Reasons to choose D70 over 350D?
- Thread starter chseah
- Start date
- Status
espn said:
Please don't spin misinformation around. That is absolutely untrue.
Anyway, to the original poster, you can't go wrong with either brand. The difference between the D70's and 350D's picture output is so good, you won't be able to tell who is superior even if you go pixel peeping. If I put you in a double blind test with pictures from these 2 cameras, you won't even tell the difference.
Even the lenses from Nikon and Canon are similar in quality. You won't be able to claim who is truly superior.
The only big differences you will face, will be how it feels in your hand and which name you prefer. Look around you and see which brand your peers are using. Get the same brand as they do, as you will be able to share equipment if needed. If not, just pick any brand. Even if you just simply flipped a coin and picked one, it is difficult to regret the decision.
Sorry, but why do you need a Nikon to take a photo like this? Is there some voodoo magic required that exist in a Nikon camera which causes every other camera to not be able to take a photo like this?
I'm a Canon user, but have been finding reasons to switch over to Nikon. Still thinking, as I have one lens left to make the decision.
I'm a Canon user, but have been finding reasons to switch over to Nikon. Still thinking, as I have one lens left to make the decision.
A week ago, I would have said go for the D70 or D70s. I have been to the shops just to have a look-see at the 2 brands and to learn more about Canon's system. My... was I impressed. Why? My humble observations:
1. Canon 20D + 100-400L IS USM is much much faster in focusing speed than Nikon's AF 80-400 VR (if this lens is AF-S then I guess it would be comparable)
2. 350D and 20D are both 8mp. Can get 20D for using and the 350D as spare, as it is small enough. Personally, with the amount of gear I'm carrying (and I am not even a professional photographer), I am seriously tempted to go for the 350D as it is much smaller. Plastic or not, it doesn't matter to me.
So... at the end of the day which camera system you choose will depend on certain factors:
1. Your friends' system
2. Your financial situation
3. Your shooting style
4. Last but not least, which camera looks more appealing. No point that camera is top-of-the-line but you can't stand its looks, right?
For me, it's Nikon as usual... Until June 2005.....well, a camera is just a tool. Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Seagull, Horseman.... the list goes on and on and on and on......
Don't be a camera collector. Buy and use the camera of your choice... It just a tool.. A very powerful one at that, if you know how to utilise its potential...
Nikonians don't flame me hor... My 2 cents...
Canonites, I'm not your god either...
1. Canon 20D + 100-400L IS USM is much much faster in focusing speed than Nikon's AF 80-400 VR (if this lens is AF-S then I guess it would be comparable)
2. 350D and 20D are both 8mp. Can get 20D for using and the 350D as spare, as it is small enough. Personally, with the amount of gear I'm carrying (and I am not even a professional photographer), I am seriously tempted to go for the 350D as it is much smaller. Plastic or not, it doesn't matter to me.
So... at the end of the day which camera system you choose will depend on certain factors:
1. Your friends' system
2. Your financial situation
3. Your shooting style
4. Last but not least, which camera looks more appealing. No point that camera is top-of-the-line but you can't stand its looks, right?
For me, it's Nikon as usual... Until June 2005.....well, a camera is just a tool. Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Seagull, Horseman.... the list goes on and on and on and on......
Don't be a camera collector. Buy and use the camera of your choice... It just a tool.. A very powerful one at that, if you know how to utilise its potential...
Nikonians don't flame me hor... My 2 cents...
Canonites, I'm not your god either...
Untrue? Then pray tell, why does the buffer drops when you push up the ISO? Isn't the NR algorithmn behind working thus the buffer has to drop because the processing power is split?Smurfie said:
Not entirely true, compare the 17-35 f/2.8L, 16-35 f/2.8L and 17-40 f/4L vs Nikkor's AF-S 17-35 f/2.8.Smurfie said:
Even the 17-40 f/4L wins silly compared to the 3K 1x-35 f/2.8Ls!
May be. But if you take one lens to make your decision, then I can say that OTOH, Canon DSLR cannot take some image. Slower vs cannot... :dunno: I wonder what those photographers who use manual focus systems produce....jamestan said:
Does the 8mp vs 6mp matter? 6mp can print 24x36 (I have done so). Does the extra 504 x 336 pixels matter?jamestan said:
I also can quote .. AF-S 200-400 f/4VR, constant f/4... *ahem* vs 100-400LWatcher said:May be. But if you take one lens to make your decision, then I can say that OTOH, Canon DSLR cannot take some image. Slower vs cannot... :dunno: I wonder what those photographers who use manual focus systems produce....
It does to me... but MP is *NOT* a determining factor in deciding a body.Watcher said:
Nope. EF-S is only on 1.6x crop cameras. That means that the $1.2k EF-S 10-22 that a user buys becomes a paper weight when that user upgrades to a higher end (1.3x) camera. Compatible? :dunno:espn said:Nor forgetting EF-S that can only be used on 1.3X/1.6X crop factor systems...and also only on the newer DSLRs and not on the older D30, D60, 10D.
Watcher said:
Yup, go for nikon if you need a 180 degrees fisheye image on a DSLR at a reasonable cost. alternatively, if you need an affordable non-fisheye lightweight and affordable ultra-wide zoom lens that has fast, accurate and silent autofocussing and offers 16-35mm equivalent field of view on a APS-C sensor size DSLR, you have to go for Canon (Nikon's equivalent offers a less wide 18-36mm at 50% higher cost and 26% heavier).
else, either system is ok ;p
If you want wider, you could consider Olympus' 4/3 system that offers a ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 7-14mm f4.0 (35mm equiv: 14-28mm). The minimum working distance (from object to front lens) is an impressive 10cm!!!
[tongue in cheek mode on]
perhaps, a less known fact is that Canon bodies can use Nikon lenses via an adaptor (losing AF) but Nikon bodies can't use Canon lenses. So, Canon offers greater possibilities in lens usage ;p
[mode off]
That is not true and has been used as an excuse by many even by a shop assistant in a well-known camera shop. Read this thread. Search for the title "clumpy fur" and see that is the difference and of course the amusing fact that more Nikon users got it right vs more Canon users got it wrongSmurfie said:
A simple logic on why noise reduction software needs to have samples and have profiles like in Neat Image to optimize noise reduction indicate logically that each camera will have different characteristics that can discriminate between cameras and brands.
But you can hardly get lenses of the same specs and quality at the same time for both brands. Even then, the technical characteristics like CA, distortion, light fall off, resolution can be used to determine which is superior. If you need to shoot wide, and you get the result seen in the middle of this page, which system would you interpret as a better one?smurfie said:
- Status
Similar threads
