Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nikon d70s vs EOS 20d

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 3:42:08 AM

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

I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features on
the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure you
see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is well
new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.

would anyone care to tip the balance for me?

More about : nikon d70s eos 20d

Anonymous
May 4, 2005 7:52:13 AM

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

vpenoso <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote:

> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?

Choose between the systems, not these particular cameras. You'll spend a
lot more on the lenses, but you'll want a new camera in a few years. I
daresay you'll be happy with the results from either camera; both are very
nice. So look at the systems, and look at the ergonomics and design
principles to see which camera is made in a way you prefer.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
May 4, 2005 8:07:13 AM

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

"vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:-fydndn6LNMQ2eXfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
> partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
> format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
on
> the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
you
> see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
> black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
well
> new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>
> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>
>

You will spend so many $1000's on lenses, I would not skimp for a few $100
on the body. The 20D is superior in all respects (unless you find that the
D70s "feels" better, but _personally_ I found the Canons superior in
"feel").
Related resources
May 4, 2005 9:30:11 AM

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

I too have been agonizing over the Nikon d70 vs. the Canon 20d. For
what it's worth, I started film with a small rangefinder, eventually
went to a Canon AE1, and eventually went Nikon with an F3. I still have
my F3, but I also have an F4. Time to go digital, except for my
favorite landscape shots, where film still rules for a 24x36 enlargement.

Anyway, I have some nice Nikon lenses, so I'm preliminarily inclined to
stick with Nikon. I've got some primes, a 20, a 24, a 50, and a 105,
but I do most of my film work with the 35-70/2.8, because it's just
about the sharpest, best standard focal length lens I have (the 105 does
give it a run for the money, and for wide landscapes, the 20 is hard to
beat).

I mainly use my F4 for everyday shooting, because it's flash
capabilities are far superior to the F3, but for landscapes where I
generally shoot manual it doesn't offer much over the F3. And for
astrophotography, the F3 is simply the best film body ever created (with
the DW-4 6x magnified 90 degree finder).

I'm keeping my F3 and selling the F4 to get into digital. I'll also
sell a few lenses, mainly keeping my primes for the F3, and perhaps the
35-70. My requirements for the digital side will be everyday shooting,
my kids doing their plays, snaps of the family at events, etc. The F3
should handle any film needs I have.

So which one? Both appear to be great cameras, and I'm willing to
switch to Canon for superior functionality. So I went with a CF card to
my local shop and shot both cameras for about an hour. There's no
question that as a Nikon user, the interface of the Nikon just felt
better, but the Canon has some nice touches. What I liked about the
Nikon, t5hough, is the ability to change certain settings that I'll
often be changing without having to go to menus. The Canon seems to
have a lot of things in its menus that the Nikon gives you direct access
via buttons. I happen to like direct buttons, levers, switches, etc.,
which is why I never moved to an F100, or an F5. The F4, I think, is my
favorite film camera, though the simplicity and pure photography delight
of the F3 is hard to beat. Though I use the F4 more often, when I pick
up the F3 it just fits in my hand beautifully, I can operate it without
moving my eye from the viewfinder because everything is laid out in
exactly the right place, and I'm so used to its 80/20 center weighted
meter that I only very rarely have exposure error. The D70 is not in
the same league as either of those cameras, but it does have that
intuitive feel I'm used to.

The Canon, though, has superior pixel count, and resolves finer detail
in large blowups. So crops will be easier to get good sharp results.

But then, I know this won't be the last digital body I get. If it were,
the Canon would win, and I'd invest in Canon lenses.

And here's the kicker. We're comparing a Nikon D70 with a very nice
18-70 lens, for under $1,0000, to a Canon 20D with a nice 17-85 lens
(albeit slower than Nikon's 18-70) at about $1,800. For all email, web
publishing, and prints up to about 8x12 and perhaps 11x 17, the results
are pretty much similar. If it were only a hundred dollars or so, I
think I'd have gone with the Canon. But at nearly twice the price, I
just couldn't go with the Canon.

Flash is also important to me. From all I've read, the d70 has
absolutely brilliant flash control (reminds me of when I finally got an
F4 and discovered perfectly exposed flash photos every time). The
Canon, apparently, has more trouble with its flash algorithm. But as
I've already said, for the purposes I need, family pics, events, etc.,
that flash finesse will come to be appreciated.

I do fully expect to end up with Nikon's replacement for the d100, the
d200 or whatever they label it, with perhaps 10 megapixels and a host of
features I'll want, and I'm fairly certain I'll do that in the next two
years. Which is why the relatively inexpensive D70 is, FOR ME, the
right camera at this time. I can handle replacing it much more easily
than replacing the 20d in a year or so.

In the meantime, when I scan a perfectly exposed slide from my F3 and
wind up with a 128 Mb file covering some 24 megapixels, and it looks as
fine as any digital shots of seen, I'm comfortable that I'll have the
right tools for all my photographic needs. At least for now.

But I know I'll be lusting after that d200 as soon as I get my D70. I
ordered it TODAY!

And I know I'll always look at 20d owners with a bit of jealousy for
their superior pixel count, silky smooth CMOS sensor, and wider range of
lenses.

Seems to me they're both great cameras, and if the Canon were only a bit
more than the Nikon I'd probably spring for it. But frankly, both of
them them will be obsolete in 2 years, so I'm a bit reluctantly to spend
so much more on the Canon, even in view of its strengths.

Mark

vpenoso wrote:
> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
> partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
> format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features on
> the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure you
> see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
> black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is well
> new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>
> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>
>
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 12:54:54 PM

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

mjr <mjr@grok.org> wrote:

> And I know I'll always look at 20d owners with a bit of jealousy for
> their superior pixel count, silky smooth CMOS sensor,

You'll find that stuff makes very little difference.

> and wider range of lenses.

Eh? One of the advantages of Nikon is the huge array of nice lenses you
have at your disposal, since Nikon never changed their lens mount. You
can pick up some fine glass for decent prices, if you don't mind focusing
manually. (Which, on a D70 (or a 20D, for that matter) is a bit of an
issue, actually, with the smaller viewfinders without manual focus aids.
Compared to a D2x with its much larger viewfinder it's like night and day.)

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 3:03:27 PM

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

In article <117h3eutaoclkfc@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>Eh? One of the advantages of Nikon is the huge array of nice lenses you
>have at your disposal, since Nikon never changed their lens mount. You
>can pick up some fine glass for decent prices, if you don't mind focusing
>manually. (Which, on a D70 (or a 20D, for that matter) is a bit of an
>issue, actually, with the smaller viewfinders without manual focus aids.

Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
on a digital camera.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 3:03:28 PM

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

Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:

> Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
> on a digital camera.

I guess there is that, on a D70, though autoexposure is overrated. :) 
If you feel you'll upgrade in the future, though, you'll get full
functionality on pro Nikons with even non-CPU lenses.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 4:08:04 PM

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

In article <117h5ri1unft7c1@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:
>
>> Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
>> on a digital camera.
>
>I guess there is that, on a D70, though autoexposure is overrated. :) 
>If you feel you'll upgrade in the future, though, you'll get full
>functionality on pro Nikons with even non-CPU lenses.

I recently bought an obsolete pro Nikon DSLR. And taking pictures on a sunny
afternoon, when I could hardly read the LCD screen, I was quickly reminded
that a light meter is not an optional extra on a DLSR.

Now, to get the full functionality out of my Nikkors, Nikon would have to
come with a full-frame DSLR :-)


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 4:08:05 PM

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

Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:

>> If you feel you'll upgrade in the future, though, you'll get full
>> functionality on pro Nikons with even non-CPU lenses.
>
> I recently bought an obsolete pro Nikon DSLR. And taking pictures on a sunny
> afternoon, when I could hardly read the LCD screen, I was quickly reminded
> that a light meter is not an optional extra on a DLSR.

I dunno about obsolete ones, but anything you can put on the D2x without
breaking the reflex mirror will give you full matrix metering.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 4:08:06 PM

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

I wrote:

> I dunno about obsolete ones, but anything you can put on the D2x without
> breaking the reflex mirror will give you full matrix metering.

Hmm, not actually true -- I guess you don't get matrix metering with
perspective control lenses. Not that you can really meter with those
at all anyway. (And, well, I've never even touched a non-AI lens, so
I don't know if those physically work.)

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
May 4, 2005 5:07:51 PM

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

vpenoso wrote:
> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year.
> ...
> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?

I'm afraid I have no advice, and might just be making things worse...but...

Have you looked at that Pentax DS at all? From what I've read it might
compare somewhat to the Nikon? It also seems to be reasonably cheap,
and quite compact.

I only ask because I'm considering buying my first DSLR too, and right
now those 3 all look like decent options to me.

Cheers.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 5:07:52 PM

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

"blue" <no.spam> wrote in message news:117i3qkejlbh0b0@corp.supernews.com...
> vpenoso wrote:
>> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. ...
>> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>
> I'm afraid I have no advice, and might just be making things
> worse...but...
>
> Have you looked at that Pentax DS at all? From what I've read it might
> compare somewhat to the Nikon? It also seems to be reasonably cheap, and
> quite compact.
>
> I only ask because I'm considering buying my first DSLR too, and right now
> those 3 all look like decent options to me.
>

I already had a gaggle of Nikkor lenses, so the choice was easy for me. I
like the "kit" lens with the D70 a lot, but non of my other lenses will
meter with the D70 (all older AI lenses), but I don't find it to be a big
problem. I carry a light meter with me, and I can usually make a good guess
and then adjust.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 6:26:52 PM

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

"vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:-fydndn6LNMQ2eXfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
> partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
> format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
on
> the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
you
> see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
> black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
well
> new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>
> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?

The D70s is not in the same category as the 20D. The D70s competes against
the Canon EOS-350D (Digital Rebel XT).

The 20D is a far more capable camera than the D70s, which would be expected
given the price difference.

The chart below shows which Nikon models are considered to compete against
which Canon models:

Nikon Canon
D50----300D
D70s---350D
D100---20D
D2H----
D2x----1D Mark II
----1Ds Mark II


I suggest you check out my web site, http://digitalslrinfo.com . You can use
the charts and tables to make comparisons.

If you already have a collection of Nikon lenses then the D70s is the
obvious choice.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 6:48:33 PM

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

On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, vpenoso <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote:
> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year.

Go play with 'em in a store. See which one jumps into your lap and
licks your nose.

--
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
May 4, 2005 8:43:58 PM

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

In article <j68dd3frmia62msersal3hgh43@inews_id.stereo.hq.phicoh.net>,
Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:

>Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
>on a digital camera.

I think you're saying that the light meter doesn't work on either the
Nikon or the Canon. One of these might not work exactly the way you'd
like (you don't say which one!) but they certainly both *work*. Don't
they?
May 4, 2005 9:16:54 PM

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

Musty wrote:

> "vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:-fydndn6LNMQ2eXfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
>
>>I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
>>partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
>>format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
>
> on
>
>>the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
>
> you
>
>>see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
>>black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
>
> well
>
>>new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>>
>>would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>>
>>
>
>
> You will spend so many $1000's on lenses, I would not skimp for a few $100
> on the body. The 20D is superior in all respects (unless you find that the
> D70s "feels" better, but _personally_ I found the Canons superior in
> "feel").
>
>
You might spend many thousands on lenses. Personally I would be very
comfortable to buy only Nikkor DX lenses to suit the 1:1.5 format, as
they will be smaller, lighter, and cheaper than equivalent 35mm format
lenses, and that influenced my decision. If it is true that Canon are
releasing a 1:1.3 ratio DSLR soon, then their logic confuses me. I trust
from the introduction of the D2X and new lenses being released
(including aftermarket brands) that Nikon has settled on 1:1.5 format as
a standard (they can always alter the 3/2 DX ratio to 4/3 (or even
"square" format later - as apart from non-round lenshoods, the optics
can cope with it.
Forget about pixel count. Even with an expensive D2X 12mp, theoretical
"detail" improvement is marginal - 30% at best - and assumes that you
got everything else right. The next "leap" from 6 or 8 mp is 25-30 mp -
not 10 or 15mp. This can certainly be done with a CCD/CMOS sensor at
1:1.5 ratio size - they will get noise levels down on these. Save some
money for a new computer, as a 16 bit tiff is going to be 150-200mb.

You an own a DSLR and still resist windows. Apple or Linux will
suffice, including freeware/GPL raw image editors for Linux.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 9:25:03 PM

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

james <fishbowl@conservatory.com> wrote:

>> Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
>> on a digital camera.
>
> I think you're saying that the light meter doesn't work on either the
> Nikon or the Canon. One of these might not work exactly the way you'd
> like (you don't say which one!) but they certainly both *work*. Don't
> they?

He was pointing out what I neglected to, that the D70 won't meter with
older manual Nikon lenses. Which really just levels the playing field,
of course, since you can't use older manual Canon lenses on the 20D,
either.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 9:28:47 PM

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

In article <-fydndn6LNMQ2eXfRVn-rQ@comcast.com>,
vpenoso <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote:
>I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
>partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
>format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features on
>the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure you
>see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
>black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is well
>new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>
>would anyone care to tip the balance for me?

Does "partial to Nikon" mean that you already have Nikon lenses?
If so, I would personally consider that to be the thing to tip the
balance. If you're starting out out with no Nikon or Cannon lenses,
that is a different matter.

I don't consider the 8.1 MP vs the 6.1 MP to be that much of a
difference.

I personally use the D70, and am quite happy with what it does.
But I had quite a bit of Nikon glass, so the choice was simple for me.

Some people seem to not be able to live without the vertical
grip (only available for Cannon from the manufacturer) -- to me this is
a non issue.

The Nikon has a little more noise at higher ISOs than the
Cannon. But I don't find the noise to be a problem.

If you have avoided Windows, and your alternative is not the
Mac, you will need to get some third-party software if you wish to use
the RAW format. (They are available for unix systems. The one which I
use is named "dcraw" (Digital Camera RAW).

You'll get lots of opinions from others -- read them all, and
merge them with what your own situation is to make your choice.

Good Luck,
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
May 4, 2005 9:34:30 PM

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

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:MY4ee.3521$pe3.3010@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> "vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:-fydndn6LNMQ2eXfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
>> I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
>> partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
>> format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
> on
>> the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
> you
>> see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
>> black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
> well
>> new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>>
>> would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>
> The D70s is not in the same category as the 20D. The D70s competes against
> the Canon EOS-350D (Digital Rebel XT).
>
> The 20D is a far more capable camera than the D70s, which would be
> expected
> given the price difference.
>
> The chart below shows which Nikon models are considered to compete against
> which Canon models:
>
> Nikon Canon
> D50----300D
> D70s---350D
> D100---20D
> D2H----
> D2x----1D Mark II
> ----1Ds Mark II
>
>
> I suggest you check out my web site, http://digitalslrinfo.com . You can
> use
> the charts and tables to make comparisons.
>
> If you already have a collection of Nikon lenses then the D70s is the
> obvious choice.
>
>

Steven,

If you had any credibility left, this might be useful, but once again, your
pro-Canon/Anti-Nikon bias comes right through. Your site is a sham.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 9:59:27 PM

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

On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, "vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net>
wrote:

>I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
>partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
>format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features on
>the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure you
>see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
>black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is well
>new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>
>would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>

Canon 20D
Nikon D70
Canon Rebel XT

Right?
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 10:07:31 PM

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

"Ben Rosengart" <br+rpdss@panix.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd7ho61.nhm.br@panix5.panix.com...
> On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, vpenoso <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote:
> > I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year.
>
> Go play with 'em in a store. See which one jumps into your lap and
> licks your nose.

Wow, cameras can do that? Seriously, while looking at them in a store is
useful, you also want to look at the differences in functionality, since
these are two cameras that are not in the same segment.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 10:13:33 PM

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

On Wed, 04 May 2005 18:07:31 GMT, Steven M. Scharf
<scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>
> "Ben Rosengart" <br+rpdss@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd7ho61.nhm.br@panix5.panix.com...
>> On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, vpenoso <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote:
>> > I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year.
>>
>> Go play with 'em in a store. See which one jumps into your lap and
>> licks your nose.
>
> Wow, cameras can do that?

Are you kidding me? I was sold on the 20D after a friend's untied
my shoelaces.

> Seriously, while looking at them in a store is
> useful, you also want to look at the differences in functionality, since
> these are two cameras that are not in the same segment.

Segment, schmegment. Mind-forg'd manacles.

--
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
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 12:21:56 AM

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

philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl (Philip Homburg) writes:

> In article <117h3eutaoclkfc@corp.supernews.com>,
> Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>>Eh? One of the advantages of Nikon is the huge array of nice lenses you
>>have at your disposal, since Nikon never changed their lens mount. You
>>can pick up some fine glass for decent prices, if you don't mind focusing
>>manually. (Which, on a D70 (or a 20D, for that matter) is a bit of an
>>issue, actually, with the smaller viewfinders without manual focus aids.
>
> Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
> on a digital camera.

Why? I wouldn't depend on what a light meter said for anything
important when I could examine the actual image the camera records,
including the histogram for all three channels (plus composite).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 12:23:15 AM

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

Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> writes:

> Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:
>
>>> If you feel you'll upgrade in the future, though, you'll get full
>>> functionality on pro Nikons with even non-CPU lenses.
>>
>> I recently bought an obsolete pro Nikon DSLR. And taking pictures on a sunny
>> afternoon, when I could hardly read the LCD screen, I was quickly reminded
>> that a light meter is not an optional extra on a DLSR.
>
> I dunno about obsolete ones, but anything you can put on the D2x without
> breaking the reflex mirror will give you full matrix metering.

Yes, the D2x is a pro-grade body. The D100, D70, and Fuji S2 Pro do
*not* support metering on non-chipped lenses. You can use AI and AIS
lenses, but only in manual exposure mode with no light meter. (This
doesn't bother me particularly, I take most of my photos that way.)
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
May 5, 2005 12:50:39 AM

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

Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in news:117i1bf4l28no51
@corp.supernews.com:

> james <fishbowl@conservatory.com> wrote:
>
>>> Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
>>> on a digital camera.
>>
>> I think you're saying that the light meter doesn't work on either the
>> Nikon or the Canon. One of these might not work exactly the way you'd
>> like (you don't say which one!) but they certainly both *work*. Don't
>> they?
>
> He was pointing out what I neglected to, that the D70 won't meter with
> older manual Nikon lenses. Which really just levels the playing field,
> of course, since you can't use older manual Canon lenses on the 20D,
> either.

With an adapter you can use old manual Nikon lenses on a 20D and you can
meter the exposure too! For using old Nikon lenses the 20D is BETTER than
the D70! Though I suspect that this is not an important feature to most
users of either camera.



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 1:11:34 AM

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

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:

> With an adapter you can use old manual Nikon lenses on a 20D and you can
> meter the exposure too!

With stop-down metering. Does that count? Because that may well be possible
on the D70, too.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:01:50 AM

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

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> writes:

> Note that some people are looking mainly at megapixels when they do
> any ranking, but I believe that this is a big mistake. For example,
> the Nikon D2x is 12.4 megapixels, while the Canon 1D Mark II is 8.2
> megapixels, but the latter performs better in terms of noise, frame
> rate, and has the very large advantage of the much bigger sensor
> with the resultant smaller crop factor. But people that look solely
> at megapixels automatically assume that the D2x must be better (and
> if they shoot only at low ISO speeds, and don't need wide angle
> capability, the D2x probably is better).

I agree completely with your main point, that looking just at
megapixels will lead you down the garden path, into the pit of
vipers.

However, I disagree that a full-frame sensor is inherently an
advantage.

It is clearly a *disadvantage* if you're a big user of long lenses.
People with 600mm f4 lenses routinely put teleconverters of at least
1.4x on them. Getting a free 1.5x in the camera is not bad for this
type of work, it's actively good.

If you're a big user of wide lenses, it may in fact be a
disadvantage. However, consider the price-class of the cameras we're
talking about; bundling a new wide-end lens into the price of the deal
may not make that much difference. So even for wide users, it *may*
not be a big lose. This gets down to how you like specific lenses
from a fairly small set, too.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:23:08 AM

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

In article <117hco4ouu3tre5@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>I wrote:
>
>> I dunno about obsolete ones, but anything you can put on the D2x without
>> breaking the reflex mirror will give you full matrix metering.
>
>Hmm, not actually true -- I guess you don't get matrix metering with
>perspective control lenses. Not that you can really meter with those
>at all anyway. (And, well, I've never even touched a non-AI lens, so
>I don't know if those physically work.)

I don't know about the D2x, but the D70 (and the N90s film
camera) both will not properly mount a non AI lens. The sensors which
feel for two factors -- whether the lens is fully stopped down (needed
for proper auto aperture control), and how many stops below maximum
aperture (needed for proper metering on a non-CPU lens) will interfere
with the aperture ring on a non-AI lens. (But -- most older non-AI lens
can be fitted with newer aperture rings to eliminate this problem. And
for those without available AI aperture rings for conversion, I can see
how to modify an existing aperture ring so the lens will mount, and so
it will work with a camera body with both sensors. It *does* require a
bit of machining equipment, and a degree of skill and care.

Note that the D70 -- with its reliance on CPU lenses, does not
even have the sensor for the stopdown information -- just the one which
senses that it is at minimum aperture.

I have seen an older Nikon body with the sensor designed to fold
clear of the aperture ring on a non-AI lens, but this feature is not
present on the D70, so you will need AI modified lenses. I don't know
what is on the D2x, as I have never had a chance to handle one -- but it
is certainly *not* present on the N90s, which I suspect was about the
same grade in the Film cameras as the D2x is in digital.

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
May 5, 2005 2:24:14 AM

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

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:fchi71h6b7t4scif84p3gma7cmjnonchpq@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, "vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
> >partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
> >format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
on
> >the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
you
> >see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
> >black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
well
> >new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
> >
> >would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
> >
>
> Canon 20D
> Nikon D70
> Canon Rebel XT
>
> Right?

Hard to say. The D70 beats the XT in terms of look and feel, and appears to
be better quality, while the XT beats the D70 in terms of functionality and
image quality.

If you want to rank the Canon and Nikon DSLRs by image quality and
functionality, it would be as below:

Canon 1Ds Mark II
Canon 1D Mark II
Nikon D2x
Canon 20D
Nikon D100
Canon Digital Rebel XT
Nikon D70
Canon Digital Rebel
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:24:15 AM

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

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> If you want to rank the Canon and Nikon DSLRs by image quality and
> functionality, it would be as below:

For fun I've added the 7D and corrected the D2x position (your silly
bias again).
>
> Canon 1Ds Mark II
Nikon D2x
> Canon 1D Mark II
> Canon 20D
K-M Maxxum 7D
> Nikon D100
> Canon Digital Rebel XT
> Nikon D70
> Canon Digital Rebel


Why there? While I'll grant the 20D its pixels, the 7D has been
reviewed by dpreview and others as being less noisy than the Rebel XT.

The 7D has better ergonomic than the 20D, but again, not as many pixels.
It has the anti-shake, but again, not as many pixels...

As to the placement of the D2x, it clearly should be above the 1D Mk II.

50% More pixels, similar sensor area, much better meter, better monitor,
high speed cropped mode is unique and probably very useful to PJ's.

I'm really not sure where the D100 belongs... if at all.

--
-- 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: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:24:15 AM

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

On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:24:14 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
<scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

>
>"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>news:fchi71h6b7t4scif84p3gma7cmjnonchpq@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, "vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
>> >partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
>> >format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
>on
>> >the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
>you
>> >see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
>> >black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
>well
>> >new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>> >
>> >would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>> >
>>
>> Canon 20D
>> Nikon D70
>> Canon Rebel XT
>>
>> Right?
>
>Hard to say. The D70 beats the XT in terms of look and feel, and appears to
>be better quality, while the XT beats the D70 in terms of functionality and
>image quality.
>
>If you want to rank the Canon and Nikon DSLRs by image quality and
>functionality, it would be as below:
>
> Canon 1Ds Mark II
> Canon 1D Mark II
> Nikon D2x
> Canon 20D
> Nikon D100
> Canon Digital Rebel XT
> Nikon D70
>Canon Digital Rebel
>

The D100 discounted is beginning to look like "the" DSLR buy
right now.
-Rich
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:24:16 AM

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

On Wed, 04 May 2005 18:49:48 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
>> If you want to rank the Canon and Nikon DSLRs by image quality and
>> functionality, it would be as below:
>
>For fun I've added the 7D and corrected the D2x position (your silly
>bias again).
>>
>> Canon 1Ds Mark II
> Nikon D2x
>> Canon 1D Mark II
>> Canon 20D
> K-M Maxxum 7D
>> Nikon D100
>> Canon Digital Rebel XT
>> Nikon D70
>> Canon Digital Rebel
>
>
>Why there? While I'll grant the 20D its pixels, the 7D has been
>reviewed by dpreview and others as being less noisy than the Rebel XT.
>
>The 7D has better ergonomic than the 20D, but again, not as many pixels.
> It has the anti-shake, but again, not as many pixels...

I think it would be interesting to have two people fire 100 shots
each at the same subjects (a variety) with the 20D and the 7D.
My gut feeling is that the Minolta would produce the majority
of usable shots. Only because even in daylight, using 100ISO speeds,
some shots just do not work because of some level of shake-induced
blur.
-Rich

>
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:24:17 AM

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

RichA wrote:

>>The 7D has better ergonomic than the 20D, but again, not as many pixels.
>> It has the anti-shake, but again, not as many pixels...
>
>
> I think it would be interesting to have two people fire 100 shots
> each at the same subjects (a variety) with the 20D and the 7D.
> My gut feeling is that the Minolta would produce the majority
> of usable shots. Only because even in daylight, using 100ISO speeds,
> some shots just do not work because of some level of shake-induced
> blur.

I'd agree if the 'variety' was shot @ 1/(1.5 x FL) and 1 to 2 stops
slower. Unless, of course, the 20D had an IS lens mounted and then it
would go in favour of the 20D.

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: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:39:46 AM

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

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>
>With an adapter you can use old manual Nikon lenses on a 20D and you can
>meter the exposure too!

With or without correct focus at infinity?

With or without an additional optical element in the adapter?
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 2:44:12 AM

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

Steven M. Scharf <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

> If you want to rank the Canon and Nikon DSLRs by image quality and
> functionality, it would be as below:
>
> Canon 1Ds Mark II
> Canon 1D Mark II
> Nikon D2x

You know, no matter how many times you keep repeating this wild fantasy
of yours, it's not going to become true.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
May 5, 2005 3:27:08 AM

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

Tony Polson <tp@nospam.net> wrote in
news:87gi711ct25867uj7r19ij9osckfuanjr2@4ax.com:

> MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>>
>>With an adapter you can use old manual Nikon lenses on a 20D and you can
>>meter the exposure too!
>
> With or without correct focus at infinity?

I believe it is with.

> With or without an additional optical element in the adapter?

My understanding is that it is without.

From what I have read the adaptor is a simple metal ring which adapts the
mount, apparently some flange distance difference allows the Nikon lenses
to attach to the Canon mount using adaptor and still allowing focus to
infinity without the need for any optical elements.

Here is a bit of info:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/manual_focu...

It seems that it is easier to use the old manual focus Nikon lenses on a
Canon EOS camera than using older Canon FD lenses.



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:59:14 AM

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

In article <117iek61dt2obe8@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>
>> With an adapter you can use old manual Nikon lenses on a 20D and you can
>> meter the exposure too!
>
>With stop-down metering. Does that count? Because that may well be possible
>on the D70, too.

No, no metering means no metering at all. It must have been one those tricks
to get potential F80 buyers to buy an F100 instead. For digital cameras,
Nikon did not think it important to make a custom setting to just enable the
light meter, for example for macro.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:59:15 AM

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

Philip Homburg wrote:
>
> No, no metering means no metering at all. It must have been one those tricks
> to get potential F80 buyers to buy an F100 instead. For digital cameras,
> Nikon did not think it important to make a custom setting to just enable the
> light meter, for example for macro.

With a closeup diopter & teleconverter, my D70 does not always meter
properly. It meters but I need to adjust the EC a lot sometimes.

--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 4:03:39 AM

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

In article <117hco4ouu3tre5@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>I wrote:
>
>> I dunno about obsolete ones, but anything you can put on the D2x without
>> breaking the reflex mirror will give you full matrix metering.
>
>Hmm, not actually true -- I guess you don't get matrix metering with
>perspective control lenses. Not that you can really meter with those
>at all anyway. (And, well, I've never even touched a non-AI lens, so
>I don't know if those physically work.)

Well, non-Ai lenses are almost the same as Ai lenses. The main difference is
that part of the aperture ring has been machined way for the Ai meter
coupling.

However, shift lenses are not proper non-Ai or Ai lenses. The aperture ring
is at the front of the lens and is non-automatic.

Not that this matters much. The only Nikon body that can meter with a shift
lens in a shifted position is the F3. For all other cameras, you meter in
stop-down mode, and then you shift the lens. My guess is that matrix metering
will work on the F6 if you tell it the actual aperture that you are
going to use (and then meter in stop-down mode).


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 4:03:40 AM

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

Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:

> Well, non-Ai lenses are almost the same as Ai lenses. The main difference
> is that part of the aperture ring has been machined way for the Ai meter
> coupling.

Right, that's what I mean; non-Ai lenses are physically different, and not
supported by the D2x, so I wasn't sure if they would even mount at all.
Having never used one, I'm not sure how big the physical difference is.

If they'll mount but not work, then my initial statement was incorrect in
that regard. :) 

> The only Nikon body that can meter with a shift lens in a shifted position
> is the F3. For all other cameras, you meter in stop-down mode, and then you
> shift the lens.

Oh, I see. I've never used one of those on 35mm either, and misunderstood;
I thought they could meter when not shifted.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 4:26:00 AM

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

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:boli719n04penjhp2f7bgavlp4tuq8gvfl@4ax.com...

> The D100 discounted is beginning to look like "the" DSLR buy
> right now.

I agree. For those that don't have to have the newest released product, the
D100 is a very good deal.
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 4:42:47 AM

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

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:cqli715hjjbeo1halhnnjfqc6269sq2ceh@4ax.com...

> I think it would be interesting to have two people fire 100 shots
> each at the same subjects (a variety) with the 20D and the 7D.
> My gut feeling is that the Minolta would produce the majority
> of usable shots.

You're probably right, but in the case of camera without anti-shake, the
user is probably simply doing shots over when they are blurry, so they're
doing a lot more total shots to get the same number of usable shots.
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:12:27 PM

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

In article <m2ll6ufowb.fsf@gw.dd-b.net>,
David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> wrote:
>philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl (Philip Homburg) writes:
>
>> In article <117h3eutaoclkfc@corp.supernews.com>,
>> Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>>>Eh? One of the advantages of Nikon is the huge array of nice lenses you
>>>have at your disposal, since Nikon never changed their lens mount. You
>>>can pick up some fine glass for decent prices, if you don't mind focusing
>>>manually. (Which, on a D70 (or a 20D, for that matter) is a bit of an
>>>issue, actually, with the smaller viewfinders without manual focus aids.
>>
>> Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have a working light meter, even
>> on a digital camera.
>
>Why? I wouldn't depend on what a light meter said for anything
>important when I could examine the actual image the camera records,
>including the histogram for all three channels (plus composite).

Except that in bright sunlight the LCD panel on my camera is almost impossible
to read.

Furthermore, when the light changes, you immediately see that in the
viewfinder.

Anyhow, if I can expose slides without a spotmeter, I can take pictures with
a digital camera without verifying whether each picture is correctly exposed
or not.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:23:30 PM

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

"Walt Hanks" <walthanks@comcast.net> writes:

> "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
> news:XYdee.3850$pe3.2915@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> (snipped)
>> But people that look solely at megapixels automatically assume that
>> the D2x must be better (and if they shoot only at low ISO speeds, and
>> don't
>> need wide angle capability, the D2x probably is better).

> Just how many people do you know who need anything wider than 12mm (18mm
> equivalent)?

Oh, probably not many. However, I had a 17mm lens before I ever owned
a digital camera of any sort, and I used it some. I was casting
covetous eyes on a 14mm. Some people buy a Bessa L and their 12mm and
don't use that body for *anything* else.

So, fine, not many peole need wider than 18mm. *Some* do.

(Since we're talking largely "art" here, "need" and "want" are pretty
much interchangeable.)
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
May 5, 2005 3:36:22 PM

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

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:fchi71h6b7t4scif84p3gma7cmjnonchpq@4ax.com...
>
>>On Tue, 3 May 2005 23:42:08 -0400, "vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have agonized over these 2 models for nearly a year. I have always been
>>>partial to Nikon, resisted Windows and have only made the jump to digital
>>>format from emulsion 35mm and 4x5 cameras 3 years ago...but the features
>
> on
>
>>>the Canon 20d are quite impressive but i do not know Canon cameras. Sure
>
> you
>
>>>see them on the sidelines all the time...either the white lenses or the
>>>black lenses..whatever......6.1 mega pix or 8.1 The new Nikon D70s, is
>
> well
>
>>>new and hundreds of dollars less than the 20d.
>>>
>>>would anyone care to tip the balance for me?
>>>
>>
>> Canon 20D
>> Nikon D70
>>Canon Rebel XT
>>
>>Right?
>
>
> Hard to say. The D70 beats the XT in terms of look and feel, and appears to
> be better quality, while the XT beats the D70 in terms of functionality and
> image quality.
>
> If you want to rank the Canon and Nikon DSLRs by image quality and
> functionality, it would be as below:
>
> Canon 1Ds Mark II
> Canon 1D Mark II
> Nikon D2x
> Canon 20D
> Nikon D100
> Canon Digital Rebel XT
> Nikon D70
> Canon Digital Rebel
>
>
Somewhere around your mid level are a number of cameras from other
makers. Minolta has an unequalled image in-camera image stabilisation,
Olympus has sensor cleaning, Fuji may have better highlight detail
retention. These aspects of functionality might have much more impact
on quality achieved in practice, which is much more important than
taking photos of test charts, and shows why your comparison is as
pointless and subjective as it is misleading.

The OP needs to get a life - I assume that the post was just a troll -
or the poster has no idea what to look for in a DSLR and should probably
go buy a canon powershot or whatever. If after reading even a fraction
of the reviews on the cameras he is looking at on the net he still can't
decide, then he appears to be a hopeless case. It's much harder
deciding which photo is the one to enlarge/print, and how to do it, than
it is to decide which camera to buy. His procrastination and hopeless
attitude leads me to believe that even a powershot might be overkill.
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:36:23 PM

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

"Frederick" <nomailplease@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:1115249738.89089@ftpsrv1...

> Somewhere around your mid level are a number of cameras from other
> makers.

This is true. The initial poster was looking only at Canon and Nikon, so I
left out everything else. Adding KM, Olympus, and Pentax, they'd be ranked
as follows:

Canon 1Ds Mark II
Canon 1D Mark II
Nikon D2x
Canon 20D
Konica-Minolta 7D
Nikon D100
Canon Digital Rebel XT
Nikon D70
Pentax istD
Canon Digital Rebel
Pentax istDs
Olympus Evolt E300

Note that some people are looking mainly at megapixels when they do any
ranking, but I believe that this is a big mistake. For example, the Nikon
D2x is 12.4 megapixels, while the Canon 1D Mark II is 8.2 megapixels, but
the latter performs better in terms of noise, frame rate, and has the very
large advantage of the much bigger sensor with the resultant smaller crop
factor. But people that look solely at megapixels automatically assume that
the D2x must be better (and if they shoot only at low ISO speeds, and don't
need wide angle capability, the D2x probably is better).
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:36:24 PM

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

Steven M. Scharf <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

> factor. But people that look solely at megapixels automatically assume that
> the D2x must be better

I look at the pictures.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:36:24 PM

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

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:XYdee.3850$pe3.2915@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
(snipped)
> But people that look solely at megapixels automatically assume that
> the D2x must be better (and if they shoot only at low ISO speeds, and
> don't
> need wide angle capability, the D2x probably is better).
>

Just how many people do you know who need anything wider than 12mm (18mm
equivalent)?

Walt
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 4:06:05 PM

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

In article <117ikbted1q5ne9@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:
>Philip Homburg <philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote:
>
>> Well, non-Ai lenses are almost the same as Ai lenses. The main difference
>> is that part of the aperture ring has been machined way for the Ai meter
>> coupling.
>
>Right, that's what I mean; non-Ai lenses are physically different, and not
>supported by the D2x, so I wasn't sure if they would even mount at all.
>Having never used one, I'm not sure how big the physical difference is.
>
>If they'll mount but not work, then my initial statement was incorrect in
>that regard. :) 

Normal non-Ai lenses do not mount on the D2X. If you really want to, it is
not that difficult to convert a non-Ai lens into one with Ai meter coupling.

For non-Ai lenses without an aperture ring at the back of the lens, it very
much depends on the lens. Some lenses can be mounted others can't. For
shift lenses, Nikon changed the design of the lenses a little bit to make
it possible to mount them.

>> The only Nikon body that can meter with a shift lens in a shifted position
>> is the F3. For all other cameras, you meter in stop-down mode, and then you
>> shift the lens.
>
>Oh, I see. I've never used one of those on 35mm either, and misunderstood;
>I thought they could meter when not shifted.

Shift lenses are metered in stop-down mode.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
May 5, 2005 5:29:08 PM

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

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> "Frederick" <nomailplease@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:1115249738.89089@ftpsrv1...
>
>
>>Somewhere around your mid level are a number of cameras from other
>>makers.
>
>
> This is true. The initial poster was looking only at Canon and Nikon, so I
> left out everything else. Adding KM, Olympus, and Pentax, they'd be ranked
> as follows:
>
> Canon 1Ds Mark II
> Canon 1D Mark II
> Nikon D2x
> Canon 20D
> Konica-Minolta 7D
> Nikon D100
> Canon Digital Rebel XT
> Nikon D70
> Pentax istD
> Canon Digital Rebel
> Pentax istDs
> Olympus Evolt E300
>
> Note that some people are looking mainly at megapixels when they do any
> ranking, but I believe that this is a big mistake. For example, the Nikon
> D2x is 12.4 megapixels, while the Canon 1D Mark II is 8.2 megapixels, but
> the latter performs better in terms of noise, frame rate, and has the very
> large advantage of the much bigger sensor with the resultant smaller crop
> factor. But people that look solely at megapixels automatically assume that
> the D2x must be better (and if they shoot only at low ISO speeds, and don't
> need wide angle capability, the D2x probably is better).
>
>
Note that you have omitted the Fuji and Olympus E1, for what it's worth
also Sigma and Kodak. If you have the time, it would be nice for you to
do a cost performance analysis rating the features of each for say a
nature photograper, sports, photo journalist, student etc.
Sticking just with Canon, there is no way at all that a 1Ds II is more
than ten times "better" than a 300D. In several aspects it is worse,
not least is my thought that even in the relatively law abiding part of
the world that I live in, hanging a wallet around my neck with a note
attached saying "$10,000 in here" would be a crazy thing to do. On the
other hand, most thieves wouldn't know a 1Ds from an old 35mm camera.
Interesting to see some of the prize winning photos and other great
photography links posted by people on this forum. Can you direct me to
many that are using a camera body costing over $5,000? Most that I have
seen are using very "humble" cameras. Is this perhaps just because very
few people are prepared to spend the $ - or is it (more likely IMO) that
gadget fixation and an ability to understand the art are mutually
exclusive psychological traits? I'm actually quite serious in saying
that - I really do get the feeling that those most attracted to
technology are kind of detached from humanity - sort of like sufferers
of aspergers syndome.
!