Nikon Camera Images Hd Download __HOT__
Zayne Plascencia
For instance, DSC_001 to DSC_099 in one folder and then the following images in a seperate folder. How can I make it save everything I shoot in the same folder? I have looked all the settings on the camera and still cannot figure it out.
The problem it creates is that when I copy the photos to my laptop, the previous set of 999 images have the same name as the new set of photos that I take. For this reason I have been unable to save all the related images from one day/trip/event in the same folder on my computer.
UPDATE: 1. I pop the SD card from the camera and use inbuilt card reader on my laptop to transfer images.2. In the new folder that the camera creates, the images start from DSC_000 to DSC_999 making it impossible for me to save all images in 1 folder on my laptop.
When a new folder is created, the memory cardformatted, or a new memory card inserted in the camera, file numberingcontinues from the last number used. If a photograph is taken when thecurrent folder contains a photograph numbered 9999, a new folder willbe created automatically and file numbering will begin again from0001.
File numbering is reset to 0001 when a new folder is created, the memory card isformatted, or a new memory card is inserted in the camera. Note that anew folder is created automatically if a photograph is taken when thecurrent folder contains 999 photographs
Hi, I used the P1000 for a full day at the zoo ! A nice place for a super zoom camera. You can see the pictures and data from Exif starting at the page below : -P1000/P1000-Zoo.htm You can also click for the full size JPG (4608 x 3456, fine mode) and if you would like to see them on a UHD TV download to a USB device. For more pictures with the P1000, see my stunning astronomy gallery : -P1000/P1000.htm
BR
The photos shown here of Seattle, Washington, USA and Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada are familiar enough to me that it shows that the Nikon P1000 camera is ACTUALLY VERY VERY GOOD at long distance shots! (I live in Vancouver, BC!)
Those images were taken from some SERIOUSLY LONG DISTANCES many hundreds of metres in some cases, and in all reality, you just can't really complain about this camera which is FAR BETTER than even the largest 2x or 3x crop would be on say a Canon 50 megapixel 5Ds/r series.
Now I should ALSO ADD that if you buy a $200 gimbal for this camera, that you can stabilize the jitter so much that the longer shots would work out quite fine! If you're willing to spend around $600 you can buy a good quality 3-axis gyroscope to truly stabilize the camera for those craters-on-the-moon shots!
this camera has a sharpness problem especially in the long zoom at people faces, seems to me they have same problem with Nikon P900 and with Canon sx60. But when you look at the images in small size, qulity seems to be O.K.
So my conclusions are the following.
1. A compact camera with such small sensor (lit. 1\2.33") should NOT have more then 8 mega pixels (good enough for 4K video and images). compact sensors with more the 8MB the images just get blurry.
2. If you want a very large and sharp image, you have to get a DSLR with a 150-600 mm lens like Tamron or Sigma. And in good daylight you can add a X2 zoom magnifier adapter for such lens, so you get 300-1,200mm zoom (with a downside that maximum aperture reduces to half size lit. f8 instead of f4).
. I did watch the pictures you post on you DPreview gallery from you Nikon P900, but they are reduces to 2MP, I would however like to see the quality of the originals at 16MP. It just seems to me that all pictures from P900 and P1000 and other compact super zoom brands seems OK when reduced to 2MP, but when enlarged to original 16MP, then starts blurriness. I would be happy to see a link for some of your original images at full size not reduced.
Tal, i have no problem sending you some comparisons. I do not really have a favorite camera system I like them all. Now do not get me wrong the DSLR is able to out resolution the 16mp because it is 24mp of my camera gear. The fact thou that the p900 or p1000 are able to give sharp results is pretty impressive. Some of my lenses costs 1 to 2K. for $450 camera that is not a bad trade off. If you want I can send you in private chat a few comparison of the tree branch i have outside shot side by side.
This gallery really makes me appreciate my dear old SX50. It's been downhill all the way since then for superzooms, with these images representing the smoking pile of wreckage at the bottom of that hill. I can't imagine what this could be used for at the long end, except maybe occupational insurance surveillance work.
Also, as you said, it works because most of the people don't abuse it. But if say, 50% of the orders would be simple "curiosity checks" of $1000+ items, how long would they still keep the system. I guess you could buy a camera on every month, and keep returning it for ever ... it is a bit of a stretched example, but would you categorize it still as an "openly-advertised right" and get mad when amazon will ban your account? :)
Well, i don't know enough about the OP to accuse him/her off being a serial returner of expensive items. I've been shooting my P1000 for a couple days now. I pre-ordered it the moment i got Nikon's notification email and eagerly awaited its arrival. But I'm probably going to return mine. No matter how much skill and discipline you have, coaxing exceptional results at 3,000mm is too difficult with the P1000. It needs better VR and ergonomics. It's a very frustrating camera at the long end and i expect a lot of people will be returning theirs if that really is what they bought their P1000 for.
By the way, i've seen your shots with the P1000.
At the tele end, they are showing much better the camera capabilities than the gallery on DPR :) Plus the fact that you show "normal" view of the scene and after that details shot as 3000mm, plus your details on each image ... you should explain how things are done to DPR :)
Thank you for posting them.
Thanks, badi. I was pretty surprised that DPR only put up 3 (I believe) P1000 shots at 3,000mm. I mean, that's really what this camera is all about! But I can see why, after shooting the P1000 as it's a real pain to get good images at 3,000mm! Don't get me wrong, this is an extreme length and keeping this kind of focal length steady will never be easy. And Seattle isn't known for bright daylight and all megazooms really need that at the long end. But there's a lot of room for improvement. VR is really inadequate and the ergonomics really need to be a lot better. Changing frame rate or AF Mode is too difficult and time-consuming. There need to be at least 2 more programmable FN buttons and/or dedicated AF and frame rate buttons, and a radically improved menu structure. Nikon's DSLRs have SUCH a great Menu system, but their megazooms have horrible Menus, and no Custom Menu. I feel like I'm shooting a Sony when I shoot the P1000. Ack! Canon is way ahead on megazoom Menus.
nikon should have put Nano Crystal Coat, flourine into the len of P1000
at least this will improve image quality at some degree, compensate for small sensor problem a little but better than nothing
While in the right conditions you can get some great shots, when conditions become less than optimal you will start struggling especially if you need to push your ISO up, or the exposure speed. So a stationary motorcyclist in full sunlight is great, but a small moving bird in overcast conditions?
That is why people spend a lot more than 1K on a camera/lens. As long as you are aware that is what you are buying fine. It is when people pretend that such a camera can compete with pro camera/lenses the problems come in.
There seems to be very little wrong with the image quality considering the senzor size and reach. To me, the images look perfectly ok when viewing on 13" IPS 1080p screen, if you don't pixel peep. It is hard to spot any real downsides at normal viewing size on my particular screen right now. Will check it later on MVA 40" 4K...
Yes, the IQ looks worse on my big screen without pixel peeping. much more of what I would describe as some kind of pixelatization is visible. Not too bad still but visibly worse. Some images still look perfectly ok but the majority looks not as good anymore.
Both the P900 and P1000 are essentially cell phone sensors attached to ridiculously high magnification lenses and bulky bodies. Another compromise is poor continuous autofocus. If you are fine with the IQ of cell phone images, are not interestested in photographing moving birds, and don't mind the heft....go for it!
Disappointed as well that there are only 3 at full zoom (two of the same subject), given that is what many will buy this camera for. I meet many birders who carry its predecessor to take record shots and who will be interested in whether this is a worthwhile upgrade. On the basis of the sample gallery its not an easy decision.
So they are showing samples of a 3000mm equivalent zoom, everyone is interested in the long end but 66 of the 70 samples are under 1500mm equivalent and two of those are the same shot, one SOC jpeg the other processed from RAW. So basically 3 pictures above 1500mm on a 3000mm camera.
@DamianFl I almost gave up too. I had to go to amazon to get an image of the camera from above to find out what the actual focal length was (it's not printed on the front of the lens but on the top of the rear of the lens), then switch the sample gallery to "grid view" which will let you select images based on focal length.
I went through the full gallery to get a good example of the full reach of the camera, like a near and far shot of the same subject - zilch and only three examples on the long end. Most images were within or close to the range of a standard zoom, not a bad thing but an example of why 3000mm is such a rarity.
I still have a super zoom camera in a drawer somewhere, but I never use it. Though they were some excellent small sensor ultrazooms like the Panasonic fz300, this Nikon just seems to be over enthusiastic with this huge zoom range. More doesn't necessarily mean better.
df19127ead