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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Don F wrote:
You are correct, of course, and I probable should have said simply that price should not be a criteria for lens performance -- good or bad (IMHO). If you sort by quality (across all shooting conditions) you end up sorting roughly by price at the same 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. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
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. 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. -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Brian C. Baird wrote:
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. 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? -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"John A. Stovall" wrote in message
... I would go as far as to say anyone buying a 20D and not knowing enough to pick a lenses doesn't need to be buying one but rather needs to be learning more about the basics of photography. John, you have to remember that people with lots of money to spend will buy high end and then expect to learn from there on. Why would someone with lots of cash restrict themselves to a lousy camera just because they haven't learned enough about photography to buy a high end camera? If they never master it, then so be it. They either set it aside or give it to someone. A lot of people in this newsgroup are in fact those kind of people. And then there are people in this newsgroup who wish they had the money to buy high end and learn as they go along. Clyde Torres |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 15:23:13 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
wrote: "Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... This is ridiculous - teh kit lens is what most peopel will buy the camera with, so why the heck is wrong with such a comparison? It's very misleading. They should compare the cameras with the closest lenses available (from the camera manufacturer). It is quite insane to compare zoom ranges of kit lenses in an SLR camera review. They should not go to some second-tier lens manufacturer that makes the same lense for both cameras. If the review is on the kit, it must be reviewed with the kit lens. If the review is on the body, the lenses should be as identical as possible; this would almost require a third party lens, since the mfgrs don't supply many identical lenses. -- Bill Funk Change "g" to "a" |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
"Clyde Torres" wrote in message m... "John A. Stovall" wrote in message ... I would go as far as to say anyone buying a 20D and not knowing enough to pick a lenses doesn't need to be buying one but rather needs to be learning more about the basics of photography. John, you have to remember that people with lots of money to spend will buy high end and then expect to learn from there on. Why would someone with lots of cash restrict themselves to a lousy camera just because they haven't learned enough about photography to buy a high end camera? If they never master it, then so be it. They either set it aside or give it to someone. A lot of people in this newsgroup are in fact those kind of people. And then there are people in this newsgroup who wish they had the money to buy high end and learn as they go along. Clyde Torres This statement shows remarkable insight. It is the reason why one can find very good used equipment at a reasonable price. It is also the reason why I have lost money over the years buying professional equipment that I have never learned how to use. One of the unfortunate facts of life is that when you are young enough to be able to learn how to use the good stuff, you are usually too poor to afford it. By the time you can afford it, you are frequently too old to learn how to use it, or just don't have the energy it takes. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 10:28:35 -0500, Paul Bielec wrote:
Alice wrote: http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml Here is another, an amateur point of view. The 300D was a real bargain when I bough it. The D70 was much more expensive. Now the price dropped and it is definitively the best digital camera for the price. I don't own any expensive gear and I don't need it. When I bought my 300D, I wanted a DSLR but I wasn't willing to spend 2000$ (Can) to buy one. The 300D and the used EOS 300, is an upgrade from the Nikon F60 I used to have. I want to buy an Elan 7e/7ne eventually. It is all I need. Upgrading to 350D or 20D, for me, it would be a waste of money. I'll upgrade in few years when the digital market stabilizes. You could be in for a long wait. I'm on my third laptop, and I'm still waiting for that market to stabilize. Obviously, I'm not putting off upgrading while I wait. :-) I think it'll be a while before the digital camera market stabilizes. And if you put off buying what you want while waiting, you'll miss out on some terrific kit. -- Bill Funk Change "g" to "a" |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
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! |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
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 |