Here's a great new article lead by Thom Hogan about the D7000:
"Time Heals all Internet Complaints Dec 28 (commentary)--Just for the heck of it I've been doing a little informal study of several Internet forums. According to my latest weekly statistics, the D7000 now overexposes 78% less than it did two months ago, back focuses 70% less, and hot pixels are down an amazing 85%.
It happens with virtually every new product release. A huge rash of complaints come almost immediately upon those first users receiving their cameras. Everyone rushes out and does random tests without first fully understanding the product, and they post "my D7000 overexposes" or "I see hot pixels" when they encounter something they don't understand or didn't expect. Hidden within all these complaints sometimes is a real issue (the P5000's tendency to punt on focus and put up a Lens Initialization error in some situations, or the hot pixels in D7000 video, for instance, both of which we have "firmware fixes" for already)."
There's more, but you get the idea. The full article on Hogan's site can be found here with the December 28th date.
Don't know if my hot pixels met the "professional view" of a hot pixel problem. After viewing my stills and video Nikon said to "send it (the camera) in for their examination". I sent it back via Amazon's return policy and the replacement has not exhibited any problems to date.
I saw this post on his web site. He could post this every time Nikon releases a camera. I bought a d90 amidst a storm of posts claiming is shoot inherently soft images and generally had poor image quality.
Unfortunately, the internet hysteria tends to mask the odd defective camera issue. People get defensive when people suggest that maybe they just need to get to know the camera better. Also, sometimes that is not the answer because their particular camera is in fact defective and this adds to the frustration.
Thom’s sort of concluding view holds much of the true and the irony is in place although there certainly were problems accompanying the release and perhaps a hair bit more than could be. I mean DP forum environment especially.
As for Nikon UK they work right on case acknowledging slightest problem to be tackled as usual even though it may take some time.
Once you've read Thom's posts for a few years, as many of us here have, you'll realise that he has regularly been the "voice of reason" against web hysteria over supposed problems with new camera models.
His "statistical analysis" statement is clearly intended as a humourous attempt to make a very serious point - that many of the problem reports that follow a camera launch tend to be caused by user unfamiliarity, and that the volume of such reports reduces rapidly as people get used to the camera, leaving those few which actually may be faults.
>Thom has been the...."voice of reason" against web hysteria over >supposed problems with new camera models.
Thanks again Brian, years ago I noticed similarly that my parents seemed to become much wiser as they grew older over the years!...hahaha
. . .
MY SETUP Nikon D7000 with zoomNIKKOR AF-S DX 10-24mm f3.5, Tamron AF 18-270mm Macro f3.5 Di II VC LD and Tamron AF 180mm f/3.5 Di SP A/M FEC LD (IF) 1:1 Macro Nikon R1 Wireless Close-Up Speedlight System, ZacutoEVF Pro Two SanDisk 32GB EXTREME PRO SDHC-UHS-1 (45MB/S) viewNX2 captureNX2 NIKCompleteCollection Ultimate Photo Mechanic 4.6.6 Annotate Pro Vegas Movio Studio 10 Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 14
Sun 02-Jan-11 05:36 PM | edited Sun 02-Jan-11 06:00 PM by richardd300
"I'm not sure why Nikon doesn't put this stuff in the manual." they don't need to Thom, they've got you for that!
Good and reputable as TH is, there is still such a thing as faulty cameras and always will be! Ignoring the "hysterical" users, then over time of course the genuine faulty cameras will reduce as QA improves following the initial high production batches. Nikon would be in trouble if they didn't. I'm a happy D7000 user now, the bad taste of my first faulty Nikon still remains though.
>Good and reputable as TH is, there is still such a thing as >faulty cameras and always will be!
Clearly, Thom does recognise that, as we can see from the text that Howard originally quoted: "...hidden within all these complaints sometimes is a real issue...". Thom certainly does not have his head in the sand, and has posted at length about several of Nikon's failings over the years.
It's a shame that your initial D7000 experience wasn't a positive one, but as you say - there will always be some faulty cameras.
>caused by user unfamiliarity, and that the volume >of such reports reduces rapidly as people get used to the >camera, leaving those few which actually may be faults.
As an example, I notice some are viewing images at 100% and comparing what they see with 100% views of smaller pixel count sensors, such as that found in the D90. Many don't realize this is an apples and oranges comparison (because the magnification is different in between the two views). This is leading to nonsense conclusions such as the D7000 being softer or less forgiving to user error. One should zoom in to an amount necessary to meet the circle of confusion required for the end application (screen, print, other)!