| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/15/2004 02:30:11 PM · #76 |
| Heehee. After a quick visit to hold both in our sweaty hands, and as I predicted we have a complete difference of opinion - so i think we'll just have to Ben's excellent advice and buy one each :-) |
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:31:24 PM · #77 |
Hey, at least both of you want one. That's farther than I can get in my house.
Message edited by author 2004-04-15 14:33:06. |
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:31:50 PM · #78 |
A separate spot meter would not be calibrated to the digital camera -- i.e. you wil lhave to figure out what ISO 100 means... it most likely will not hit the right exposure (you'd have to compensate, maybe ISO 100 means ISO 80 or 120).
Also, macro shots and other lenses that would distort the metering, a separate spot meter is a pain to use, because through the lens the reading owuld be a lot different. Macro shots for example can have a variation of about 1-2 stops versus an external meter.
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dadas115:
I guess the partial metering thing being ﾃ｢彳noughﾃ｢ is a really personal thing. I have never found it to be enough for those situations when I want a spot meter. |
I pretty much can always find something in the equivalent light that I can meter off, and work out the relevant exposure, that's why I haven't found it a problem. I'm thinking of getting a spot meter mainly for more complex cases, were a camera spot meter wouldn't help much either. |
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:32:38 PM · #79 |
Dunno if it really matters or not in this internet age, but something maybe worth considering is if you have any friends with one or the other systems.
The opportunity to share problems, get help, share/ loan lenses etc is pretty useful.
So how did it fall out, Kavey liked the 300D and you like the Nikon D70 ? :)
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:36:30 PM · #80 |
K and G, I'm not sure if rain is common this time of year where you're going, but you might want to bring a large garbage bag (unless you have rain protection for your bag already). I'm assuming it'll be very damn hot and you'll be walking/hiking for many hours with your camera bag on your back. The camera is likely not impervious to sweat, so the garbage bag can add a layer to prevent sweat absorption although it may otherwise contribute to moisture (much less than a good sweat of course). I found that large zippable freezer bags (the double-layer kind) are incredible useful in saving your gear from the nastiness of sweat, moisture, and rain. Without something between your shirt/back and the bag, even moderate perspiring will contribute to a scent that ripens in only a few days. This latter part I found out the hard way (oh great teacher), although it came in handy as bad smells tend to be the bane of thieves (some anyway).
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:39:11 PM · #81 |
In a similar vein, I steal shower caps from hotels whenever I can - good rain protection and built in elastic.
Floral ones tend to attract more bees though...
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:51:57 PM · #82 |
[quote=paganini] Nikon has a far better wide angle selection than Canon does for digital specific applications.
I don't really agree at all. Especially with the Sigma 12-24 available for EF mount. Also, contrary to popular belief I havenﾃ｢冲 found the AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF to be any better than the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM. The 10.5mm f/2.8G ED-IF might be nice but again it is a real specialty lens and not something that every consumer is going to have a burning need for. The 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF also is an interesting product but again isnﾃ｢冲 anything that canﾃ｢冲 be covered using Canon lenses.
Greg
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 02:55:06 PM · #83 |
[quote=paganini] A separate spot meter would not be calibrated to the digital camera -- i.e. you wil lhave to figure out what ISO 100 means... it most likely will not hit the right exposure (you'd have to compensate, maybe ISO 100 means ISO 80 or 120).
Indeed I have found this to be the case.
[quote=paganini]Also, macro shots and other lenses that would distort the metering, a separate spot meter is a pain to use, because through the lens the reading owuld be a lot different. Macro shots for example can have a variation of about 1-2 stops versus an external meter.
Again I agree with you.
Greg |
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:02:09 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
So how did it fall out, Kavey liked the 300D and you like the Nikon D70 ? :) |
Yup! I know exactly what she means, the D70 is a much "chunkier" body than the 300D - I've got big hands, so the D70 feels very comfortable and to be honest the 300D feels a little small. And of course it's the other way around for her.
Of course, by the time we make a decision they'll have sold out of whichever one we choose :-) |
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:04:01 PM · #85 |
So we went to feel the 300D and D70 earlier this evening.
BOTH have incredibly quick and silent autofocus (I'm a Minolta user remember and Minoltas are slow and loud to focus).
BOTH (with their default lenses) allow me to get really close to an object at all focal lengths and still focus.
+
The 300D fits in my hand like it was moulded for me. It's very very comfortable to hold.
-
The D70 is too large for my hand, particularly in terms of height. BUT Pete is 6 foot 6 inches tall and has appropriately large hands to match. So he loves the feel of it. I'm not sure whether I could learn to live with it or whether it's sufficiently oversized to drive me nuts long term.
- on range and + on weight
The 300D comes with a 18mm to 55mm lens, weight 190 grams.
+ on range and - on weight
The D70 comes with a 18mm to 70mm lens, weight 420 grams.
-
The D70 has very annoying lines and things drawn into the viewfinder glass. It's like they've decided their users need help with the rule of thirds or something.
Neutral
We could buy a Tamron 28mm to 200mm lens, weight 354 grams, cost ﾃつ｣200 as the longer lens for either body.
We could buy a Sigma 70mm to 300mm lens, weight 540 grams, cost ﾃつ｣150 for either body..
We could buy a Nikon G series 70mm to 300mm lens, weight 425 grams, cost ﾃつ｣130 for the D70.
Neutral (not enough difference to worry about)
300D with the 18mm to 55mm lens = ﾃつ｣900 approx (we can find it for a little less)
D70 with the 18mm to 70mm lens = ﾃつ｣1000 approx (we can find it for a little less)
+
D70 has a RAW mode that allows you to save LOSSLESS compressed RAW files at about 5 MEG as opposed to the 300D's 6-8 MEG (but I'm not sure how often we'd use this)
+
300D offers ISO 100 as slowest whereas D70 only offers 200.
+
D70 has a Max shutter speed of 1/8000 sec compared to 1/4000 sec for the 300D. But I really don't see us using these kind of speeds anyway.
Flash Modes - I'm confused:
300D is listed as having Auto, On, Anti red-eye, Off modes
D70 is listed as having Front curtain, Rear curtain, Red-Eye, Slow, Red-Eye Slow but doesn't list Auto but I'm assuming it must also have an Auto mode?
+
On the D70 exposure compensation can be set in eithe 1/3 stop increments or 1/2 stop increments. (Only 1/3 stop on the 300D). Since I'm likely to bracket this may be handy, though not a huge deal.
So as you can see I am (and have been since last night) in agreement that the D70 outclasses the 300D on a number of levels BUT it's the hand holding thing.
OK so... still dithering and going round in circles.
Message edited by author 2004-04-15 15:09:53.
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:11:35 PM · #86 |
Another thing:
Nikon has better skin tone rendition than Canon does, it's more neutral. Fuji S2, has incredible skin tone than either of them is what ihave found. I have to twiddle a lot post processing on the 10D to get the skin tones that i want. Canon seems to tilt toward the green side a lot, which can be annoying unless you're shooting foliages/flowers/landscapes.
Sensor technology wise, Canon has the edge -- but it's all perceived. Some say that the Nikon noises are higher than Canon (which by measurement, they are), but if you look at high ISO shots which Nikon supposedly have higher noises, Nikon D100 would generally look better than the Canon 10D at high ISO (800+) because the noises are more even and finer grained. I have found at ISO 1600 with the 10D, the noise pattern is quite annoying, it actually has a noticeable pattern (see photo below), where it is at a diagnal and very noticeable (instead of film grains which is a lot more even).
//photography.consultku.com/felicia_concert/crw_5590_std.jpg
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:17:22 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by dadas115:
[quote=paganini] A separate spot meter would not be calibrated to the digital camera -- i.e. you wil lhave to figure out what ISO 100 means... it most likely will not hit the right exposure (you'd have to compensate, maybe ISO 100 means ISO 80 or 120).
Indeed I have found this to be the case.
[quote=paganini]Also, macro shots and other lenses that would distort the metering, a separate spot meter is a pain to use, because through the lens the reading owuld be a lot different. Macro shots for example can have a variation of about 1-2 stops versus an external meter.
Again I agree with you.
Greg |
I heard that a couple of people have managed it with film. There are even occasionally mad people who just look at it and work it out without toys - it isn't that hard with some practice really.
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:19:17 PM · #88 |
You could get a 300D and BiG ED3
The battery grip makes it a generally bigger, more holdable, hefty camera.
Cheaper than getting two SLRs...
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:21:24 PM · #89 |
On the shutter speeds and ISO differences, the really fast shutter speed on the d70 and ISO 200, works out the same as the half again slower max speed on the 300D at ISO 100 - so its essentially a wash.
Might make it marginally tougher to do waterfalls in bright sunlight with ND filters with the D70, but it basically ends up that the cameras are equivalent on exposure terms.
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:22:45 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by paganini:
I have found at ISO 1600 with the 10D, the noise pattern is quite annoying, it actually has a noticeable pattern (see photo below), where it is at a diagnal and very noticeable (instead of film grains which is a lot more even).
//photography.consultku.com/felicia_concert/crw_5590_std.jpg |
Random curiosity - is that shot with an IS lens ?
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:26:18 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by paganini:
Another thing:
Nikon has better skin tone rendition than Canon does, it's more neutral. Fuji S2, has incredible skin tone than either of them is what ihave found..... |
Thats because the Fuji S2 is a Nikon camera using Nikon lens, with Fuji electronics inside.(S1/S2/S3 are all basically a Nikon N80 (F80) body with Fuji Insides)
If I could afford it I would get the new S3 when it hits the streets but no chance of that....yet!
Message edited by author 2004-04-15 15:32:17.
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:30:25 PM · #92 |
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:36:36 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
To quote DPC Chat:
|
Well, you did ask :)
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:39:03 PM · #94 |
yes, but you have to spend $1300 for a 16-35 mm lens when Nikon can give you something wider than that for a lot cheaper :)
Even the D70 kit lens is "ED" (equivalent L) lens!!! Something Drebel can't match.
Originally posted by dadas115:
[quote=paganini] Nikon has a far better wide angle selection than Canon does for digital specific applications.
I don't really agree at all. Especially with the Sigma 12-24 available for EF mount. Also, contrary to popular belief I havenﾃ｢冲 found the AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF to be any better than the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM. The 10.5mm f/2.8G ED-IF might be nice but again it is a real specialty lens and not something that every consumer is going to have a burning need for. The 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF also is an interesting product but again isnﾃ｢冲 anything that canﾃ｢冲 be covered using Canon lenses.
Greg |
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:39:49 PM · #95 |
No, it's a 50 mm F1.8 :) probably at F1.8 and about 1/60 seconds, ISO 1600.
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by paganini:
I have found at ISO 1600 with the 10D, the noise pattern is quite annoying, it actually has a noticeable pattern (see photo below), where it is at a diagnal and very noticeable (instead of film grains which is a lot more even).
//photography.consultku.com/felicia_concert/crw_5590_std.jpg |
Random curiosity - is that shot with an IS lens ? |
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:42:17 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by paganini:
No, it's a 50 mm F1.8 :) probably at F1.8 and about 1/60 seconds, ISO 1600.
|
Ta. I'd be happy to even get ISO 1600, never mind complain about the quality ;)
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:45:27 PM · #97 |
[quote=paganini] yes, but you have to spend $1300 for a 16-35 mm lens when Nikon can give you something wider than that for a lot cheaper :)
Even the D70 kit lens is "ED" (equivalent L) lens!!! Something Drebel can't match.
I got my 16-35 for $950 and I donﾃ｢冲 really think that the Nikon kit lens is really in the same class as an L lens just because it has an ED element. That is like saying that the Sigma 70-300 APO is an L equivalent lens. I remain unconvinced.
Greg
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 03:48:38 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by paganini:
yes, but you have to spend $1300 for a 16-35 mm lens when Nikon can give you something wider than that for a lot cheaper :)
|
You could always spend about half that and get the 17-40 F4L. Pretty good wide open and most landscape-y wideangle stuff you'll want to stop it down anyway. ( I realise there are other uses for WA lenses that need it wide open though)
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 04:01:56 PM · #99 |
You need to sell your D60 and get a 1D Mark II :) Give your D60 to your wife. Then i'd be drooling over YOUR camera!!!
(My wife is bugging me about a camera now that she sees how much fun i have with mine. She said she wants a Nikon though and she doesnt' like the PowerShot G2 that i have.)
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by paganini:
No, it's a 50 mm F1.8 :) probably at F1.8 and about 1/60 seconds, ISO 1600.
|
Ta. I'd be happy to even get ISO 1600, never mind complain about the quality ;) |
|
|
|
|
04/15/2004 04:04:09 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by paganini:
You need to sell your D60 and get a 1D Mark II :) Give your D60 to your wife. Then i'd be drooling over YOUR camera!!!
|
I'm getting a 22Mp Leaf Valeo Mamiya instead.
I've had it with small file sizes. I'm looking forward to my first top 5 placing with it and then finding who wants the 132Mb file sent their way for verification.
My wife is in the process of stealing my D60.
Message edited by author 2004-04-15 16:05:03.
|
|
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: 09/10/2025 11:43:06 PM EDT.
