Why we should all hope the D2X is great

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

In article <7h2q11tecfsmmg8mk9u4pqi7qur4562opp@4ax.com>,
cerdeza@xplornet.com says...
> I won't ever be buying one but any advance in design, image quality,
> or features only makes the other manufacturers try harder. I was
> really happy to see the Minolta come out with a body based system of
> image stabilization because the other camera manufacturers must now be
> taking good looks at that feature, especially if it sells well. Until
> digital took over Canon claimed the photojournalist market by dropping
> their lens prices to reasonable rates. Up until the 80's Nikon had
> owned that market and had got complacent. I am happy whenever I see
> new features become standard items on cameras. I think people looking
> for failure are a little messed up.

Well, certainly I hope the D2X can provide some competition to Canon's
rule of the professional market. Unfortunately, that just doesn't seem
like it will be the case for those individuals who want low noise
performance or full-frame imaging.

Nor does the D2Hs seem like it will pull a significant share of the
market from the 1D Mark II. It doesn't even look like it will retain
the customers Nikon does have. So, a lot of hopes are pinned to the D2X
to answer the Canon call.

So, I would like to see Nikon compete with Canon on the high end. The
problem is, they're not doing a very good job as far as I can tell.

The thing is, I really, really want a full-frame 16+ megapixel camera.
I want low noise and I don't want to pay for it. So the faster the two
knuckleheads at the top race to get ahead of the other, the closer my
dream comes to being a reality.

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

Brian Baird wrote:

> The thing is, I really, really want a full-frame 16+ megapixel camera.
> I want low noise and I don't want to pay for it. So the faster the two
> knuckleheads at the top race to get ahead of the other, the closer my
> dream comes to being a reality.

Me too. That, I agree with.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

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

This is all a bit like rooting for a team. We are all diehard fans of one
brand or another, and win or lose we will still be diehard fans.
Competition is good for everybody. It's just that some companies tend to
take a wait see, while others try to be on the cutting edge. The hope is
that everybody keeps moving forward.

Personally, I'm very happy with my D70, and will be until something comes
along (from Nikon) that blows it away at a reasonable price. Heck, my old
F's still take great photos. I just have to work around the fact that they
don't focus for me, and I have to think a bit more when it comes to
exposure.

And I kept my old point and shoot digital until it would still point, but
wouldn't shoot anymore. Just remember, it's not the camera but the person
behind the lens that makes or breaks a picture.


"McLeod" <cerdeza@xplornet.com> wrote in message
news:7h2q11tecfsmmg8mk9u4pqi7qur4562opp@4ax.com...
>I won't ever be buying one but any advance in design, image quality,
> or features only makes the other manufacturers try harder. I was
> really happy to see the Minolta come out with a body based system of
> image stabilization because the other camera manufacturers must now be
> taking good looks at that feature, especially if it sells well. Until
> digital took over Canon claimed the photojournalist market by dropping
> their lens prices to reasonable rates. Up until the 80's Nikon had
> owned that market and had got complacent. I am happy whenever I see
> new features become standard items on cameras. I think people looking
> for failure are a little messed up.

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

In article <vZednedarcFRpYDfRVn-pA@giganews.com>, frank@fshe2fs.com
says...
> > Brian finds this hilarious when his closet conservative friend accuses
> > him of all sorts of liberal treachery, even when opinions on the
> > subject have not been offered.
> >
> > Ok, I'll stop referring to myself in the third person now... Or will
> > he?
>
> How does his employer refer to him? ... them?

"HEY! YOU!"

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

In article <cvjfpj$fup$3@inews.gazeta.pl>,
alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca says...
> >>>The thing is, I really, really want a full-frame 16+ megapixel camera.
> >>>I want low noise and I don't want to pay for it. So the faster the two
> >>>knuckleheads at the top race to get ahead of the other, the closer my
> >>>dream comes to being a reality.
> >>
> >>Me too. That, I agree with.

> > I think you're disagreeing more with your idea of Brian than actually
> > WITH Brian.
>
> Just accept the two phrases as the simple statements they are. I'll even
> upgrade the second sentence as follows:
>
> "I agree with Brian on this."
>
> How's that?

Nope.

I demand total loyalty to my reality. Anything less would be...
unacceptable.

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

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1109241032.161456.115300@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Sheldon wrote:
> > This is all a bit like rooting for a team. We are all diehard fans
> of one
> > brand or another, and win or lose we will still be diehard fans.
> > Competition is good for everybody. It's just that some companies
> tend to
> > take a wait see, while others try to be on the cutting edge. The
> hope is
> > that everybody keeps moving forward.
>
> Or, are we? I like my Canon but I no die-hard Canon fan. Nor am I a
> Nikon hater. And I own a nice film Minolta SLR too.
>
> Die-hard fanatism only produces an Apple ;-) Very nice but over-priced.

Yeah, but the price of those PowerBooks G4s has been dropping precipitously
lately. No doubt Apple is getting ready to roll out a new product line, but
I am looking at replacing the ThinkPad. For what I spend on the G4 I can
replace the ThinkPad and all my software and still have money left over. The
only downside is the PowerBooks is 1.67 GHz while the ThinkPad would be 1.8
GHz. OTOH, I would be getting a bigger hard drive, more memory, a 17" screen
instead of a 15" screen, and a better DVD writer. Also, IBM has been making
noises that the ThinkPad is a money loser, so getting another one could mean
an orphaned machine. I could go Dell, but that is no cheaper. I think the
PowerBooks is bug ugly, but I could probably live with it.

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

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:57:30 -0700, Sheldon <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote:
> This is all a bit like rooting for a team. We are all diehard fans of one
> brand or another,

There's at least one person here who just likes to make images.
Oh sure, the equipment for doing that is cool in and of itself.
But that's a distraction from the main point, as far as I'm
concerned.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall

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

C J Campbell wrote:
> Yeah, but the price of those PowerBooks G4s has been dropping
precipitously
> lately. No doubt Apple is getting ready to roll out a new product
line, but
> I am looking at replacing the ThinkPad. For what I spend on the G4 I
can
> replace the ThinkPad and all my software and still have money left
over. The
> only downside is the PowerBooks is 1.67 GHz while the ThinkPad would
be 1.8
> GHz.

Fanatism also produces the likes of Digital. Very nice, but no longer
in production ;-)

- Siddhartha