Luminous landscape looks at the D3/D300

[Nickcanada]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/nikon-d3-d300.shtml


If the 5D mkII has ISO ability like that I'm getting one. :p

[swpars]

The review seems to imply that no current Canon camera has Auto ISO. I thought the 40D had this feature?

I sincerely hope that the D80 replacement (D90?) has high ISO capabilities like the D300- so I can pick one up in 2010 for a good deal when it's at the end of its life cycle.

[coldrain]

Like all of their articles, this one is weird in places too. I read that article 2 times, because in the beginning it seems to claim to get into the UI differences between the Canon and the Nikons. And then it does not really do that! Just very superficially.

As always, not very informative, as always, hair raising and eye bleeding layout and design of the page... one weird website indeed.

[erichlund]

Perhaps you and I did not read the same article. Camera operation features are basically what he talked about, and that IS the user interface. For instance, he took Canon to task for burying (in a menu, I presume: He didn't say how you get to it) Mirror Lockup (credit for having it), and praised Nikon for including it on the mode selection dial. However, Nikon doesn't allow the use of self timer with Mirror Lockup, and that was a balancing negative. These are user interface issues.

The meat of the article (the center portion) was all about these user interface items. If you were expecting him to talk about just shape and positioning of buttons, that's only a very limited portion of what makes up a user interface. Features that make your picture taking experience better or easier are part of the user interface, and he spent a significant portion of the article on them.

[coldrain]

Exactly, just barely skimming UI aspects. Nothing about menu structure, how they differ. Nothing about the AF systems and how they differ in operation (settings wise, while shooting). Nothing about WB and other image settings, nothing about focal point selection or about DOF button placement, nothing about anything of all such things... only about what features the cameras have (and that is not exhaustive either).

So basically, not what it promisses to be: an actual user interface comparison between Canon (1D MK III) and Nikon (D3).

Like all their articles basically, they do not dig deep yet they pretend to do so. And yikes, what is up with that AWFUL website design, talk about UI...

The only website I know that is even worse on the eyes is that website from that Norwegian Nikon guy with the UV interest, what is his name.

Although traumflieger (German Canon centric website) is not much better web site design wise... very informative and thorough they are though (but one would expect that from a German site).

[erichlund]

Exactly, just barely skimming UI aspects. Nothing about menu structure, how they differ. Nothing about the AF systems and how they differ in operation (settings wise, while shooting). Nothing about WB and other image settings, nothing about focal point selection or about DOF button placement, nothing about anything of all such things... only about what features the cameras have (and that is not exhaustive either).

In two years of using the D200, I rarely ever go into the menus. I consider this an advantage in user interface design (that the features I use most are accessible without the menu system.) The manual for the D300 is 421 pages. It seems a little unlikely that he would cover every feature. Most of what he talked about is new or changed. He hit some highlights.

So basically, not what it promisses to be: an actual user interface comparison between Canon (1D MK III) and Nikon (D3).

Like all their articles basically, they do not dig deep yet they pretend to do so. And yikes, what is up with that AWFUL website design, talk about UI...

I don't think you realize that most of these people are not like Phil Askey. They do not do website for a living. The website is a sideline. The colors are not the best, but as long as the contrast is adequate and when I click on something, it works, I really don't care about other people's design choices.

The only website I know that is even worse on the eyes is that website from that Norwegian Nikon guy with the UV interest, what is his name.

Admittedly, some people who specialize in actually taking photographs and teaching seem to have a disfunction when it comes to website design. I will choose to not care. Bjorn Rorslett's opinion about cameras and lenses matters because it's not about how they measure in a lab, but how the work in actual use. It's not that he does is not aware of those technical issues. He probably knows more than you or I ever will. But he chooses to limit his publication to describing the actual use of the item in review.

Although traumflieger (German Canon centric website) is not much better web site design wise... very informative and thorough they are though (but one would expect that from a German site).

Can't help you there. I don't read German, don't use Canon, and don't know the URL. Sounds like a bunch of gear heads who have more time for the website than actual photography (based, admittedly, only on your description). Are any of them actually photographers (by that, I mean, of some notoriety)? You see, as limited as Reichman's article is, it comes from the perspective of someone who has spent a significant portion of his life as a professional and serious amateur photographer. That actually does count for something.

[coldrain]

Menus? You picked one word out to dismiss my criticism of that article?

You never change WB, AF points and AF function, never change ISO settings, you never actually operate the camera? THAT is what the UI is about, and that is what the article pretends to be about, and it just is not.

And that was my criticism. No or hardly any actual information about how Canon and Nikon differ. At times one reads how the Canon cameras seem to be more geared towards actual practice, and at times you read the exact opposite (like in this article). But this guy does not explain why, other than that we know that yes, Canon should have a dedicated mirror lock up button.

So, i still maintain that it is not a very valuable article, and the more you analyze it, the stranger it gets.