D300 vs D3 vs D90

[Cyberwlf]

I was reading Ken Rockwells site and to my surprise he made an observation neither DCResource or DPReview did. That the D90 was offering equal or better IQ than the D300 and close to the D3 in colour saturation at high ISOs, and that sharpness across all cameras were equal.

Now he did say the FPS, build, etc of the D300/D3 was clearly faster/more rugged. But that's it, he also said 11 focus points vs 51 didnt matter.

So this view surprised me but i was wondering what others thoughts on this were, especially people who've been able to do their own comparison between these cameras? As i found the whole thing a little hard to believe at first given the markets & 'class' of camera the D90 is supposed to fall into compared to the D300/D3.

[jcon]

Just more evidence Mr. Rockwell drinks his own bath water!

[Turn]

I think Rockwell is the equivalent of Fox News

[Rooz]

I think Rockwell is the equivalent of Fox News

lmfao...
never heard it put that way before. thats gold.

[Cyberwlf]

Haha, nice. Well I think that speaks for itself then.

[Rooz]

That the D90 was offering equal or better IQ than the D300

equal to yes. better ? how so ? doesnt make alot of sense. in saying that...a canon xt in the right hands can produce IQ as good as a d300.



and close to the D3 in colour saturation at high ISOs.


complete and utter rot.



and that sharpness across all cameras were equal.


irrelevant. he has harped on about this sharpness thing forever and a day. truth is its a load of rubbish.



he also said 11 focus points vs 51 didnt matter.


complete and utter rot.


So this view surprised me

it should, cos its complete and utter rot.


but i was wondering what others thoughts on this were,

its complete and utter rot.


i found the whole thing a little hard to believe at first.

you should, cos its complete and utter rot.

i hope that clarifies my thoughts on the matter. lol :p

[Cyberwlf]

It does, very clearly! :p

Funny thing is he has a section on his website which he refers to for those who he dismisses for questioning his sharpness ideas. He calls them armchair critics who never take photos. heh

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

He's the tosspot who also said something like the 18-200VR replaces all the lenses in your arsenal, you now only need one lens. You've seen for yourself how true that was.

[K1W1]

I was reading Ken Rockwells site


We all make that mistake once. Most of us never repeat it.

[VTEC_EATER]

He's the tosspot who also said something like the 18-200VR replaces all the lenses in your arsenal, you now only need one lens. You've seen for yourself how true that was.

And that everyone who is not a professional needs nothing more than the D40.

Not bashing the D40 crowd. Its a great camera and takes amazing photos, but even I know that every one of you out there will want to upgrade at some point.

[josef]

He's the tosspot who also said something like the 18-200VR replaces all the lenses in your arsenal, you now only need one lens. You've seen for yourself how true that was.

wait.. this isn't true?.. damn that Rockwell!!

[alessy]

Yust because of his statement that 18-200 is good enough to replace most of the lenses , I bought it. But I didnt need long till I realized that it is all in his mind... It is only his experience witch I dont think is worth anything.
His site sould be closed down because his statements are ... "I dont know how to say" ... putting a potencial buyer on a wrong track with wrong information.
I belive I'm not the only one that has been wrong informed by his statements.

[Cyberwlf]

It's easy to be mislead by his site, it comes across as a knowledgeable resource. Thom Hogans site by comparison though seems to be better though http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm , and his guide book on the D300 seems quality too.

[K1W1]

Thom Hogans guide books are worth every penny.

[SpecialK]

We all make that mistake once. Most of us never repeat it.

Well put, K1W1. Ken lost in the poll below, 11 to 18.

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35914&highlight=Rockwell

[Cyberwlf]

Poll is 19 now :p

[Cyberwlf]

I just made the mistake of rediscovering the Nokianian forums again. Information overload. Anyhow! The funny part was they had a recent KR thread there which had the same consensus ;)

[K1W1]

Seeing as the comparison between that twit and Thom Hogan has already been made on this thread everybody should have a read of this thoughtful and provocative essay (http://www.bythom.com/2009predictions.htm) and compare it with the drivel that appears on the other site.

[Cyberwlf]

Very good article, recent too. Hadn't noticed that one before, thanks for pointing it out. I'd like to think his predictions for Nikon in 2009 for the low end market a little too pessimistic though, especially as companies have had it made painfully aware to them now its sink or swim time, and to do that you gotta deliver.

I think though that Sony's low end dSLR's have taken up some popularity in the low end if my observations during my travels in Europe are any indication of what's popular, so think they may do better in 2009 than he predicts, not necessarily greatly better, but they do have seemed to establish something of a following amongst consumers. But this may not be the same in the American market, or Asia Pacific

Anyhow, if Nikon and Canon get short on money, there seems to be plenty of money still in doing what they originally started out doing, providing precision glass for weapons :p

As for product predictions, interesting stuff. Lets wait n see!

[eddie_dane]

I guess I'm the only one that likes Ken's site. Sure a lot of what he says is hyperbole but it's the web. Most people in here are advanced amateurs or even professionals. I think a lot of time you have to consider the audience when you judge the message. For a lot of people, a D40 and 18-200 is all (or more) than they will ever need. These are people that will never read bythom.com because it is over their heads. I don't mean this condencendantly either because a few years ago, that was me.

Now, I finally have a fairly decent collection of equipment and lenses. I've been taking my 16 year old son out taking pictures. He loves the D50. Compared to the Panasonic FZ-30 he was using prior, it's pretty complicated and it's started a lot of educational conversations with him about exposure, etc. He loves the 18-200 lens for its versatility. He's not as concerned as us about IQ but that pure desire to get what's in his head into the camera. I try to nudge him towards what I consider better glass but he wants the wide focal range and has a blast with it. I've found myself turning my nose up at the prospect of him using it too before I remind myself that the reason why he has access to it is that I bought it and used it happily for about 2 years!

The more I progress in my knowledge and technique, the more I insist on better equipment. Same goes for info on the web. I read Ken's site a lot less than I used to and read people like Thom more often and read what people in here has to say. I used to go to dpreview every day, now I only go there when someone in another forum refers to it.

[jcon]

All thats good and well, but when you are on the net, and people are reading what you say when they are trying to make an informed decision, you(Mr Rockwell), shouldnt be stating OPINIONS as FACTS. The same thing happens here from time to time, but Mr Rockwell is terrible at it.