Cameras & Optics.

Levi · « **Reply #60 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 04:01 am »

I see what you mean. This is on 12mm, widest you can get on a digital w/o going fisheye.

AdamM · « **Reply #61 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 09:06 am »

Cool shot!

Quote

I see what you mean. This is on 12mm, widest you can get on a digital w/o going fisheye.

You can actually go to 10mm on a 1.6x digital before fisheye. Canon makes a great 10-22 which stays straight - barely at 10mm!

/A

Imperial · « **Reply #62 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 09:56 pm »

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp
And then Nikon releases the D300...
When is it gonna end?
I'm never gonna be able to choose now!!!

Well, like they say: I'll wait for them to show up in the ring, fight it out, then we'll see!
...
I should just go for the 400D or the 40x... and concentrate on learning the art... and get me some nice lenses...
There will always be a new body every 18 months or so... I've been told...

Imperial

NealH · « **Reply #63 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 10:51 pm »

My advice, get the standard D40 then, you can upgrade later or keep what you have. Unless you plan on enlarging, I doubt you will ever notice the increased resolution of the D40X. In addition, I believe the 40 has a faster fill flash shutter sync. I like this feature, especially when taking outdoor relatively close-up pictures of human subjects.

AdamM · « **Reply #64 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 10:57 pm »

Go to a store
Hold both
play with both
Take your time
Play with the interfaces, controls, menus.

It's like the mob, once you join 'the family' it's hard to get out, since you'll be buying lenses for that family. (Well, unless you're using Canon since you can use all the lenses - last plug!:)

Only then can you decide. They've got very different personalities and you may be really drawn to one or the other.

Good luck!
/A

Vapor Audio · « **Reply #65 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 12:00 am »

Happy Day for Nikon users

I just placed my pre-order for a D3, using my Nikon Professional Services membership I should get it in early November.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond3/

That and the new full-frame 14-24/2.8 lens should be unbelievable!

95bcwh · « **Reply #66 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 12:03 am »

The total cost of owning a Canon system is cheaper than Nikon, Canon also have more lens choices. Being a fan of neither, I will choose Canon over Nikon.

Quote from: Imperial on 23 Aug 2007, 09:56 pm

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp
And then Nikon releases the D300...
When is it gonna end?
I'm never gonna be able to choose now!!!

Well, like they say: I'll wait for them to show up in the ring, fight it out, then we'll see!
...
I should just go for the 400D or the 40x... and concentrate on learning the art... and get me some nice lenses...
There will always be a new body every 18 months or so... I've been told...

Imperial

brj · « **Reply #67 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 05:36 am »

Wow, the internal frames of those new Nikons (and probably any modern metal-framed SLR) are beautiful. Not a reason to buy a camera by itself of course, but a work of engineering approaching art in its own right.

I've got to say that as appealing as some of these new cameras are, especially the full frame options, I can't see ever moving to them until they shed some serious weight (and cost). My camera and lens weigh a "mere" 2.5 lbs total, and I find lugging that around town or hiking the boonies to be a pain by the end of the day. I played with a Canon 1D in a store the other day, and cringed when I picked it up. The new Nikon D3 is just as monstrous a beast. If you shoot everything from a tripod in a studio, it probably isn't an issue, but otherwise, I confess that I'm feeling a growing attraction for the lower weight options currently available.

The screens on the new Nikons do look fantastic, however...

JohnR · « **Reply #68 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 08:03 am »

Who wudda thunk, a VGA display on the back of a camera...! I wonder if it's TN, IPS, or MVA...

Imperial · « **Reply #69 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 11:20 am »

Quote from: JohnR on 24 Aug 2007, 08:03 am

Who wudda thunk, a VGA display on the back of a camera...! I wonder if it's TN, IPS, or MVA...

The Nikon does look nice.
But they flat out lie about the screen! they say it has 922000 pixels...
Well unless they've just invented snow to use on your barbeque the truth is more like
307200 pixels! But still it is a bit better than Canon
Nikon counts the rgb cells individually... as we all know, a cell is a red green and blue composite... that is ONE pixel...!
Hence the resolution on the back viewscreen is 640 x 480 = 307200 ... Dadaaaa!!!

Imperial

Levi · « **Reply #70 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 11:53 am »

It looks like you are an early adopter.

Are you using a D2Xs now?

It would probably awhile before I switch to the new Nikon D3. Probably 6mos after it's debut, they will come up with D3s

-Levi

Quote from: TurboFC3S on 24 Aug 2007, 12:00 am

Happy Day for Nikon users I just placed my pre-order for a D3, using my Nikon Professional Services membership I should get it in early November.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond3/

That and the new full-frame 14-24/2.8 lens should be unbelievable!

95bcwh · « **Reply #71 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 03:14 pm »

Well I read somewhere that Nikon also lied about the 14-bit A/D converter.

Quote from: Imperial on 24 Aug 2007, 11:20 am

The Nikon does look nice.
But they flat out lie about the screen! they say it has 922000 pixels...
Well unless they've just invented snow to use on your barbeque the truth is more like
307200 pixels! But still it is a bit better than Canon
Nikon counts the rgb cells individually... as we all know, a cell is a red green and blue composite... that is ONE pixel...!
Hence the resolution on the back viewscreen is 640 x 480 = 307200 ... Dadaaaa!!!

Imperial

Vapor Audio · « **Reply #72 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 04:01 pm »

Quote from: Levi on 24 Aug 2007, 11:53 am

It looks like you are an early adopter.

Are you using a D2Xs now?

It would probably awhile before I switch to the new Nikon D3. Probably 6mos after it's debut, they will come up with D3s

Right now I have a bunch of cameras - D200, D2Hs, D70s. My kit will probably end up being the D3 and D200, or maybe get a D300 as well. The D3 looks like the perfect studio and wedding camera, and for indoor sports which I shoot a lot of. The D200 or D300 will be my outdoor sports camera where I need more reach, and will also be my travel camera.

The D3 looks to be a massive step forward, I've read a few quotes about image quality from it, and I'm drooling to say the least. Everyone who's seen the output from these new Nikon CMOS sensors in the D3 and D300 are shocked, saying even the D300 is a new leader in high ISO performance ... and the D3 is just untouchable by anything on the market today. Who knows how they'll do once they hit the market, but I'm excited. It sounds like finally we'll have some true high ISO performance, not the posterization Canon gives to mask noise.

As far as Nikon misrepresenting the screen and image processing, as far as I can tell all the specs are correct. It truly is a 922000 pixel screen, and much has been made of the new 14-bit image processing.

Levi · « **Reply #73 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 04:12 pm »

If you have a D200 or D2Hs, consider the D2Xs which also a massive step forward

. The D2Xs will be several hundreds cheaper when the D3 comes out. I have tried those camera's so just my .02

Quote from: TurboFC3S on 24 Aug 2007, 04:01 pm

Quote from: Levi on 24 Aug 2007, 11:53 am
It looks like you are an early adopter.

Are you using a D2Xs now?

It would probably awhile before I switch to the new Nikon D3. Probably 6mos after it's debut, they will come up with D3s

Right now I have a bunch of cameras - D200, D2Hs, D70s. My kit will probably end up being the D3 and D200, or maybe get a D300 as well. The D3 looks like the perfect studio and wedding camera, and for indoor sports which I shoot a lot of. The D200 or D300 will be my outdoor sports camera where I need more reach, and will also be my travel camera.

The D3 looks to be a massive step forward, I've read a few quotes about image quality from it, and I'm drooling to say the least. Everyone who's seen the output from these new Nikon CMOS sensors in the D3 and D300 are shocked, saying even the D300 is a new leader in high ISO performance ... and the D3 is just untouchable by anything on the market today. Who knows how they'll do once they hit the market, but I'm excited. It sounds like finally we'll have some true high ISO performance, not the posterization Canon gives to mask noise.

As far as Nikon misrepresenting the screen and image processing, as far as I can tell all the specs are correct. It truly is a 922000 pixel screen, and much has been made of the new 14-bit image processing.

Vapor Audio · « **Reply #74 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 04:21 pm »

Quote from: Levi on 24 Aug 2007, 04:12 pm

If you have a D200 or D2Hs, consider the D2Xs which also a massive step forward . The D2Xs will be several hundreds cheaper when the D3 comes out. I have tried those camera's so just my .02

I had a D2x for awhile, but didn't see it offering much over the D200. The D2x does give slightly better resolution, but it's not noticable unless I make a large print ... I do like the D2x autofocus and viewfinder (but the D2Hs gives me those things). The reason why I have the D2Hs is for those times when file-size is important, if I'm in the field processing hundreds of shots with a laptop or for web only. Honestly, I'll miss those small files.

Levi · « **Reply #75 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 04:45 pm »

D200 uses CCD , D2H uses LBcast while D2X uses cmos sensor much like the D3. Go figure.

Quote from: TurboFC3S on 24 Aug 2007, 04:21 pm

Quote from: Levi on 24 Aug 2007, 04:12 pm
If you have a D200 or D2Hs, consider the D2Xs which also a massive step forward . The D2Xs will be several hundreds cheaper when the D3 comes out. I have tried those camera's so just my .02

I had a D2x for awhile, but didn't see it offering much over the D200. The D2x does give slightly better resolution, but it's not noticable unless I make a large print ... I do like the D2x autofocus and viewfinder (but the D2Hs gives me those things). The reason why I have the D2Hs is for those times when file-size is important, if I'm in the field processing hundreds of shots with a laptop or for web only. Honestly, I'll miss those small files.

Vapor Audio · « **Reply #76 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 05:18 pm »

Quote from: Levi on 24 Aug 2007, 04:45 pm

D200 uses CCD , D2H uses LBcast while D2X uses cmos sensor much like the D3. Go figure.

The difference is the D200 and D2x sensors are made by sony, the new D3 sensor are an original Nikon design built by an undisclosed and apparently super-secret 3rd party.

Levi · « **Reply #77 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 06:03 pm »

Here is my point. My personal opinion. We can go about this for seems like days and go nowhere.

D300 will never be better than D3.

On the same token, D200 will never be better than D2X.

Cheers,
Levi

Vapor Audio · « **Reply #78 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 06:26 pm »

Quote from: Levi on 24 Aug 2007, 06:03 pm

On the same token, D200 will never be better than D2X.

I didn't know we were 'going around'. Of course the D200 isn't better than the D2x ... I never said it was. If you could get a D2x with a removable grip then I'd have one right now. My point is I think the difference between the D2x and D3 will be much greater than the difference between the D2x and D200.

Levi · « **Reply #79 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 07:14 pm »

I agree. The full-frame sensor alone is a great feature if you are into wide angle lenses.