Is it just me or is the Nikon D60 a bit crap?

O

oldnick

Messages
218
Edit My Images
Yes
I've recently "upgraded" from a Fuji E550 to a Nikon D60 and I am very far from impressed. I am getting exposure, focus, colour balance errors and pronounced purple fringing. Yes low light performance seems a bit better but considering the size and cost I was expecting far more than this.
 
:thinking:

I hate to say it, but it's probably just you, the D60 is an excellent wee camera, but there's always the chance that you've been landed with a duff one.

Perhaps you could post one of your pictures that are exhibiting these errors and we can advise you on what has caused them :)
 
I'm sure you know that the D60 should perform very well. Is it new? It may be faulty.
 
Clearly there is an issue, it's capable of superb results. You will have to work out if it's you or the camera at fault...think we'd need far more info to make any decision, maybe some pictures and exposure info.
 
Exposure errors could be due to the equipment or the user. You'd need to give us more details.

Focus errors, ditto.
Colour balance errors, ditto.

Pronounced purple fringing sounds more like a lens issue. What lens are you using?

Some example pictures would be good.
 
I have just PMd you oldnick to see if anyone here can help you post a pic
 
OK here goes - the camera is brand new and pictures were taken using the stock 18-55mm VR lens in full auto mode.


bruges.jpg

norwood029.jpg

parke.jpg

and by way of contrast one from my old Fuji, taken in similar conditions to the Bruges pic
florence.jpg
 
they are all over exposed imho , what settings did you use for metering ? :)
 
Thanks RV

The camera was in full auto mode

The pic in Florence was taken using my old Fuji compact in similar lighting conditions to the Bruges shot, and is in my opinion far superior to those taken on the Nikon.
 
My D60 seems to be perfect - it does everything i want it to. Purple fringing could be due to your lens suffering from Chromatic Aberration? :shrug: If this is the case you could take it back, if not just keep practicing, maybe try manual mode because it gives you a LOT more control over what you get.
 
First 3 are definitely over exposed, if you are shooting raw then you should be able to sort that out easy enough. What software are you using for PP?
 
(very) Quick edit in elements 7 to calm that exposure down a bit.......

Original:

bruges.jpg


Edit:

brugesedit.jpg


Is this more the type of look you're after?:thinking:
 
I don't think it is over exposing particularly. The second shot is the only one that look a 'tad' too bright to me but nothing a small amount of exposure compensation wouldn't have cured.

The first shot has a mixture of shadow areas and highlights, the camera has exposed more for the shadow areas which has made the highlights on the bright bricks a little too bright.

The foot path shot, the camera has exposed the foliage just fine as you would expect, because it is the most prominent thing in the photo...the sky would be blown out here unless it was early morning or late afternoon and the sun was behind you.

Nothing out of the ordinary really going on here IMO with a camera that is set to auto mode and snapping scenes with contrasty light.

Comparing a shot taken by another camera at a totally different time is a bit piontless to be fair. I think you just need to learn more about exposure and the camera settings :)

So get out there and get snapping and you'll soon love your D60 :D
 
Each camera handles slightly differently and it takes time to learn it. It's a bit like expecting every car to drive the same. Even within manufacturers range they vary model to model.

The other thing to remember is that with a camera on auto it is doing it's best to work out what you want but it's not got your eyes. It is trying to meter everything to 18% gray to get your exposure right for you but when you have a wide dynamic range as you do in some of these it's not got a clue which part of the scene to meter for.

In auto it's going for average metering, it doesn't know how much depth of field you would like. So when the camera is trying to make everything average then your pics are unlikely to really sing.

Get a decent book for it like a Field Guide and have some fun learning how to get the best out of it. It's a great feeling when it becomes a creative tool in your hands. :)
 
hi, my d80 did this. to counteract this i used to underexpose by .3 or .7 most of the time. try it !
 
Same here, I always used to underexpose by 0.3 on my D50 and D40X
 
-.3 on my D700 just to be safe too. You can hard wire that in the menus on some Nikons too.

Looks like the scenes you are trying to capture have a lot of highlights and shadows, always tricky.

The Fuji's were always awesome with extended DR, my S3 was a beast - shame they stopped with the S5 :(
 
I have to say, I'm surprised that no one has said that the camera is faulty. I find it believe that a modern camera cannot handle these shots better. These are not isolated shots, I have more. Why should I have to deliberately under expose? Although I am new to DSLR's I am not new to photography. I have normally used auto mode except in what I have considered exceptionally difficult conditions - And do not consider the shots posted as particularly difficult. Ive owed camera's right back to a beloved Pentax ME, and I've never experienced such poor performance.
 
I own the D60 myself and to be honest never shoot in Auto. I have to agree with going in aperture priority mode setting an exposure comp and working with that. But I do have to agree with oldnick too. I think my 1 beef with the D60 is that it isn't awfully good at "measuring" what the correct exposure. Even in Aperture prio I sometimes find myself fiddling with the exp comp just to get the exposure right. Either that or I just shoot manual.

The only times I've experienced the "purple fringing" so to speak was in long exposures. As soon as you cross the 2 minute barrier the corners of the photo start to go a bit wierd. I've read someplace it's to do with the sensor not being able to properly handle exposure that long.

Outside of those 2 things, I love it. It's an excellent wee camera once you figure out it's couple of nuisances. I'm only learning myself, but I've manage to take a couple of crackers on it (at least others have said so!) so I'm not getting rid of it for a while yet :)
 
Youre using a semi professional camera in a playful mode (auto). Take it out of that mode, play with the metering modes, spot, centre, etc; change the photo mode around from vivid to std to neutral and see what you get. Just because you can drive a Fiesta one day doesnt mean you can slip into an F1 car the next and expect to be able to get it going.
 
I wrote this on another forum when somebody posted up photos taken in auto mode. Auto mode is useful for getting 'guaranteed' shots, it is, however, not the best for the getting the best shots or the most creative shots. If you could use Auto mode to do that, there would be no reason to have all the additional settings on the camera.

I came from a Fuji S5700 to a Canon 450d and looked on in horror as I saw my brand new 450d blow out skies, where the S5700 would not. The fact of the matter is that the Fuji is better at coping with wider dynamic ranges.

Which is why the dSLR's have all these fancy menus. You have to know that underexposing a shot, or overexposing a shot; using aperture, shutter or manual priority modes; average or spot metering; using gradient or neutral density filters or no filter; will improve your photo. These kind of things.

It is in many respects much easier to get a 'pleasing' photo with a compact digital camera than it is with a dSLR, however get it right with a dSLR and you'll know it's right. It's much more rewarding and the photo will be of a much higher quality.

I guess in the future digital compacts and dSLRs will be one and the same, but that's for another thread.
 
i remember on my d40 had to adjust the exposure
 
shots looked fine to me... only thing that seemed wrong, was the exposer/compostion, which arent the cameras fault :shake: its a good camera, dont give up when the first few shots dont match up to what you want :) may take years to get the best from it;)
 
oldnick said:
I have to say, I'm surprised that no one has said that the camera is faulty. I find it believe that a modern camera cannot handle these shots better. These are not isolated shots, I have more. Why should I have to deliberately under expose? Although I am new to DSLR's I am not new to photography. I have normally used auto mode except in what I have considered exceptionally difficult conditions - And do not consider the shots posted as particularly difficult. Ive owed camera's right back to a beloved Pentax ME, and I've never experienced such poor performance.
Click to expand...

I think it's probably because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top