PDA

View Full Version : What does Nikon do now?



asdasd12345
02-17-2005, 08:37 AM
So the new 350D/Rebel XT is released in March for quite a bit less than the D70. Obviously if Nikon have a new DSLR waiting in the wings, the D70's price has to come down quite a lot as it can no longer compete with the Rebel XT which is cheaper than the D70. I figure the price of the D70 will drop to $799, because for only 100 more you can get the Rebel XT body.

I also figure Nikon has a new 8MP Dslr waiting to be announced/released. There are rumours of a D90, Dxx that are coming out soon. It has to be priced around the cost of the Rebel XT.

D70FAN
02-17-2005, 09:43 AM
So the new 350D/Rebel XT is released in March for quite a bit less than the D70. Obviously if Nikon have a new DSLR waiting in the wings, the D70's price has to come down quite a lot as it can no longer compete with the Rebel XT which is cheaper than the D70. I figure the price of the D70 will drop to $799, because for only 100 more you can get the Rebel XT body.

I also figure Nikon has a new 8MP Dslr waiting to be announced/released. There are rumours of a D90, Dxx that are coming out soon. It has to be priced around the cost of the Rebel XT.

Like the 20D the new Rebel looks pretty nice. Once again Canon seems to have out-consumered and one-upped Nikon, but we will see, when the reviews come out, if Canon has one-upped Nikon or simply shot themselves in the foot, by cutting into the 20D market. Yes I realize that it is not the same 8MP APS-C imager (wink-wink), and it will "only" shoot 3fps and has a smaller buffer (do I hear hackers scrambling looking for the answer?).

As a D70 owner (who is now waiting for Nikon to fix and return it). I have to tell you that Canon is looking mighty good right now, and I'm really looking seriously at the 350D or even the 20D.

If Nikon can't figure out how to upgrade the existing D70 (decent firmware upgrade to fix the intermittent moire problem) and offer a decent answer to the XT, they might as well shut down the Thailand plant, because there is no longer a compelling reason for consumers to stay with Nikon.

The 20D was the warning shot accross the bow, the XT is aimed at the bridge. Let's hope that Nikon has an answering shot, or Canon may actually hit them below the waterline with the same shot. :(

asdasd12345
02-17-2005, 02:17 PM
I think it stands to reason that now the Rebel XT has been announced, the Nikon D70 will not sell many more units. The base price without the rebates for the kit with lens is over 1100. Meanwhile you can buy the new rebel which looks like a much better camera for 1000 with a lens kit. Nikon has to do something quite quickly or like you say, they may as well stop producing the D70. I was going to get one, but I thought I should wait until after the PMA.

D70FAN
02-17-2005, 07:16 PM
I think it stands to reason that now the Rebel XT has been announced, the Nikon D70 will not sell many more units. The base price without the rebates for the kit with lens is over 1100. Meanwhile you can buy the new rebel which looks like a much better camera for 1000 with a lens kit. Nikon has to do something quite quickly or like you say, they may as well stop producing the D70. I was going to get one, but I thought I should wait until after the PMA.

Yup. Canon is playing the "PT Barnum" card with the 350D. So what makes the 350D better than the D70?

Ah! 8MP. Anything else...?

Nikon hit their sales goal and target audience with the D70. Truely head-and-antlers above anything Canon was offering. Canon replied in kind with the 20D and now the 350D.

Ok Nikon, you're on...Next!

timmciglobal
02-18-2005, 01:13 AM
If you ask me Nikon's up a creek without a paddle.

Nikon was SECOND to release a "consumer" dSLR. Nikon is now going to be second (if at all) to release a "upgraded" consumer dSLR.

As far as claiming 350 has nothing over the D70 I think thats REALLY stretching it, the rebel had various pros versus the D70 (not limited to lens selection, ISO noise performance) and the 350 is going to add to that size and higher native resolution (and probably even higher ISO performance)

I think Nikon's worst nightmare was a 20D "baby" version. I think it's the primary reason the rebate is running to march 31st. I doubt Nikon has a D70 replacement ready until atleast April/May area, probably started the second they saw the 20D and realized what canon's sensor was doing.

There is an entire consumer market (a very big one) that doesn't care about spot metering or kit lens MTF performance. They care about good images capable of being croped, high speed shooting and "megapixels"

You put a D70 even @ 999 full kit vs a 350XT you're going to lose in the consumer market.

Shame really I do think the D70 has many refinements that canon could learn from but canon does have more brand recognition.

Tim

scalia
02-18-2005, 01:32 AM
Sony will buy Nikon... :D

now, that make a healthy competition:
1. Canon
2. Sony + Nikon
3. Panasonic + Oly (and 4/3 gangs)
;)

Samuel Lo
02-18-2005, 10:10 AM
Sony will buy Nikon... :D

now, that make a healthy competition:
1. Canon
2. Sony + Nikon
3. Panasonic + Oly (and 4/3 gangs)
;)

Really?
So will Nikon use Lenses from Carl Zeiss?

erichlund
02-18-2005, 10:58 AM
If you ask me Nikon's up a creek without a paddle.

Nikon was SECOND to release a "consumer" dSLR. Nikon is now going to be second (if at all) to release a "upgraded" consumer dSLR.

As far as claiming 350 has nothing over the D70 I think thats REALLY stretching it, the rebel had various pros versus the D70 (not limited to lens selection, ISO noise performance) and the 350 is going to add to that size and higher native resolution (and probably even higher ISO performance)

I think Nikon's worst nightmare was a 20D "baby" version. I think it's the primary reason the rebate is running to march 31st. I doubt Nikon has a D70 replacement ready until atleast April/May area, probably started the second they saw the 20D and realized what canon's sensor was doing.

There is an entire consumer market (a very big one) that doesn't care about spot metering or kit lens MTF performance. They care about good images capable of being croped, high speed shooting and "megapixels"

You put a D70 even @ 999 full kit vs a 350XT you're going to lose in the consumer market.

Shame really I do think the D70 has many refinements that canon could learn from but canon does have more brand recognition.

Tim

Second yes, but clearly the better camera. The key with Nikon is to be patient. They work at their own pace. But the D70 was a blockbuster, and its replacement will probably be so, as well. The D70 was so popular that nearly 90% of the traffic on the Nikon users site, www.nikonians.com (http://www.nikonians.com), was D70. In fact, there's a bit of a battle going on now, because the moderators are moving many posts to other forums if they contain any degree of "other" information, such as lenses or speedlights. The D70 users are up in arms.

ISO performance??? The 350 advertising is careful to say this is not the same sensor as in the 20D. It's a little early to be making performance claims.

Brand Recognition??? Perhaps, but only as a mainstream consumer brand. If you took a poll on the street and asked people what brand of camera is most used by pros, I would guess they would say Nikon. They might actually be wrong, but that's what I expect the impression would be.

Cheers,
Eric

timmciglobal
02-18-2005, 01:00 PM
Canon didn't sell 1 million rebels to pros.

The consumer market is FAR greater then the pro market. The pro market is in lenses and someone buying a D70 isn't buying a 200>400 2.8 VR lens.

Tim

asdasd12345
02-18-2005, 01:51 PM
It seems that right now would be a very silly time to buy a DSLR. Not only should the Rebel XT drive down the price of the D70 but also the Pentax *ist DS and the Olympus E300. They simply have to knock down the price quite a bit otherwise Canon is going to slaughter them (if the Rebel XT proves to be an excellent camera that is)

Jredtugboat
02-18-2005, 02:35 PM
It seems that right now would be a very silly time to buy a DSLR. Not only should the Rebel XT drive down the price of the D70 but also the Pentax *ist DS and the Olympus E300. They simply have to knock down the price quite a bit otherwise Canon is going to slaughter them (if the Rebel XT proves to be an excellent camera that is)

You make an interesting point. I'm not sure I totally agree, but it comes down to how you look at things.

If you look at things from a "most value for the dollar" POV, then it's not such a bad time to buy a dSLR, especially if rumours of the upcoming price wars pan out. The D70, EOS-20D, and the Rebels are all capable of taking excellent pictures, while allowing you to buy glass that should last you into the next generation.

If you look at things from a "performance and price" POV, then you might think, hey, let's wait a year or so and see how the sensor market shakes out before buying. (How long will APS-C remain a standard for prosumer/consumer dSLRs? That's my latest question.)

For myself, I have to admit that I fall prey to the DQ (Doodad Quotient) and the technology...I bought the first-generation of the Thunderbird Athlon, for example, because it was the sexiest thing I could afford, not so much because I actually needed all the power (at the time). I'm considering holding off another year before taking the splurge. In the meantime, I'm beginning to look at new cameras in the ultra-slim/portable market, because I want something good that I can have on me at all times.

jeisner
02-19-2005, 03:25 AM
Yup. Canon is playing the "PT Barnum" card with the 350D. So what makes the 350D better than the D70?

Ah! 8MP. Anything else...?

Well Canon has added a couple of featuers that the Pentax *isdt DS already had, that the D71 will probably have when it comes out ;-)

- MLU
- Smaller size
- Lighter
- AA support, albeit through grip (does D70 have this?)
- USB 2

Feature I like that my DS doesn't have

- Raw and JPEG: Not a huge thing but can be god to have both and not just one or the other, if the JPEG looks good you won't need to bother playing with the RAW file.


There is nothing ground-breaking that would make me want to swap but regardless its all good, now all the other camera companies scramble to think of nifty features to add that the others don't have, and of course also incorporate the competitions features. A price/feature war is all good for us in the end, as long as there is competition.

speaklightly
02-19-2005, 04:17 PM
Asdasd12345-

I think you make an excellent point. Because Canon got out with the DigRebel XT before Nikon, Nikon is already at a disadvantage, time-wise. Yes, Nikon can still save things by making a block buster announcement just as the PMA is opening. But, please keep in mind they have already made the anouncements, at least, regarding their fixed lens digital cameras.

Will they pop out with a dSLR announcement of a Nikon D-70 replacement all by itself, just as PMA is opening? Actually, I think they will. They have made a huge fixed plant investment in their Thailand facility. For them not to announce a Nikon D-70 replacement at this critical (marketing-wise) time would doom the D-70 and its replacements. Quite literally, they have to do something rather immediately, or be preempted by Canon. Personally, I don't think that Nikon is going to allow Canon take total control of the ever growing consumer dSLR market.

So my guess, and please understand it is nothing more than a guess, is that Nikon has now been forced to act, or to kiss off the consumer dSLR market. No, the market is most probably moving a good deal faster than Nikon desires, but they are now being forced to act if they want any share of the consumer dSLR market. Their investment in their Thailand manufacturing facilities demands that they act right now.

Will they act? Frankly, I am not sure. Let's wait and see.

Speaklightly

D70FAN
02-19-2005, 07:01 PM
Well Canon has added a couple of featuers that the Pentax *isdt DS already had, that the D71 will probably have when it comes out ;-)

- MLU
- Smaller size
- Lighter
- AA support, albeit through grip (does D70 have this?)
- USB 2

Feature I like that my DS doesn't have

- Raw and JPEG: Not a huge thing but can be god to have both and not just one or the other, if the JPEG looks good you won't need to bother playing with the RAW file.

There is nothing ground-breaking that would make me want to swap but regardless its all good, now all the other camera companies scramble to think of nifty features to add that the others don't have, and of course also incorporate the competitions features. A price/feature war is all good for us in the end, as long as there is competition.

Do any of those attributes hinder your ability to take pictures? Would the photos you see now be any different if those features were added to your *ist DS?

From my point of veiw, none of the attributes you have listed are important. And in the case of "smaller and lighter" are actually negatives. Why do I need a battery grip? And yes there is an after market grip available for the D70. Do I ever hook the D70 directly to a computer? Never. So USB2.0HS is pretty moot.

8MP, Could be an advantage. I didn't really notice it on the 20D vs. D70 prints (11 x 17), but more is always better...right? ;)

jeisner
02-19-2005, 11:17 PM
Do any of those attributes hinder your ability to take pictures? Would the photos you see now be any different if those features were added to your *ist DS?

Apart from 8mp and Raw + Jpeg, they are all features that the *ist DS already has that Canon are adding to their new camera. Not having 8mp on a slightly smaller sensor isn't going to worry me all that much, the 6mp Sony CCD in the D70 and ist DS is fine for my use.

As for if they help or not, well the size and weight of the DS (and now canon 350) is about right for me ;-). On a tripod, MLU is a feature that does come in useful if you want the photos to be a sharp as they can be. I find for Macro photography (which I enjoy) on tripod using this feature does help in certain situations, you can see the following article that explains the situations it helps in.... MLU (http://photo.net/photo/nature/mlu)


Why do I need a battery grip?

I don't, I can use AA or CRV3 batteries in the camera itself, buying a grip just allows this in the 350 and D70, I didn't realise that the D70 already has this, I guess Canon was the only one behind on this issue. Then again not everyone sees the advantage of using AA or CRV3 batteries, it is a personal preference thing I guess.


Do I ever hook the D70 directly to a computer? Never. So USB2.0 is pretty moot.

Fair enough I didn't with previous cameras, but with USB 2 on the ist DS I do these days, but again its personal preference thing I guess.

gary_hendricks
02-20-2005, 02:34 AM
So the new 350D/Rebel XT is released in March for quite a bit less than the D70. Obviously if Nikon have a new DSLR waiting in the wings, the D70's price has to come down quite a lot as it can no longer compete with the Rebel XT which is cheaper than the D70. I figure the price of the D70 will drop to $799, because for only 100 more you can get the Rebel XT body.

I also figure Nikon has a new 8MP Dslr waiting to be announced/released. There are rumours of a D90, Dxx that are coming out soon. It has to be priced around the cost of the Rebel XT.

When is that 8MP Nikon DLSR coming? Anyone?

chinmi
02-20-2005, 08:49 AM
well, maybe they were doing an R&D to make a product that can beat the 350D...

but eventhough the 350D is already annoounced, 2 of my friends still buy the D70 this week... while i'll still wait for the 350D to come to my country (maybe around 4-5 months)

gary_hendricks
02-20-2005, 08:54 AM
I did some research just found a site that confirms the D90 won't come out for another year or so. So just buy a D70 now and don't worry.

Rhys
02-20-2005, 09:21 AM
I did some research just found a site that confirms the D90 won't come out for another year or so. So just buy a D70 now and don't worry.

I think an all-in-one seems a better deal at the moment. Until all DSLRs are full-frame like Canon's D20, I see no advantage of the DSLR over the all-in-one.

asdasd12345
02-20-2005, 01:40 PM
Well, a full day of the PMA has gone by, and I would be surprised if Nikon announces anything new now apart from the CoolPix's. I was hoping for a D50 or a D90 or anything new really. I guess I will wait until reviewers get their hands on a Rebel XT before I shell out some cash. Its a scary thing buying a digital camera because as soon as you buy it you know its going to be cheaper in a months time.

Rhys
02-20-2005, 02:42 PM
Well, a full day of the PMA has gone by, and I would be surprised if Nikon announces anything new now apart from the CoolPix's. I was hoping for a D50 or a D90 or anything new really. I guess I will wait until reviewers get their hands on a Rebel XT before I shell out some cash. Its a scary thing buying a digital camera because as soon as you buy it you know its going to be cheaper in a months time.

So do what I do... decide what you want now then buy when it's discontinued, some 6 months later.

I'm satisified with my 3mp cameras. I'll keep on with them until something worthwhile comes along. For the moment, I see nothing but fluff.

jeisner
02-20-2005, 04:45 PM
Until all DSLRs are full-frame like Canon's D20, I see no advantage of the DSLR over the all-in-one.

1) Why do you need full frame?

2) The Canon 20D is certainly NOT full frame!

Rhys
02-20-2005, 05:19 PM
Well there was some camera Canon produced recently that was full frame. The model number is immaterial. Until DSLRs are full frame then I really fail to see the point of buying them.

scalia
02-20-2005, 06:50 PM
Well there was some camera Canon produced recently that was full frame. The model number is immaterial. Until DSLRs are full frame then I really fail to see the point of buying them.

here's an interesting discussion : Thoughts About "Full Frame" (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-oct-24-04.shtml)

cheers

Rhys
02-20-2005, 07:12 PM
here's an interesting discussion : Thoughts About "Full Frame" (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-oct-24-04.shtml)

cheers

It is indeed an interesting view that the guy is presenting. For me, the advantage of full-frame is the ability to use wide-angle lenses. With the smaller sensor, the lenses are all heading towards telephoto which isn't to everybody's taste.

While I very much like the 380mm equivalence of the S1 IS, I do miss having the option of a 24mm equivalent. I found I tended as an SLR user to use lenses ranging from 24mm to 135mm most of all.

This is the true advantage of full-frame.

Samuel Lo
02-20-2005, 07:35 PM
It is indeed an interesting view that the guy is presenting. For me, the advantage of full-frame is the ability to use wide-angle lenses. With the smaller sensor, the lenses are all heading towards telephoto which isn't to everybody's taste.

While I very much like the 380mm equivalence of the S1 IS, I do miss having the option of a 24mm equivalent. I found I tended as an SLR user to use lenses ranging from 24mm to 135mm most of all.

This is the true advantage of full-frame.

If wide angle is needed, you can have a 12-24mm Lens, then you get a true 18-36mm Focal length, and it cover the range from ultra wide to wide angle.

jeisner
02-20-2005, 07:42 PM
For me, the advantage of full-frame is the ability to use wide-angle lenses.

I am still unsure of your reasons, there are plenty of wide angle lenses, even for pentax (which you say is only a niche range), there will surely be plenty more for Nikon and Canon?

Some of the cheaper wide angle zooms for Pentax
-Sigma 18-55
-Pentax 18-50
-Sigma 18-135
-Tamron 19-35

Some of the higher quality wide angle zooms for Pentax
-Sigma 18-50 EX
-Pentax 16-45 f4
-Tamron 17-35 f2.8
-Sigma 15-30 EX
-Sigma 17-35 f2.8 EX
-Sigma 10-20 EX (release date for PK mount not set, soon for C+N)


Quality prime wide angle for Pentax
-Pentax 14mm f2.8
-Sigma 14mm f2.8 EX
-Sigma 20mm f1.8
-Tamron 14mm f2.8

Even when you consider the 1.5x crop factor there are a lot of usefull wide angle lenses here, and due to the crop factor tele lenses to reach the same distance are cheaper, ie to get to 300mm I only need to buy a decent quality 200mm.

It will be a long while yet until FF is affordable, to most of us!

Rhys
02-21-2005, 08:09 AM
A long time until FF is available? I don't think so. Look at the prices. The Canon D whatever that has full-frame is about half what the Kodak full-frame camera costs. I expect next year the price will halve again and again the following year as has been seen in previous years.

I'd be very wary about forking out more than 500 on a digital camera anyway on the grounds that they're obsolete in 6 - 12 months and judging by George's experience, even those manufactured as "pro" cameras aren't 100% reliable. I don't know how many photos he took but 11 months into the warranty even though it's not a generic failure doesn't sound too promising - especially when one considers the sums currently involved.

I still say stick with all-in-ones until the price of the FF DSLRs comes down to a realistic level. That surely can't be more than 2 or 3 years from now.

Jredtugboat
02-21-2005, 10:04 AM
A long time until FF is available? I don't think so. Look at the prices. The Canon D whatever that has full-frame is about half what the Kodak full-frame camera costs. I expect next year the price will halve again and again the following year as has been seen in previous years.

I'd be very wary about forking out more than 500 on a digital camera anyway on the grounds that they're obsolete in 6 - 12 months and judging by George's experience, even those manufactured as "pro" cameras aren't 100% reliable. I don't know how many photos he took but 11 months into the warranty even though it's not a generic failure doesn't sound too promising - especially when one considers the sums currently involved.

I still say stick with all-in-ones until the price of the FF DSLRs comes down to a realistic level. That surely can't be more than 2 or 3 years from now.

All in ones are certainly attractive these days--they offer great portability, ease of use and are neat packages to haul around. Certainly when I'm traveling, given the choice, I'd prefer to take my all in one to my (future) dSLR with a kitbag of auxiliary lenses.

On the other hand...it's always a case of "when do you jump in the river?"
Buying a dSLR now will bring you dividends in terms of glamour appeal, flexibility, quality and performance. If I buy in the next year--rather than the next 2 or 3--I figure I'll be getting my feet wet and buying bits and pieces of a kit that will be interchangeable with my full frame dSLR. I can sell my dSLR at that time on the used market and still get a decent return. The trick for me will be to ensure that I don't buy a "digital only" lens that can't be used with a full frame.

That's how I'm thinking about buying, anyway. For me the potential of getting the camera I want sooner has tangible and intangible benefits, rather than waiting for those 2 or 3 years when all of us can have a shot at affording full frame cameras.

Rhys
02-21-2005, 11:21 AM
All in ones are certainly attractive these days--they offer great portability, ease of use and are neat packages to haul around. Certainly when I'm traveling, given the choice, I'd prefer to take my all in one to my (future) dSLR with a kitbag of auxiliary lenses.

On the other hand...it's always a case of "when do you jump in the river?"
Buying a dSLR now will bring you dividends in terms of glamour appeal, flexibility, quality and performance. If I buy in the next year--rather than the next 2 or 3--I figure I'll be getting my feet wet and buying bits and pieces of a kit that will be interchangeable with my full frame dSLR. I can sell my dSLR at that time on the used market and still get a decent return. The trick for me will be to ensure that I don't buy a "digital only" lens that can't be used with a full frame.

That's how I'm thinking about buying, anyway. For me the potential of getting the camera I want sooner has tangible and intangible benefits, rather than waiting for those 2 or 3 years when all of us can have a shot at affording full frame cameras.


Yes. DSLRs until they are full-frame and therefore equivalent to film cameras for frame coverage and hence use of wide-angle lenses will remain mere toys in my opinion. To me, a DSLR must equal a film SLR in terms of quality and functions as well as ease of use. Thus far I have seen none that can even remotely equal my 30 year old Nikon FM. I can put a 24mm lens on my FM and I get a 24mm lense's angle of view. I don't get 24mm x 1.5 or 24mm x 1.6 or some other fancy designation. The lenses I use on my FM will work on an F, F2, F3, F4, F5, F301, F401, F801 etc. If I were to buy an 18-24mm Digital Nikon lens, it would not work with my F cameras.

If I went for a Canon film camera and the full-frame Canon digital then I could interchange all the canon lenses I had with no problems (as long as I wasn't silly enough to get those suited solely to tiny sensor digital canons.

Of course, when all these DSLRs become full frame, their resale value will improve although they'll have to work on reliability then. The reason I went for FMs as opposed to F301, F801 etc when I bought mine was purely because I'd tried electronic cameras and found them to be abysmal in terms of performance, longevity and reliability.

Thus far Canon seems to have the edge on reliability.

jeisner
02-21-2005, 02:04 PM
DSLRs until they are full-frame and therefore equivalent to film cameras for frame coverage and hence use of wide-angle lenses will remain mere toys in my opinion.

Back this up?

You said it wasn't possible to have wide angle, so I listed around a dozen, so you say now that wide angles are mere toys? Becominng very troll like, aren't we?

Rhys
02-21-2005, 02:26 PM
Back this up?

You said it wasn't possible to have wide angle, so I listed around a dozen, so you say now that wide angles are mere toys? Becominng very troll like, aren't we?

No. That's a deliberate misinterpretation of what I said:

I am saying that it's not possible to have a true wide-angle on an all-in-one. The best gives a 28mm equivalence. Where're the 24mm, 20mm and 18mm lenses I used to use?

With a DSLR, until they start being full-frame, we won't be able to fit 6mm fisheye lenses and get the full effect of a 6mm fish eye lens. Instead, one would have to use a 4mm lens to get a 6mm effect.

Until DSLRs can do all that a film SLR can, I stand by my statement.

jeisner
02-21-2005, 03:09 PM
I am not twisting anything, you said:


For me, the advantage of full-frame is the ability to use wide-angle lenses.

Well there a plenty of wide angle lenses available for APS sized sensor DSLRs.


I found I tended as an SLR user to use lenses ranging from 24mm to 135mm most of all.

This is the true advantage of full-frame.

This is also an advantage of APS sensor sized DSLRs not just full-frame!

Rhys
02-21-2005, 03:41 PM
I am not twisting anything, you said:



Well there a plenty of wide angle lenses available for APS sized sensor DSLRs.



This is also an advantage of APS sensor sized DSLRs not just full-frame!

But the advantage of full-frame is that you get the same angle of view from the same lens on both film and digital so it's possible to use film as well as digital with the same lenses giving the same effects.

jeisner
02-21-2005, 03:51 PM
But the advantage of full-frame is that you get the same angle of view from the same lens on both film and digital so it's possible to use film as well as digital with the same lenses giving the same effects.

Thats better I will buy that ;-)

Myself, I only use digital so it doesn't bother me at all, I actually prefer it as a 200mm prime is a fair bit cheaper than a 300mm. My Girlfriend still uses film and we share lenses, again it doesn't bother either of us that we get different FOV though, as sometimes if we both want to use the same length at the same time say 200mm, she can use my 200mm prime and I use the 135 prime. Same with wide angle, she can use my 28mm and I will use the 16mm.

scalia
02-21-2005, 08:55 PM
But the advantage of full-frame is that you get the same angle of view from the same lens on both film and digital so it's possible to use film as well as digital with the same lenses giving the same effects.

well, just give up that old design lenses :D
go with the new design lenses like the digital zuiko:
7-14mm (14-28mm) F/4
14-35mm (28-70mm) F/2
35-100mm (70-200mm) F/2
90-250mm (180-500mm) F/2.8

and if you want fisheye, they'll give you one ZD fisheye lens too this year...

it's time to jump aboard ;)

Samuel Lo
02-21-2005, 09:18 PM
well, just give up that old design lenses :D
go with the new design lenses like the digital zuiko:
7-14mm (14-28mm) F/4
14-35mm (28-70mm) F/2
35-100mm (70-200mm) F/2
90-250mm (180-500mm) F/2.8

and if you want fisheye, they'll give you one ZD fisheye lens too this year...

it's time to jump aboard ;)


Hey, it's not a bad idea! Remember when we give up the typewriter and use computer? or give the LP disc to the others when we decided to listen to CD instead?

D70FAN
02-21-2005, 09:57 PM
A long time until FF is available? I don't think so. Look at the prices. The Canon D whatever that has full-frame is about half what the Kodak full-frame camera costs. I expect next year the price will halve again and again the following year as has been seen in previous years.

I'd be very wary about forking out more than 500 on a digital camera anyway on the grounds that they're obsolete in 6 - 12 months and judging by George's experience, even those manufactured as "pro" cameras aren't 100% reliable. I don't know how many photos he took but 11 months into the warranty even though it's not a generic failure doesn't sound too promising - especially when one considers the sums currently involved.

I still say stick with all-in-ones until the price of the FF DSLRs comes down to a realistic level. That surely can't be more than 2 or 3 years from now.

I hate to break this to you... but the full-frame "Canon D whatever" is the 16MP 1Ds Mark II at the princely sum of $8000. the Kodak DCS Pro SLR 14n/14c series run around $5000 for 14MP. These are the only 2 full frame 35mm dSLR's I am aware of.

I can't argue too much about relaibility, but elecronics are what they are, and really not much different from mechanical devices. Sooner or later they fail. Not a big deal unless the device is out of warranty. ;)

And yes, I would buy another D70 in a nano second. My recent experience aside, there is no better camera in its class.

When I compare the quality of my D70 shots, to the 3.2MP CP990 and the 4MP Sony S85, it reminds me of why I bought the D70 in the first place. The ergonaomics, performance, and image quality are superb. and I feel very fortunate indeed to be able to afford one.

erichlund
02-22-2005, 09:18 AM
the Kodak DCS Pro SLR 14n/14c series run around $5000 for 14MP. These are the only 2 full frame 35mm dSLR's I am aware of.


The original 11mp 1Ds (still available, and also $8000, go figure) was also full frame.

Cheers,
Eric

Ant
02-22-2005, 03:24 PM
A recent interview with the head of R&D at Nikon, Mr.Goto Satoru, confirmed that as far as Nikon are concerned they will never produce a full frame DSLR.

jeisner
02-22-2005, 03:31 PM
Apart from compatability with the old 35mm format, why do they need to make Full Frame, if APS sized sensors are perfectly adequate.

times change, move on! ;-)

D70FAN
02-23-2005, 02:38 AM
A recent interview with the head of R&D at Nikon, Mr.Goto Satoru, confirmed that as far as Nikon are concerned they will never produce a full frame DSLR.

Wow that's a pretty bold statement, and means that they have something up their sleeve. Never is a long time.

As it is I have some concern that the new D2X seems to have an ISO limit of 800 as Nikon packs 12 million pixels into a CMOS APS-C sensor. But knowing Nikon there will be a work around or extended low noise mode.

Could you give us a pointer to the artical/interview? Thanks.

D70FAN
02-23-2005, 02:47 AM
Apart from compatability with the old 35mm format, why do they need to make Full Frame, if APS sized sensors are perfectly adequate.

times change, move on! ;-)

Unfortunatey, if you believe conventional wisdom...

As the number of pixels increases, per a given sensor area, the sensitivity to light decreases. This requires more amplification of the base signal and with the amplification of the basel signal also goes noise (looks like film grain) which decreases the sharpness and detail. Software such as Noise Ninja can help this problem quite a bit but having a clean image to start with is definately better...And in professional photography where time is money it is darned important.

so your right, as long as they don't incresase the pixel density into the higher noise range, APS-C will work just fine.

Ant
02-23-2005, 03:33 PM
Could you give us a pointer to the artical/interview? Thanks.

Sure. Here it is:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=12370552

We know there are demands for FF. At the same time, we have
archived very high quality results with DX format.

- DX format will remain competitive even 10 years later from now.
DSLR doesn't use films. It doesn't need to stick to 135 film size.

Rex914
02-24-2005, 07:21 PM
I am saying that it's not possible to have a true wide-angle on an all-in-one. The best gives a 28mm equivalence. Where're the 24mm, 20mm and 18mm lenses I used to use?

Uh, Coolpix 8400? That's the first and only all-in-one with a 24mm starting focal length.

Interesting that they have a D50 and a "D200" in the wraps. Also a bold statement that they will capture "40%" of the DSLR market. But when you think of it, from a real perspective, it's just Canon and Nikon with the others looking on from the sidelines (sorry Olympus and Pentax users). From just my experience, I see a lot more Canon users, so I guess that right now, Canon holds about 60% of the market. Nikon holds a good 30%. The others are grappling with the remaining 10%.

speaklightly
02-24-2005, 09:20 PM
Yes, Rex, I agree with you, it is indeed rather unfortunate that the all in one digital cameras like the Coolpix 8400/8800 capture a good part of what should be the dSLR market for Nikon. These competitors have placed a lot of pressure on the emmerging dSLR market. The have, in essence, slowed the diSLR market for Nikon.

Whether that is indeed a part of Nikon's strategy or not, the Coolpix 8400/8700/8800, along with the rather massive moire fault, have slowed Nikon's sales of their rather excellent D-70 dSLR. Perhaps, it has allowed Nikon, some much needed breathing room ncould that be Nikon's strategy?

But the fact is that Nikon is holding back once again, all the while Canon is boldly charging ahead with the DigReb 350XT and the Canon 20D. Can Nikon withstand the onslaught? I wonder?

Speaklightly

erichlund
02-24-2005, 10:17 PM
A recent interview with the head of R&D at Nikon, Mr.Goto Satoru, confirmed that as far as Nikon are concerned they will never produce a full frame DSLR.

About one month after I was assured by a customer support person at Apple computer that the 6502 series processor would be supported forever, they essentially announced that my newly purchased Apple IIGS was obsolete. If their lips are moving, they're lying.

Cheers,
Eric

Rex914
02-24-2005, 11:30 PM
As the adage goes, "never say never" may apply here. It definitely is a rather bold statement to make.

D70FAN
02-26-2005, 03:20 PM
Uh, Coolpix 8400? That's the first and only all-in-one with a 24mm starting focal length.

Interesting that they have a D50 and a "D200" in the wraps. Also a bold statement that they will capture "40%" of the DSLR market. But when you think of it, from a real perspective, it's just Canon and Nikon with the others looking on from the sidelines (sorry Olympus and Pentax users). From just my experience, I see a lot more Canon users, so I guess that right now, Canon holds about 60% of the market. Nikon holds a good 30%. The others are grappling with the remaining 10%.

It's interesting that in Japan the D70 is considered to be a better value than the 20D. In the five stores in Akehabara (and one in ginza) the predominant manufacturer is Nikon. The concensus, in this small sampling, being that Nikon is high quality and Canon is next in consumer type cameras and dSLR's. Since the average Japanese person does not buy professional gear I did not get much of an opinion, nor had most heard of the 1Ds MK II. But curiously enough they had heard of the D2H and D2X.

That aside none of the stores had heard of the 350D or the XT version of the DReb (of course it has a different logo in Japan). So it appears that the 350D or XT has not been released in Japan yet.

Not exactly a professional poll, and it is localized to the very consumer oriented Akehabara and Ginza areas, so does not reflect the opinion of the whole country.

Your 60-30-10 theory is based on what you see locally, just as my non-professional pole shows Nikon to be the clear leader in Japan. ;)

Just thought you would find it interesting.

chuckp
03-19-2005, 12:34 PM
It took Canon more than a year, to match (or better) the D 70. Let's not panic. Just sit back and enjoy the camera show.

D70FAN
03-19-2005, 07:06 PM
It took Canon more than a year, to match (or better) the D 70. Let's not panic. Just sit back and enjoy the camera show.

Unfortunately it is neither a match or better. The more I read about this camera, the more I think Canon threw this one together on a budget. If the XT were as good as the D70 it would be a 20D without the 5 frames per second continuous mode.

sassassoo
03-23-2005, 09:07 PM
Does anyone know if Nikon D70's rebate period is extending beyond March 31, like in the UK?