SIDE BY SIDE - D70 vs Rebel XT/350D

On 9 Mar 2005 13:03:53 GMT, Dag wrote:

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

The after rebate cost of the 18-70mm kit lens was $120. Why wouldn't
you buy it.

In article , Paul Bielec wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:

Larry wrote:

[ ... ]

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.

[ ... ]

What I ment was the memory card or battery door.
"door" was missing in my post

O.K. Looking at mine, the Memory card door looks quite good,
and interestingly enough it has a rubber gasket to help seal out the
elements when it is closed. (I never noticed that before now, when your
article called my attention to it.) There is also a small rubber button
to catch the swing of the door when you pop it open -- perhaps because
of the possibility of the noise distracting people in certain
situations, though that would have to be quieter than the shutter.

As for the battery door -- it happens to be removable (without
tools), as long as you pull at the right angle, so it could be easily
replaced at need. Since it closes firmly flush with the bottom, I've
never had any problem with it.

The one thing which *I* wish had been a bit better was the
clip-on shield over the LCD display. I lost the first one, when it
(apparently) hooked on my belt as I was getting out of a car, and by the
time I noticed that it was missing, it was too late to find it. (I
tried -- ever looked for a transparent chip of plastic over highly
variable terrain? :-)

The replacement has been attached by a tether to the left-hand
strap bracket. (I did a couple of eye splices in some bright yellow
nylon string. :-) That has saved it from getting lost quite a few times
since. (I tend to wear the camera most of the time that I am outdoors
or even indoors away from the house.)

I've read complaints about the noise of the autofocus, which
seemed to be complaints about nothing to me, as I had the "28-105mm
f3.5-4.5 D" lens when I got the camera. I did not get the kit lens.

Now that I've added a 50mm f1.4 autofocus, I see where the
complaints come from. It produces significanly more noise than the
28-105mm does. Both are mechanically-coupled (from the camera body)
autofocus -- not ones with the built-in motor in the lens, which I have
not yet experienced.

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 ---

The one thing which *I* wish had been a bit better was the
clip-on shield over the LCD display. I lost the first one, when it
(apparently) hooked on my belt as I was getting out of a car, and by the
time I noticed that it was missing, it was too late to find it. (I
tried -- ever looked for a transparent chip of plastic over highly
variable terrain? :-)

The replacement has been attached by a tether to the left-hand
strap bracket. (I did a couple of eye splices in some bright yellow
nylon string. :-) That has saved it from getting lost quite a few times
since. (I tend to wear the camera most of the time that I am outdoors
or even indoors away from the house.)

I bought self adhensive Palm screen protectors and I installed it over
the LCD of my 300D. You have to cut it out to proper shape but it works
like a charm.

Paul Bielec wrote:



I bought self adhensive Palm screen protectors and I installed it over
the LCD of my 300D. You have to cut it out to proper shape but it works
like a charm.

Where did you buy them? I was at Bureau-en-Gros (Staples to the rest of
you) last night and they were $20 for a pack of 12. Seemed outrageous.
I don't want 12, I figure a few will last a long enough time.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:

Larry wrote:

[ ... ]

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.

[ ... ]

What I ment was the memory card or battery door.
"door" was missing in my post

O.K. Looking at mine, the Memory card door looks quite good,
and interestingly enough it has a rubber gasket to help seal out the
elements when it is closed. (I never noticed that before now, when your
article called my attention to it.) There is also a small rubber button
to catch the swing of the door when you pop it open -- perhaps because
of the possibility of the noise distracting people in certain
situations, though that would have to be quieter than the shutter.

Sure - the card door does look and feel flimsy, but after almost 1 years
careless use, it has been just fine. I'm sure it could also be replaced
fairly easily IF it did ever break off.

As for the battery door -- it happens to be removable (without
tools), as long as you pull at the right angle, so it could be easily
replaced at need. Since it closes firmly flush with the bottom, I've
never had any problem with it.

Me neither.


The one thing which *I* wish had been a bit better was the
clip-on shield over the LCD display. I lost the first one, when it
(apparently) hooked on my belt as I was getting out of a car, and by the
time I noticed that it was missing, it was too late to find it. (I
tried -- ever looked for a transparent chip of plastic over highly
variable terrain? :-)

The replacement has been attached by a tether to the left-hand
strap bracket. (I did a couple of eye splices in some bright yellow
nylon string. :-) That has saved it from getting lost quite a few times
since. (I tend to wear the camera most of the time that I am outdoors
or even indoors away from the house.)

And the tranparent cover DOES have a little hole predrilled in it for
exactly that purpose. What's more, new ones are pretty cheap.

( I really should buy another one, mine is cracked from dropping the camera
about 4 foot onto concrete - and that's the ONLY damage )


I've read complaints about the noise of the autofocus, which
seemed to be complaints about nothing to me, as I had the "28-105mm
f3.5-4.5 D" lens when I got the camera. I did not get the kit lens.

Now that I've added a 50mm f1.4 autofocus, I see where the
complaints come from. It produces significanly more noise than the
28-105mm does. Both are mechanically-coupled (from the camera body)
autofocus -- not ones with the built-in motor in the lens, which I have
not yet experienced.

Yup - it's a lens issue.

I have a couple of older (but good) Nikon lenses that aren't AF-S, and are a
little noisy (but not too noisy unless you are photographing funerals full
of easily offended people, near to a PA coupled microphone), and a couple of
AF-S lenses that are really quiet. To be honest, the noise on the mech.
coupled versus AF-S lense is no issue at all for me. Sometimes, with the
AF-S lenses, I have to almost check to see if they have moved at all (and
the sharp focus in the viewfinder ins't an illusion)

"Oliver Costich" wrote in message
...
On 9 Mar 2005 13:03:53 GMT, Dag wrote:

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

The after rebate cost of the 18-70mm kit lens was $120. Why wouldn't
you buy it.

Glass Nazis

Alan Browne wrote:
Paul Bielec wrote:



I bought self adhensive Palm screen protectors and I installed it over
the LCD of my 300D. You have to cut it out to proper shape but it
works like a charm.


Where did you buy them? I was at Bureau-en-Gros (Staples to the rest of
you) last night and they were $20 for a pack of 12. Seemed outrageous.
I don't want 12, I figure a few will last a long enough time.

Cheers,
Alan


I got a pack of 10 or 12 on liquidation at Future Shop. It was on one of
these tables they put at the entrance.

In article , adm wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:

[ ... ]

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.

[ ... ]

The one thing which *I* wish had been a bit better was the
clip-on shield over the LCD display. I lost the first one, when it

[ ... ]

The replacement has been attached by a tether to the left-hand
strap bracket.

[ ... ]

And the tranparent cover DOES have a little hole predrilled

Actually -- the hole is moulded at the same time as the rest
of the features, as *drilling* a hole in a plastic so thin and brittle
would be very likely to break it.

in it for
exactly that purpose. What's more, new ones are pretty cheap.

Agreed -- except that they are seldom in stock where I buy, and
I have to wait a week after ordering one. :-)

( I really should buy another one, mine is cracked from dropping the camera
about 4 foot onto concrete - and that's the ONLY damage )

I think *that* should end the argument about plastic bodies -- at
least as Nikon makes them. I presume that you experienced no subsequent
focus problems or balky mirror.

And I wonder what would have happened if you had a microdrive
in it, instead of a CF card.

I've read complaints about the noise of the autofocus, which
seemed to be complaints about nothing to me, as I had the "28-105mm
f3.5-4.5 D" lens when I got the camera. I did not get the kit lens.

Now that I've added a 50mm f1.4 autofocus, I see where the
complaints come from. It produces significantly more noise than the

[ ... ]

Yup - it's a lens issue.

I have a couple of older (but good) Nikon lenses that aren't AF-S, and are a
little noisy (but not too noisy unless you are photographing funerals full
of easily offended people, near to a PA coupled microphone), and a couple of
AF-S lenses that are really quiet. To be honest, the noise on the mech.
coupled versus AF-S lense is no issue at all for me. Sometimes, with the
AF-S lenses, I have to almost check to see if they have moved at all (and
the sharp focus in the viewfinder ins't an illusion)

The loudest part on the 50mm f1.4 seems to be when the autofocus
starts in the wrong direction and hits a hard stop at the infinity
point before reversing, producing a bit of a "clack" sound.
(Interesting that I got this "normal" lens later, and the 28-105mmm
first (though I already had that one, for another camera, so I skipped
the "kit" lens.) At the moment, the third easy-to-use lens is a 180mm
f2.8 which has been converted to add the CPU to it -- though of course,
no autofocus.

I do also use the Medical Nikor with it -- in manual mode, since
I got the flash sync adaptor, which can handle switching the higher
voltages present in that old built-in flash design. The only problem is
that I am locked out from using the closest setting, because the ISO
(ASA) is too high for that. And I'm not at all sure that I can stack a
neutral density filter with the two close-up lenses which are part of it
for the extreme close-ups. (I also lose the annotation features (e.g.
magnification/reduction ratio), because they are in the area beyond the
sensor.)

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 ---

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:01:07 -0500, Oliver Costich wrote:

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

The after rebate cost of the 18-70mm kit lens was $120. Why wouldn't
you buy it.

I was speaking in general and not refering to Anything specific. You are
assuming that rebates are available all over the world and last forever.

Dag