xVx said:new lens too?
http://www2.photim.com/info/img.php?N=1133
Guess this should answer your question ;pAn drew said:Does anyone think it would be a good idea to upgrade to the 30D from the 20D? Or to the D200 from 20D?![]()
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:Xing said:Guess this should answer your question ;p
Quote from Rob Galbriath - Don't take this as a recommendation of the D200 over the 30D. For one, we've only used a preproduction 30D, and then only briefly. More importantly, we've shot the D200 and 20D side-by-side for available light basketball over several weekends this winter, and the 20D is by far the better camera for this purpose. Not only were the ISO 800 through ISO 3200 frames massively cleaner and more usable, the percentage of in-focus frames was signficantly higher. In fact, we've ruled out using the D200 for this sort of assigment again. So, we don't think Nikon has in the D200 a camera that's a clear winner over the upcoming 30D by any means.
... for much of what we shoot, the 20D is a better choice than the D200, so it's likely the 30D will be as well. But for many shooters, those who can stick to lower ISO settings and don't shoot much action, the D200 may seem like the more appealing option.
Xing said:Guess this should answer your question ;p
Quote from Rob Galbriath - Don't take this as a recommendation of the D200 over the 30D. For one, we've only used a preproduction 30D, and then only briefly. More importantly, we've shot the D200 and 20D side-by-side for available light basketball over several weekends this winter, and the 20D is by far the better camera for this purpose. Not only were the ISO 800 through ISO 3200 frames massively cleaner and more usable, the percentage of in-focus frames was signficantly higher. In fact, we've ruled out using the D200 for this sort of assigment again. So, we don't think Nikon has in the D200 a camera that's a clear winner over the upcoming 30D by any means.
... for much of what we shoot, the 20D is a better choice than the D200, so it's likely the 30D will be as well. But for many shooters, those who can stick to lower ISO settings and don't shoot much action, the D200 may seem like the more appealing option.
:bsmilie:An drew said:Thanks for info and advice. So it looks like the good news is that I should keep my upgrading funds in my pocket and wait for the one after 30D.![]()
Watcher said:
Quote from Rob Galbriath - Don't take this as a recommendation of the D200 over the 30D. For one, we've only used a preproduction 30D, and then only briefly. More importantly, we've shot the D200 and 20D side-by-side for available light basketball over several weekends this winter, and the 20D is by far the better camera for this purpose. Not only were the ISO 800 through ISO 3200 frames massively cleaner and more usable, the percentage of in-focus frames was signficantly higher. In fact, we've ruled out using the D200 for this sort of assigment again. So, we don't think Nikon has in the D200 a camera that's a clear winner over the upcoming 30D by any means.
... for much of what we shoot, the 20D is a better choice than the D200, so it's likely the 30D will be as well. But for many shooters, those who can stick to lower ISO settings and don't shoot much action, the D200 may seem like the more appealing option.
mpenza said:Not too sure what lenses he used with the 2 bodies but probably something comparable given the statement made (I don't think it's the lenses' "fault" that cause the less clean, less usable and less in-focus frames). Canon likely doesn't see the Nikon D200 as much of a threat (to 20D series) and hence the 30D "minimal response".
radedward said:It also lacks the flash capabilities of the Nikon system and that will count against it for some people.