On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:32:59 +0000 (UTC), Sander Vesik
wrote:

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Brian C. Baird wrote:
In article ,
says...
Kind of ridiculous to compare a $99 lens with a nearly $300 one and base
your judgment on the camera heavily on that.

But both are the normal kit lens that the majority of first-timers will buy
the camera with, no? So it is a comparison not so much of camera bodies but
kits, but what percentage of buyers will understand the difference? After
all, there is no use in buying the camera without lens for them.

But who sticks with the kit lens? Almost nobody. And you're forgetting
the utility of an extra $200 to throw towards a decent zoom.

A lot of people. Why do you think camera store "kits" with superzooms are
so popular? For those that don't, the extra lay-out would in at least
the Canon case be quite pointless.

Indeed. At least in the case of the D70, I don't know anyone who
*didn't* buy the kit - even if they had significant investment in
Nikon glass already. That was (and still is) a good deal.

Canon is simply doing its usual 'low price at all costs' thing.

You mean catering to the market to maintain their #1 position? Yeah,
that's horrible.

In that case you should not be arguing that teh comparison is unfair, as
the Canon kit buyers are getting what Canon designed for them - a lower
quality cheaper combination.

...but are they falling for it?

--
Owamanga!

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
says...

Ummmm.....what about spot metering and fast flash sync ?

For me, those are far more useful than mirror lock up.

For me.

Which is why the D70 is the best choice for you.

Absolutely - just as I said ;-)

That seems to be the thing everyone forgets in these conversations -
that one isn't always superior and the other is junk. There are many
aspect to consider and you have to choose the combination of features
and quality you want. Certainly the 350XT will be a better choice for
some, the D70 a better choice for others.

Couldn't agree more - and Nikon/Canon bashing/flagwaving does no-one any
good.


That said, the comparison was crap, so if there's any bickering it's
mostly due to that.

Brian C. Baird wrote:

That seems to be the thing everyone forgets in these conversations -
that one isn't always superior and the other is junk. There are many

aspect to consider and you have to choose the combination of features

and quality you want. Certainly the 350XT will be a better choice
for
some, the D70 a better choice for others.

Very true. One size does not fit all. The biggest thing I look for is
image quality, including color accuracy and low noise levels, across
the full ISO range. This is naturally going to lead me to Canon's
offerings because no one else offers this, and I'm reluctantly willing
to give up stuff like spot metering. But some people are quite happy at
the lower ISO settings, and don't care about noise at ISO 800 or ISO
1600, because they don't use these settings, and for them the D70 is
just fine.

OTOH, there ARE some digital SLRs, that have so many issues that it is
difficult to figure out why anyone would consider them (and the
plunging prices, and rebates, on some of these models make it clear
that few people are!). I can buy the Olympus E300 for a net cost of
$580, the least expensive D-SLR as far as I can tell, but IMVAIO, it's
a bad deal. The Sigma SD10 body is way overpriced at $1350, costing
more than the Canon 20D with a kit lens!

The D70 and EOS-350D are hands down the best choices in the amateur
market, and most people would be happy with either of them, despite the
minor shortcomings of each.

That said, the comparison was crap, so if there's any bickering it's
mostly due to that.

That's the bottom line. None of these review sites are perfect, but the
one that did this review was terrible.

All review sites reflect the site owners personal prefernces somewhat.
I.e., ever since I bought my first film SLR, and was advised to get the
vertical grip, I find it so useful in portrait mode that I simply
cannot imagine buying an SLR that doesn't support this option
(reviewers always mention the same issue on the D70, and it is a
constant complaint on D70 forums, to the point that someone is coming
out with an after-market grip). But of course I recognize that some
people don't want the weight and expense of a vertical grip, and the
lack of one is a non-issue.

I've begun keeping a list of the relatively unbiased versus relatively
biased evaluation and review sites, it's on my site.

Steve
http://digitalslrinfo.com

In article ,
says...
But who sticks with the kit lens? Almost nobody. And you're forgetting
the utility of an extra $200 to throw towards a decent zoom.

A lot of people. Why do you think camera store "kits" with superzooms are
so popular? For those that don't, the extra lay-out would in at least
the Canon case be quite pointless.

The kits are popular because it gives them a lens covering a popular
range for cheap. They can always buy bigger/better/more expensive
lenses later.

To that end, the Canon succeeds a little better than the Nikon, I'm
afraid.

Canon is simply doing its usual 'low price at all costs' thing.

You mean catering to the market to maintain their #1 position? Yeah,
that's horrible.

In that case you should not be arguing that teh comparison is unfair, as
the Canon kit buyers are getting what Canon designed for them - a lower
quality cheaper combination.

No, they're getting what they want. A dSLR with great performance for
under $1,000. The lens might not be perfect, but most entry level
buyers aren't going to splurge for a more expensive lens until much,
much later.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

In article ,
says...
No, the 18-70 is certainly NOT 'L' glass equivalent.

Which is the case - you don't know what the optical performance
of teh 18-70 is or you are deluding yourself about L glass quality?

"L" denotes better build quality and better optics. It also means a
hell of a lot more in terms of cost.

The 18-70 is a decent consumer zoom. But it is no where near the
quality/build of a 'L' series lens.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

No, they're getting what they want. A dSLR with great performance for
under $1,000. The lens might not be perfect, but most entry level
buyers aren't going to splurge for a more expensive lens until much,
much later.

Exactly.
Too many people always compare against the best and forget about the
price. You get what you pay for. And you want to spent 1000$ on a
camera, you don't want to know which one is the best. You want to know
which one is the best for 1000$.
I know that my 300D is not as good as the 20D. In the same way as my
Honda is not as good as a BMW. But it is one of the best for the price.
And the 300D kit was definitively the best digital camera for the price
when I bought it. The D70 kit was better...it was 1.5 times more
expensive as well.

On 6 Mar 2005 05:51:49 GMT, "Alice" wrote:

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml

The review gives price as one factor favouring the D70, saying that
the 350D body is 100 canadian dollars more expensive than the D70 as
recommended retail price.

This seems to vary considerably betteen markets. Cyberphoto, the most
reputable Swedish online camera store, quotes the D70 at SEK 6376, and
the 350D at SEK 6396. Dustin, another online store, quotes both the
D70 and the 350D at SEK 6396 The price differential in Cyberphoto's
case, SEK 20, amounts to CAD 3:59, and it is thus fair to argue that
the cameras are marketed at an essentially equal price for the Swedish
market.

Jan Böhme
Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik.
Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur.

In article , says...

No, they're getting what they want. A dSLR with great performance for
under $1,000. The lens might not be perfect, but most entry level
buyers aren't going to splurge for a more expensive lens until much,
much later.

Exactly.
Too many people always compare against the best and forget about the
price. You get what you pay for. And you want to spent 1000$ on a
camera, you don't want to know which one is the best. You want to know
which one is the best for 1000$.
I know that my 300D is not as good as the 20D. In the same way as my
Honda is not as good as a BMW. But it is one of the best for the price.
And the 300D kit was definitively the best digital camera for the price
when I bought it. The D70 kit was better...it was 1.5 times more
expensive as well.



I did the same kind of math when I bought my last new camera. (a Sony F-828)
It was either the Sony or a DRebel, and the Sony seemed (and has been) MUCH
more rugged.

I dont get good pictures at ISO 800 (not even usable) and I have to be
carefull about backlighting (pf), but the Sony has taken some whacks for the
horses that the Canon might not have survived. It took one knock severe
enough to straighten the little triangular fastener at the end of the neck-
strap, and dump it to the ground (thank God the lens cover was on). It went
face first into the dirt!

I picked it up and dusted it off with a soft paintbrush I use to clean things
(sable hair) It didn't get broken.

I went out today and farted around at the camera store... Played with a D70,
a Digital Rebel, and several other cameras, including the EVolt.

I hate to say it but the one that felt "Tough Enough" in my hands was the
D70... Go Figure.

With any luck, I'll have one soon. I was seriously considering the New DRebel
or the '20.

The '20 plus a lens would be too much money for me this spring, but the D70
with the kit lens will probably do the job, at least through the spring, as
long as I keep it away from the horses.

This year there will be less "in the ring" shooting and more posed stuff, now
that I have all my lights and a backdrop ready to go.

I know I ramble on a bit, but the point is, I KNOW the Canon '20 is a better
camera, but we all have to deal with the money problem (we gotta PAY for
stuff). With all the money I have spent on backdrops, lights, reflectors
ect. the D70 is what I can afford without going into debt. Perhaps the D70
will earn me enough to pay for a '20 (or whatever Canon comes up with next).
Then I can retire to the peacefull life of a 'round the house camera. Or put
a BIG lens on it and use it for nature shots.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 14:29:55 GMT, "ian lincoln"
wrote:


"Clyde Torres" wrote in message
. com...
"Alice" wrote in message ...
http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml

I'm not sure this review puts to bed anything. The Nikon/Canon zealots
will read what they want out of it and come up with different conclusions.

I for one have both a D70 and 20D. They are far superior cameras to the
original Digital Rebel, and from what I can see, the D70 is still superior
to the 350D DRXT. Oh,well, to each her own.


Reading the first page the feature set has the slight edge for nikon in
terms of shear number of advantages over the other.

Yes. Although one of the Nikon advantages is duplicated in their list
(the metering) and two arguably insignificant advantages for Nikon are
included (the 1.5 crop factor is touted as a "larger sensor" in
comparison to the crop factor of 1,6 with the 350D, and the startup
time of 0,02 seconds is given as faster then the 0,2 sec of EOS 350D,
when both times are faster than itnormally would take to raise the
camera to one's eyes) I didn't find a correspondingly irrelevant or
insignificant advantage listed on the Canon side. (Well, I suppose
that one could argue that the colour choice options for the 350D body
are irrelevant and insignficant as far as actual photography goes.)

Furthermore, one Nikon advantage is with "optional" software, which I
suppose means that you don't get unless you pay extra money not
accounted for in the price comparison. And the warranty advantage
would seem to be Canada-specific, too.

So, instead of 23-16 in favour of Nikon, it is more of 19-15 in Canada
and 18-15 outside of it. Still an edge in numbers, but not quite as
impressive anymore.

Jan Böhme
Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik.
Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur.

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Steven M. Scharf wrote:

If anyone is trying to de-feature based on price, it's Nikon. It's
inexcusable to not have mirror lock-up, it's just a firmware issue, and they

MLU is not just a firware issue. A real MLU always needs mechanics support
as otherwise holding it up continues to draw power.

omitted it to try to move people to a more expensive model. Similarly, the
lack of a vertical grip connection is another de-contenting move to try to
force consumers to move up to the D100. They remind me of how some car
manufacturers have certain options only available on the most expensive
sub-model (Honda is famous for this). Kudos to Canon for not leaving
important features off of its amateur product.

What colour is teh sky on your planet? D100 and D70 are not trivialy
comparable and there is a ton of way more useful features than you list
in the d100 to make one chosoe that over d70. There is no need for
extra shepherding.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++