| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/20/2005 05:41:39 PM · #26 |
| Even my 1DsMkII uses SD (and CF) |
|
|
|
04/20/2005 05:54:13 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by colda:
'tis very true, which means that the D70 will be available at a reduced price :) |
But not for long. The D2H is already becoming scarse as a new camera. And maybe the price won't be reduced much. Nikon got blasted hard by D2H owners who thought they were dealt a raw deal on the resale value of their cameras when the new price was cut by about half.
|
|
|
|
04/21/2005 01:55:45 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by grandmarginal:
Originally posted by colda:
Originally posted by yido:
colda,
I think D70 is now being replaced by the D70s. |
'tis very true, which means that the D70 will be available at a reduced price :) |
On the Nikon Canada site they price the D70s at $1599.95 and the D70 at $1499.95 (wich it's been at for some time now), a $100.00 differance (Canadian).
I've found only 3 units of the D70 left in stores in my area. If the price for the D70 drops, I'll have to buy it quick before they're all gone.
I'm still not decided on wich one to buy. The D70s not only has a bigger LCD screen, it also has new AF features. Ah, decisions...
Edit: Oh yeah and the D50 will not be available in Canada until june. |
To add to the confusion, bear in mind that Nikon are releasing a firmware update for the D70 to give it some of the advantages that the D70s has.
|
|
|
|
04/21/2005 12:16:46 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Gil P:
.... but nothing rivals Canon "L" glass. |
The quality of glass would be the last reason to choose Canon over Nikon. If you were to compare the choices Canon offers with what Nikon offers and the quality of "L" glass vs. "ED" glass I think the scales would tip heavily towards Nikon. The only problem I would have with Nikon is the black lenses. They do now offer some of the bigger glass in gray, but the black stuff just gets too hot.
Message edited by author 2005-04-21 12:17:14. |
|
|
|
04/21/2005 12:25:39 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by Gil P:
.... but nothing rivals Canon "L" glass. |
The quality of glass would be the last reason to choose Canon over Nikon. If you were to compare the choices Canon offers with what Nikon offers and the quality of "L" glass vs. "ED" glass I think the scales would tip heavily towards Nikon. The only problem I would have with Nikon is the black lenses. They do now offer some of the bigger glass in gray, but the black stuff just gets too hot. |
Certainly can't argue with the idea that black gets hotter than gray, but at the same time, I can't help but think about how many pros have had no trouble using the black lenses to create amazing photographs. In that light, I have to wonder if it's really a big deal, or a subtle thing that may help in very specific cases but be negligible in most.
|
|
|
|
04/21/2005 07:14:19 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by cghubbell:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by Gil P:
.... but nothing rivals Canon "L" glass. |
The quality of glass would be the last reason to choose Canon over Nikon. If you were to compare the choices Canon offers with what Nikon offers and the quality of "L" glass vs. "ED" glass I think the scales would tip heavily towards Nikon. The only problem I would have with Nikon is the black lenses. They do now offer some of the bigger glass in gray, but the black stuff just gets too hot. |
Certainly can't argue with the idea that black gets hotter than gray, but at the same time, I can't help but think about how many pros have had no trouble using the black lenses to create amazing photographs. In that light, I have to wonder if it's really a big deal, or a subtle thing that may help in very specific cases but be negligible in most. |
When the black housing gets up over 180F it is a very big deal. Sit in the summer sun for more then 20 minutes and you can fry an egg on the housing of a black lens. That is no exageration. |
|
|
|
04/22/2005 08:18:27 PM · #32 |
Is it me or is 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens becoming the kit lens of choice for all digital SLR's. I think Pentex has it for their new dSLR and Nikon is using it for their D50. Personally, I'd prefer a 18-85 or a 18-105 if it was possible. 55mm feels too short for me.
Now, here is the real question, if you are buying your first dSLR system, which would you choose? Nikon D50 or Canon Digital Rebel XT/350D?
Message edited by author 2005-04-22 20:22:02.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2005 08:24:25 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by yido:
Now, here is the real question, if you are buying your first dSLR system, which would you choose? Nikon D50 or Canon Digital Rebel XT/350D? |
On paper, it would seem that the XT has the edge. This is a loaded question for sure. |
|
|
|
04/22/2005 08:30:52 PM · #34 |
That's why I posted it. To fan the flames of friendly ribbing between the Canon and the Nikon folks. If I was starting out right now, I'd probably would have gotten the D50, not realizing that Nikon lens and accessories cost more. So knowing what I know now, I would get the XT so that I can upgrade later for less.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2005 08:38:30 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by yido:
Is it me or is 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens becoming the kit lens of choice for all digital SLR's. I think Pentex has it for their new dSLR and Nikon is using it for their D50. Personally, I'd prefer a 18-85 or a 18-105 if it was possible. 55mm feels too short for me. |
I agree. I really like the 18-70 (D70 kit lens). It's got a nice bit of zoom without being too bulky. Makes an excellent starter lens. Unless the 18-55 is gonna be a lot cheaper (making it fit with the cost aspect of the D50), I think they should of stuck with the 18-70. |
|
|
|
04/22/2005 08:40:57 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by snackwells:
Originally posted by yido:
Now, here is the real question, if you are buying your first dSLR system, which would you choose? Nikon D50 or Canon Digital Rebel XT/350D? |
On paper, it would seem that the XT has the edge. This is a loaded question for sure. |
Of course the Nikon may possibly be $150-$200 less then the XT, but we'll see what type of price point they decide on.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2005 08:54:45 PM · #37 |
Kearock,
I agree, 18-70mm would be a much nicer starting walk around lens to start a system with. I think Nikon switched to 18-55 to cut cost since the kit lens adds 100 dollars.
Faidoi,
I think the prices have been set for the D50 at $899 for the kit vs. $999 for the Canon's kit, minus $100 for the lensless version of each. So Nikon is cheaper, but when I was pricing comparable lenses and flashes, the Nikon was about $50 or more expensive for everything.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2005 11:36:59 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by yido:
If I was starting out right now, I'd probably would have gotten the D50, not realizing that Nikon lens and accessories cost more. So knowing what I know now, I would get the XT so that I can upgrade later for less. |
What ever gave you the impression that Nikon lenses cost more then Canon lenses?
|
|
|
|
04/23/2005 01:46:48 AM · #39 |
What ever gave you the impression that Nikon lenses cost more then Canon lenses? [/quote]
Well, looking at B&H, a comparing consumer Canon to Nikon, 50mm 1.8 is $80 vs.90, 10-22 Canon is $800 vs Nikon's 12-24 $900, 75-300USM III Canon $189 vs Nikon 70-300 $299 (ED version, their cheapest is $130), 28-105 f3.5 $230 vs $325, 70-200 f2.8 stabilized is about $1600 for both, Canon 580 EX $310 vs Nikon SB 800 $320. Overall, from lenses that I was looking at, Nikon seems about same to a bit more expensive.
Message edited by author 2005-04-23 01:51:35.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2005 01:54:50 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by yido:
What ever gave you the impression that Nikon lenses cost more then Canon lenses? |
Well, looking at B&H, a comparing consumer Canon to Nikon, 50mm 1.8 is $80 vs.90, 10-22 Canon is $800 vs Nikon's 12-24 $900, 75-300USM III Canon $189 vs Nikon 70-300 $299 (ED version, their cheapest is $130), 28-105 f3.5 $230 vs $325, 70-200 f2.8 stabilized is about $1600 for both, Canon 580 EX $310 vs Nikon SB 800 $320. Overall, from lenses that I was looking at, Nikon seems about same to a bit more expensive. [/quote]
Nikon also issues more rebates then Canon too. |
|
|
|
04/23/2005 02:01:52 AM · #41 |
Nikon also issues more rebates then Canon too. [/quote]
Perhaps so, but now we're really splitting hairs. when I was looking into starting a system, I was considering a DR kit with a 420/580 EX, and a 75-300, vs D70 kit with SB800/600, and a 70-300 ED lens. Nikon accessories were more expensive. But knowing about lens cost and accessories, I'd consider the Canon now, especially since you can't get a factory battery grip for the D50/70, where as you can for the DR, XT, 20D, which I really like having.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2005 02:18:09 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by yido:
Nikon also issues more rebates then Canon too. |
Perhaps so, but now we're really splitting hairs. when I was looking into starting a system, I was considering a DR kit with a 420/580 EX, and a 75-300, vs D70 kit with SB800/600, and a 70-300 ED lens. Nikon accessories were more expensive. But knowing about lens cost and accessories, I'd consider the Canon now, especially since you can't get a factory battery grip for the D50/70, where as you can for the DR, XT, 20D, which I really like having. [/quote]
If the Xt used sd card I would probably have one already :( Imagine if the next dSLR comes out where you can choose the card format.
Why not buy compact flash or sell the sd cards? I want to keep the p/s camera that goes with the sd cards. The money used for compact flash could easily go toward a lens investment.
I totally agree about the grip part though. |
|
|
|
04/23/2005 10:07:24 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by yido:
What ever gave you the impression that Nikon lenses cost more then Canon lenses? |
Well, looking at B&H, a comparing consumer Canon to Nikon, 50mm 1.8 is $80 vs.90, 10-22 Canon is $800 vs Nikon's 12-24 $900, 75-300USM III Canon $189 vs Nikon 70-300 $299 (ED version, their cheapest is $130), 28-105 f3.5 $230 vs $325, 70-200 f2.8 stabilized is about $1600 for both, Canon 580 EX $310 vs Nikon SB 800 $320. Overall, from lenses that I was looking at, Nikon seems about same to a bit more expensive. [/quote]
Nikon has a lot more lenses to choose from, and a lot more of their older versions are also available to fit the newer DSLRs. At the higher end, as in "ED" and "L" glass, sometimes Nikon lenses cost more and sometimes Canon lenses do. Mostly it seems about the same.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/16/2025 07:43:09 PM EDT.
