Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New digital camera

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi
I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years and
want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400 (wide
angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70 is only
6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly more
expensive.

Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for the
D70 over the 8400?

Thanks.

- Eugel

More about : digital camera

Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Even though the D70 is only 6MP, it can produce noise free, unprocessed
looking images with higher dynamic range. The reason is the D70 uses a much
larger sensor then the toys do. The 8mp prosumer cameras use a tiny sensor
that is less than a centimeter on the longest side. This means the sensing
cells are very small and capture much less light for a given exposure. The
output from the small sensors must be amplified much higher than the larger
ones. This means more noise. The larger sensors also have less electronics
at each photo site meaning the cells can be bigger still, but the sensor is
not capable of live previews (aside from the fact that the mirror is in the
way).
bg

"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41c95f1e$1@news.starhub.net.sg...
> Hi
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years
and
> want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400 (wide
> angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70 is
only
> 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly more
> expensive.
>
> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for
the
> D70 over the 8400?
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Eugel
>
>
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41c95f1e$1@news.starhub.net.sg...
> Hi
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years
> and want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400
> (wide angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70
> is only 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly
> more expensive.
>
> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for
> the D70 over the 8400?
>

The resolution of a camera is an overhyped and mistunderstood measure of
camera quality. Mepapixels make a difference if you're making large prints,
but unless you're going bigger than 11x17, 6 megapixels is more than enough.
It's a convenient handle that people apply. "An 8 megapixel camera must be
better than a 6 megapixel camera". It's untrue.

The advantage to dSLRs is that they have better image quality than point and
shoots. The reason is the size and nature of the sensor. Larger sensor means
less noise. Additionally, you will get better flexibility and better quality
lenses for the D70.

The 8400 does OK. It's a good camera and takes good pictures. You may not
need the flexibility or image quality of a D70 - the 8700 may be good enough
for your needs. If you're a photographic enthusiast, and like to print your
images and hang them on the wall, get the D70 and learn photography. If you
don't clearly understand things like f-stops, ISO, depth of field or flash
photography, then save your money and get the Coolpix.

HMc
Related resources
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41c95f1e$1@news.starhub.net.sg...
> Hi
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years
> and want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400
> (wide angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70
> is only 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly
> more expensive.
>
> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for
> the D70 over the 8400?
>
> Thanks.

Picture Quality is the biggest one.

The D70 has a huge sensor when compared to the 8400 - and so the images are
much less noisy.

If you want wide angle, then also look at the 12-24 DX lens for the D70.
That's about as wide as it gets without going to the 10.5mm fisheye.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eugel wrote:
>Aside from lens interchangeability, is >there any reason I should opt for the
>D70 over the 8400?

Look on eBay first for a Sony DSC-D770. Lens is fixed - but a 28-to-140
(35mm equiv.) zoom. It's great for almost everything - and prices on
barely-used ones way down now.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<B>Dissident news - plus immigration, gun rights, weather, Internet Gun Show
<I><A HREF="http://www.alamanceind.com">ALAMANCE INDEPENDENT:
official newspaper of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy</A></b></i>
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

No need for me to elaborate on how "megapixels aren't everything" and how
D-SLRs do better--especially at higher ISOs--than "all-in-ones" due to the
larger sensor-size, everyone else has made that clear for you.

However, one thing I did notice which could factor in to the decision--you
mentioned you have a collection of Nikkor lenses. How many, and how much did
they cost? Reason I ask--they don't work with your D70, if this is an issue
for you. Understand--the D70 is an OUTSTANDING camera which I give my very
enthusiastic recommendation to, it's wonderful. However, the D70 won't meter
with older Nikkor lenses, and "non-AI" lenses won't fit at all, in case any
of yours are that all (you did mentioned a Nikon F2AS).

If this is an issue for you, consider the Nikon D1x; it is a very wonderful
camera built like a tank, it's based on the Nikon F5, and it will meter
(center-weighted only I believe) with your older lenses. It was once a
$4000+ camera, but I've seen them go used on Fred Miranda and Rob Galibriath
for $1700 or so. Just a thought.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/index.asp

http://www.fredmiranda.com/

If that is not an issue for you, then never mind that and get the D70.

LRH

"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41c95f1e$1@news.starhub.net.sg...
> Hi
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years
> and want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400
> (wide angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70
> is only 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly
> more expensive.
>
> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for
> the D70 over the 8400?
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Eugel
>
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Eugel Yeo"
> Hi
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years and
> want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400 (wide
> angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70 is only
> 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly more
> expensive.
>
> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for the
> D70 over the 8400?


Aside from the good points already offered about image quality
from the body of a DSLR, don't overlook the flexibility and quality
from the primary source, the lens.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eugel Yeo wrote:
> Hi
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for
> years and want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the
> Nikon 8400 (wide angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way
> to go. The D70 is only 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is
> also significantly more expensive.
>
> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt
> for the D70 over the 8400?
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Eugel

My personal opinion:

Both are good cameras and it appears you have a good idea of what you
want (not camera but features) and that is VERY good.

Both cameras have advantages. Size, weight, convenience are generally
on one side and versatility and image quality on the other. Life is full of
trade offs. I just bought a Canon 20D (dSLR) and it is one I would consider
for your use, but I am not suggesting it would be better or worse for you.
It is what "I" would pick for your use. It has very wide angle lenses
available for it. Right now with what I have I can go to the equivalent of
a 16mm lens on a 35 mm full frame film camera. I suspect that is not far
off from what your Nikon suggestion can do.

I suspect both of your choices will meet the quality needs you have.
Either one should be able to produce good quality 8x10 prints. The Nikon
may be able to do better, but as noted there are trade off's. Few people,
other than most of the regulars here, would notice the difference unless the
prints were side by side.

Good Luck

--
Joseph Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cameras like the Coolpix...
Shutter lag
Long write times to card
Focus hunt
Poor focus in low light (especially the Coolpix line)
Can't be expanded
Poor ISO range
Smaller camera
Lighter to carry
All-in-one
Less control over flashes.

I recently returned the Nikon Coolpix 8800, which I considered a "fancy toy"
and bought the D70. After owning the D70 for less than a month I can't believe
I even bothered with a camera like the 8800. You really have to use both to see
the difference. A camera's job is to "get out of your way" and let you grab the
image. You need a DSLR like a D70 for that.

Good luck!

Capt RB
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Howard McCollister wrote:
[]
> The 8400 does OK. It's a good camera and takes good pictures. You may
> not need the flexibility or image quality of a D70 - the 8700 may be
> good enough for your needs. If you're a photographic enthusiast, and
> like to print your images and hang them on the wall, get the D70 and
> learn photography. If you don't clearly understand things like
> f-stops, ISO, depth of field or flash photography, then save your
> money and get the Coolpix.

The Nikon 8400 does more than "OK". It can produce excellent images,
without the size, weight, bulk and cost penalties of a DSLR system. It
also offers full manual controls for more creative photography - plenty
for the "photographic enthusiast" to play with.

I would have thought that for architectural photography a full-frame SLR
with a perspective control lens would have been the ideal - but this is
still a very expensive solution today.

The 8400 does offer an auto mode which may be similar to your 3.2MP Casio,
and may make the transition easier. The DSLR system may produce better
images (given the right lenses), but only you can decide if the costs are
worth it! Perhaps handling both models in a store may help make that
decision.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Oh, I forgot to mention--if you go the D1x route, make sure it is the D1X
not the D1 without the x; the one without the X is much older and is only
2.7 megapixels; while megapixels aren't everything, still these days I'd
just go ahead & get the 5.5 megapixels of the D1X or 6MP of the D70. When
comparing WITHIN types (in this case, one D-SLR vs another), the megapixel
count is far more relevant.

And if I didn't make this clear--your older Nikkor lenses, provided they
aren't the "non-AI" types, they WILL FIT the D70, but the D70 won't meter
with them because it doesn't have a mechanical aperture coupling ring around
the lens mount like your classic F3 (and D1x) does. So you'd have to use a
hand-held meter or else guess everytime.

LRH
December 22, 2004 10:52:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <10siq4i6ikks3c3@corp.supernews.com>, anon@anon.com says...
>
>Even though the D70 is only 6MP, it can produce noise free, unprocessed
>looking images with higher dynamic range. The reason is the D70 uses a much
>larger sensor then the toys do. The 8mp prosumer cameras use a tiny sensor
>that is less than a centimeter on the longest side. This means the sensing
>cells are very small and capture much less light for a given exposure. The
>output from the small sensors must be amplified much higher than the larger
>ones. This means more noise. The larger sensors also have less electronics
>at each photo site meaning the cells can be bigger still, but the sensor is
>not capable of live previews (aside from the fact that the mirror is in the
>way).
>bg
>
>"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:41c95f1e$1@news.starhub.net.sg...
>> Hi
>> I'm new to this newsgroup. I've been using an old 3.2MP Casio for years
>and
>> want to upgrade. As an architect, I'm attracted to the Nikon 8400 (wide
>> angle) but am wondering if the D70 should be the way to go. The D70 is
>only
>> 6MP, while the 8400 is 8MP. Yet, the D70 is also significantly more
>> expensive.
>>
>> Aside from lens interchangeability, is there any reason I should opt for
>the
>> D70 over the 8400?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> - Eugel

Aside from the above explanation, I'd like to address some of the pluses and
minuses of the 8400 v dSLR for architectural photography:

Pluses: 8400 + supplemental WA lens - very good coverage, with some pincushion
distortion, which is fairly easy to fix in Photoshop (and probably other image
editing software). The camera, even with the supplemental lens is still a
compact package, and, especially in RAW mode, takes fine pictures. The movable
monitor can be a real plus when you are in an awkward position, say on the "
deck" looking up at the ceiling (I wish that the D70 had a monitor on a
swivel). Bad thing - be very careful of the monitor on a swivel, as it can be
broken off. The attachment battery pack for the 8400 will help with battery
life, but it's still short of the D70's battery.

Minus: D70 can use a great array of lenses, that the 8400 cannot. I believe
that the Cambo Ultima 35 can be used with the D70. For ~US$3500, you can make
it into a view camera. D70's images will be better than those of the 8400 (
again, shoot RAW), and you will, in general, have fewer distortions to "clean
up" from the WA lenses - choose WA lenses carefully with regard to pincushion
distortion. Chosen carefully, the lenses will be better than 8400's,
especially with the WA supplemental.

I generally shoot 4x5 film for my architectural clients, with 2.25CM for
details, but have begun shooting digitally for several with special needs.
I've used the 5400 and 5700 CP's with good results. The 5400 probably has an
edge in use because of its lenses (zoom + supplemental). The 8400 is basically
an improved, enhanced 5400. Recently, I've added the D70, and except for the
swivel monitor, love it. For my clients (and for me), the slightly greater
expense is well worth it. I'm not ready, however, to sell off my 4x5s, though
the Hassleblads might soon be on the block!

Another reply indicated that the 8400 would be a smoother transition from your
Casio, and I have to agree. However, you are only dealing with a slight
learning curve to dSLR.

Hunt
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"noone" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:vGgyd.10536$iD.6246@fed1read05...
> No need for me to elaborate on how "megapixels aren't everything" and how
> D-SLRs do better--especially at higher ISOs--than "all-in-ones" due to the
> larger sensor-size, everyone else has made that clear for you.
>
> However, one thing I did notice which could factor in to the decision--you
> mentioned you have a collection of Nikkor lenses. How many, and how much
> did they cost? Reason I ask--they don't work with your D70, if this is an
> issue for you. Understand--the D70 is an OUTSTANDING camera which I give
> my very enthusiastic recommendation to, it's wonderful. However, the D70
> won't meter with older Nikkor lenses, and "non-AI" lenses won't fit at
> all, in case any of yours are that all (you did mentioned a Nikon F2AS).
>
> If this is an issue for you, consider the Nikon D1x; it is a very
> wonderful camera built like a tank, it's based on the Nikon F5, and it
> will meter (center-weighted only I believe) with your older lenses. It was
> once a $4000+ camera, but I've seen them go used on Fred Miranda and Rob
> Galibriath for $1700 or so. Just a thought.
>
> http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/index.asp
>
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/
>
> If that is not an issue for you, then never mind that and get the D70.

Good point. Another consideration would be the D2H which (in the US) is
currently selling for $1999, and will also meter with the older Nikkor
lenses that won't work on the D70.

HMc
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

..> I recently returned the Nikon Coolpix 8800, which I considered a "fancy
toy"
> and bought the D70. After owning the D70 for less than a month I can't
> believe
> I even bothered with a camera like the 8800. You really have to use both
> to see
> the difference. A camera's job is to "get out of your way" and let you
> grab the
> image. You need a DSLR like a D70 for that.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Capt RB

At twice the cost, it should be twice as good. Could it be the lens?
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

No one wrote, in part:
> (I wish that the D70 had a monitor on a swivel)

I know of people who say they connect their D70s to their computers for
some work. I don't think they're in the field, though. :-> If you have a
laptop, and the work you're doing warrants the aggravation, consider
hooking your D70 to a laptop to get the benefit of a monitor on an
extension cord.
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 10:52:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> At twice the cost, it should be twice as good. Could it be the lens?

I have just bought a D70 and Sigma 12-24, I am over the moon at the output,
the lens is wonderful for landscape and interior shots.
December 23, 2004 12:45:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <3q1xdip5o3.fsf@shell4.tdl.com>, phil_stripling@cieux.zzn.com says
....
>
>No one wrote, in part:
>> (I wish that the D70 had a monitor on a swivel)
>
>I know of people who say they connect their D70s to their computers for
>some work. I don't think they're in the field, though. :-> If you have a
>laptop, and the work you're doing warrants the aggravation, consider
>hooking your D70 to a laptop to get the benefit of a monitor on an
>extension cord.
>--
>Phil Stripling

Yes, I've got Capture 4.xx on the laptop and have used it for intervalometer
work, but, as most of the low-angle shots are away from power, and my
Toshiba's big screen eats batteries, I have not run it in the field.

I also find the swivel monitor handy for letting the client "see" what they
are getting, without their having to get to the viewfinder. Of course, it's
always kinda' fun to let them have a go at the ground glass on the 4x5. I'll
usually mount the binocular viewer on for the client, regardless of what I'm
using.

Hunt
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 12:45:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hunt wrote, in part:
>usually mount the binocular viewer on for the client, regardless of what
>I'm using.

Nice idea. I have a friend who uses a binocular viewer on his telescope
to ease his eye fatigue. Gives him a sense of stereovision as well -- depth
when looking at the moon.
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks for all your input. Very helpful indeed. I didnt even know there was
such a thing as different sizes of sensors!
Yes, I admit to having been seduced by the "more megapixels = better camera"
marketing hype.

I'm a fairly competent photographer with a non-digital 35mm SLR. My
collection has been whittled down to
a Nikon F2AS, an F3 and a variety of Nikkor lenses. Being an architect, I
also have a perspective control
lens...which I hope to use with a dSLR (though it's no longer be 28mm focal
length of course). So my
inclination now is to stretch a bit and go for a D70 over the 8400.

I've tried several prosumer cameras and none of them give me the
instantaneous respose and control I get with my Nikon
SLRs. Maybe it's just familiarity with old technology.

I've tried (briefly) a Canon Rebel but didnt warm to it. I'll go try a D70
and see how comfortable I am with it.

Once again, thanks everyone for your opinions! Cheers.

- Eugel
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eugel Yeo wrote:
[]
> I'm a fairly competent photographer with a non-digital 35mm SLR. My
> collection has been whittled down to
> a Nikon F2AS, an F3 and a variety of Nikkor lenses.

You didn't mention that!

> Being an architect, I also have a perspective control lens

Nor that!

[]
> So my inclination now is to stretch a bit and go for a D70 over the
> 8400.

Fair enough! I'm sure you'll be delighted with the D70.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eugel wrote in part:
> I'll go try a D70 and see how comfortable I am with it.

My wife was interested in moving from a point and shoot to a better
camera. A local camera store rents digital cameras, though not the D-70 nor
the Digital Rebel (not enough money in it - they didn't think they could
charge enough to make it worthwhile). Louise rented whatever the Canon
camera is that the people at the store said would give her a feel for the
Rebel, so she took it out for the weekend. She then looked at what she
would give up for the Rebel as opposed to the 'truly pro' camera she
rented, and bought the Rebel.

I have some vague recollection that the D-70 is based on the N-80 body. I
went from an FM2n to the N-80 without too much trouble, so I predict you
can move from your set of Nikon bodies to the D-70 with little effort.

Note that if you have manual focus lenses with an aperture ring, you may
not be able to get full functionality from them on the D-70 body -- it
expects auto-everything lenses with automatic aperture, too. (I _think_
that's right. I'll have a few dozen people correcting me if I'm not. :->)

My suggestion is not to go with the CoolPix -- you're way ahead of it
already.
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Phil Stripling wrote:
[]
> My suggestion is not to go with the CoolPix -- you're way ahead of it
> already.

The Nikon Coolpix 8400 and the D70 are different tools for different jobs.
Neither is "way ahead" of the other....each has its place.

David
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> writes:

> Phil Stripling wrote:
> []
> > My suggestion is not to go with the CoolPix -- you're way ahead of it
> > already.
>
> The Nikon Coolpix 8400 and the D70 are different tools for different jobs.
> Neither is "way ahead" of the other....each has its place.

While I agree that each camera has it's place, my comment was not that one
camera is ahead of the other.

--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Phil Stripling wrote:
> "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> writes:
>
>> Phil Stripling wrote:
>> []
>>> My suggestion is not to go with the CoolPix -- you're way ahead of
>>> it already.
>>
>> The Nikon Coolpix 8400 and the D70 are different tools for different
>> jobs. Neither is "way ahead" of the other....each has its place.
>
> While I agree that each camera has it's place, my comment was not
> that one camera is ahead of the other.

Accepted, my statement reflected wrongly on what you said.

I do think it's equally wrong to imply that someone who has completely
mastered (D)SLR photography cannot find a place for a P&S in their
toolkit.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:21:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> writes:

> I do think it's equally wrong to imply that someone who has completely
> mastered (D)SLR photography cannot find a place for a P&S in their
> toolkit.

:-> True, again, but my comment was aimed at his (stated) intended use for
the camera.
---begin quote-----
I'm a fairly competent photographer with a non-digital 35mm SLR. My
collection has been whittled down to a Nikon F2AS, an F3 and a variety of
Nikkor lenses. Being an architect, I also have a perspective control
lens...which I hope to use with a dSLR (though it's no longer be 28mm focal
length of course). So my inclination now is to stretch a bit and go for a
D70 over the 8400.

I've tried several prosumer cameras and none of them give me the
instantaneous respose and control I get with my Nikon SLRs. Maybe it's just
familiarity with old technology.
----end quote------

This was _not_ in his initial post, and I had the opportunity to read both
his posts before recommending that he choose the D-70. I also presume that
his intended us of the digital camera will be that stated in his post, a
presumption that may well be wrong.

"Finding a place for a point and shoot in one's camera bag" is different
from "which camera should I buy." From an educational perspective, I'm sure
this discussion is beneficial to the poster, and my recommendation, based
on what I've read so far, remains to get the D-70 as in my humble opinion
he'll find that more useful for a longer time than an 8400.

My only digital camera is a CoolPix 990, by the way, which is remarkably
good. The manual settings can be a chore, though, so I use it mostly in
Program mode.
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 4:05:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Phil Stripling wrote:
> "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> writes:
>
>> I do think it's equally wrong to imply that someone who has
>> completely mastered (D)SLR photography cannot find a place for a P&S
>> in their toolkit.
>
> :-> True, again, but my comment was aimed at his (stated) intended
> use for the camera.

Yes, agreed. I'm having trouble with my precise words today - it must be
too near the holiday!

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 4:05:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> writes:

> Yes, agreed. I'm having trouble with my precise words today - it must be
> too near the holiday!

Margaritas on me.

--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 11:50:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Phil Stripling" <phil_stripling@cieux.zzn.com> wrote in message
news:3qacs5logy.fsf@shell4.tdl.com...
> "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> writes:
>
>> Yes, agreed. I'm having trouble with my precise words today - it must be
>> too near the holiday!
On thread of D70's and my previous post, I never go anywhere without my tiny
4mp Kyocera Finwcam, just for those, I wish I had my bloody camera on me,
moments.

Cheeers and meryy christmas.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 8:07:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:52:51 +0800, "Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Yet, the D70 is also significantly more expensive.

That's a good enough reason to buy it... :-)

The main thing I like about my D70 is the sheer speed. From switch-on it can
focus and take a picture in under two seconds. As the zoom is manual (assuming a
zoom lens fitted), you can zoom as quickly or slowly as you like.
No need to switch to playback to review it either.

My older camera, an Oly-C750 took ages to get ready, ages to focus (if at all in
low light), and the zoom was slow.

However, as an architect, I guess you'll be photographing buildings. Since they
don't move (much) maybe the speed thing won't be an issue.

--
Chris Pollard


CG Internet café, Tagum City, Philippines
http://www.cginternet.net
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 9:19:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <10siq4i6ikks3c3@corp.supernews.com>, BG250 <anon@anon.com>
wrote:

> Even though the D70 is only 6MP, it can produce noise free, unprocessed
> looking images with higher dynamic range. The reason is the D70 uses a much
> larger sensor then the toys do. The 8mp prosumer cameras use a tiny sensor
> that is less than a centimeter on the longest side. This means the sensing
> cells are very small and capture much less light for a given exposure. The
>SNIP<

For additional information on pixel size, see

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/panc....
html

(executive summary: the Mars Rover has one million pixels on a sensor
that is 12x12mm square. Sony's DSC-F717 has 5.2 million sensors on a
chip that is 8.8x6.6mm. The Rover's pixels are much larger. "As the
receptors get smaller, a higher quality lens is needed to properly
focus light onto each pixel. So where each pixel ought to capture
different light information -- say perhaps a subtle shading change on
the subject's cheek -- the same information can get spread across
several pixels after passing through a lower quality lens."

And as stated above, the larger pixels on the Rover are more light
sensitive than the smaller ones on consumer cameras.

Phil

--
Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip@
http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 9:31:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The apparently well-named John Taverner <jtav@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> Cheeers and meryy christmas.

Uh, yeees, and to yyou as well. :-> Margaritas on me. (Or, as noted in
Eats Shoots & Leaves, by Lynne Truss, "Margarita's on me.")

--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.
January 2, 2005 8:03:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:41c981f6$1@news.starhub.net.sg:

> I'm a fairly competent photographer with a non-digital 35mm SLR. My
> collection has been whittled down to
> a Nikon F2AS, an F3 and a variety of Nikkor lenses. Being an
> architect, I also have a perspective control
> lens...which I hope to use with a dSLR (though it's no longer be 28mm
> focal length of course). So my
> inclination now is to stretch a bit and go for a D70 over the 8400.
>


That being the case, I'm going to go out on a limb:

I recommend you buy the D70, which will make use of your lenses to some
degree, although probably it won't meter with any of them. Since your
buildings won't be moving, you can just use trial and error, or even one of
your other bodies to do the metering.

I also recommend you get a used Coolpix 5000 and the accessory wide angle
lens, which you can probably pick up used for under $500 now. This will
give you an equivalent of 19mm in the wide setting, which is really cool.

Then you'll have the big SLR system for when you can carry it, and the
little, light, superwide, handheld system when you can't, or don't want to.

Bob

--
Delete the inverse SPAM to reply
Anonymous
January 3, 2005 2:32:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:03:55 -0600, bob <usenetMAPS@2fiddles.com>
wrote:

>"Eugel Yeo" <clean_uranus@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:41c981f6$1@news.starhub.net.sg:
>
>> I'm a fairly competent photographer with a non-digital 35mm SLR. My
>> collection has been whittled down to
>> a Nikon F2AS, an F3 and a variety of Nikkor lenses. Being an
>> architect, I also have a perspective control
>> lens...which I hope to use with a dSLR (though it's no longer be 28mm
>> focal length of course). So my
>> inclination now is to stretch a bit and go for a D70 over the 8400.
>>
>
>
>That being the case, I'm going to go out on a limb:
>
>I recommend you buy the D70, which will make use of your lenses to some
>degree, although probably it won't meter with any of them. Since your
>buildings won't be moving, you can just use trial and error, or even one of
>your other bodies to do the metering.

Why not use a light meter?


***************************************************************

"Americans have plenty of everything and the best of nothing."

John C. Keats
American Writer
1924-2000
January 3, 2005 2:32:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John A. Stovall <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:u01ht0duk3ha6nne6ahjpjbfi7cgtk759g@4ax.com:

> Why not use a light meter?

Well, he says he has an F3, which has a perfectly good light meter built
in. Now if he happens to have a light meter (that's not part of a camera)
then that would be an even better alternatve.

Bob

--
Delete the inverse SPAM to reply
!