small digital cameras I've seen) monitor works. Never crossed my mind that it wouldn't work the same way.

In any case, the more I use it the more I'm adjusting to using the viewfinder. I recently purchased a Nikkor 70-300mm lens and the SB-600 flash. It's been many years since I've used a SLR.

I've no regrets about this camera (well, so far anyway!). Just wish it had those two features. Maybe future versions?

Maverick :-)

Once you get used to the idea, you will find yourself using the all-in-one less and less (and less).

Like my FE, my CP990 is getting a well deserved rest. Why? I just don't enjoy using them as much as the D70. Once you get proficient, it is an incredible instrument.

If you purchased the AF 70-300 G lens, you might want to consider taking it back and getting the Sigma 70-300 APO. A little more money, but a much better lens.

The SB600, like it's big brother (SB800) are incredible. But this time...Read the manual. It's a good read, and you will say wow a lot. ;)

All you need now is the very excellent Nikkor 50mm f1.8 ($99) and you will be ready to go.

maverick3
07-06-2005, 12:39 AM
Thanks for the advice, George! (And all others who replied.)

Maverick

thesween
07-07-2005, 03:54 PM
I'd take a wild guess and say that "the prime" is quickly becoming a novelty, rather than a necessity. Most pros I know, and I do know several, almost never use primes. The main exception would be in shooting macro, where a prime 1:1 macro lens can be a huge plus.

It really is pretty simple; twenty years ago, zooms were clunky and optically deficient - ten years ago, they'd improved - nowadays, the zoom can be total optical perfection and take up little space. Do I own primes? You bet. Do I use them? Not like I once did, there's no compelling reason, other than tradition. Traditions are great, but clinging to them for no valid reason makes no sense to me. A few years ago a lot of photogs were adamant that digital would never replace film. If you do even minimal research, you'll find that film sales have dropped 60% in the last four years. Will film survive? I certainly wouldn't bet serious money on it. Will "the prime" endure? I'd speculate it will, but it's most unlikely that you'll find many photogs lugging around bags of them in the future. Cheers!

D70FAN
07-07-2005, 05:48 PM
I'd take a wild guess and say that "the prime" is quickly becoming a novelty, rather than a necessity. Most pros I know, and I do know several, almost never use primes. The main exception would be in shooting macro, where a prime 1:1 macro lens can be a huge plus.

It really is pretty simple; twenty years ago, zooms were clunky and optically deficient - ten years ago, they'd improved - nowadays, the zoom can be total optical perfection and take up little space. Do I own primes? You bet. Do I use them? Not like I once did, there's no compelling reason, other than tradition. Traditions are great, but clinging to them for no valid reason makes no sense to me. A few years ago a lot of photogs were adamant that digital would never replace film. If you do even minimal research, you'll find that film sales have dropped 60% in the last four years. Will film survive? I certainly wouldn't bet serious money on it. Will "the prime" endure? I'd speculate it will, but it's most unlikely that you'll find many photogs lugging around bags of them in the future. Cheers!

With a few exceptions, like the 50mm f1.8, I am inclined to agree. While not quite as sharp as primes in its range, lenses like the the Sigma 18-125, make up in utility for minor shortfalls in wide open shooting. And low cost zoom lenses like the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 come darn close to matching the enduring 50.

In the middle end of that cost spectrum lenses like the $900 AF Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 are pretty darned impressive, and can easily keep pace with most of the prime counterparts in it's focal range, including the 105 f2, 135 f2.8, and 180 f2.8). Combined these would easily cost around $2300 and be a considerable pain to carry and change.

I'm pretty sure that is the case with Canons 70-200 f2.8 L and the Sigma counterpart as well.