Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

Well, I've seen the shots from these two cameras and handled
them both. For noise, the Canon wins, having less noise but the
noise is more chromatic. The Nikon has more noise (this was a 1600
ISO) it is "monochromatic" and really gets bad with under exposure.
Shots underexposing human flesh should be avoided at all costs.
A noise program is going to have more trouble dealing with the Nikon
noise and will likely destroy more fine detail when removing it than
when removing noise from the Canon. The so-called "granular" or
film-like grainy noise is not desirable, owing to the difficulty of
removing it from images. The colourful blotchy noise is easy to deal
with. The noise differences between the cameras at correct exposure
are not radically different but the differences are there.

As for the cameras themselves, the D200 wins. One noticeable thing,
the shutter/mirror slap in the Canon is much harsher, a real clunk is
felt when it fires. Both are harsher than Olympus's E-1, which makes
sense probably because of the larger (heavier) mirrors/mechanisms.

In fact with high end glass, ( used L on the Canon) they are both
heavy cameras with basic "normal" (17-40 or so) zoom lenses attached.
This will actually help mitigate any vibration caused by Canon's rough
firing.

Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

Rich wrote:
Well, I've seen the shots from these two cameras and handled
them both. For noise, the Canon wins, having less noise but the
noise is more chromatic. The Nikon has more noise (this was a 1600
ISO) it is "monochromatic" and really gets bad with under exposure.
Shots underexposing human flesh should be avoided at all costs.
A noise program is going to have more trouble dealing with the Nikon
noise and will likely destroy more fine detail when removing it than
when removing noise from the Canon. The so-called "granular" or
film-like grainy noise is not desirable, owing to the difficulty of
removing it from images. The colourful blotchy noise is easy to deal
with. The noise differences between the cameras at correct exposure
are not radically different but the differences are there.

As for the cameras themselves, the D200 wins. One noticeable thing,
the shutter/mirror slap in the Canon is much harsher, a real clunk is
felt when it fires. Both are harsher than Olympus's E-1, which makes
sense probably because of the larger (heavier) mirrors/mechanisms.

In fact with high end glass, ( used L on the Canon) they are both
heavy cameras with basic "normal" (17-40 or so) zoom lenses attached.
This will actually help mitigate any vibration caused by Canon's rough
firing.

Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

Nikon lenses are more expensive.

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

Rich wrote:


Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

I'd like to see the guy in the doorway get one of these bags off the top
shelf!
--
www.photosbydouglas.com
www.weprint2canvas.com
If you really must write,use my
name at an above domain.

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

jb wrote:

Rich wrote:

Well, I've seen the shots from these two cameras and handled
them both. For noise, the Canon wins, having less noise but the
noise is more chromatic. The Nikon has more noise (this was a 1600
ISO) it is "monochromatic" and really gets bad with under exposure.
Shots underexposing human flesh should be avoided at all costs.
A noise program is going to have more trouble dealing with the Nikon
noise and will likely destroy more fine detail when removing it than
when removing noise from the Canon. The so-called "granular" or
film-like grainy noise is not desirable, owing to the difficulty of
removing it from images. The colourful blotchy noise is easy to deal
with. The noise differences between the cameras at correct exposure
are not radically different but the differences are there.
As for the cameras themselves, the D200 wins. One noticeable thing,
the shutter/mirror slap in the Canon is much harsher, a real clunk is
felt when it fires. Both are harsher than Olympus's E-1, which makes
sense probably because of the larger (heavier) mirrors/mechanisms.

In fact with high end glass, ( used L on the Canon) they are both
heavy cameras with basic "normal" (17-40 or so) zoom lenses attached.
This will actually help mitigate any vibration caused by Canon's rough
firing.

Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694


Nikon lenses are more expensive.

You mean Canon has more selection of cheap lenses?

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:44:22 GMT, "D-Mac" wrote:

Rich wrote:


Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

I'd like to see the guy in the doorway get one of these bags off the top
shelf!

Does seem like a stupid way to display something. Unless it is extra
stock.
-Rich

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

"Rich" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:44:22 GMT, "D-Mac" wrote:

Rich wrote:


Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

I'd like to see the guy in the doorway get one of these bags off the top
shelf!

Does seem like a stupid way to display something. Unless it is extra
stock.

It is a retail store, and their rent is charged per square foot! We do the
same thing at our store, and it's not a big deal to lift the bags down with
a pole.

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

In article , Rich
wrote:

Well, I've seen the shots from these two cameras and handled
them both. For noise, the Canon wins, having less noise but the
noise is more chromatic. The Nikon has more noise (this was a 1600
ISO) it is "monochromatic" and really gets bad with under exposure.
Shots underexposing human flesh should be avoided at all costs.
A noise program is going to have more trouble dealing with the Nikon
noise and will likely destroy more fine detail when removing it than
when removing noise from the Canon. The so-called "granular" or
film-like grainy noise is not desirable, owing to the difficulty of
removing it from images. The colourful blotchy noise is easy to deal
with. The noise differences between the cameras at correct exposure
are not radically different but the differences are there.

As for the cameras themselves, the D200 wins. One noticeable thing,
the shutter/mirror slap in the Canon is much harsher, a real clunk is
felt when it fires. Both are harsher than Olympus's E-1, which makes
sense probably because of the larger (heavier) mirrors/mechanisms.

In fact with high end glass, ( used L on the Canon) they are both
heavy cameras with basic "normal" (17-40 or so) zoom lenses attached.
This will actually help mitigate any vibration caused by Canon's rough
firing.

ALERT - ALERT!! Rich actually touched a camera!

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

"Rich" wrote in message
...
Here's a Canon image, 17-40L 1600 ISO taken in a store.
Noise is well supressed.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

Let's see the same image shot with the Nikon. (I'm presuming you did do a
proper comparison -- right???)
Bob

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200
 

Rich wrote:
Well, I've seen the shots from these two cameras and handled
them both. For noise, the Canon wins, having less noise but the
noise is more chromatic. The Nikon has more noise (this was a 1600
ISO) it is "monochromatic" and really gets bad with under exposure.
Shots underexposing human flesh should be avoided at all costs.
A noise program is going to have more trouble dealing with the Nikon
noise and will likely destroy more fine detail when removing it than
when removing noise from the Canon. The so-called "granular" or
film-like grainy noise is not desirable, owing to the difficulty of
removing it from images. The colourful blotchy noise is easy to deal
with. The noise differences between the cameras at correct exposure
are not radically different but the differences are there.

As for the cameras themselves, the D200 wins.


So we get the highly detailed 'explanation' when Canon has a better
picture, but then you say, "the D200 wins" and that's it?? In what way
did the D200 "win"?

Come on Rich, can't you just let it go man!! I am amazed you even
touched a Canon (If you truly did) so that is progress. However,
please stop the insistent whining about how great Nikon is and how
Canon sucks when we all know you're just the poster boy for Nikon and
you can't really make any other argument.

I mean a couple of days ago you start a thread about spending $300 more
to get the D200 vs. the D30. Now it's the D200 wins? Talk about an
unbiased opinion....NOT!

Canon 30D versus the Nikon D200