Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

thinking about a D70

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
February 13, 2005 7:10:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I bought a Nikon CoolPix 2500 several years ago so I could take quick
random pictures without lugging around my camera and lenses, but now I
would like to get a more functional digital camera.

My two options are to get a D70 (probably, not certain yet) AND a
decent non-SLR for times when I do not want to carry around a bunch of
junk, or just to get a non-SLR digicam and forget the SLR for now.
Initially I was only considering the SLR but now I am not sure that I
have to get it.

One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
non-SLRs.

I stormchase when I can and take a lot of pictures under windy, dark
and generally unpleasant conditions.

I sometimes set up the tripod and see what sort of lightning shots I
can capture, although I am not quite so bold as I used to be so I do
not do that very often these days.

I do not take a great deal of night shots in general, but I take
enough that I worry about noise with the non-SLR cameras under
low-light conditions.

One other concern is this - having a fast enough lens. Are the
non-SLRs catching up at all? Any suggestions on cameras for me to
research? (either as replacement or companion for the SLR...)

As for the D70 itself, I have read about it and played around with it
enough to know what I like and dislike about it but I am wondering if
any users have encountered unexpected issues that I should know about
prior to purchase.

More about : thinking d70

February 13, 2005 9:16:26 AM

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

sasquatch wrote:

> My two options are to get a D70 (probably, not certain yet) AND a
> decent non-SLR for times when I do not want to carry around a bunch of
> junk, or just to get a non-SLR digicam and forget the SLR for now.
> Initially I was only considering the SLR but now I am not sure that I
> have to get it.

Hi. I own a D70. It was my first DSLR. The camera is excellent - even
the kit lens does nicely, though you will also want to buy a 50mm 1.4 or
1.8 as a fast lens that is tack-sharp. As for the macro work, you can
achieve good results with a non-slr digital, but the DSLR gives you the
advantage of having a bright optical viewfinder, and access to dedicated
macro lenses.

> One other concern is this - having a fast enough lens. Are the
> non-SLRs catching up at all?

There are some non-slr digitals with relatively fast lenses. However,
the biggest difference is going to the usable ISO range. DSLRs can take
great shots at 800 with acceptable noise levels, whereas you would have
noisier images at anything over 100 on many non-slr digitals. When I was
looking, it was between the D70 and the Olympus C-8080. I went with the
D70 because I did not want to be tied to a single, non-removable lens,
and because of the stunningly clean images the D70 produces. It is a
great camera, and it has some of the best lenses and accessories
available for it.

--

Thaddeus Lipshitz
Anonymous
February 13, 2005 12:32:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:10:39 -0600, in rec.photo.digital sasquatch
<sasquatch@the.woods> wrote:

>I bought a Nikon CoolPix 2500 several years ago so I could take quick
>random pictures without lugging around my camera and lenses, but now I
>would like to get a more functional digital camera.
>
>My two options are to get a D70 (probably, not certain yet) AND a
>decent non-SLR for times when I do not want to carry around a bunch of
>junk, or just to get a non-SLR digicam and forget the SLR for now.
>Initially I was only considering the SLR but now I am not sure that I
>have to get it.
>
>One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
>a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
>plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
>go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
>non-SLRs.

Going to need a dedicated hardware for macros. The kit lens only focuses
down to about 1.5 feet. Not necessarily expensive, but something you need
to be aware of. New lens, diopters, or extension tubes are various options.


----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Related resources
Anonymous
February 13, 2005 1:39:08 PM

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

>When I was
> looking, it was between the D70 and the Olympus C-8080. I went with the
> D70 because I did not want to be tied to a single, non-removable lens,
> and because of the stunningly clean images the D70 produces. It is a
> great camera, and it has some of the best lenses and accessories
> available for it.

I looked at the same two cameras and wound up with the D70 as well. I also
had a gaggle of Nikon lenses from an old Nikon F, but they work just fine on
the D70 after being converted to AI specs. You will need some kind of Macro
lens (already had one), but the lens that comes with the kit should serve
you well for most applications. Shots taken with my old Macro lens have
blown people away. Don't be fooled by the "Tulip" setting on the camera.
It changes the colors and some other settings somewhat, but does not put the
camera in a true macro mode.

Keep in mind the photos that come directly out of most DSLR cameras are not
the same as what comes out of most point and shoot cameras. You may have to
do a bit of tweaking using software to get the best image, but there are
some tricks to making your D70 into an excellent point and shoot camera
(changing some internal settings).

I think the camera is a joy to hold and use, and is much more versatile than
the 8080 will ever be (and I'm a big Olympus fan).

One more thing. When you change lenses on any DSLR camera you are always up
against the problem of dust on the sensor. In most cases this can easily be
blown away by a bulb type blower, but it can be a pain at times. However, I
think the tradeoff is worth it.

Sheldon
>
February 13, 2005 1:58:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Canon 20D , or wait for the replacement of the 300d (should be announced
this week).
Anonymous
February 13, 2005 2:55:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"sasquatch" <sasquatch@the.woods> wrote in message
news:vr3u01931ctf7o8qsjilt93h35l5ri8a94@4ax.com...
> I bought a Nikon CoolPix 2500 several years ago so I could take quick
> random pictures without lugging around my camera and lenses, but now I
> would like to get a more functional digital camera.
>
> My two options are to get a D70 (probably, not certain yet) AND a
> decent non-SLR for times when I do not want to carry around a bunch of
> junk, or just to get a non-SLR digicam and forget the SLR for now.
> Initially I was only considering the SLR but now I am not sure that I
> have to get it.
>
> One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
> a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
> plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
> go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
> non-SLRs.
>
> I stormchase when I can and take a lot of pictures under windy, dark
> and generally unpleasant conditions.
>
> I sometimes set up the tripod and see what sort of lightning shots I
> can capture, although I am not quite so bold as I used to be so I do
> not do that very often these days.
>
> I do not take a great deal of night shots in general, but I take
> enough that I worry about noise with the non-SLR cameras under
> low-light conditions.
>
> One other concern is this - having a fast enough lens. Are the
> non-SLRs catching up at all? Any suggestions on cameras for me to
> research? (either as replacement or companion for the SLR...)
>
> As for the D70 itself, I have read about it and played around with it
> enough to know what I like and dislike about it but I am wondering if
> any users have encountered unexpected issues that I should know about
> prior to purchase.

Check out the Panasonic FZ20. Fast lens, anti-shake, 97% user satisfaction.
Anonymous
February 13, 2005 3:28:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

DSLR - Pentax *istDS - 6MP, Versatile, compatible with almost all old Pentax
lenses including screw mount with an adapter. With DA 18-55mm kit lens at
the price, its worth considering. ISO range 200 - 3200

[OT] Non-DSLR my choice is Fuji F810. 6MP/12MP incl 6MP RAW. All the manual
control you could want and fits in your pocket. Exhibits some flare from the
polished stainless steel outer lens surround with the sun in front at
certain angles. Otherwise a brilliant and superbly versatile camera. ISO
range 80 - 400 (800 @ 3MP)

"sasquatch" <sasquatch@the.woods> wrote in message
news:vr3u01931ctf7o8qsjilt93h35l5ri8a94@4ax.com...
>I bought a Nikon CoolPix 2500 several years ago so I could take quick
> random pictures without lugging around my camera and lenses, but now I
> would like to get a more functional digital camera.
>
> My two options are to get a D70 (probably, not certain yet) AND a
> decent non-SLR for times when I do not want to carry around a bunch of
> junk, or just to get a non-SLR digicam and forget the SLR for now.
> Initially I was only considering the SLR but now I am not sure that I
> have to get it.
>
> One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
> a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
> plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
> go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
> non-SLRs.
>
> I stormchase when I can and take a lot of pictures under windy, dark
> and generally unpleasant conditions.
>
> I sometimes set up the tripod and see what sort of lightning shots I
> can capture, although I am not quite so bold as I used to be so I do
> not do that very often these days.
>
> I do not take a great deal of night shots in general, but I take
> enough that I worry about noise with the non-SLR cameras under
> low-light conditions.
>
> One other concern is this - having a fast enough lens. Are the
> non-SLRs catching up at all? Any suggestions on cameras for me to
> research? (either as replacement or companion for the SLR...)
>
> As for the D70 itself, I have read about it and played around with it
> enough to know what I like and dislike about it but I am wondering if
> any users have encountered unexpected issues that I should know about
> prior to purchase.
February 13, 2005 5:34:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Just be aware that extra lenses are really needed to get the most out of
the D70. A nicer fixed lens digicam probably has the versitality of
$2,000 worth of SLR lenses and is a lot smaller & less hassle. If you
are not up for some lens additions, the D70 will leave you with pretty
limited abilities. The kit lens is not fast, wide or long, nor much of a
macro lens.

Also working with RAW files means more time spent on the computer though
that will let you capture really subtle and difficult lighting conditions.
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 4:53:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <o3pu01ttslht18hueiuc9okpete1ev85ev@4ax.com>,
Ed Ruf <egruf_usenet@cox.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:10:39 -0600, in rec.photo.digital sasquatch
><sasquatch@the.woods> wrote:

[ ... ]

>>One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
>>a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
>>plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
>>go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
>>non-SLRs.
>
>Going to need a dedicated hardware for macros. The kit lens only focuses
>down to about 1.5 feet. Not necessarily expensive, but something you need
>to be aware of. New lens, diopters, or extension tubes are various options.

Note that if you opt for a different lens instead of the one
which comes with the kit, you can get a lot closer. There is a macro
mode in the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5D. You have to be between 50mm and 105mm
to switch that mode on, and it then locks you out of the shorter focal
lengths, and opens the autofocus range to quite close -- about two
inches from the front element. Not quite down to the 1:1 of a true
macro, but pretty good.

It (the camera) also has a autofocus-assist mode, in which it
uses the light used for anti-redeye to give a bit more illumination for
reasonably close focusing in poor light.

However, this lens has one disadvantage in low light and macro
mode. When working really close to the front of the lens, and using the
built-in pop-up flash, the lens casts a shadow on about the bottom third
of the subject, so an external flash would be preferred for this. If
you are outdoors in daylight, and don't feel the need for fill flash,
this should not be a problem.

Note also, however, if you habitually shoot wide angle, the 28mm
end is not as wide as it sounds -- since any focal length has to be
multiplied by 1.5 to get the actual effective coverage on a 35mm
full-frame camera. So -- this lens is the equivalent of 42-157.5mm. I
generally prefer to shoot at the longer range, so this is not a problem
for me, but it might be for you.

For when I *really* want close, I go to the old Medical Nikor,
with the external flash adaptor on the shoe, so I can use its built-in
ring flash. It gets really well illuminated shots really close.

It has setting rings for the ASA and the reduction ratio, which
is determined by screw-on elements which are sometimes stacked. The
camera has too much sensitivity at the close end. There was supposed to
be a special cord with a resistor in it to allow working closer with
higher ASAs, though I do not yet have this. And the alternative of
adding a ND filter might get me there, but I'm not sure about stacking
this in combination with two close-up lenses, the most powerful of which
does not have threads on the subject end -- probably to discourage
stacking them in the wrong order. This lens, of course, is long out of
production. It was made for the Nikon-F.

My use of this lens with this camera has so far been limited to
using it to photograph an interesting spider between the main window and
the storm window last summer and fall.

But it is *not* the lens to use outdoors for several reasons --
one of which being that it requires a power cord -- unless you can find
the alternative power supply, which only requires batteries which are
perhaps no longer made. :-)

I hope that this helps,
DoN.
--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 3:48:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"sasquatch" <sasquatch@the.woods> wrote in message
news:vr3u01931ctf7o8qsjilt93h35l5ri8a94@4ax.com...
> I bought a Nikon CoolPix 2500 several years ago so I could take quick
> random pictures without lugging around my camera and lenses, but now
I
> would like to get a more functional digital camera.

> As for the D70 itself, I have read about it and played around with it
> enough to know what I like and dislike about it but I am wondering if
> any users have encountered unexpected issues that I should know about
> prior to purchase.

Probably not an issue for you, since you're not doing portrait or
wedding photography, but a lot of people are upset that Nikon doesn't
offer a vertical control grip accessory for the D70 (available on the
D100). The D70 is a consumer level camera, and most other manufacturers
don't offer the vertical control grip for cameras in this class either.
Some people have complained about moire, but most say that it's
removeable in post-processing when it does occur.

You might wait a week and see what Canon comes out with to replace the
EOS-300D Digital Rebel. The Nikon D70 is a step above the Canon Digital
Rebel, but a step below the Canon EOS-20D. The D70 is a great camera,
everyone I know with one is very pleased with it.

As someone else pointed out, the Panasonic FZ-20 would be a good
non-SLR solution; at $475, it's less than half of what you'd have to
spend to get started with a D70.

Steve
Digital Camera Short List: "http://digitalcamerashortlist.com/"
Digital SLR Selection Criteria:
"http://nordicgroup.us/digicam/dslrcriteria.html"
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 5:21:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

sasquatch <sasquatch@the.woods> wrote:

>One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
>a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
>plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
>go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
>non-SLRs.

Yeah, the Nikon non-slrs are quite good for their macro. With
an SLR you'll have to buy a macro lens.

>I stormchase when I can and take a lot of pictures under windy, dark
>and generally unpleasant conditions.

Not nice changing SLR lenses in those conditions; you're asking
for dust on the sensor. A "zlr" like the FZ20 would be a lot
better for nasty conditions.

>I do not take a great deal of night shots in general, but I take
>enough that I worry about noise with the non-SLR cameras under
>low-light conditions.

Yes, non-SLRs are bad for noise in low-light. D70 is very
good; I would say its ISO 1600 is as good as my p&s's 400.

>One other concern is this - having a fast enough lens. Are the
>non-SLRs catching up at all? Any suggestions on cameras for me to
>research? (either as replacement or companion for the SLR...)

My Oly 3040 has an f1.8 (one of the reasons I went for that
p&s). I don't think lens speed is as much a constraint as the
noise-limited ISO. Also consider the depth of field, since
non-SLRs have smaller focal length lenses, and so much greater
depth of field. That can be handy for your macro, maybe not so
handy for portraits etc.

My main reason for going dSLR was shutter lag and power-on delay.
I'm very happy with the D70; it lets me easily capture shots that
otherwise I would struggle all day to trap.

If that's not a problem for you, weigh up things like the FZ20
or non-SLR Nikons, and mainly compare on the noisy ISO.

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 5:29:50 PM

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

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:21:24 +0200, Ken Tough <ken@objectech.co.uk>
wrote:

>sasquatch <sasquatch@the.woods> wrote:
>
>>One of the things I am looking for is great macro capability as I have
>>a couple of acres of gardens and I take a lot of pictures of tiny
>>plants and insects. I am guessing that this alone is not a reason to
>>go for the SLR as I have seeen some amazing macro shots taken with
>>non-SLRs.
>
>Yeah, the Nikon non-slrs are quite good for their macro. With
>an SLR you'll have to buy a macro lens.

Yes. We have a D70, but got it last spring without any lenses, and
have used the three we had for our F5 so far. One of them is an
excellent macro, the AF 105 MicroNikkor. It does get 1:1 images on the
focal plane.

Unfortunately its current price is more than the D70, I think. But it
will do the job.



Rodney Myrvaagnes J36 Gjo/a


"We have achieved the inversion of the single note."
__ Peter Ustinov as Karlheinz Stckhausen
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 7:30:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Why the prices vary so much from $500 to $999 from online stores ? Could
somebody recommend a decent store that's not
too expensive for this type of camera . I've talked with a sale man from
an online store , he said the camera brand new and
have usa nikon warranty card , is it good enough to ask for a camera ?
btw its latest price is $599 .

Thank you very much for any advices I could get .

A
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 10:25:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I use D70 with Nikkor 50/1.8 (~150$). Works pretty fine for me. I am just
about to have other fix 24/2.8 and that is it. Enough.

Regards,

K.Polak
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 12:35:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

aeride wrote:
> Why the prices vary so much from $500 to $999 from online stores ? Could
> somebody recommend a decent store that's not
> too expensive for this type of camera . I've talked with a sale man from
> an online store , he said the camera brand new and
> have usa nikon warranty card , is it good enough to ask for a camera ?
> btw its latest price is $599 .
>
> Thank you very much for any advices I could get .

I'm planning to get one soon (just waiting to see what's announced for
PMA). I've selected B & H [1] which seems to get good recomendations,
and they have the D70 kit w/ 1GB storage for $1299 (USD) plus a $200
mail-in rebate[2]. They also have D70s w/o the kit lens, and used
D70s[3] if you prefer something cheaper.

1. <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/&gt;
2.
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=produ...;
3.
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=searc...;
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 11:04:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

aeride wrote:
> Why the prices vary so much from $500 to $999 from online stores ?
Could
> somebody recommend a decent store that's not
> too expensive for this type of camera . I've talked with a sale man
from
> an online store , he said the camera brand new and
> have usa nikon warranty card , is it good enough to ask for a camera
?
> btw its latest price is $599 .
>
> Thank you very much for any advices I could get .
>
> A

You might check http://www.resellerratings.com/

They have reviews of online retailers there.

Some of the very low price quotes come from stores that
will insist that you have to buy a lot of overpriced accessories.
If you refuse to buy them, they then tell you the camera you
want is out of stock.

They may have other ways to mislead you and steal your money
too.

Alan
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 12:57:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"aeride" <aerider@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:37cu5nF5b79e0U1@individual.net...
> Why the prices vary so much from $500 to $999 from online stores ? Could
> somebody recommend a decent store that's not
> too expensive for this type of camera . I've talked with a sale man from
> an online store , he said the camera brand new and
> have usa nikon warranty card , is it good enough to ask for a camera ? btw
> its latest price is $599 .
>
> Thank you very much for any advices I could get .
>

When the price gets this low there is a problem. They may take everything
out of the box and sell each piece separately. Yes, you get a US camera,
but by the time you get everything that is supposed to come with it you've
paid more than if you had bought it at an "honest" dealer. The D70 does not
come with a memory card, but that's about the only thing missing. You
should, with a memory card, be able to open the box, charge the battery, and
start taking photos immediately (that's the kit with the lens). If you get
the body only you will obviously need a lens.

There is also a dealer out there who, in the fine print, claims that the
price you see, and the price you originally see on your virtual invoice, may
not reflect the actual price charged to your credit card. I got mine at
Circuit City for $100 off plus Nikon's $100 rebate. Now Nikon offers a $200
rebate (US) on the D70 kit.
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 10:43:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <3oWdnXa7CexotI_fRVn-gA@comcast.com>,
Sheldon <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote:
>
>"aeride" <aerider@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:37cu5nF5b79e0U1@individual.net...

>> Why the prices vary so much from $500 to $999 from online stores ? Could
>> somebody recommend a decent store that's not
>> too expensive for this type of camera . I've talked with a sale man from
>> an online store , he said the camera brand new and
>> have usa nikon warranty card , is it good enough to ask for a camera ? btw
>> its latest price is $599 .

[ ... ]

>When the price gets this low there is a problem.

I agree.

> They may take everything
>out of the box and sell each piece separately. Yes, you get a US camera,
>but by the time you get everything that is supposed to come with it you've
>paid more than if you had bought it at an "honest" dealer.

I've heard of this, but I have not dealt with anyone who does
this.

> The D70 does not
>come with a memory card, but that's about the only thing missing. You
>should, with a memory card, be able to open the box, charge the battery, and
>start taking photos immediately (that's the kit with the lens). If you get
>the body only you will obviously need a lens.

Which is the way I went, since I already had a 28-105mm AF Nikor
which I like very much. The focal-length range is better suited to my
style of seeing than the one in the kit.

A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup. When
you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display protective cover
to the mounting point for the neck strap. I thought of this, but had
not gotten around to it, and the cover popped off when I was walking
around a hamfest. It took nearly a week to get a replacement, so I
spent some time putting a pair of eye splices into the ends of some
nylon cord to keep it around. It has saved it several times now, and I
may wind up replacing it because of accumulated scratches before it gets
lost.

And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
scratched -- or even worse -- broken.

>There is also a dealer out there who, in the fine print, claims that the
>price you see, and the price you originally see on your virtual invoice, may
>not reflect the actual price charged to your credit card.

Nasty!

> I got mine at
>Circuit City for $100 off plus Nikon's $100 rebate. Now Nikon offers a $200
>rebate (US) on the D70 kit.

Hmm ... I never even thought of them for a serious camera.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
February 17, 2005 4:21:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

DoN. Nichols wrote:
....
> A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup.
> When you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display
> protective cover to the mounting point for the neck strap. I
> thought of this, but had not gotten around to it, and the cover
> popped off when I was walking around a hamfest. It took nearly
> a week to get a replacement, so I spent some time putting a
> pair of eye splices into the ends of some nylon cord to keep it
> around. It has saved it several times now, and I may wind up
> replacing it because of accumulated scratches before it gets
> lost.
>
> And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
> scratched -- or even worse -- broken.

A good idea.

Another slant on protecting LCD displays is to get an LCD
protector for a Palm Pilot, cut it to size, and fit it to
the camera LCD.

These protectors are sheets of flexible but tough transparent
plastic with an adhesive backing. You press it in place over the
LCD and any scratches occur on the plastic rather than the LCD.
They're cheap and easy to replace if they eventually get
scratched up.

Alan
Anonymous
February 17, 2005 7:41:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1108675313.658717.182830@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
"Alan Meyer" <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> DoN. Nichols wrote:
> ...
> > A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup.
> > When you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display
> > protective cover to the mounting point for the neck strap. I
> > thought of this, but had not gotten around to it, and the cover
> > popped off when I was walking around a hamfest. It took nearly
> > a week to get a replacement, so I spent some time putting a
> > pair of eye splices into the ends of some nylon cord to keep it
> > around. It has saved it several times now, and I may wind up
> > replacing it because of accumulated scratches before it gets
> > lost.
> >
> > And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
> > scratched -- or even worse -- broken.
>
> A good idea.
>
> Another slant on protecting LCD displays is to get an LCD
> protector for a Palm Pilot, cut it to size, and fit it to
> the camera LCD.
>
> These protectors are sheets of flexible but tough transparent
> plastic with an adhesive backing. You press it in place over the
> LCD and any scratches occur on the plastic rather than the LCD.
> They're cheap and easy to replace if they eventually get
> scratched up.
>
> Alan

Giotto's now supplies precut protective screens in 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0,
2.5, 3.0 and 3.5" diagonal sizes. These are crystal clear, use no
adhesive, come 3 to a pack with a cleaning cloth for the screen and a
pressure card to apply it. Will be sold at camera stores.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
Anonymous
February 17, 2005 7:41:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> > DoN. Nichols wrote:
> > ...
> > > A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup.
> > > When you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display
> > > protective cover to the mounting point for the neck strap. I
> > > thought of this, but had not gotten around to it, and the cover
> > > popped off when I was walking around a hamfest. It took nearly
> > > a week to get a replacement, so I spent some time putting a
> > > pair of eye splices into the ends of some nylon cord to keep it
> > > around. It has saved it several times now, and I may wind up
> > > replacing it because of accumulated scratches before it gets
> > > lost.
> > >
> > > And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
> > > scratched -- or even worse -- broken.
> >
> > A good idea.
> >
> > Another slant on protecting LCD displays is to get an LCD
> > protector for a Palm Pilot, cut it to size, and fit it to
> > the camera LCD.
> >
> > These protectors are sheets of flexible but tough transparent
> > plastic with an adhesive backing. You press it in place over the
> > LCD and any scratches occur on the plastic rather than the LCD.
> > They're cheap and easy to replace if they eventually get
> > scratched up.
> >
> > Alan
>
> Giotto's now supplies precut protective screens in 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0,
> 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5" diagonal sizes. These are crystal clear, use no
> adhesive, come 3 to a pack with a cleaning cloth for the screen and a
> pressure card to apply it. Will be sold at camera stores.

I already got a replacement LCD cover for mine. Haven't lost it yet, but
they are only about $10, and a lot more solid than a piece of clear plastic
that a button, zipper, or buckle could easily tear through. They do put
that little hole in there to tie it to something, so I guess they are trying
to tell us something. :-) At least it's not like that line of Olympus p and
s cameras that knocked the lens cap off everytime you turned it on.
Anonymous
February 17, 2005 11:27:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Sheldon wrote:
> ...
> ... and a lot more solid than a piece of clear plastic that a
> button, zipper, or buckle could easily tear through
....

DoN. Nichols wrote:
....
> Hmm ... very interesting possibility. What are the chances
> that a belt or clothing will hook it and peel it up when
> wearing on a neck strap?
....

I've had good luck with the plastic protector I put on my LCD.
I've also had one on my Palm VIIx for about 3 years. The Palm
gets a lot of heavy use, including much abrasion from the metal
stylus.

I don't think a button, zipper, or buckle could tear through it,
or sharper objects either. I think you'd need a sharp knife with
some force behind it. I also don't think anything is likely to
hook under it and peel it off. You've got to work to get
something under a corner of the plastic and peel it up. Casual
rubbing won't do it. The plastic is not like saran wrap. It's
pretty heavy, tough stuff with a pretty sticky adhesive.

Alan
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 1:37:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1108675313.658717.182830@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>DoN. Nichols wrote:
>...
>> A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup.
>> When you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display
>> protective cover to the mounting point for the neck strap. I

[ ... ]

>> And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
>> scratched -- or even worse -- broken.
>
>A good idea.
>
>Another slant on protecting LCD displays is to get an LCD
>protector for a Palm Pilot, cut it to size, and fit it to
>the camera LCD.
>
>These protectors are sheets of flexible but tough transparent
>plastic with an adhesive backing. You press it in place over the
>LCD and any scratches occur on the plastic rather than the LCD.
>They're cheap and easy to replace if they eventually get
>scratched up.

Hmm ... very interesting possibility. What are the chances that
a belt or clothing will hook it and peel it up when wearing on a neck
strap?

Thanks,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 2:38:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1108700843.199806.37600@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote:

[ ... ]

>DoN. Nichols wrote:
>...
>> Hmm ... very interesting possibility. What are the chances
>> that a belt or clothing will hook it and peel it up when
>> wearing on a neck strap?
>...
>
>I've had good luck with the plastic protector I put on my LCD.
>I've also had one on my Palm VIIx for about 3 years. The Palm
>gets a lot of heavy use, including much abrasion from the metal
>stylus.
>
>I don't think a button, zipper, or buckle could tear through it,
>or sharper objects either. I think you'd need a sharp knife with
>some force behind it. I also don't think anything is likely to
>hook under it and peel it off. You've got to work to get
>something under a corner of the plastic and peel it up. Casual
>rubbing won't do it. The plastic is not like saran wrap. It's
>pretty heavy, tough stuff with a pretty sticky adhesive.

That sounds quite good. Protection from anything other than a
concentrated blow (which would simply flex the plastic, and break the
harder plastic of the LCD screen). For protection from that, I think
that a combination of what you are describing with the sacrificial
clip-on plastic cover over it. (That may well break, but protect the
LCD while doing so.)

Thanks,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 12:48:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Sheldon <sheldon@REMOVEsopris.net> wrote:

>At least it's not like that line of Olympus p and
>s cameras that knocked the lens cap off everytime you turned it on.

Correction. The lens cap gets knocked off every time you move the
camera to/from a bag, turn around, or rub it against something rough
and dirty.

When you switch the camera on, the lens cap remains very firmly
attached and the camera grinds like it's set on darkroast espresso.

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 12:49:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I don't think a button, zipper, or buckle could tear through it,
>or sharper objects either. I think you'd need a sharp knife with
>some force behind it. I also don't think anything is likely to
>hook under it and peel it off. You've got to work to get
>something under a corner of the plastic and peel it up. Casual
>rubbing won't do it. The plastic is not like saran wrap. It's
>pretty heavy, tough stuff with a pretty sticky adhesive.

Which of course it needs to be because those pocket PCs are
used with touch-screen styluses which are by no means gentle
on the plastic.

--
Ken Tough
February 18, 2005 4:06:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

or wait for the replacement of the 300d (should be announced
> this week).

I was right ! :p 
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 6:02:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I lost an LCD protector, too, and now I just use a piece of clear
packing tape to hold the bottom tab of the protector to the camera (the
top hooks securely into the camera). That's worked well for more than
two months, now.

The LCD screen on my old Coolpix 4500 was all scratched to hell within
its first month and Nikon tokd me it'd be a VERY expensive repair...

-=-Joe
February 25, 2005 5:14:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Little late chiming in with my suggestion, but the system I use to not lose
the cover is ten-pound fishing line (Two bucks at Walmart).

One knot at little hole bottom left of the protector and one knot on a ring
attached to strapholder on body.

Of course you have to use fishing knots (How? Google!).

Jim from Hilton Head
--
Remove the obvious to reply.


> From: "Sheldon" <sheldon@REMOVEsopris.net>
> Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 15:45:45 -0700
> Subject: Re: Protecting LCD screens. Was: thinking about a D70/where to buy ?
>
>>> DoN. Nichols wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup.
>>>> When you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display
>>>> protective cover to the mounting point for the neck strap. I
>>>> thought of this, but had not gotten around to it, and the cover
>>>> popped off when I was walking around a hamfest. It took nearly
>>>> a week to get a replacement, so I spent some time putting a
>>>> pair of eye splices into the ends of some nylon cord to keep it
>>>> around. It has saved it several times now, and I may wind up
>>>> replacing it because of accumulated scratches before it gets
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
>>>> scratched -- or even worse -- broken.
>>>
>>> A good idea.
>>>
>>> Another slant on protecting LCD displays is to get an LCD
>>> protector for a Palm Pilot, cut it to size, and fit it to
>>> the camera LCD.
>>>
>>> These protectors are sheets of flexible but tough transparent
>>> plastic with an adhesive backing. You press it in place over the
>>> LCD and any scratches occur on the plastic rather than the LCD.
>>> They're cheap and easy to replace if they eventually get
>>> scratched up.
>>>
>>> Alan
>>
>> Giotto's now supplies precut protective screens in 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0,
>> 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5" diagonal sizes. These are crystal clear, use no
>> adhesive, come 3 to a pack with a cleaning cloth for the screen and a
>> pressure card to apply it. Will be sold at camera stores.
>
> I already got a replacement LCD cover for mine. Haven't lost it yet, but
> they are only about $10, and a lot more solid than a piece of clear plastic
> that a button, zipper, or buckle could easily tear through. They do put
> that little hole in there to tie it to something, so I guess they are trying
> to tell us something. :-) At least it's not like that line of Olympus p and
> s cameras that knocked the lens cap off everytime you turned it on.
>
>
February 27, 2005 10:17:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Meyer wrote:
> DoN. Nichols wrote:
> ...
> > A suggestion, which I have not yet seen in this newsgroup.
> > When you get the camera -- make a "leash" to tie the display
> > protective cover to the mounting point for the neck strap. I
> > thought of this, but had not gotten around to it, and the cover
> > popped off when I was walking around a hamfest. It took nearly
> > a week to get a replacement, so I spent some time putting a
> > pair of eye splices into the ends of some nylon cord to keep it
> > around. It has saved it several times now, and I may wind up
> > replacing it because of accumulated scratches before it gets
> > lost.
> >
> > And it certainly beats having the display get similarly
> > scratched -- or even worse -- broken.
>
> A good idea.
>
> Another slant on protecting LCD displays is to get an LCD
> protector for a Palm Pilot, cut it to size, and fit it to
> the camera LCD.
>
> These protectors are sheets of flexible but tough transparent
> plastic with an adhesive backing. You press it in place over the
> LCD and any scratches occur on the plastic rather than the LCD.
> They're cheap and easy to replace if they eventually get
> scratched up.
>
> Alan
!