If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
"Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Bill wrote: It's too bad Canon didn't have an 18-70 or similar lense to compare with the Nikkor 18-70. Now that I think about it, I'd like to see Canon come out with a non-IS version of their 17-85 with the same optical quality, as it would be a good everyday lense for a good price. It would be an excellent starter lense for the Rebel series and 20D too. The problem is more that while Nikon bundles essentialy a L glass equvalent with D70, Canon bundles low quality lens - something you wouldn't really want to keep if you already hadlens and were intersted in quality. The Nikon one would be a keeper either ways. i only use the kit lens as buying a decent 18mm is rather expensive. Basically if i'm not shooting landscape or in tight spaces indoors i will stick to my 28-105. |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message .. . In article , says... The problem is more that while Nikon bundles essentialy a L glass equvalent with D70 No, the 18-70 is certainly NOT 'L' glass equivalent. not sure its even glass. ;( |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message ink.net... "Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Bill wrote: It's too bad Canon didn't have an 18-70 or similar lense to compare with the Nikkor 18-70. Now that I think about it, I'd like to see Canon come out with a non-IS version of their 17-85 with the same optical quality, as it would be a good everyday lense for a good price. It would be an excellent starter lense for the Rebel series and 20D too. The problem is more that while Nikon bundles essentialy a L glass equvalent with D70, Canon bundles low quality lens - something you wouldn't really want to keep if you already hadlens and were intersted in quality. The Nikon one would be a keeper either ways. Neither of those statements are true. The Nikon lens has been crticized for build quality and vignetting, the Canon lens has been criticiszed for being too soft at the edges. They are both mid-level lenses. The Nikon has a metal mount, and a wider range, which makes some people think that it is better than it really is. The difference is that the Canon lens, at $100 difference, is a no-brainer, but the Nikon lens at $300 difference is something to consider more carefully. The 18-70 is a dx DO lens. Which is what canon call low dispersion and sigma call apo. I'm reasonably sure that is better than G or even D lenses. Its certainly far more substantial. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
"Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Brian C. Baird wrote: In article , says... http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml Kind of ridiculous to compare a $99 lens with a nearly $300 one and base your judgment on the camera heavily on that. But both are the normal kit lens that the majority of first-timers will buy the camera with, no? So it is a comparison not so much of camera bodies but kits, but what percentage of buyers will understand the difference? After all, there is no use in buying the camera without lens for them. Canon is simply doing its usual 'low price at all costs' thing. I agree. canon have done themselves a disservice with this choice of lens. Nikon have a cheap lens alternative, the yellow ring 28-80 G lens kit that sells cheaper. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Jan Böhme wrote:
On 6 Mar 2005 05:51:49 GMT, "Alice" wrote: http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml The review gives price as one factor favouring the D70, saying that the 350D body is 100 canadian dollars more expensive than the D70 as recommended retail price. This seems to vary considerably betteen markets. Cyberphoto, the most reputable Swedish online camera store, quotes the D70 at SEK 6376, and the 350D at SEK 6396. Dustin, another online store, quotes both the D70 and the 350D at SEK 6396 The price differential in Cyberphoto's case, SEK 20, amounts to CAD 3:59, and it is thus fair to argue that the cameras are marketed at an essentially equal price for the Swedish market. Jan Böhme Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik. Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur. So far, I've seen the following in Montreal (all an CAD, add 15% taxes): Digital Rebel + 18-55 969$ D70 Body 999$ Digital Rebel XT body 1149$ Digital Rebel XT + 18-55 1299$ I paid around 1200$ for my Rebel D kit year ago. Not too bad compared to the D70. Its price dropped 500$ within a year... |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
"Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... 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. What does the 100 do that the d70 doesn't? It seemed to me more the otherway around. Once the d70 came out i couldn't sell 100 the 70 was faster and shot continously for longer. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
In message ,
"Darrell" dev/null wrote: "Ben Rosengart" wrote in message ... On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 02:34:00 GMT, wrote: The companies are more interested in what they can get away with, not with how they can make a superior product for very little extra cost. I bet it would cost only a couple thousand dollars of programming time to put a RAW RGB histogram in the firmware. If they would just let people hack on the firmware, I'm sure they could get someone to add that feature (and lots more) for free. Or have an open source SDK for the camera, those who want to play could have fun... It is really frustrating having a camera with some great technology, owned by a company that has absolutely no vision as to how to use it. It's 2005, and we don't have Tv modes that inversely scale exposure time with focal length! It would be trivial to make such a mode, with an exhaustive SDK. Or how about these: RAW data clips, and the camera automatically takes another shot immediately at lower ISO (or stopped down, or a shorter exposure). User-programmable sets of ISO, aperture and shutter parameters for each absolute EV. Memory to not allow a certain lens to open up all the way, unless not doing so forces extreme under-exposure. -- John P Sheehy |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:
Larry wrote: [ ... ] I use a small Canon A60 when I don't want to bring my DRebel (hiking, biking, skiing). It makes great 4x6 for a 2MP P&S camera. When I looked at D70, it gave a rougher impression. I don't remember exactly what it was, but there was something really cheap about it, the battery or memory card maybe. Something that didn't fit in on a camera in that price range. Hmm ... I haven't noticed anything of that sort. The battery is a specialized Li-ion battery which gives an amazing number of shots per charge. (Well over 700 shots at the medim/fine size JPEGs on a 1GB flash card, I've not filled a flash card with RAW for a comparison -- but a large percentage of those shots used the built-in flash at some distance.) As for the Flash Card -- you buy your own choice for that, the same with the other cameras. The Nikon kit (I have been told) does not come with a Flash Card. My D70 body certainly did not. Thus, I was able to pick my own choice in the size/cost/speed tradeoff. (I opted for a 1GB 80X Lexar -- and got another one a week or so later. I've only had to roll over to the second on a long weekend trip with a wedding involved. (No -- I was not the pro, but I took a lot of shots anyway. :-) And I have been quite happy with my D70 -- but I already had Nikon glass. Otherwise, the Cannon might have had a greater chance. Enjoy, DoN. -- Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 12:19:25 -0600, John A Stovall wrote:
On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 23:30:16 GMT, "ian lincoln" wrote: snipped considering the main selling point of the canon is its 8mp sensor putting an inferior lens on the front seems pointless. Why bother buying one with a kit lens? In putting together my Canon 20D system. I just bought the body and then added the lens(es) I wanted which would meet my needs. Because the Body with the kit lense is a lot cheaper than the body plus the cheapest lens you can buy seperatly. Assuming you don't have limitless resources it's a good way to a get the camera and start taking pictures while saving up for (and deciding) whatever lens you want next. Dag |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
DoN. Nichols wrote:
In article , Paul Bielec wrote: Larry wrote: [ ... ] I use a small Canon A60 when I don't want to bring my DRebel (hiking, biking, skiing). It makes great 4x6 for a 2MP P&S camera. When I looked at D70, it gave a rougher impression. I don't remember exactly what it was, but there was something really cheap about it, the battery or memory card maybe. Something that didn't fit in on a camera in that price range. Hmm ... I haven't noticed anything of that sort. The battery is a specialized Li-ion battery which gives an amazing number of shots per charge. (Well over 700 shots at the medim/fine size JPEGs on a 1GB flash card, I've not filled a flash card with RAW for a comparison -- but a large percentage of those shots used the built-in flash at some distance.) As for the Flash Card -- you buy your own choice for that, the same with the other cameras. The Nikon kit (I have been told) does not come with a Flash Card. My D70 body certainly did not. Thus, I was able to pick my own choice in the size/cost/speed tradeoff. (I opted for a 1GB 80X Lexar -- and got another one a week or so later. I've only had to roll over to the second on a long weekend trip with a wedding involved. (No -- I was not the pro, but I took a lot of shots anyway. :-) And I have been quite happy with my D70 -- but I already had Nikon glass. Otherwise, the Cannon might have had a greater chance. Enjoy, DoN. What I ment was the memory card or battery door. "door" was missing in my post |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Digital Rebel XT/350D | Darrell | Digital Photography | 78 | February 25th 05 07:36 AM |
Digital Rebel XT/350D | Darrell | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | February 16th 05 03:26 AM |
FS: Canon EOS Digital Rebel 6.3 Megapixel Used | Anonymous | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 27th 04 08:47 AM |
Instead of Canon Digital Rebel... | Digital Photography | 26 | December 15th 04 12:59 AM | |
__ (Brand New) Canon Digital Rebel w/18-55mm lens for sale __ | David Weaver | General Equipment For Sale | 2 | November 8th 03 05:42 PM |