| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/25/2004 11:30:50 PM · #26 |
The photo in this link is a fake. Nikon's sport the red band. Chinese fakes don't. Given this, I'd be sceptical about the specs, too. |
|
|
|
01/26/2004 09:37:51 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by Pedro:
Did I correctly read minimum ISO of 200? |
Just like the D100. |
Odd...I didn't know such things. so for anyone with a D100...any fallout from that? i.e., does that translate to slower shutter speed requirements, higher noise/grain than say the 10d? |
Yes I shoot with a D1x at work and have a D100 as a backup. The noise on the D100 at ISO 200 is worse than ISO 400 on the D1x. But thats still looks pretty good as long as your not doing product photography or anything low-light. |
|
|
|
01/26/2004 02:47:00 PM · #28 |
is the D70 a better spec than the 100D or a lower end product ? I'm not very familiar with the nikon range but I've got a friend wanting advice on which one to buy
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 04:02:39 AM · #29 |
| //www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond70/default.asp |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 07:11:46 AM · #30 |
| So it is an entry level cam like the Canon Drebel ? I'll recommend my friend looks at the D100... |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 07:19:16 AM · #31 |
From what all the reviews/previews say, it's a direct competitor to the 300D.
Also, aren't there rumours somewhere of another Nikon DSLR very soon - I seem to remember (though my memory is very un-specific) some mention of the D100 being a stop-gap ... ?
E
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 08:29:51 AM · #32 |
So, being neither a Canon NOR a Nikon guy, and having absolutely ZERO experience with either type of camera or lens system (be it digital or film), how is one really to choose between the two?
I don't even know where to start.
Message edited by author 2004-01-28 08:30:19. |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 08:55:24 AM · #33 |
Competition at last :) just wait till the D100 gets replaced and the D1X and we might start to see real benefits (Price/tech war) :)
Nice that the D70 in some ways out specs the D100 :) sign of things to come... |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 08:58:42 AM · #34 |
Most people will tell you that you are buying into a lens system. Camera bodies will come and go as technology marches on, but the investment you make in lenses (assuming you spend money on lenses appropriate for a DSLR and don't chintz out) will likely keep you "loyal" to a specific brand.
That said, I think the Canon lens system has more going for it than Nikon. They have more IS (Image Stabilizer) lenses (10) than Nikon does VR (Vibration Reduction) (4), more lenses with USM for ultra-fast, ultra-quiet focusing, and, perhaps most importantly: Canon already has a full-frame DSLR.
All of Nikon's present and rumored DSLR's have a 1.5X crop factor, and Nikon continues to release more and more lenses that only work with this APS-sized (you do remember APS film, right?) sensor (their "DX" line of lenses). This indicates to many folks that Nikon is "satisfied" with a smaller sensor size in their DSLRs and may not ever move to full-frame. Canon is likely to continue to push full-frame R&D, since they already have full-frame, 1.3X and 1.6X crop-factor bodies. If you buy a Nikon 1.5X body now, and invest in a bunch of DX lenses, and then a few years down the road Nikon says "hey, we better develop a full-frame sensor to compete with Canon", and you want to upgrade, your DX-series lenses will be useless.
Canon also has a lot of specialized lenses, such as their line-up of three tilt/shift lenses and 5X life-size macro. They are also developing new in-roads into optical technology, such as Diffractive Optics that allow shorter and lighter lenses compared to comparable refractive optical systems.
But that's just my biased 2¢.
Message edited by author 2004-01-28 09:26:49. |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 09:02:39 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Most people will tell you that you are buying into a lens system. Camera bodies will come and go as technology marches on, but the investment you make in lenses (assuming you spend money on lenses appropriate for a DSLR and don't chintz out) will likely keep you "loyal" to a specific brand.
|
This seems to a peculiarity avoided by most pros - who seem willing to trade in an entire set of lenses and switch to whichever system happens to be better for what they are trying to do - lens investment is just that - they hold their value pretty well for trade in /exchange. Certainly compared to the value of bodies
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 09:43:23 AM · #36 |
Oh, I forgot to mention that I also found this reply in this recent photo.net topic interesting:
Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
dec 20, 2003; 06:23 a.m.
Was at a Nikon product presentation about the D2H and new DX lenses earlier this month where a Nikon rep said officially that IF Nikon were to ever release a fullframe DSLR then that DSLR would need to have a new large diameter lensmount incompatible with the current F lenses. He did NOT say that this would not happen, but he did sound like it was quite unlikely to happen in the near future at least.
The reason for that is the inherent problems with abberations when projecting an image on a 35mm sensor using a lens designed for a 35mm film frame. The higher angle of incidence on the edge of the frame causes abberations which are too large to meet the quality criteriums Nikon places on their products. |
Note that in 1987, Canon abandonded its "FD" lens mount and came up with its current "EF" lens mount. In addition to switching to a completely electronic interface for focusing, aperture control, etc. Canon also increased the size of the lens mount to an internal diameter of 54mm (external diameter of 65mm) -- the largest clear aperture of any lens system used with a 35mm SLR camera.
For comparison, Nikon has used the same (small) F-mount since the 1950's. They have added "enhancements" to permit auto-focus, electronic aperture control, etc., but even so, there are all kinds of exceptions to which Nikon lenses you can use on which Nikon bodies (for example: low-end Nikons aren̢۪t compatible with manual focus lenses; early Nikon lenses had the focus motor in the camera, with a mechanical linkage between the lens and the camera; some Nikon lenses require manually setting the aperture on the lens because it can't be set by the camera, etc.) With Canon, an EF lens is fully functional on any camera with an EF mount.
Message edited by author 2004-01-28 10:29:29. |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 10:05:20 AM · #37 |
Incredible specifications! I hope I can buy one... |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 10:30:01 AM · #38 |
here is a side by side comparison with the D100 and the Canon Rebel... some very nice features on this baby! Compare!
Oh Yeah! It's also about 500 dollars less then the D100!
Message edited by author 2004-01-28 10:31:24.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 11:14:44 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by RiderGal:
here is a side by side comparison with the D100 and the Canon Rebel... some very nice features on this baby! Compare!
Oh Yeah! It's also about 500 dollars less then the D100! |
Edit: URL
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 11:31:03 AM · #40 |
Henry's is the only dealer I can find for the Nikon D70 in Canada. It's not going to be available until spring and it's going to be $1600 Canadian, body only. The Rebel, body only is about $1300 Canadian.
Message edited by author 2004-01-28 11:31:53.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 11:32:54 AM · #41 |
| I was just curious, isn't there a huge difference with the minimum shutter speeds on these cameras? The Rebels is 100 ISO, the D70 and D100's are 200 ISO. Does it work differently for Digital? If not, that would be the deciding factor for me right there. |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 11:57:38 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by Paige:
I was just curious, isn't there a huge difference with the minimum shutter speeds on these cameras? The Rebels is 100 ISO, the D70 and D100's are 200 ISO. Does it work differently for Digital? |
That isn't the shutter speed, that is the ISO setting, or measure of light sensitivity.
The Digital Rebel (300D) has ISO 100, which is useful when you are shooting outdoors with plenty of light and want the minimum amount of sensor noise (akin to "film grain") in your capture. The CMOS sensor in the Rebel/10D results in silky-smooth output at these low-ISO settings, and in general, the lower the ISO setting of a digital camera, the less noise it has compared to other ISO settings on the same camera. The tradeoff is that you need more light at lower ISOs.
Just because two digital cameras both say they support "ISO 200" does not mean they have the same noise levels. ISO 400 on the 10D blows away ISO 400 on any point-and-shoot, for example (on the 10D, it is practically noise-free and very usable).
To see how the noise levels at the various ISO settings of the Digital Rebel compare to the 10D and the Nikon D100, check out this link. (Don't forget that the EOS 300D's standard parameter set (Parameter 1) has higher sharpening which will affect noise as well as higher saturation which will make color noise more visible.)
Message edited by author 2004-01-28 12:02:47. |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 12:13:30 PM · #43 |
Doh, ISO, that's what I meant. My brain doesn't function well until at least noon :) and to think I went to school for this ;)
Thanks EddyG, that's the exact info I was looking for. |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 12:53:01 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by RiderGal:
here is a side by side comparison with the D100 and the Canon Rebel... some very nice features on this baby! |
Thanks, Talya -- but here's a corrected link for the comparison page. The comparisons are very interesting -- seems that the D70 has a wider range of options (on some features: exposure, etc...)
Still, Eddy's point about the lens system is spot-on. The problem remains, however, that as a know-nothing about SLRs, I'm a know-nothing about lenses. I guess it's time for me to study up.
I'm looking at the lower-end SLRs as an entry point so that I can build up a larger library of lenses. Having used a 10D (for a day, anyway), I'm leaning in that direction. However, the Rebel may not cut it.... Not sure. Anyone else struggling with these issues?
Thanks for the great help so far! |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 04:09:35 PM · #45 |
If you are not going to buy the manufacturer's lenses, then it probably doesn't matter....Canon/Nikon. If you are going to buy the manufacturer's lenses, then it might matter. Although I specifically chose to go Nikon/Nikkor and have not regretted it, Canon does make some marvelous glass.
To help me decide....I reviewed photos for 3 months (Popular Photography at the time), and each time I found a photo that I liked, I noted what equipment was used to take it. My decision was simply the culmination tally of the photos that I liked. You may have different taste in photos, so decide from the photos that you like. Understand the costs associated with the equipment that produces your favorite photos, then decide if you can accept those costs, or do you need to compromise.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2004 07:51:20 PM · #46 |
|
|
|
01/28/2004 09:24:28 PM · #47 |
My decision is made. The lens cinched the deal. I've posted previously that 28mm is the standard for my "grab and go" set up and this package fits well with my other Nikkors. Exactly what I've been wanting.
|
|
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: 08/01/2025 06:46:30 PM EDT.
