PDA

View Full Version : Nikon d70s or Canon Rebel XT Poll!



jcw122
08-18-2005, 05:50 PM
Just out of curiousity, I'm starting this poll, asking people whether they would/do prefer the Nikon d70s or Canon Rebel XT over one another.

PLEASE STATE WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR CHOICE

EDIT: THIS IS NOT A PREFERENCE OF COMPANIES!!

D70FAN
08-18-2005, 08:18 PM
Just out of curiousity, I'm starting this poll, asking people whether they would/do prefer the Nikon d70s or Canon Rebel XT over one another.

PLEASE STATE WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR CHOICE

EDIT: opps, forgot to make the poll...umm...moderators if you can add one please? 1-Canon Rebel XT 2-Nikon d70s

Nope. Been there done that. Doesn't need to be restated. Serves no purpose. People like Canon... people like Nikon... people like Pentax...People like Olympus... people like Konica Minolta... and people start surveys.

Try being in one of the 5 ownership groups and enjoy photography, instead of taking meaningless surveys.

Rhys
08-19-2005, 05:59 AM
Just out of curiousity, I'm starting this poll, asking people whether they would/do prefer the Nikon d70s or Canon Rebel XT over one another.

I prefer Canon for digital AF and Nikon for flm MF.

Kalfireth
08-19-2005, 07:42 AM
If this is about personal preference then I'm going for the Nikon. Electronically they're both capable cameras - but I prefer the Nikons size and weight.

And will I criticise a Canon owner for picking Canon? hell no. I will not be drawn into the same tired sort of debate as happened with the ATI / nVidia graphics card war.

MrForgetable
08-19-2005, 06:31 PM
People like Olympus (???)...


i have an olympus and i loooooooove it.

but i'm too scared to state that here because i'll get butchered by all the canikon lovers here.

"OMG OLYMPUS HIGH ISO SUXXXXXX!!!one11!!"
"OMG OLYMPUS FOURTHIRDS HAS ALMOST NO LENSES IN ITS LINEUP!! I MEAN WHO CAN LIVE WITHOUT A 27.391mm F2.362907 PRIME LENS?!?"
"OMG OLYMPUS IS SOOOOOOOOOOO SLOW COMPARE TO 1D MarkII!!"
"OMG OLYMPUS LOOKS LIKE A PIECE OF CRAP WITH A PIECE SHAVED OFF THE TOP!!! SO UGLY!!"

and i could care less!

just messing of course :)

jcw122
08-19-2005, 09:17 PM
Umm...wtf?

First off, I refuse to be a photographer who shuns other companies, thats just ridiculous, very childish.


Second, I wasn't even asking for a company preferance, I was asking for individual preferences for which CAMERA they would like to have better, not which COMPANYs camera......

Obviously you people are not about the technology, more about the company. Well grow up, corporations like Nikon, Canon, who ever, DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU INDIVIDUALLY, THEY CARE ABOUT YOUR $$$. So stop feeling so special.


I'm honestly disappointed here.

D70FAN
08-19-2005, 10:16 PM
i have an olympus and i loooooooove it.

but i'm too scared to state that here because i'll get butchered by all the canikon lovers here.

"OMG OLYMPUS HIGH ISO SUXXXXXX!!!one11!!"
"OMG OLYMPUS FOURTHIRDS HAS ALMOST NO LENSES IN ITS LINEUP!! I MEAN WHO CAN LIVE WITHOUT A 27.391mm F2.362907 PRIME LENS?!?"
"OMG OLYMPUS IS SOOOOOOOOOOO SLOW COMPARE TO 1D MarkII!!"
"OMG OLYMPUS LOOKS LIKE A PIECE OF CRAP WITH A PIECE SHAVED OFF THE TOP!!! SO UGLY!!"

and i could care less!

just messing of course :)

Yeah. Sorry you took offense. I'm not a big fan of the E-300 and have a tough time understanding the rationale behind the design, but that's just me.

The (???) may have been a little crass, so I have edited it out.

Glad you like the Oly.

D70FAN
08-19-2005, 10:18 PM
Umm...wtf?

First off, I refuse to be a photographer who shuns other companies, thats just ridiculous, very childish.


Second, I wasn't even asking for a company preferance, I was asking for individual preferences for which CAMERA they would like to have better, not which COMPANYs camera......

Obviously you people are not about the technology, more about the company. Well grow up, corporations like Nikon, Canon, who ever, DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU INDIVIDUALLY, THEY CARE ABOUT YOUR $$$. So stop feeling so special.

I'm honestly disappointed here.

Sorry for your disappointment.

I have come to dislike poles, concerning Canon vs. Nikon, as it has a tendacy to polerize, leading to disagreements, which seem to grow to insults. And while this one may have started with the best of intentions there really is nothing to be gained.

jcw122
08-20-2005, 09:29 PM
Sorry for your disappointment.

I have come to dislike poles, concerning Canon vs. Nikon, as it has a tendacy to polerize, leading to disagreements, which seem to grow to insults. And while this one may have started with the best of intentions there really is nothing to be gained.


Thank you very much for the explanation George, no more disappointment in you now from me. Ur explanation of why u don't like polls makes alot of sense.

MrForgetable
08-20-2005, 11:56 PM
Yeah. Sorry you took offense. I'm not a big fan of the E-300 and have a tough time understanding the rationale behind the design, but that's just me.

The (???) may have been a little crass, so I have edited it out.

Glad you like the Oly.

it's perfectly fine. i was just messing around.

a lot of people aren't fans of the E-300 looks, but i think it is a very "functional-ugly". i find that my nose doesn't get "smushed" by the LCD when looking at the viewfinder and is much easier keeping the other eye on the subject when shooting something more dangerous such as motor racing or dangerous animals.

the high ISO "problem" exists though. but if i expose it nicely, i find the photos are easy to fix and clean up in PP, especially when i shoot RAW. and if for some reason the photo is way underexposed and there is too much noise, i can always make it a B+W and make the noise look like i added it on there on purpose :p

D70FAN
08-21-2005, 07:51 AM
it's perfectly fine. i was just messing around.

a lot of people aren't fans of the E-300 looks, but i think it is a very "functional-ugly". i find that my nose doesn't get "smushed" by the LCD when looking at the viewfinder and is much easier keeping the other eye on the subject when shooting something more dangerous such as motor racing or dangerous animals.

the high ISO "problem" exists though. but if i expose it nicely, i find the photos are easy to fix and clean up in PP, especially when i shoot RAW. and if for some reason the photo is way underexposed and there is too much noise, i can always make it a B+W and make the noise look like i added it on there on purpose :p

I don't find the E-300 ugly, and I would promote the camera if it were priced in the $500 area (with lens). I think of it more as an 8080 with removable lens. Kind of a cross-over camera.

Anyway, enough said.

Sounds like you like it and that's all that counts.

D70FAN
08-21-2005, 08:10 AM
Thank you very much for the explanation George, no more disappointment in you now from me. Ur explanation of why u don't like polls makes alot of sense.

Thanks. Since the poll is running, there are also some flaws with this poll that need addressing:

The D70s has only been available for a couple of months and I would be willing to bet that almost no one on the DCRP has tried one.

Also with the advent of the D50 to compete directly with the XT, I don't think that the D70s will even come into play in this poll.

So the response will be pretty predictable (a blow-out for the XT), and possibly misleading to the point where someone considering a dSLR will go for the more popular camera and not even try the other 5.

The beneficiaries here will be those who own the XT as this poll helps validate their decision, further polarizing this board.

Just some thoughts.

jcw122
08-22-2005, 10:11 AM
Nice thoughts, I myself am about to buy the d70s very soon, but it's still keeping me guessing why people want this d50, it's a downgraded version of the d70s, but it can be found for DEAD similar prices of the d70s, so why would people buy a camera that isn't as good, for the same price? (i've started a thread on this a few days ago) http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11445

D70FAN
08-22-2005, 03:13 PM
Nice thoughts, I myself am about to buy the d70s very soon, but it's still keeping me guessing why people want this d50, it's a downgraded version of the d70s, but it can be found for DEAD similar prices of the d70s, so why would people buy a camera that isn't as good, for the same price? (i've started a thread on this a few days ago) http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11445

Just my 2 cents worth:

If you look at the price of the D70 (not to be confused with the D70s), it is nose-to-nose with the D50 (about $749 for the body). But the D70 is no longer in production so when the last of them are sold the D70s will remain with a base price of $899 for the body, add $300 for the 18-70 kit lens, and you have $1199 for the kit (list).

The D50 is designed and advertised for the "family or home" photographer, and I would be willing to bet that you will see it selling for $699-$749 (with the 18-55 DX) by November, and the D70s at $1099 with 18-70 DX.

While the D50 is detuned it is certainly not a clunker, and seems to have a new faster controller providing High Speed USB, better noise processing, and faster focusing than the D70s (but not by much). For the lower price and the performance boosts, you give up some control and minor features, but it seems to be every bit as competent as the D70s.

When the dust settles, I think that Nikon will have done a good job of positioning at the $800 and $1200 levels, and should have a nifty offering in the $1600 level with the replacement for the D100.

Anyway, if you get half the enjoyment out of the D70s that I have from the D70 you will be a fortunate person indeed (as I am).

jcw122
08-22-2005, 03:32 PM
All good points, but still, 899 is the d70's MSRP, and I've found it at a few places for OVER 100 buck LESS THAN MSRP. http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Nikon_D70s_Digital_SLR_Camera_Body_Only,__82344 48/search=Nikon+d70s

Many of these resellers are very well ranked.

BUT THEN AGAIN, I can see it being an advantage of the d50 using the High Speed USB 2.0, and the better processing and what not.

AllanMarcus
08-22-2005, 04:32 PM
I'm getting the Konica-Minolta Maxxum D5 :-)

98 SNAKE EATER
08-29-2005, 08:32 AM
XT


Price, more MP's, more available accessories :)




Rick

ishturkish
08-29-2005, 09:42 PM
well, since all you're asking for is our opinion, there's nothing wrong with giving it, subjective to my own needs as it may be. Picture quality is very close on these cameras (assuming comparable lenses), so you really can't go wrong with any of today's entry level DSLRs. If we're nitpicking, my current wish-list ranking:

1. KM 5D. All things being relatively equal, AS trumps the other's advantages. ISO range of 100-3200. *based on limited reviews only
2. Nikon D50. Great ergonomics, great price, solid build.
3. Pentax *ist DS. Same selling points as the D50 (even cheaper and lighter), with less available lenses.
4. Rebel XT. The feature list/value is great, lots of lenses and accesories, but I hate holding that thing.
5. Nikon D70. Great camera, but I prefer the smaller ones above
6. Oly E300. I can live with getting my camera cleaned at a shop every once in a while...

Milo
09-01-2005, 07:24 AM
I feel safer with a Canon. But hey, they all take great pictures, its like comparing apples and pears. Their both fruit. Just don't get me started on Lieca's ;)

http://01792.org

D70FAN
09-01-2005, 08:41 AM
I feel safer with a Canon. But hey, they all take great pictures, its like comparing apples and pears. Their both fruit. Just don't get me started on Lieca's ;)

http://01792.org

Come on Milo... I think we are ready for a change of pace. Let's hear from the Lieca camp. ;)

astro
09-01-2005, 03:46 PM
I choose Pentax *ist DS. :)
*ist DS body only costs $560 at www.buydig.com
If you want a great portable dSLR with a great line of lens, and a great viewfinder, the pentax is the best choice IMO.
One thing that is commonly overlooked nowadays is the viewfinder. Typical budget SLRs, such as offerings from your favorite Canon digital rebels, and Nikon D70s, both use low quality mirror viewfinders that result in low resolution and low magnification. Pentax actually includes a pentaprism viewfinder that you will usually only find on higher end models. This is a critical aspect that is imperative to have accurate manual focusing.

Pentax also has the best compatibility with old lens. You can fit on anything from over 30 years ago with full lens functionality. With a $10 adapter, you can use even older lens that use the screwmount.
Now why would you want to use old lens?
First of all, the price, you can get great lens for a fraction of the cost.
In two weeks, I have amassed a total for SIX lenses for ~$400 from ebay.

SMC DA 18-55mm kit lens - $105
SMC FA 35-70mm/80-200mm circa early 90s -$85
SMC M 50mm F/1.4 circa early 80s from ebay for $55
SMC A 135mm F/3.5 circa late 70s from ebay for $45
Super Takumar 300mm F/4 circa late 60s for $105.

If bought new, such a lens collection would have set you back over $2000.
Aside from the lack of autofocus, the old manual focus fixed focal length lenses have about the same quality as the new lens if not better. In fact, they are in many aspects better. Nothing beats the smooth focus of a manual focusing lens. Autofocus lens in comparison, have loose focusing mechanisms, so the motor can spin it more easily. If you ever used both autofocus and manual focus, the difference is like night and day.
And don't overlook Pentax's quality either. According to Lumious Landscapes, they have the best fast fifty, and their limited line of lenses are the highest quality ever made.
Here are some great reviews of Pentax lenses.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml
But I've taken pictures that look just as wonderful with another, albeit completely forgotten aristocrat the M42 screwmount Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm f/1.4. This is one of my favorite lenses, in fact. Its results can be simply gorgeous. Of course, to use this lens you'll have to put up with using a Spotmatic, one of the greatest SLRs in history but long in the tooth today. An engineer at a Japanese camera company told me that if this lens were manufactured and marketed today, it would most likely have to sell for $1,200 to $1,500. I got mine for $60. (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-09-22.shtml)

Here are a few pics I took with it..
Macro with the 135mm F/3.5 with a Leica closeup lens I got from ebay for $5 (http://astroguy.org/aphidmacro1.jpg)
another macro (http://astroguy.org/redantlg.jpg)
yet another one (http://astroguy.org/wasplarge.jpg)
Sample shot I took with my 300mm F/4 that only cost me $105, this lens would have cost over $1200 new (http://astroguy.org/300mm2.jpg)
Don't expect to get anywhere near this kind of sharpness with $200 cheap zoom lenses.

D70FAN
09-01-2005, 08:01 PM
I choose Pentax *ist DS. :)
*ist DS body only costs $560 at www.buydig.com
If you want a great portable dSLR with a great line of lens, and a great viewfinder, the pentax is the best choice IMO.
One thing that is commonly overlooked nowadays is the viewfinder. Typical budget SLRs, such as offerings from your favorite Canon digital rebels, and Nikon D70s, both use low quality mirror viewfinders that result in low resolution and low magnification. Pentax actually includes a pentaprism viewfinder that you will usually only find on higher end models. This is a critical aspect that is imperative to have accurate manual focusing.

Pentax also has the best compatibility with old lens. You can fit on anything from over 30 years ago with full lens functionality. With a $10 adapter, you can use even older lens that use the screwmount.
Now why would you want to use old lens?
First of all, the price, you can get great lens for a fraction of the cost.
In two weeks, I have amassed a total for SIX lenses for ~$400 from ebay.

SMC DA 18-55mm kit lens - $105
SMC FA 35-70mm/80-200mm circa early 90s -$85
SMC M 50mm F/1.4 circa early 80s from ebay for $55
SMC A 135mm F/3.5 circa late 70s from ebay for $45
Super Takumar 300mm F/4 circa late 60s for $105.

If bought new, such a lens collection would have set you back over $2000.
Aside from the lack of autofocus, the old manual focus fixed focal length lenses have about the same quality as the new lens if not better. In fact, they are in many aspects better. Nothing beats the smooth focus of a manual focusing lens. Autofocus lens in comparison, have loose focusing mechanisms, so the motor can spin it more easily. If you ever used both autofocus and manual focus, the difference is like night and day.
And don't overlook Pentax's quality either. According to Lumious Landscapes, they have the best fast fifty, and their limited line of lenses are the highest quality ever made.
Here are some great reviews of Pentax lenses.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml
But I've taken pictures that look just as wonderful with another, albeit completely forgotten aristocrat the M42 screwmount Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm f/1.4. This is one of my favorite lenses, in fact. Its results can be simply gorgeous. Of course, to use this lens you'll have to put up with using a Spotmatic, one of the greatest SLRs in history but long in the tooth today. An engineer at a Japanese camera company told me that if this lens were manufactured and marketed today, it would most likely have to sell for $1,200 to $1,500. I got mine for $60. (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-09-22.shtml)

Here are a few pics I took with it..
Macro with the 135mm F/3.5 with a Leica closeup lens I got from ebay for $5 (http://astroguy.org/aphidmacro1.jpg)
another macro (http://astroguy.org/redantlg.jpg)
yet another one (http://astroguy.org/wasplarge.jpg)
Sample shot I took with my 300mm F/4 that only cost me $105, this lens would have cost over $1200 new (http://astroguy.org/300mm2.jpg)
Don't expect to get anywhere near this kind of sharpness with $200 cheap zoom lenses.

Oakely-doakely. Nice pitch. We are happy that you are happy.

As I said before... Have fun lugging all that glass around.

Tyger
09-01-2005, 08:22 PM
Honestly I looked at both and the selling point for me was the Price.

I wanted an entry level SLR cam that i can learn and grow with. The MP was a plus as well as the features. If the D70S was the same price i coul of went either way as this is my first SLR camera.

BigConig
09-08-2005, 06:11 AM
I prefer the ergonomics, menu and build of the D70s

aparmley
09-09-2005, 02:57 PM
I don't think a person could go wrong with either really, but I think a more benefical thread would be:

I have owned both the XT/20D and the D70/D70s and heres my opinion: . . .

=)

After all the pole says which do you prefer, its hard to gain preference without the experience of both.

j26
09-09-2005, 05:17 PM
D70s

I haven't tried it, but I was looking for a camera a while back and couldn't get comfortable holding the XT, so I went for the D70. I haven't looked back.

It's all down to ergonomics for me - both are great cameras, but I'm so happy I went for the larger and heavier D70. To me it feels more like a proper camera than the XT.

geezerrob
09-10-2005, 07:21 PM
Hi All,
For me it was the 8 megapixels over the 6. I have printed a 30x40 enlargement photo from my XT on an Epson 9600 without a trace of noise or grain. The result was truly amazing.

Rob

Rhys
09-10-2005, 08:21 PM
I went for 8 megapixels and the smaller, lighter camera. The bonus is that the BG-E3 takes AA batteries as well as Canon's funky battery.

D70FAN
09-10-2005, 08:52 PM
Hi All,
For me it was the 8 megapixels over the 6. I have printed a 30x40 enlargement photo from my XT on an Epson 9600 without a trace of noise or grain. The result was truly amazing.

Rob

Did you do a comparison 30 x 40 print with a 6MP dSLR image?

jcw122
09-11-2005, 07:41 AM
Well, I compared features and what each camera has directly (thanks to dpreview.com...awesome site)...I looked at both of their in-depth reviews as well as side by sideing them....

I chose the Canon Digital Rebel XT...I took my first shots a few days ago and I'm VERY pleased!

BTW the I like my SIgma 18-200s!

D70FAN
09-11-2005, 07:46 AM
Well, I compared features and what each camera has directly (thanks to dpreview.com...awesome site)...I looked at both of their in-depth reviews as well as side by sideing them....

I chose the Canon Digital Rebel XT...I took my first shots a few days ago and I'm VERY pleased!

BTW the I like my SIgma 18-200s!

As far as picture quality, what's not to like.

Thanks for the input on the Sigma 18-200 as we have had several Canon users with focus problems on this, and other, Sigma lenses.

jcw122
09-11-2005, 07:03 PM
As far as picture quality, what's not to like.

Thanks for the input on the Sigma 18-200 as we have had several Canon users with focus problems on this, and other, Sigma lenses.

Yeah from the few pics I've taken so far (90?) I've done some low light pictures w/ focusing w/out flash help...and they look great. Very happy w/ how far they zoom, and I'm glad I chose them over the 18-125 because of the extra range and no vignetting.

geezerrob
09-12-2005, 04:14 AM
Did you do a comparison 30 x 40 print with a 6MP dSLR image?

Yes, I did (from a friends camera here at work). Although the Nikon's result was very good the Canon's was a little bit better (in my eyes). I agree with those who say you cannot go wrong with with either one. It really just comes down to personal choice.

Rob

Rhys
09-12-2005, 05:20 AM
I find it amsing to see the same arguents cropping up year after year. A few years ago, 2 megapixels was argued as being as good as 3 megapixels for printing 10x8s. I'll admit that I have some nice A4s from 2 megapixels but they do lack the crispness I can get from 3 at A4.

Then people argued that 3 megapixels was as good as 4 then that 4 was as good as 5 etc (ad nauseum)

Now people are arguing that 6 megapixels is as good as 8. I'll agree that the percentge difference is less but 8 megapixels will allow more pixels per inch thus allowing larger prints or clearer lrge prints than 6 megapixels. It just cracks me up to see people arguing that infereor megapixelage is as good as superior megapixelage.