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

If you compare 4x6 prints side by side with a loupe, you will be evaluating
somebody's enlarger.

In message ,
"Michael A. Covington"
wrote:

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.

I doubt it's the sensor. The D70 is more prone to color moire than the
10D, so the D70 sensor/filter combo is not going to be the bottleneck.

The 20D is somewhere in-between; It can produce color moire by shooting
the solid white screen of my laptop from about 5 feet away with my
sharpest lens, at 90mm. I have never seen it in any of the pictures
I've taken that weren't for the purpose of producing moire.
--


John P Sheehy

Michael A. Covington wrote:
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.

Something to do with CMOS vs CCD sensor at long exposures?
- Siddhartha

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:09:32 -0500, "Michael A. Covington"
wrote:

If you compare 4x6 prints side by side with a loupe, you will be evaluating
somebody's enlarger.

IIRC, I specifically said we don't do that.
And, yes, I know people who do, but they aren't (IMO) comparing hopw
the photo looks, but are instead comparing the printing technique, or
how the print was made.
I'm one of those funny people who sees the object of photography to be
the representqation of the subject, not a contest to see who can best
whom at using the 'superior' technology. It's the final image as seen
by the viewer that counts.
If that viewer wants to examine the print to see how it was made, he's
no tinterested in the image, but the technology behind it; that's
finer, in itself, but it's not the purpose of photography, IMO.
But that's me. I just enjoy what I do.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:09:32 -0500, "Michael A. Covington"
wrote:

If you compare 4x6 prints side by side with a loupe, you will be evaluating
somebody's enlarger.

IIRC, I specifically said we don't do that.
And, yes, I know people who do, but they aren't (IMO) comparing hopw
the photo looks, but are instead comparing the printing technique, or
how the print was made.
I'm one of those funny people who sees the object of photography to be
the representqation of the subject, not a contest to see who can best
whom at using the 'superior' technology. It's the final image as seen
by the viewer that counts.
If that viewer wants to examine the print to see how it was made, he's
no tinterested in the image, but the technology behind it; that's
finer, in itself, but it's not the purpose of photography, IMO.
But that's me. I just enjoy what I do.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:09:32 -0500, "Michael A. Covington"
wrote:

If you compare 4x6 prints side by side with a loupe, you will be evaluating
somebody's enlarger.

IIRC, I specifically said we don't do that.
And, yes, I know people who do, but they aren't (IMO) comparing hopw
the photo looks, but are instead comparing the printing technique, or
how the print was made.
I'm one of those funny people who sees the object of photography to be
the representqation of the subject, not a contest to see who can best
whom at using the 'superior' technology. It's the final image as seen
by the viewer that counts.
If that viewer wants to examine the print to see how it was made, he's
no tinterested in the image, but the technology behind it; that's
finer, in itself, but it's not the purpose of photography, IMO.
But that's me. I just enjoy what I do.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

"Gisle Hannemyr" wrote in message
...

Does anyone publish a comprehensive set of Nikon lens performance
tests, comparable to the MTF curves in "EOS Lens Work III" from
Canon?

Nikon. You'll find them on their Japanese web site. Scroll down
to the botom of the page. Here is an example:
http://www.nikon-image.com/jpn/produ...5-70mmf28d.htm

Outstanding!!! Many thanks! I don't read Japanese, but I think I can
reverse-engineer their file and directory naming system...

"Gisle Hannemyr" wrote in message
...

Does anyone publish a comprehensive set of Nikon lens performance
tests, comparable to the MTF curves in "EOS Lens Work III" from
Canon?

Nikon. You'll find them on their Japanese web site. Scroll down
to the botom of the page. Here is an example:
http://www.nikon-image.com/jpn/produ...5-70mmf28d.htm

Outstanding!!! Many thanks! I don't read Japanese, but I think I can
reverse-engineer their file and directory naming system...

Michael A. Covington wrote:
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.

I may be misremembering which lens it was -- sorry.

Michael A. Covington wrote:
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.

I may be misremembering which lens it was -- sorry.