300D vs D70
- Thread starter checker
- Start date
- Status
again, yes i was mistakened about AF-S, its DX
that they can't be used on FF as eg: a 12-24 lense, while a sigma 12-24 can be used as a 12-24 lens on a FF body.
so my point to be made is :
a) how much is a nikkor 12-24?
b) how much is a sigma 12-24?
c) if nikon releases a FF SLR for $3000 tommorow, what happens to the value of the nikkor 12-24?
d) if nikon releases a FF 12-24 lens.. how will that change things
well, we can't conclusively say anything yet since market demand will decide these things, but I have my own opinion and you too will have yours.
I tend to believe it is the other way round.Watcher said:
Anyway, I'm not going to get involved in this brand/equipment debate. Too much has been said before already, the point of such arguments always comes to nought.
Just be happy with what u have and concentrate on taking pictures. My 2 cts.
Let me do car analogies.loupgarou said:
Two cars of approximate same price but one comes out a new design every year, the other, every 3 years.
a) it is saying that just because there is a possibility of an accident, you buy a cheaper car, rather than the capability of the car itself.
b) if you don't intend to upgrade to a newer version of the cars, instead, will wait till it is scrape (10 years), do you care about the value, depreciation and EOL? What if you change your mind or that a new feature comes out that you really want?
If the car breaks down or gets into an accident, do you consider only getting the same car back, even if the other brand may a better car?
Features (with ranking importance & significance). For example, giving a photoj a 8 MP camera instead of longer battery life and faster operation times like start up and write time. Which features do you think a photo j will think is better? Conversely, which do you think a fashion studio shooter will need?loupgarou said:
True, but in terms of price, both companies products are more or less equivalent. That is competition at work here.loupgarou said:
As for the features, I guess we have to disagree on it. Features on the lower end are at the receiving end of the trickle down effect. I have yet to see very long battery life, 3D matrix color metering, extremely fast CF write time and instantaneous startup time on 1D Mk2. Do you think these features will appear on 300DMk3 much less 300D Mk2 or 10D Mk2?
Yes, there will be improvements, but what, how useful and when is the matter of question here. May be I'm not reading the right stuff, but I only see higher resolution sensors from Canon as the only dramatic improvements in its future.loupgarou said:
It will become cheaper but it is a question of when. My guess is about 4.5-5 years (3 Moore generations).loupgarou said:
I know and agree. But like someone said, take today worry about tomorrow. Price vs quality. Read where people traded back the Sigma for the Nikon, not the other way round. So you can think about the apparent quality vs price there.loupgarou said:
As I said, FF DSLR is not that close. Even if it comes out, there are still hundred of thousands if not million of DSLR from D1 until D70 that the 12-24 can be used on, unlike any EF-S lenses that will most likely stay at the lowest end. So if there is a need, I can sell. There is a strong demand; check out the WTBs in the buy and sell.
its not quite the same analogy, because the car doesn't tie you down by its accessories such that you can't change it easily.
besides, the newer model is
a) newer design - (ie: looks/ergonomics/lcd's etc)
b) pricepoint - either equivalent or lower
c) features - (whatever trickles down)
now indirectly, who makes more sales and why they make sales? ie: responding to market demand/earning market share.
--
let's look at the handphone market
what happened to motorola after they lost the lead handphone share due to slow release of products etc?
Did people continue to buy motorola phones and accessories, if sales were reduced what happened to r&d?
*actually there was a lot more to this, but I'm remembering this from an article i read about motorola revamping the handphone business after a long lull..
--
in anycase, competition keeps things cheap for consumers.
Buy nikon and increase their market share , cos if canon market share goes too high, they will become a monopoly and no longer compete and everyone suffers also.
---
Guide for buying a dslr.
a) what are your friends using and can you borrow lenses from them. if can, buy what they buy.
mysonlovenemo
New Member
loupgarou said:
:thumbsup:
was abt to post this,
really another fun part of photography is to go outing with friends and interchange your lens, compare the effect etc......
and save u lots of $$.....
again, it depends on empirical data. just go and
a) identify which are the canon users who cross post and post irrelevantly (troll posts) and likewise
b) identify the nikon ones.
run a sql statement and check.
the point is: its pointless, anyone who posts in uncivilised manner is wrong, you cannot stereotype by brand advocacy.
also, you cannot discount the fact that there are probably more canon users than nikon users *ie: market share* and this propogates down to the boards.
as a result there are more absolute numbers of canon trolls to nikon trolls. but as an percentage of trolls to users , only a proper investigation can reveal that
Jus_a_Nick
New Member
Compare D70 and 300D can talk about 1000++mm focal length lenses, you guys are good. Most of us make alot of valid points here but i guess certain technicals would ready be too complicated for the poor chap who is jus into D photography and jus wants a plain view of the 2 cameras. (pardon me if i am wrong)
IMHO, maybe the experts may differ, if you are looking into starting in Digital Photography, both cameras, being SLR could let you learn from it for easily a few if not years to come. Both are good entry level cameras.
Alot of new function and technology may be good to have, but then take a look at some good old photographs taken by full manual cameras, well, at least personally i find that my pictures are yet to be a fraction of that worth although yes, i got my abcd ttl, spot meter,2,3,4d matrix metering etc etc.ohh well, maybe it's jus me.
End of day i personally feel that jus get the camera which you like to handle, which feels better in your hands, and one that you would like to take out to shoot. That will be the good camera.
in terms of technicals of which system(now we OT beyong D70 n 300D) both have it pros and cons, but in my own personal opinion it not goona make a big difference unless you are a professional doing spefic fields of photography and which in this case you would not need to ask the qns then already. (once again pardon me if i am wrong)
cheers, and happy shooting.
checker said:
IMHO, maybe the experts may differ, if you are looking into starting in Digital Photography, both cameras, being SLR could let you learn from it for easily a few if not years to come. Both are good entry level cameras.
Alot of new function and technology may be good to have, but then take a look at some good old photographs taken by full manual cameras, well, at least personally i find that my pictures are yet to be a fraction of that worth although yes, i got my abcd ttl, spot meter,2,3,4d matrix metering etc etc.ohh well, maybe it's jus me.
End of day i personally feel that jus get the camera which you like to handle, which feels better in your hands, and one that you would like to take out to shoot. That will be the good camera.
in terms of technicals of which system(now we OT beyong D70 n 300D) both have it pros and cons, but in my own personal opinion it not goona make a big difference unless you are a professional doing spefic fields of photography and which in this case you would not need to ask the qns then already. (once again pardon me if i am wrong)
cheers, and happy shooting.
Your Attention Please
1) Keep it on topic folks
2) Keep it civil (no nasty insults)
3) Keep it relevant to the original post.
Failure to do so will result in this thread being disected and split up in to several sub threads and any inflamatory posts will be deleted without warning or explination.
Ian
Nikon Forum Moderator.
1) Keep it on topic folks
2) Keep it civil (no nasty insults)
3) Keep it relevant to the original post.
Failure to do so will result in this thread being disected and split up in to several sub threads and any inflamatory posts will be deleted without warning or explination.
Ian
Nikon Forum Moderator.
FYI,
a snippet from the article:
"Now, the Canon Rebel and Nikon D70 may be the first two $1,000 digital S.L.R.'s, but they don't exactly make an apples-to-apples comparison. The Rebel's $1,000 price includes a basic 3X (18- to 44-millimeter) zoom lens. (Make that very basic. The Rebel's body alone goes for $900, which tells you something about the quality of the starter lens. Pros gripe that this particular lens is not interchangeable with other Canon EOS cameras, either.)
But the Nikon comes with no lens at all. You're expected to spend another $300 for, say, the professional 3.8X 18- to 70-millimeter lens.
So what does that 30 percent premium buy you? For example, the Nikon has a zero startup time. You can flip the camera on and snap the shot in well under half a second. (The Rebel takes about three seconds to power up.)
And speaking of speed, the D70's Burst mode captures three frames per second for up to 144 consecutive shots, compared with four at the Rebel's top speed. You might wonder just how important the Burst feature is - how often, after all, do you shoot sporting events? - but it turns out that expressions, pets, children and other mercurial subjects also benefit from Burst mode. The tiniest turn of the corner of a mouth can make all the difference, and Burst mode increases the likelihood that you'll capture just the right one.
Both cameras offer extremely clear, easy-to-use onscreen menus, along with useful presets like Night Portrait and Sports. (Nikon's previous digital S.L.R., the $1,500 D10, lacks those presets.) Making manual adjustments is very easy, too: while holding down a button on the camera's body - Exposure Compensation, for example, to brighten a scene - you turn a dial that falls naturally under your index finger and watch the settings in the backlighted liquid-crystal display status window.
The Nikon, with its superior allotment of customizable settings, makes a better choice for veteran photographers going digital; the less expensive, easier-to-use Rebel might make a better candidate for digicam owners hoping to graduate to more professional-looking pictures.
Both cameras are solid and responsive, though, and both produce spectacular quality. At nytimes.com/circuits, you can see sample pictures taken by a $1,000 digital S.L.R. displayed side-by-side with the same photos from a $400 consumer camera. It won't take you longer than 1/250th of a second to see the difference."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/25/technology/circuits/25stat.html?pagewanted=all&position=
a snippet from the article:
"Now, the Canon Rebel and Nikon D70 may be the first two $1,000 digital S.L.R.'s, but they don't exactly make an apples-to-apples comparison. The Rebel's $1,000 price includes a basic 3X (18- to 44-millimeter) zoom lens. (Make that very basic. The Rebel's body alone goes for $900, which tells you something about the quality of the starter lens. Pros gripe that this particular lens is not interchangeable with other Canon EOS cameras, either.)
But the Nikon comes with no lens at all. You're expected to spend another $300 for, say, the professional 3.8X 18- to 70-millimeter lens.
So what does that 30 percent premium buy you? For example, the Nikon has a zero startup time. You can flip the camera on and snap the shot in well under half a second. (The Rebel takes about three seconds to power up.)
And speaking of speed, the D70's Burst mode captures three frames per second for up to 144 consecutive shots, compared with four at the Rebel's top speed. You might wonder just how important the Burst feature is - how often, after all, do you shoot sporting events? - but it turns out that expressions, pets, children and other mercurial subjects also benefit from Burst mode. The tiniest turn of the corner of a mouth can make all the difference, and Burst mode increases the likelihood that you'll capture just the right one.
Both cameras offer extremely clear, easy-to-use onscreen menus, along with useful presets like Night Portrait and Sports. (Nikon's previous digital S.L.R., the $1,500 D10, lacks those presets.) Making manual adjustments is very easy, too: while holding down a button on the camera's body - Exposure Compensation, for example, to brighten a scene - you turn a dial that falls naturally under your index finger and watch the settings in the backlighted liquid-crystal display status window.
The Nikon, with its superior allotment of customizable settings, makes a better choice for veteran photographers going digital; the less expensive, easier-to-use Rebel might make a better candidate for digicam owners hoping to graduate to more professional-looking pictures.
Both cameras are solid and responsive, though, and both produce spectacular quality. At nytimes.com/circuits, you can see sample pictures taken by a $1,000 digital S.L.R. displayed side-by-side with the same photos from a $400 consumer camera. It won't take you longer than 1/250th of a second to see the difference."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/25/technology/circuits/25stat.html?pagewanted=all&position=
- Status
