| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/29/2004 10:58:28 AM · #26 |
well im ordering something tonight. those canon rebates are not makin the choice easier....
appreciate all this input!
|
|
|
|
10/29/2004 11:10:11 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by mrphrtq:
Remember, if you are choosing between the D70 and the 300D, you do not want to consider only the features of the camera. Think of it not as buying a camera, but choosing a lens system. The lenses you buy for whichever camera you choose are going to outlast the camera you choose now.
Remember, beautiful pictures can be made with either camera. |
And the lens systems are pretty close to even in quality, so you are back to the features. Which, of couse, the D70 beats the 300D on, hands down. :)
Someone mentioned the ISO and noise comparisons. Here is a ISO/noise comparison between the D70 & 300D (also D70 and D100). If you notice, the noise on the D70 @ISO200 is compariable to the 300D @ ISO100. If you compare evenly (ISO 200 to ISO200 and so on), the D70 noise is much better than the 300D.
You are just getting a much better camera with the D70, IMHO. That's why I decided to go that route.
Edit: spelling
Message edited by author 2004-10-29 11:10:57.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2004 11:12:18 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by petrakka:
well im ordering something tonight. those canon rebates are not makin the choice easier....
appreciate all this input! |
Nikon is offering rebates on a lot of their lens right now.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2004 11:19:37 AM · #29 |
I think you should be looking at what you hope to accomplish photographically, and then looking at lens choices. The decision by Nikon to stick with a DX size sensor is irrelevant when considering the lense system. Any quality optics designed for a full frame 35mm or CMOS will work just as well on a DX sensor. The DX lenses are just smaller and lighter because they don't need as much glass. Bottom line, your investment will be protected just fine if you buy the right lenses. DX for wide angle is good, but unecesary for everything else. When you consider that (all religious battles aside) there are a great many pros on both sides of the fence, it's hard to really argue in defense of one side or the other.
I didn't think as much about the lens system when I bought my D70. I made my decision based on the body in comparison to the 300d, and based on the kit lens being MUCH better on the D70 and a great price in the kit. I can find a lense that does anything I can imaging needing in the Nikon line - I just need to find the money to buy it :)
|
|
|
|
10/29/2004 11:24:51 AM · #30 |
It's all abut the lens system. I chose Canon and, like Azrifel, have a 17-40 F4L, 50 1.4, 70-200 F4L as well as a 28 2.8 and a 28-105 3.5-4.5 that don't get used very much.
The key for me was that I can turn around and use the EF lenses on film and 1.3x or full-frame 1-series cameras. I plan on getting a 1-series camera somewhere down the road. With the Nikon made-for-digital lenses and the EF-S lenses, you can't do this.
I was also interested in the F4 L series of lenses, which doesn't really have an equivalent in the Nikon realm.
Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages, so consider the lenses over the bodies as they'lll be the only constant in your camera system. Bodies come and go. If I had to choose a body, I'd get the D70 over the 300D, but I'd get the 300D for the type of lenses I want.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2004 11:29:28 AM · #31 |
If i had to buy another camera today, i would go with d70 again. And again, i would buy just the body and buy lens separately, just like i did last time.
Just a coupla cents. |
|
|
|
10/29/2004 11:55:13 AM · #32 |
Why are you only limiting your choices to N&C? Konica-Minolta is releasing their new 7D with in camera IS on November 19, and while it will probably cost about the same as the C20D, the lenses for this system are many and you can get them quite cheaply too. Plus, it saves you on carrying a tripod around with you and the lenses are very high quality.
I too have heard that Sony is coming out with a DSLR of it's own coupled with Carl Zeiss lenses some times next year, but it's rumored to be of the 4/3rds system that Olympus is touting with their E1 and E300 cameras. The E300 (Evolt) may also be something to consider since it promises to compete prise wise with the Canon Rebel. It's 8 mps and the glass to go with it from Oly, while expensive, is very high quality. If more companies start jumping on the bandwagon you may find cheaper lenses for 4/3rds cameras in the very near future, especially if Sony and Panasonic (so rumored) jump aboard.
From what I've been reading, full frame sensors may not really be the wave of the future for any of the manufacturers, as these are systems that are expensive to build and heavy to carry around, being that they require more metal and glass. FF systems may become a niche market for those pros that require that kind of very high resolution, but for most of us, we may not even be able to tell the difference in quality with new sensor technologies that are able to pack more pixels into smaller chips that will yield less noise.
Sorry if I've muddled your decision even more so. |
|
|
|
10/29/2004 12:02:15 PM · #33 |
| just a question about the systems, but nikon is the only one who has a "true" fisheye lens for the reduced sensors, right? there's no canon or sigma equivalent? i'm trying to choose a camera as well and the fisheye is kinda important for some of the things i want to do. |
|
|
|
10/29/2004 02:00:41 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by feetstink:
just a question about the systems, but nikon is the only one who has a "true" fisheye lens for the reduced sensors, right? there's no canon or sigma equivalent? i'm trying to choose a camera as well and the fisheye is kinda important for some of the things i want to do. |
Nikon is the only one with a fisheye desgined for reduced sensors only, yes. It is the DX AF-S (!) 10,5mm F2.8. It costs 675 euro over here.
Sigma has an AF 8mm F4 180 degrees circular fishey, but I believe that it produces a circular crop on a 35mm negative. It might work better with a DX/APS sized sensor, but you'd have to search for some information about if it works and what the quality is. In Holland it costs 649 euro including tax. 8mm on a 20D becomes 12.something on your reduced sensor.
Canon's wides fisheye is the EF 15 F2.8 (without USM!) It becomes a 24mm on the 20D and it costs 669 euro.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2004 09:36:19 PM · #35 |
yea that fisheye talk really nails my concerns right there. im limitin my choices to canon and nikon cuz of cost pretty much. the new minolta is gonna be 1600. im tryin to stay under 1900 or so for everything. i played with em both at work today....again. gaahh. ive also just read a lot that canon and nikon seem to be best suited for the action/ sport based photography, for various reasons.
|
|
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: 08/19/2025 03:03:57 PM EDT.
