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
  #81  
Old March 8th 05, 03:26 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message ,
"David J. Littleboy" wrote:

wrote in message
.. .


... for a given focal length, or range (as in a zoom). A $70 50mm lens
can be optically superior to an L-grade wide-angle zoom.


There are always exceptions.


http://etischer.com/300d/Tamron28-75.html


Well, I was thinking about stuff like 16-35mm, etc.

It looks to me that the Tamron at f/4.0 at the ends and f/5.6 in the middle
is about as good as lenses get. (Although it's a pity his 70-200/4.0
misfocused.) It's not coincidental that my Tamron has produced the sharpest
images I've seen from the 300D.)


Nice. I might find that hard to believe, except for the fact that I
already own one Tamron lens, the 90mm f2.8 Di Macro, and it is the
sharpest lens I own.
--


John P Sheehy

  #82  
Old March 8th 05, 03:27 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message ,
Alan Browne wrote:

wrote:

In message ,
Alan Browne wrote:


If you sort by quality (across all shooting conditions) you end up
sorting roughly by price at the same time.



... for a given focal length, or range (as in a zoom). A $70 50mm lens
can be optically superior to an L-grade wide-angle zoom.



I believe most people would understand that...


.... and for those that don't ... my post.
--


John P Sheehy

  #83  
Old March 8th 05, 03:31 AM
DoN. Nichols
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article .com,
wrote:

[ ... ]

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 shoot handheld most of the time, and when I want a vertical
format, it is easy to raise my right elbow as I rotate the camera to
take a photo in the portrait orientation. (Or sometimes I even tuck it
in as I rotate the camera the other way.) Since the next shot is as
likely as not to return to landscape orientation, I would find shifting
my hand between grips more of a pain than simply rotating the camera
while maintaining my grip.

If I took a lot of photos on a tripod in portrait orientation, I
might consider the vertical grip to be an issue. And if I had one of
those brackets which switch easily between portrait and landscape mode,
I would probably want to remote the release button to the pan handle of
the tripod or something similar. (And even remote several of the extra
controls, including both thumbwheels.)

But for now, it is just a matter of noise in the discussions to me.

Enjoy,
DoN.

P.S. Speaking of noise -- I don't find the noise at ISO 1600 to be
that bad. But my standard of comparison is the Nikon/Kodak
NC2000e/c (Nikon N90s converted to digital by Kodak) which is
*quite* noisy in ISO 1600 mode.
--
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 ---
  #84  
Old March 8th 05, 03:34 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message . com,
"Scharf-DCA" wrote:

John P Sheehy wrote:


Like a RAW RGB histogram?


AFAIK, the only low-end D-SLR with an RGB histogram is the Sigma SD10,
and it's there for a very good reason. It's not like any major player
is putting this feature into their amateur or prosumer models.


Which should be a crime, IMO.

The companies are more interested in what they can get away with, not
with how they can make a superior product for very little extra cost. I
bet it would cost only a couple thousand dollars of programming time to
put a RAW RGB histogram in the firmware.
--


John P Sheehy

  #85  
Old March 8th 05, 03:34 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message . com,
"Scharf-DCA" wrote:

John P Sheehy wrote:


Like a RAW RGB histogram?


AFAIK, the only low-end D-SLR with an RGB histogram is the Sigma SD10,
and it's there for a very good reason. It's not like any major player
is putting this feature into their amateur or prosumer models.


Which should be a crime, IMO.

The companies are more interested in what they can get away with, not
with how they can make a superior product for very little extra cost. I
bet it would cost only a couple thousand dollars of programming time to
put a RAW RGB histogram in the firmware.
--


John P Sheehy

  #86  
Old March 8th 05, 04:57 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message ,
Big Bill wrote:

On 7 Mar 2005 16:58:51 -0800, "Scharf-DCA"
wrote:

John P Sheehy wrote:

Like a RAW RGB histogram?


AFAIK, the only low-end D-SLR with an RGB histogram is the Sigma SD10,
and it's there for a very good reason.


Because the SD10 doesn't do anything *BUT* RAW?


Is it really a RAW RGB histogram, though, or is it a color-balanced sRGB
histogram?

By "RAW RGB", I mean 0 to 4095 for each recorded channel, not 0 to 255
for estimated gamma/color-corrected conversion.
--


John P Sheehy

  #87  
Old March 8th 05, 05:49 AM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sander Vesik wrote:

MLU is not just a firware issue. A real MLU always needs mechanics support
as otherwise holding it up continues to draw power.


Timer based MLU's (such as Minolta 2 sec.) only draw that current
briefly. Compared to 15 and 30 sec, not to mention 5 minute bulb
exposures, it's nothing.


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.
  #88  
Old March 8th 05, 06:02 AM
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

And what does a Canon Body and their 17-85 lens cost in lieu of a kit.
Make your own kit.

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

"Sander Vesik" wrote in message
...


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.



Neither of those statements are true. The Nikon lens has been crticized for
build quality and vignetting, the Canon lens has been criticiszed for being
too soft at the edges. They are both mid-level lenses. The Nikon has a metal
mount, and a wider range, which makes some people think that it is better
than it really is. The difference is that the Canon lens, at $100
difference, is a no-brainer, but the Nikon lens at $300 difference is
something to consider more carefully.




  #89  
Old March 8th 05, 06:03 AM
Kevin McMurtrie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

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.


Are there any issues wrt the DO and the digital sensor that you've seen?
Do you shooti into the light very often?

Cheers,
Alan.


The only issue with the DO is that it doesn't have a normal blur at the
DOF edges. Rather than the blur gradually increasing in radius, you get
haze that gradually solidifies. It's sometimes attributed to an optics
problem but it will not happen completely inside or outside the DOF.

I didn't have time to compose this properly so the aperture is way too
large and there's a bit of backfocus. You can see the haze on the edge
of the ticket book.

http://www.pixelmemory.us/Photos/SF%...%202004/raw/IM
G_3219.JPG


These stage photos were taken handheld from the crowd with the 70-300 DO
IS. There's enough backlighting to cause blooming but I don't notice
any haze. (The trees are fogged by real fog.)

http://www.pixelmemory.us/Photos/SF%...e%2020%202004/
  #90  
Old March 8th 05, 01:34 PM
David J. Littleboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:

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.


I disagree: to the best I can tell, the D70 is fine at ISO 800 and 1600.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page14.asp

Look at the patches: at ISO 800 and 1600, the D70 is at least as good if not
better than the 300D. (Note that the D100 looks a lot more like the 300D
than the D70.)

The luminance noise graph is problematic because it's basically the green
channel.

If you look at the RGB noise graph, you'll see that they're all really
close. The best of these cameras at ISO 1600 is nowhere near as good as the
worst at ISO 800. (And the 20D really doesn't change that: it's ISO 1600
green channel is about the same as the D70's ISO 800 green channel, but red
and blue are a mess.)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos20d/page20.asp

So in practical terms, the differences are really small.

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.


Yep. Although we haven't seen the Dpreview 350D review yet: we're assuming
it acts like the 20D.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



 




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 10:11 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.