new camera - DPChallenge Forums

Leica 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario Elmar-T ASPH

10/03/2005 08:29:32 PM · #1

so im probaly gonna be buying a new camera this weekend and ive narrowed it down to the nikon d70s or the cannon digital rebel.

i went down to the local camera shop and took a look at these cameras and held them and i defintaly liked the feel of the d70s better than the cannon. also the lense on the d70s seemed really nice.

two questions

1. should i be looking at the cannon eos 20d
2. if yes then are the stock lenses camparable on the d70s and the cannon d20?

MAK

Leica M Monochrom

10/03/2005 08:36:33 PM · #2

There is so little between these 2 camera giants that it is basically down to how you feel holding the camera. I went with Nikon because I had Nikon glass already (ironically i dont own the same glass these days) 6MP-8MP is no difference really, the main thing is the lens system, you will buying into lenses so go with the lens system you prefer, both are very good of cause but I would reccomend Nikon because that is the way I chose and I am very happy with it, I have tried Canon too and have to say that Canon are also really good... I feel Nikon give you a better kit lens with the 18-70 AF-S 3.5-4.5. I have that lens but it wasnt as a kit i got mine seperate and it is a really good lens, I dont think the Canon one is AS good but it is still a decent lens.

final word from me is - GO WITH NIKON!

Pioneer

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM for Canon EOS

10/03/2005 08:44:47 PM · #3

I am not sure why I see people say that there is no difference between the 6 and 8 mp cameras. It's still offering 30% more pixels is it not? Is that not batter than less? You could say a 4mp is the same as a 6 then couldn't you. I know some people are going to have something to say about this, but I can't see more not being better. I can also say that the MP actually mean nothing when it comes to great photo's, because some 1,2 and 3 mp cameras have done very well in the right hands (not mine of course LOL)What it would come down to what feels good to you, and fits your budget. Good luck and enjoy your new camera which ever you choose.

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

10/03/2005 08:46:35 PM · #4

You answered your own question with:

"i defintaly liked the feel of the d70s better than the cannon"

Canon and Nikon are both excellent cameras and lens systems. for me it came down to the feel of the camera in my hands and the layout of the controls. I find the Nikon more intuitive.

As for trying the Canon 20D it would not be a fair comparision. The 20D is at least 500$ more and the kit lens that comes with canon is not as good. However, the 20D has a much better feel than the 300/350. Control layout is still not as intuitive for me.

Good luck and have fun with whatever you chose!

Chaszmyr

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/03/2005 08:46:41 PM · #5

I think the previous couple releases in the 20d product line were on the last couple Octobers, so it seems as if Canon may be planning to release a 30d (or whatever they call it) this month. Anyone else have any more info about this?

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

10/03/2005 08:50:24 PM · #6

Originally posted by Chaszmyr:

Yeah - and who knows about the rumurs of the Nikon D200? You'll never catch up by waiting for each new release. It will be interesting to see the next step for the 20D compared to the next for the D100. That should be a good heads up match. Can't wait.

Pioneer

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM for Canon EOS

10/03/2005 08:51:38 PM · #7

There will always be something better, and not too far around the corner either. Just get what makes you happy now

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

10/03/2005 09:01:27 PM · #8

thanks for all the great response i think i will go with the nikon. but ya thanks again im just getting into photography and this forum has been such a reliable resource thanks.

chris

jab119

10/03/2005 09:07:53 PM · #9

Originally posted by Pioneer:

well the differance is not that much and is not very noticible between 6 and 8 MP. you notice a quality differance once you double the MP's. 6 is better than 3, but 6 is not really better than 5 or 4.
12 MP's are much better than 6, but not that much better than 8 or 10.

there was a chart somewhere that showed the MP's size in relation to the next bigger size. once oyu see that you will understand it a little better

James

pianomom

Canon EOS-20D

10/04/2005 10:30:51 AM · #10

Just one note. You don't have to buy the kit lens that usually comes with the 20D. I got the body with the 17-85mm lens. It's much better.

eschelar

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/04/2005 11:17:34 AM · #11

Ok, here we go:

Pioneer and Jab 119. The real reason 8MP isn't much of an increase over a 6MP, but a 6MP is a much bigger increase over 4MP is not to do with doubling. It is more to do with the fact that you are dealing with squares. 8mp on the 350XT is 3456x2304. 6mp on the D70s is 3008x2000. This is NOT a 30% jump in resolution. This is a 3456/3008=14.89% increase in general resolution. Going from 4MP (2464x1632 in the D2Hs) to 6mp reveals a jump of 3008/2464=22%. This is not a 50% increase in resolution. There are of course many other factors to image quality than merely megapixels. 6mp pics can be resized to 8mp and have the same level of quality as an 8mp, or better if narrower apertures are used. An 8mp camera will print 15% bigger pictures than a 6mp. A 6mp camera will print 22% bigger pictures than a 4mp.

None of this is actually important though to the OP, mostly because there are many other factors than MP that govern image quality.

If I were given the choice between a Rebel and a D70, it'd be the D70 hands down. The reason is that the D70 is not meant to be competition for the Rebel. It was designed simply better. It is considered a better metering camera, as well as having certain benefits for those who use a lot of fill flash outdoors due to high flash sync speed. It is also a significantly beefier camera.

I would only say that if I was comparing bodies though. I feel that for the money, Canon lenses are better. It is true that the Kit lens on the D70 eats the Kit lens on the Canon, but excellent images CAN be taken with either. Moreover, most people would not dream of limiting themselves to an 18-70 or 18-55mm lens. It is the lenses that you must buy afterwards where the wisdom of the decision comes in.

Both Canon and Nikon have excellent lenses, but not everyone wants to buy the same lenses. For the lenses I want to and someday may actually buy, the Nikon version is no better, but significantly more expensive. To the point where it approaches the price of a body.

To make this decision, one absolutely MUST make careful planning and good use of online sites like BHPhoto to determine cost vs. end result. For me, Nikon represents possibly one less lens bought, but still ends up being almost 500 dollars more in the end for the lenses. That's easily the price of moving up to a 20D. 20D vs D70s isn't much of a decision. 5fps, 8mp, lower noise at ISO 1600, Battery grip for vertical shooting, special focusing mode for f2.8 and better lenses. That's pretty much where it's at.

Take a long careful look at what you future lens purchases will be. Either camera WILL make you happy.

most people considering paying for the 28-80mm f2.8 Tamron lens as an alternative to the 18-70 or 18-55. Having the 80 dollar Canon kit lens in the bag gives you a bit more wide angle if you really need it.

digitalpins

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

10/04/2005 11:33:19 AM · #12

it just basically comes down to what feels better to you while you are holding it in your hand taking pictures, both are excellent cameras, the 6 to 8 pixels are not a huge difference

Message edited by author 2005-10-04 11:33:35.

henry_buckle

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

10/04/2005 11:43:55 AM · #13

The thing that annoys me about the DRebels is that canon didnt put the LCD on the top of the camera like Nikon did. Personally I dont like the feel of the Rebel XT either.

Personally Id opt for a second hand 10D, or if you dont mind firmware hacks the Rebel (non XT).

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

10/04/2005 11:58:07 AM · #14

If my memory serves me correctly (which it doesn't seem to these days :) it takes a quadrupling of megapixels to double your resolution.

Also, to take advantage of an increase in resolution you need to have high quality, high resolution, good contrast lenses, so be prepared to spend a lot of money for both body and lenses.

Lastly...THERE ARE OTHER CAMERA MAKERS OTHER THAN CANON AND NIKON that make excellent products.

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

10/05/2005 09:38:23 PM · #15

one last quick question just wondering if there is a big difference between ccd and cmos sensors?

yido

Canon EOS-5D

10/05/2005 10:58:37 PM · #16

I think CMOS sensors take less power to run. In practical terms, there doesn't seem to be much imaging difference. Funny thing is that even Nikon is using CMOS sensors in their new D2X.

As for your question, if you like the feel of the d70s, then that's a very important factor. Imaging quality wise, I think the XT offers more with ISO 100 and 8MPs. It's not a hugh difference though. The other thing is that Canon offers a grip while Nikon doesn't for the d70. I think 20D offers the most features, but it's also much more expensive.

You should check out dpreview and compare the XT and the d70s, see if the technical differences are important for you. As for optics, both Canon and Nikon make nice comparable lenses.

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

10/05/2005 11:10:18 PM · #17

Originally posted by eschelar:

Umm, not to quibble, but measuring one dimensional size increase is causing your math to be wrong.

You increase by ~14.5% in both directions on a 6-8mp jump, making it 30%

edit - Oh yeah, OP post. I'd go for the 20d. better ISO and noise levels if even by a little. skip the kit and get that 24-120sumpin one everyone has been raving about.

Message edited by author 2005-10-05 23:12:25.

ttreit

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

10/05/2005 11:26:03 PM · #18

Personally I give the edge to Canon glass but both Canons and Nikons are great. I have no regrets with my 20D and I owned Nikons before this. I'm a full Canon convert. Plus for some reason it seems that Canons always have like double the battery life of Nikons. :)

But you have to pick what's best for you. Before you spend the money go through the in depth reviews of the cameras you're considering on DPreview, Cnet, etc. Read the reviews written by consumers too. Like at epinion, amazon.com, wherever. Basically spend a couple days gathering all the information you can and then make your choice.

Olyuzi mentioned there are other cameras out there, and while thats true and you can get some fine pictures from them, there's a lot to be said for sticking with the big two. Namely there's more used gear to pick through, more people who can offer you help/advice with your gear, and there's a reason those two are at the top. Personally I'll stick with Canon, but if they went out of business i'd switch back to Nikon. For non SLRs I think you can pick from a wider range of manufacturers, but when you start talking about investing in glass my vote is go with Canon or Nikon, no question.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

10/05/2005 11:44:02 PM · #19

Actually, since you spelled Canon wrong I think you need to go with the Nikon. :)

eschelar

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/05/2005 11:53:11 PM · #20

No wavelength. You can't ADD horizontal resolution to vertical resolution. If you make an increase in the dimension of a sensor's horizontal resolution and the aspect ratio is maintained, the vertical resolution will increase by the exact same amount. There is nothing extra here because the resolution increase is the same increase.

Adding Vertical resolution does not increase horizontal resolution. Overall resolution is the combination of both factors based on the diagonal line. That's pythagorean. Because Asquared * (increase) + Bsquared * (increase) = Csquared * (increase), you can see that the increase is a common factor and is not actually part of the addition process. The Rebel XT has 4153 pixels diagonally on a 3:2 pitch. The D70s has 3612 pixels diagonally on a 3:2 pitch. 4153/3612 = 14.89%, the exact same as the increase on either edge. This is my simplified version of the math.

Unfortunately, this is skewed because this is not a straight diagonal line. Therefore, we now need to slice down the sides to an inch per inch number so we can get a true diagonal line on a square, not a right angle triangle in the 3:2 aspect ratio. This is relatively easy since the pixel pitch is exactly the same on the diagonal and the vertical. Images are scaleable, so I will apply a scale of 1:1inch below.

350XT linear ppi = 3456/3 = 2304/2 = 1152
350XT Diagonal ppi= 1152x1152x2=2654208. sqrt = 1629

D70s linear ppi = 3008/3 = 2000/2 = 1000 (The horizontal is 0.2% different - insignificant)
D70s diagonal ppi = 1000x1000x2=2000000. sqrt = 1414

1629/1414 = 15.2%

Therefore, the ACTUAL increase of diagonal resolution on a true diagonal based on a square is 15.2% when moving from 6mp to 8mp.

My lazy math gives me:
Increase to Horizontal Resolution from 6mp to 8mp: 14.89%
Increase to Vertical Resolution from 6mp to 8mp: 14.89%
Increase to Diagonal Resolution from 6mp to 8mp: 14.89%

I just find it easier to make the ratio off a single side rather than off the diagonal because it is measuring a relationship and I don't need to go through the whole Pythagorean deal with squaring a number like 3456 and finding the square route for a number like

Because this increase is related to the actual number of pixels, it holds true regardless of the size of the sensor or size of the prints.

That is also why I said that the number of pixels is NOT the only factor in determining resolution, but is important to remember because situations where the number of pixels is not the most important factor are relatively few.

PS. This is math I learned when I was 10 years old. I still remember the day I learned it. I was on the Coho ferry from Victoria to Seattle.

It came up a couple of years later in grade 6 math via the BC curriculum.

I do hope you are able to do this sort of thing by yourself. If you are a little rusty, check up on Factors and balanced equations.

ttreit

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

10/07/2005 03:07:20 PM · #21

So have you decided yet? :)

SteveJ

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

10/07/2005 03:14:34 PM · #22

Isn't there a problem with D70's and the blinking green light of death?

The Canon kit lens (USM) is a great little lens.

Steve

eschelar

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/08/2005 01:36:08 AM · #23

DPreview recently placed an advisory that Nikon has admitted to the problem of the Green Blinking Light of Death fault in their cameras. It is due to a little plastic doohickey that breaks easily and does some internal damage or something like that. There is a free repair offered by Nikon on this problem unconditionally.

Personally, I feel that D70 is is seriously nice camera, but because of the expensive glass, I'd go with Konica before I went with Nikon. The only difficulty is that is only valid if there are no higher up options desired. Canon has the higher options, Nikon might go there, but KM seems pretty static right now. If they could get something with high frame rates, even at 6MP, I'd probably go that route. 3fps is a bit slow for me.