Cyrn, you parked your ass in this thread liao, see you inside here posting since early morning!!! :bigeyes:
Nikon D300 / D3 what effect on Canon?
- Thread starter kuoann
- Start date
- Status
CYRN
Senior Member
Similarly priced to 1D3, the D3 seems pretty attractive, pair it wif the 14-24 it will be haven for WA shooters.
Add a 18-200 VR and you'll have a general all rounder.
:think: You sure? ... i've seen a wedding being covered using D2x with 18-200 VR .. seriously not bad...
CYRN
Senior Member
yeah... but I'm pointing to an option that Canon dosent have.
*edit* dun look down on those DX lenses, some of them, the IQ is equal or better then L hor.
CYRN
Senior Member
actually @ 12MP, Nikon will not fell the pressure yet. But if they have FF that challenges 1DS resolution, their lenses might require upgrades.
yeah... but I'm pointing to an option that Canon dosent have.
I agree... can imagine a 14-24L IS :lovegrin: :bsmilie:
CYRN
Senior Member
umm I'm refering to the option to use both standard and DX lenses on 1 body.
BTW, why wan IS on WA lenses... kinda not much use loh.
True ... now those who bought the DX lenses
.. they have to start getting normal lenses again ...IS on WA pretty useful during events if you want to capture under ambient/low light where low shutter speeds are bound to be a problem...
CYRN
Senior Member
True ... now those who bought the DX lenses
IS on WA pretty useful during events if you want to capture under ambient/low light where low shutter speeds are bound to be a problem...
D3 got native ISO 6400 woah. who needs IS... and darker, I donnoe shoot wat liao.
I'm by any means looking down on DX lenses or any of Nikkor's lenses...
I just think that if anyone is getting the D3, it would be people with lenses like the 28-70 2.8, 80-200 2.8 etc etc... not just the 18-200 all in one (love this lens though).
Not bad is not the best... and I rather work with a fast lens than a slow one (200@5.6 vs 200@2.8)...
And for the 14-24... Canon better get the message... and move fast... It's one lens that I would sell my 16-35 for...
I just think that if anyone is getting the D3, it would be people with lenses like the 28-70 2.8, 80-200 2.8 etc etc... not just the 18-200 all in one (love this lens though).
Not bad is not the best... and I rather work with a fast lens than a slow one (200@5.6 vs 200@2.8)...
And for the 14-24... Canon better get the message... and move fast... It's one lens that I would sell my 16-35 for...
:bsmilie: It's quite amusing reading all the posts about how Canon has got slapped in its face by Nikon, how Canon should wake up their ideas, and even comments like bunny and tortoise race.
It's true that the specs from Nikon's new models are quite "innovative". And maybe I'm missing something here but to say that Nikon have trumped Canon is a bit of an over-statement, don't you think? The race is far from over.
IMO, the only features in the new Nikon models that are helpful to taking a better photo is the higher ISO, and the 51-point AF. Canon has had 45-point AF points since pre-digital days, and had Full Frame DSLR since donkey years ago.
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but I think we're letting the Press Releases and Specs from both manufacturers get to our heads and forming all sorts of conclusions, aren't we?
It's true that the specs from Nikon's new models are quite "innovative". And maybe I'm missing something here but to say that Nikon have trumped Canon is a bit of an over-statement, don't you think? The race is far from over.
IMO, the only features in the new Nikon models that are helpful to taking a better photo is the higher ISO, and the 51-point AF. Canon has had 45-point AF points since pre-digital days, and had Full Frame DSLR since donkey years ago.
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but I think we're letting the Press Releases and Specs from both manufacturers get to our heads and forming all sorts of conclusions, aren't we?
Halfmoon
Senior Member
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but I think we're letting the Press Releases and Specs from both manufacturers get to our heads and forming all sorts of conclusions, aren't we?
I say we should wait for users feedback.... who know if their could be QC problem, etc...... :dunno:
ya the 18-200VR is not bad at all
:bsmilie: It's quite amusing reading all the posts about how Canon has got slapped in its face by Nikon, how Canon should wake up their ideas, and even comments like bunny and tortoise race.
It's true that the specs from Nikon's new models are quite "innovative". And maybe I'm missing something here but to say that Nikon have trumped Canon is a bit of an over-statement, don't you think? The race is far from over.
IMO, the only features in the new Nikon models that are helpful to taking a better photo is the higher ISO, and the 51-point AF. Canon has had 45-point AF points since pre-digital days, and had Full Frame DSLR since donkey years ago.
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but I think we're letting the Press Releases and Specs from both manufacturers get to our heads and forming all sorts of conclusions, aren't we?
Ok guys, let's get this clear. Nobody here is saying doom and gloom for Canon. Nobody here is saying the race is over. It's just pent up frustration of Canon's "piece-meal incremental" attitude. Mind you, not capability nor ability, just attitude.
Don't get misleaded by these rants. We're all still hopeful on our future with Canon. If we weren't you wouldn't even be reading this, we'd be gone by now over to the Nikon camp.
5D got glue prob. That is why mirror tends to drop off.:bsmilie:
I am quite sure Canon has plans for new DSLRs that can match D3/D300 very soon.
- Status
Similar threads
