A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SIDE BY SIDE - D70 vs Rebel XT/350D



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 7th 05, 02:44 AM
Brian C. Baird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


I agree, the Nikon gets the edge in image quality due to the better
glass on it. Perhaps if you couple the 350/XT with a similar quality
lense like the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, that optical edge is removed and it
once again becomes more a comparison of the bodies.

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 best way to compare the two would be to put either a third-party
lens on each, or use the respective 50mm primes from Nikon and Canon,
which are pretty much identical in quality.

As far as the kit lenses, Canon doesn't have a equivalent to the 18-70
Nikon, but the 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS certainly has a lot going for it.
If only it were closer in price to the 24-135mm version.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/
  #22  
Old March 7th 05, 04:29 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alice wrote:
http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml


Interesting comparison.

I think he went into too much detail on items that don't matter (i.e
0.2 versus 0.02 seconds start-up time), and didn't concentrate enough
on important items.

Strongest negative of the 350D is the lack of spot metering. Strongest
negative of the D70 is the noise at higher ISO settings, ISO range, and
moire.

Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I always tend to first look at what the
reviews say are the "negatives" or "cons" of each camera, and find the
fewest cons that are important, and for which their is no workaround.
Then I look at the "positives" or "pros" of the models that haven't
been eliminated by the "negatives" or "cons."

The biggest drawbacks of the D70 are noise at higher ISO settings, and
excessive moire, for which there is no real work-arounds. The lack of
mirror lock-up, and the lack of a vertical grip (even though there is
an after-market grip coming), would be other issues that some people
may care about, though maybe not in the amateur segment.

Steve
http://digitalslrinfo.com

  #23  
Old March 7th 05, 06:29 AM
paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bill wrote:

...IS version of their 17-85


Someone mentioned there is a kit price with this lens. What does that
kit cost? What minimum f-stop is that lens?
  #24  
Old March 7th 05, 07:28 AM
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I may be interested in a DSLR at some point. While I am interested in
specifications, balance and feel; my main concern is in results. Can I
assume that with moderate cropping both the D70 and DRXT will produce
very similar images and get those images with the same relative ease.
If so then the lens and noise issue will take a back seat.

I am assuming that the results will be comparable at all of the ISO speeds.

ian lincoln wrote:

"ian lincoln" wrote in message
. uk...


"Clyde Torres" wrote in message
.com...


"Alice" wrote in message ...


http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml


I'm not sure this review puts to bed anything. The Nikon/Canon zealots
will read what they want out of it and come up with different
conclusions.

I for one have both a D70 and 20D. They are far superior cameras to the
original Digital Rebel, and from what I can see, the D70 is still
superior to the 350D DRXT. Oh,well, to each her own.


going onto the second page the kit lens for the nikon is far superior.



There certainly are more custom functions on the nikon, i wonder how many
budding amateurs would comprehend the real world practical use of each one
let alone use them to their full artistic potential. My main concern is the
sensor itself. Very low noise images even at high iso is a good thing. No
need for IS lenses if you can increase the sensitivity by 3 stops without a
serious compromise on noise.

I have heard of problems with moire patterns such as that of photographing a
roof with uniform slates lined on it. I've been shown an example of the
nikon censor producing interesting patterns of its own under these
circumstances.

The bundled raw processing software with the d70 is said to be ****e too.

My main concern as someone who sells both and is not on commission is that i
am giving an honest and informed opinion. The typical person who asks me
won't have done his reading and asks very basic questions about the cameras.
This makes me think things like custom functions and other things buried
deep in menus aren't going to be used so though on paper the D70 is better
you are paying for alot of stuff you aren't going to use. There is also the
issue of plain old image quality, how does the nikon cope in both raw and
jpeg. Such a user is more likely to be a jpeg user so which is the better
using that format?

A typical example is of someone who thinks he is going to make it as a
wedding photographer (don't ask). Typically alot of flash used to flash
exposure control is important. This means the d70. On the other hand you
aren't going to stick with the built in flash and the ex550 has flash
exposure compensation so is it an issue?

In a reasonably lit church were people aren't groping around in the dark
the EV0.5 sensitivity compared to the EV1 of the canon for metering and
focusing isn't really an issue. Black cats in coal scuttles may be one
thing but comparitively ordinary conditions i doubt it. On paper the nikon
is better but it costs 200 more even with cashback in our store.

The 350 is a nice compromise in price performance and features between the
300 and the 20D. With enlargements and cropping in consideration i think
the final resolution and sensor qualities tilt the balance in such a
customers hands.




  #25  
Old March 7th 05, 07:32 AM
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Bill wrote:

Brian C. Baird wrote:



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.



I agree, the Nikon gets the edge in image quality due to the better
glass on it.

The glass on the kit lens should not be an issue. Compare the bodies.
The DRXT buyer should consider getting the !8-85 S lens. The D70 user
should get the Kit lens. Then compare the results.

Perhaps if you couple the 350/XT with a similar quality
lense like the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, that optical edge is removed and it
once again becomes more a comparison of the bodies.

It's too bad Canon didn't have an 18-70 or similar lense to compare with
the Nikkor 18-70.

Read above comment.

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.


  #26  
Old March 7th 05, 08:29 AM
Kevin McMurtrie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
measekite wrote:

I may be interested in a DSLR at some point. While I am interested in
specifications, balance and feel; my main concern is in results. Can I
assume that with moderate cropping both the D70 and DRXT will produce
very similar images and get those images with the same relative ease.
If so then the lens and noise issue will take a back seat.

I am assuming that the results will be comparable at all of the ISO speeds.


The Canon should have the edge in image quality, being that it's a
second generation of a camera that was good competition to the D70. It
will definitely do better on very long exposures.

The Canon seems to be designed as travel camera while the Nikon as a
hobby camera. The Canon is compact and comes with an ultra-light
(expendable) kit lens while the Nikon is a more standard size and comes
with a normal quality kit lens. Even then it's not a huge difference.
Better try them out.

I went with Canon a year ago because I use my camera hiking and
bicycling. A more compact camera and lighter lenses means a lot to me.
The only heavy lens I have is the 70-300 DO IS, and that can be forgiven
because its IS eliminates a tripod and it's the size of a large coffee
mug.


ian lincoln wrote:

"ian lincoln" wrote in message
. uk...


"Clyde Torres" wrote in message
.com...


"Alice" wrote in message ...


http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/Nik...sRebelXT.shtml


I'm not sure this review puts to bed anything. The Nikon/Canon zealots
will read what they want out of it and come up with different
conclusions.

I for one have both a D70 and 20D. They are far superior cameras to the
original Digital Rebel, and from what I can see, the D70 is still
superior to the 350D DRXT. Oh,well, to each her own.


going onto the second page the kit lens for the nikon is far superior.



There certainly are more custom functions on the nikon, i wonder how many
budding amateurs would comprehend the real world practical use of each one
let alone use them to their full artistic potential. My main concern is the
sensor itself. Very low noise images even at high iso is a good thing. No
need for IS lenses if you can increase the sensitivity by 3 stops without a
serious compromise on noise.

I have heard of problems with moire patterns such as that of photographing a
roof with uniform slates lined on it. I've been shown an example of the
nikon censor producing interesting patterns of its own under these
circumstances.

The bundled raw processing software with the d70 is said to be ****e too.

My main concern as someone who sells both and is not on commission is that i
am giving an honest and informed opinion. The typical person who asks me
won't have done his reading and asks very basic questions about the cameras.
This makes me think things like custom functions and other things buried
deep in menus aren't going to be used so though on paper the D70 is better
you are paying for alot of stuff you aren't going to use. There is also the
issue of plain old image quality, how does the nikon cope in both raw and
jpeg. Such a user is more likely to be a jpeg user so which is the better
using that format?

A typical example is of someone who thinks he is going to make it as a
wedding photographer (don't ask). Typically alot of flash used to flash
exposure control is important. This means the d70. On the other hand you
aren't going to stick with the built in flash and the ex550 has flash
exposure compensation so is it an issue?

In a reasonably lit church were people aren't groping around in the dark
the EV0.5 sensitivity compared to the EV1 of the canon for metering and
focusing isn't really an issue. Black cats in coal scuttles may be one
thing but comparitively ordinary conditions i doubt it. On paper the nikon
is better but it costs 200 more even with cashback in our store.

The 350 is a nice compromise in price performance and features between the
300 and the 20D. With enlargements and cropping in consideration i think
the final resolution and sensor qualities tilt the balance in such a
customers hands.




  #27  
Old March 7th 05, 11:56 AM
DJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 23:56:33 GMT, "ian lincoln"
wrote:


"Sheldon" wrote in message
...

The final resolution debate.
Had an older couple who currently shoot film with an eos 300 and want to go


snip

good results. I suggested they only increase the size by 20% at a time
rather than one jump. Finally i gave them a disk of my own work and said
"print that at A3 without any manipulation and see what happens". They also
wanted to know if they could take me home

Based on the same situation what would you have advised?


My advice: Let them take you home. "Old" folks might teach you some new tricks!
:-)



  #28  
Old March 7th 05, 12:25 PM
Sander Vesik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++
  #29  
Old March 7th 05, 12:27 PM
Sander Vesik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm ian lincoln wrote:

considering the main selling point of the canon is its 8mp sensor putting an
inferior lens on the front seems pointless. On the other hand i have read a


Note that its Canon's choice to put the lens there, not the reviewer's.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++
  #30  
Old March 7th 05, 12:35 PM
Sander Vesik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SIDE BY SIDE - D70 vs Rebel XT/350D Alice Digital SLR Cameras 118 March 11th 05 11:36 AM
SIDE BY SIDE - D70 vs Rebel XT/350D Alice 35mm Photo Equipment 119 March 11th 05 11:36 AM
Digital Rebel XT/350D Darrell Digital Photography 78 February 25th 05 08:36 AM
Digital Rebel XT/350D Darrell Digital SLR Cameras 0 February 16th 05 04:26 AM
__ (Brand New) Canon Digital Rebel w/18-55mm lens for sale __ David Weaver General Equipment For Sale 2 November 8th 03 06:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.