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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Woodchuck Bill commented courteously ...
Dude, I also own the 5700, and for me the choice is between the 8800 and the D70. I don't want to start a ZLR vs SLR war here, but I'm waiting until after I hear all of the PMA new releases before I decide which model to buy. I too am in love with my 5700, but I can learn to love another if it steals my heart! :-) . No chance of a war from me, Bill! I have my reasons for wanting a ZLR and not a DSLR, no matter whose, and I have my reasons for dumping the 5700. As I said in my OP, the 5700 is truly outstanding in daylight, but I've failed miserably after 6 monts of pain, re-shoots, tech support, repair, etc. to get decent, consistent flash pictures with either the itty bitty Speedlight or the very competant Sunpak 433D. And I'm getting no where fast, so it's time to cut my losses and get on with my life. If I were in the market for a DSLR, I'd take a look at both the D70 and Canon 20D before buying anything. Let the war begin! -- ATM, aka Jerry |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Woodchuck Bill wrote:
Dude, I also own the 5700, and for me the choice is between the 8800 and the D70. I don't want to start a ZLR vs SLR war here, but I'm waiting until after I hear all of the PMA new releases before I decide which model to buy. I too am in love with my 5700, but I can learn to love another if it steals my heart! :-) I have the Nikon Coolpix 5000 and the Canon SLR 300d. For action shots the 300d is the automatic choice but for static low light shots, the 5000 wins hands down. I have just completed a 5 week trip to asia and left the 300d at home because of it's weight with all of the lens etc. The points in favour of the 5000 were it's reticulating LCD view-finder and the 19mm WA lens accessory, both received a lot of use with the 3,000 photos that I shot. -- Regards - Terry Hollis, Auckland, New Zealand replace "nospam" with "terry.hollis" to reply |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Terry Hollis wrote:
I have the Nikon Coolpix 5000 and the Canon SLR 300d. For action shots the 300d is the automatic choice but for static low light shots, the 5000 wins hands down. That's very interesting, I would have thought it to be the other way round. What does the 5000 offer on static low light shots that the 300d does not? -Wolfgang |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
Terry Hollis wrote: I have the Nikon Coolpix 5000 and the Canon SLR 300d. For action shots the 300d is the automatic choice but for static low light shots, the 5000 wins hands down. That's very interesting, I would have thought it to be the other way round. What does the 5000 offer on static low light shots that the 300d does not? -Wolfgang The 300d is an SLR and as such you must use a tripod in low light conditions, for a traveller in Asia, a tripod is not an option. The CP 5000 has a reticulating LCD view-finder and I have found that in low light situations I can always find something to support the camera, a wall, rubbish bin or whatever and in spite of the awkward position the camera may be in, I can still get a good view of the view-finder. With the SLR the need to have your eye in a particular place makes it unsuitable for this rough and ready type of support. -- Regards - Terry Hollis, Auckland, New Zealand replace "nospam" with "terry.hollis" to reply |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Larry wrote:
In article , says... The 300d is an SLR and as such you must use a tripod in low light conditions, for a traveller in Asia, a tripod is not an option. The CP 5000 has a reticulating LCD view-finder and I have found that in low light situations I can always find something to support the camera, a wall, rubbish bin or whatever and in spite of the awkward position the camera may be in, I can still get a good view of the view-finder. With the SLR the need to have your eye in a particular place makes it unsuitable for this rough and ready type of support. I think you meant "Articulated" view finder.. recticulated infers some sort of "pattern" like on a Recticulated Python. You are right and much more articulate than I :-) -- Regards - Terry Hollis, Auckland, New Zealand replace "nospam" with "terry.hollis" to reply |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:59:49 +1300, "Terry Hollis"
wrote: The 300d is an SLR and as such you must use a tripod in low light conditions, for a traveller in Asia, a tripod is not an option. The CP 5000 has a reticulating LCD view-finder and I have found that in low light situations I can always find something to support the camera, a wall, rubbish bin or whatever and in spite of the awkward position the camera may be in, I can still get a good view of the view-finder. With the SLR the need to have your eye in a particular place makes it unsuitable for this rough and ready type of support. Righto. But you don't think that the fact that the 300D has some tree stops more of usable sensor sensitivity compensates a little for its lack of articulated viewfinder? Or, put another way: It has to be a good deal darker to be low light conditions for a 300D than for the CP 5000. Jan Böhme Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik. Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Jan Böhme wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:59:49 +1300, "Terry Hollis" wrote: The 300d is an SLR and as such you must use a tripod in low light conditions, for a traveller in Asia, a tripod is not an option. The CP 5000 has a reticulating LCD view-finder and I have found that in low light situations I can always find something to support the camera, a wall, rubbish bin or whatever and in spite of the awkward position the camera may be in, I can still get a good view of the view-finder. With the SLR the need to have your eye in a particular place makes it unsuitable for this rough and ready type of support. Righto. But you don't think that the fact that the 300D has some tree stops more of usable sensor sensitivity compensates a little for its lack of articulated viewfinder? Or, put another way: It has to be a good deal darker to be low light conditions for a 300D than for the CP 5000. Jan Böhme Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik. Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur I don't know how you arrive at 3 stops, the 300d does 1600 ISO and the CP5000 does 800 ISO. The standard lens for the Canon has an aperture of 3.5 and the CP5000 has an aperture of 2.8, maybe a 1/2 stop advantage to the Canon with a lens that is close to usless for touring. Add to that the wide-angle lens accessory for the Nikon being equivalent to 19mm (in 35mm terms) and the Canon at 28mm is not in the same race. I use my 300d for sports photography and long lens stuff and for that the Nikon is not in the race. -- Regards - Terry Hollis, Auckland, New Zealand replace "nospam" with "terry.hollis" to reply |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Terry Hollis wrote:
Jan Böhme wrote: On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:59:49 +1300, "Terry Hollis" wrote: The 300d is an SLR and as such you must use a tripod in low light conditions, for a traveller in Asia, a tripod is not an option. The CP 5000 has a reticulating LCD view-finder and I have found that in low light situations I can always find something to support the camera, a wall, rubbish bin or whatever and in spite of the awkward position the camera may be in, I can still get a good view of the view-finder. With the SLR the need to have your eye in a particular place makes it unsuitable for this rough and ready type of support. Righto. But you don't think that the fact that the 300D has some tree stops more of usable sensor sensitivity compensates a little for its lack of articulated viewfinder? Or, put another way: It has to be a good deal darker to be low light conditions for a 300D than for the CP 5000. Jan Böhme Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik. Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur I don't know how you arrive at 3 stops, the 300d does 1600 ISO and the CP5000 does 800 ISO. The standard lens for the Canon has an aperture of 3.5 and the CP5000 has an aperture of 2.8, maybe a 1/2 stop advantage to the Canon with a lens that is close to usless for touring. Add to that the wide-angle lens accessory for the Nikon being equivalent to 19mm (in 35mm terms) and the Canon at 28mm is not in the same race. I use my 300d for sports photography and long lens stuff and for that the Nikon is not in the race. CP5000 in the Petersen Auto Museum, no flash: http://www.fototime.com/B876FF9954F4C74/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/EB5BE405C1A8111/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/3CC13CDF1644C51/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/3EAA017BB310772/orig.jpg With hand-held Vivitar "Digital Slave" flash: http://www.fototime.com/87EB914558721D5/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/E92E40D65091B45/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/C606881EBCC2A20/orig.jpg Bondurant, Shelby, Phil Hill, Gurney, Hall: http://www.fototime.com/5D78DA29829119C/orig.jpg I really like the CP5000 with WA convertor. And they are practically giving them away these days. For this kind of work the only reason to pass them up is keep-ahead-of-the-pack, Bigger Bat stuff. -- Frank ess |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon 8800 | Nancy C Kenfield | Digital Photography | 5 | February 8th 05 12:28 AM |
Nikon 8800 | Evon | Digital Photography | 0 | January 12th 05 11:21 AM |
Seeking recommendation for used SLR gears | S. S. | 35mm Photo Equipment | 186 | December 10th 04 12:18 AM |
CANON - The Great Innovator (was: CANON – The Great Pretender) | Steven M. Scharf | Digital Photography | 104 | September 3rd 04 01:01 PM |
Nikon 8000 demo unit vs. Nikon 8000 refurb vs. Nikon 9000 | JR | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 2 | April 10th 04 05:40 PM |