C/N model comparisons : OT Spilt from : Official D70 specs are out!

[mpenza]

Sigh, most of the above which is the result of the merging of thread, etc is taken out of context.

First, for an alleged D2H-killer (of course Canon has to guess what Nikon will come out with. The camera was open beta'ed more than 6 months before the 1D2 came out), the features (on paper) in terms of handling, does not exceed what the D2H has, esp the shutter lag (no restriction on the aperture), etc.

did anyone say 1D2 was a D2H-killer? I thought the general concensus here is that both cameras have their benefits and features that will appeal to users. You seemed to be the only one that is repeatedly trying to "kill" 1D2 with the D2H specs even before it was released. I personally don't find that the 1D2 is threatening the existence of D2H. The availability just give the pros more choices for equipment.

 

[Red Dawn]

Have YOU handled a 1D2 and D2H?

D2H = yes. 1D2 = no.

but then the 1D2 has very similar specs (shutter lag, mirror blackout etc) to the EOS 1v, with which I've shot for close to 2 yrs. The camera aspect of the interface is also exactly the same as the 1v. I've also did a short shoot with a 1D before, and all these cameras are very similar in terms of handling.

The d2h may be a bit more responsive, but that in no way makes it outright superior for its main application, which is sports and PJ work. Pros have been using the F5, 1v etc for sports work for years, and if they can now have a digital camera that has the same level of responsiveness and has 8 megapixels from which they can get beautiful detailed shots with more leeway for cropping (esp for sports), i think that's an advantage that should not be taken lightly, a great advantage that you seem to want to readily dismiss as "just more megapixels".

none of this makes the D2h any lesser of a camera in anyway, but at least i am not as ready and eager to point out the noise in the D2h high ISO images compared to your great enthusiasm to point out that 8 megapixels is "just more megapixels".

How do YOU know that I have not handled a D2H? Nice way about going on a conversation, right?

No i don't know. That's why i asked in the earlier post. But you do not seem that interested (or want to) give an answer ya?

Please read your own quotes carefully. Both Rob and Phil has read alleged or even tried out (no idea if they have) but look at how they phrase it:

"There are promised improvements" - Have they seen or measured it?
and
"We're optimistic - confident even - that the photos coming from the 1D MKII are going to be smoother and considerably less noisy than the 1D, despite the 1D's pixel pitch advantage" - They have not seen any actual images, so how are you so sure that it will deliver and not just some hope on your part?

Currently, only specs. Non of those sites have reported handling and analysing the final product yet. Right now on paper, the only thing that is outright superior to D2H is the pixel count.

And wat's wrong with pixel count superiority? It's a very important advantage, as stated above. Even sports shooters could do with more pixels. Jed has used the 14n for sports before and has made nice crops from that high resolution 14 mp image. And all the images submitted are cropped in one way or another. Ask anyone of them involved in the field if they mind having more megapixels to crop from.

Especially if those 8 megapixels are cleaner than Nikon's 4 mp image. I'm sure Phil and Rob's optimism is not unfounded - Canon does have a track record with clean CMOS images.

Digit has got it right when he pointed out the various other improvements to the 1d2. I think you need to base ur arguments MORE than just on 10s of milliseconds of responsiveness........

 

[Newbie123]

For a PJ? Maybe, but if combined with a lower powering battery, this may cause an issue when used on the field. Especially when your direct competitor (D2H) has longer battery life, lighter weight, immediate start up. The 8-MP thing was an indication that the focus of Canon seems to be on increasing the MP count but not the handling (NiMH battery for eg). Yes, eventually a PJ cam will come but does PJ clammor (now) for more MP or better handling? Design for the more egregarious issues rather than pushing the bleeding edge.

Hmm... Handling? Does that mean u would prefer a 2MP DSLR with way better handling over a 4MP one? I seriously dun see the need to argue over handling where the none of us here has handled the MkII. 8MP? Nice to have right? But doesn't neccessary means the PJ need to shoot at 8MP right, its up to PJ himself/herself to decide. :dunno:

 

[mpenza]

For a PJ? Maybe, but if combined with a lower powering battery, this may cause an issue when used on the field. Especially when your direct competitor (D2H) has longer battery life, lighter weight, immediate start up. The 8-MP thing was an indication that the focus of Canon seems to be on increasing the MP count but not the handling (NiMH battery for eg). Yes, eventually a PJ cam will come but does PJ clammor (now) for more MP or better handling? Design for the more egregarious issues rather than pushing the bleeding edge.

I do not recall reading any complaints about poor battery life on the 1D. Was it even a problem to begin with? Does PJ clamour for marginally better battery life on their pro cameras much more than an increase in MP?

Also, is the handling of 1D poor? If not, there is not much issue to discuss.

It's just like comparing the worth of two millionaires and the discussion was that one had a few hundreds dollars more cash in the bank.

Anyway, there are some cameras that do not need batteries, much lighter, takes 0s for focussing and don't even need to start up before shooting. Some of these are super cheap somemore and come with weather-sealing and underwater capabilities.

 

[Red Dawn]

For a PJ? Maybe, but if combined with a lower powering battery, this may cause an issue when used on the field. Especially when your direct competitor (D2H) has longer battery life, lighter weight, immediate start up. The 8-MP thing was an indication that the focus of Canon seems to be on increasing the MP count but not the handling (NiMH battery for eg). Yes, eventually a PJ cam will come but does PJ clammor (now) for more MP or better handling? Design for the more egregarious issues rather than pushing the bleeding edge.

the 8 mp thing is more of an indication that Canon has got it right with a balance of high resolution images and fast shooting performance.

you know wat? if i'm the gambling type i will put my money on the fact that the images from the 1d2 will be much better, at all ISOs, than the D2h.

Canon not interested in improving handling? Then wat does the improvement in the ETTL, additional SD slot, improved shutter count, improved Auto Focus etc etc count as????????? Especially improving AF.

And your point about PJs clamouring for better handling or more megapixels...... well i know this PJ from Clubsnap shooting sports and i know wat HE thinks

 

[gremlin]

Yes, we should wait for some proper review on all aspects of the camera before a final conclusion can be made.

Bravo! You arrived at a very logical and sensible conclusion.

That said, the "on paper" specs loses out to the D2H.

Sigh.. maybe you didn't. Oh well, if that makes you feel better :bsmilie:

 

[Red Dawn]

Also, is the handling of 1D poor? If not, there is not much issue to discuss.

It's just like comparing the worth of two millionaires and the discussing was that one had a few hundreds dollars more cash in the bank.

yes that was well said. Comparing a few milliseconds in difference and NOTHING ELSE. This whole discussion started cos it was claimed the 1d2 has nothing but megapixels, and the d2h, by implication is better cos it handles much better.

Nobody is saying the D2h is a bad camera.

Anyway i think i shall make this my last post in this thread. I've said all i wanted

 

[ckiang]

yes that was well said. Comparing a few milliseconds in difference and NOTHING ELSE. This whole discussion started cos it was claimed the 1d2 has nothing but megapixels, and the d2h, by implication is better cos it handles much better.

Nobody is saying the D2h is a bad camera.

Anyway i think i shall make this my last post in this thread. I've said all i wanted

I still dunno what's the big deal with the (relatively long) start up time of 0.5s. People I know never turn off their cameras throughout a shoot. There are a couple of my friends who do, and I always wonder why. (and I am not talking about consumer digicams but regular film SLRs here). The battery drain is really negligible even if you leave the thing on overnight (yes, I've been there, done that). Let's not over exagerrate shortcomings. It's just like everybody saying D100/300D produces soft images. This is true, but has been over exagerrated. With proper techniques, very good images can still be produced.

Let's also not be overly defensive over the brand of camera one owns or one's dream camera to the point of nitpicking every single shortcoming. For me? I am just going to stick with the D100 until such a time when it can no longer serve my needs well.

Regards
CK

 

[rncw]

It's just like everybody saying D100/300D produces soft images. This is true, but has been over exagerrated. With proper techniques, very good images can still be produced.

Let's also not be overly defensive over the brand of camera one owns or one's dream camera to the point of nitpicking every single shortcoming.

Regards
CK

this is very true.... :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


especially after having my low-pass filter changed, images looks slightly more sharper than before.... :think:

 

[xdivider]

did anyone say 1D2 was a D2H-killer? I thought the general concensus here is that both cameras have their benefits and features that will appeal to users. You seemed to be the only one that is repeatedly trying to "kill" 1D2 with the D2H specs even before it was released. I personally don't find that the 1D2 is threatening the existence of D2H. The availability just give the pros more choices for equipment.

As the blockhead who started this whole mess with a thoughtless remark (i think....), let me state that I never claimed that 1D2 was a D2H killer. I juz remarked that the last round Nikon released a pro cam (D2H) and Canon a low cost cam (300D) and its vice versa this time. In fact 1D2 looked more like a 1Ds killer to me......

 

[mpenza]

oops... you may open another can of worms ;p

 

[sebastiansong]

this is very true.... :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


especially after having my low-pass filter changed, images looks slightly more sharper than before.... :think:

pardon my ignorance RNCW, what is a low-pass filter and how is it different from the normal USM? kindly enlighten.. thnx

 

[espn]

The D100's CCD is protected by a filter, that filter is the lowpass filter, similarly with other Canon CCDs there is a similiar filter on the CCD.

The CCD is not directly exposed to the light particles, but through the filter first.

 

[xdivider]

oops... you may open another can of worms ;p

In another forum hopefully :sweat:. Meanwhile i siam far far......

 

[rncw]

pardon my ignorance RNCW, what is a low-pass filter and how is it different from the normal USM? kindly enlighten.. thnx

the low pass filter is the piece of plastic/glass that's covering the CCD, some called it the AA filter (anti-aliasing filter ), one of it's purposes is to prevent moire (something like that)...this got nothing to do with USM (as in unsharp mask)... (also, this is where you do the swabbing if you find dust spots appearing in your pics)

it was said that due to this function of the filter, the sharpness of the D100 was sort of reduced...

 

[moos blues]

hello all... sounds fun... :what:

anywae... here are my thoughts... like i said MY thoughts...

-people dunt switch systems overnight do they? just because of a body?

even IF the cameras are ment to be direct competition to each other, no point having a dick-size war about which is better. .5....37 like i wld feel that happening... haha.. my point is the respective companies have built the cameras to what they feel can sell and what is needed wad.. not out to con a newbie into buying a pro DSLR, they have to make money right? dunt most electronic products sell features? so what is 8 MP is not needed......its all about positioning the product thats all. most people(most shooters) would know what they want in a camera, u test it u like it, use it. at the end of the day... it takes pictures.. and noise... let it speak for itself lah. . . systems will be systems... a tit for tat etc... if i gave u a 1d2 or a d2h wont u still use it...

maybe like mountain biking, shld have a free ride section, where bikes are tortured.... ppl take pictures under the toughest conditions, loww light ar, for long hours, in the freezer,... or the see which has less noise section.. in the end.. its pointless..

D2h 1D D70 300D 1Ds 100D are all apple, oranges, pears and grapes.. dunt have that metallity to compare them like that. in good fun its nice to see one system beat the other.. but thats not how it shld be la.... in the end defending ur system ends up as slamming the other.. which is rubbish.



anywae.... aiya canon will win lah... heh heh!

:devil: joking joking... how to see more great cams out there, regardless of brand...




:lovegrin:

 

[sehsuan]

well i know this PJ from Clubsnap shooting sports and i know wat HE thinks

RD, who? me? :bsmilie:

watcher, i dont know why you sounded you sure was backing the D2H so strongly, yet having a seeming not-so-nice relation with the yet-to-be-released 1D2. as a canon user myself, i admit, it's gonna be really nice when i can have 8mp to crop shots of from - if i had a nicely filled frame from something that my lens' 200mm end can provide, i would like it. but in case if the 1.3x FOV crop, if the subject doesn't fill the frame, well, i could have possibly a 6mp crop and still work out my photo from there. it's kind of like having a reach of a longer lens without owning it, and i can choose to err on the side of having a shorter lens than to use a super long lens... dont know if you get what i'm saying or not... i'll try to rephrase myself another time when i'm more awake.. damned sleepy now...