Nikon D70 Or Canon Digital Rebel (Yes, A Tired Thread) (Little Long)

Do the Nikon lenses compare to the L series lenses or the less expensive
series? I have not seen a comparison and this could make a difference, at
least in my purchase.

I remember reading a while back that the Digital Rebel wasn't sharp
enough to warrant L lenses. Is that still the consensus?

Thanks.

-Joel

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" wrote in message
...
Do the Nikon lenses compare to the L series lenses or the less expensive
series? I have not seen a comparison and this could make a difference, at
least in my purchase.

I remember reading a while back that the Digital Rebel wasn't sharp
enough to warrant L lenses. Is that still the consensus?

I saw a published astrophotography test of a 10D which showed a distinct
advantage of the 200/2.8 Canon L lens on a 10D versus 180/2.8 Nikon lens on
D70. Either the D70 sensor is inherently less sharp, or the 10D picked up a
very subtle difference between the lenses.

My understanding is that the Digital Rebel sensor is similar to the 10D.

Also, the L lenses are much more mechanically rugged, and that should be an
advantage apart from sharpness.

Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote:
Do the Nikon lenses compare to the L series lenses or the less expensive
series? I have not seen a comparison and this could make a difference, at
least in my purchase.


I remember reading a while back that the Digital Rebel wasn't sharp
enough to warrant L lenses. Is that still the consensus?

Don't believe that "observation" reached anything like the level of a
consensus.

The image sensor is the same as the 10 D, and is sharp enough.

--
John McWilliams

In message ,
(Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote:

I remember reading a while back that the Digital Rebel wasn't sharp
enough to warrant L lenses. Is that still the consensus?

Even if it *were* true, what difference would it make in the long run?
The DR will be old hat long before the lenses are. The person with the
DR now, buying lenses, may have a 25MP camera in a few years.

In any event, the DR has the same exact resolution to the 10D, and the
same resolution as a D60 (but with somewhat different filtering). Good
lenses make a big difference on any of these DSLRs; they filter out the
high frequencies to prevent aliasing, so a lens that gives more
pixel-to-pixel contrast will take images that sharpen better in
software.
--


John P Sheehy

In message ,
(Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote:

I remember reading a while back that the Digital Rebel wasn't sharp
enough to warrant L lenses. Is that still the consensus?

Even if it *were* true, what difference would it make in the long run?
The DR will be old hat long before the lenses are. The person with the
DR now, buying lenses, may have a 25MP camera in a few years.

In any event, the DR has the same exact resolution to the 10D, and the
same resolution as a D60 (but with somewhat different filtering). Good
lenses make a big difference on any of these DSLRs; they filter out the
high frequencies to prevent aliasing, so a lens that gives more
pixel-to-pixel contrast will take images that sharpen better in
software.
--


John P Sheehy

Bill H. wrote:
Do the Nikon lenses compare to the L series lenses or the less expensive
series?

At the same price point, the performance is similar. The best data
I've found is at http://www.photodo.com/.

Andrew.

Bill H. wrote:
Do the Nikon lenses compare to the L series lenses or the less expensive
series?

At the same price point, the performance is similar. The best data
I've found is at http://www.photodo.com/.

Andrew.

Bill H. wrote:
Do the Nikon lenses compare to the L series lenses or the less expensive
series?

At the same price point, the performance is similar. The best data
I've found is at http://www.photodo.com/.

Andrew.

In message ,
Gisle Hannemyr wrote:

With a hight-contrast target, L-glass resolution is in triple digits,
so if somebody has argued that the Rebel isn't "sharp enough" to
warrant L-glass - their argument has probably been based upon the
observation that 67 lpmm is less than what L-glass can deliver,
and they've come to the (wrong) conclusion that the higher
resolution is "wasted".

Also, you could use a teleconverter, or extension tubes, and make the
optics more of a limiting factor. Your pixel-to-pixel contrast will be
lower, but your absolute subject detail will be higher.
--


John P Sheehy

In message ,
Gisle Hannemyr wrote:

With a hight-contrast target, L-glass resolution is in triple digits,
so if somebody has argued that the Rebel isn't "sharp enough" to
warrant L-glass - their argument has probably been based upon the
observation that 67 lpmm is less than what L-glass can deliver,
and they've come to the (wrong) conclusion that the higher
resolution is "wasted".

Also, you could use a teleconverter, or extension tubes, and make the
optics more of a limiting factor. Your pixel-to-pixel contrast will be
lower, but your absolute subject detail will be higher.
--


John P Sheehy