Nikon D40 shipping today

"Jeroen Wenting" jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl writes:
You have to focus all MF lenses manually on both the D40 and the D70.
And loose metering. non-D lenses meter only on the D200 and up.

Correct. The D40 works exactly as well (or as badly) with MF lenses
as the D70.

I decided to not be interested in a D200 given that there has to be a
comparably priced FF model coming (or else Nikon will die).

"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
"Jeroen Wenting" jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl writes:
You have to focus all MF lenses manually on both the D40 and the D70.
And loose metering. non-D lenses meter only on the D200 and up.

Correct. The D40 works exactly as well (or as badly) with MF lenses
as the D70.

I decided to not be interested in a D200 given that there has to be a
comparably priced FF model coming (or else Nikon will die).

All this yearning for full frame reminds me that I'm old enough to remember
when they said 35mm would never be good enough for serious work, you had to
have 2¼ x 2¼ at least.

I'll bet you 18,500 zorknids that full frame never makes up one percent of
the digital SLR market -- whether Nikon ever makes such a dSLR or not.

Neil

On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 09:36:37 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


I'll bet you 18,500 zorknids that full frame never makes up one percent of
the digital SLR market -- whether Nikon ever makes such a dSLR or not.


I suspect that "full frame" DSLRs -- as a portion of the overall
DSLR market -- willl be roughly the same as the top-end Nikons
and Canons (eg. F4, EOS1v) were to to the general 35 mm
film SLR market.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

Raphael Bustin writes:
I suspect that "full frame" DSLRs -- as a portion of the overall
DSLR market -- willl be roughly the same as the top-end Nikons
and Canons (eg. F4, EOS1v) were to to the general 35 mm
film SLR market.

I think they're already below that level. The 5D is about where the
Nikon F100 or Canon equivalent were in the late 35mm era, a distinct
level below the top end. Canon has indicated it expects that all but
its entry level DSLR's will be full frame at some point, i.e. full
frame will reach the 20D/30D/D200 level if not the D80 level.

Also, for us Ken Rockwell fans (both of us ;-) ), he just got his and
reviews it he

some morons actually read the **** he wrotes ? lol

On 02 Dec 2006 07:13:49 -0800, Paul Rubin
wrote:

Raphael Bustin writes:
I suspect that "full frame" DSLRs -- as a portion of the overall
DSLR market -- willl be roughly the same as the top-end Nikons
and Canons (eg. F4, EOS1v) were to to the general 35 mm
film SLR market.

I think they're already below that level.

Did you really mean "below" or was that meant to be "above"?

The 5D is about where the
Nikon F100 or Canon equivalent were in the late 35mm era, a distinct
level below the top end. Canon has indicated it expects that all but
its entry level DSLR's will be full frame at some point, i.e. full
frame will reach the 20D/30D/D200 level if not the D80 level.


Can you give me a cite for that statement by Canon?

Honestly, it's surprsing to me. How far into the future
are they talking about?

FF is going to have to come **way** down in price
before it reaches any sort of mass market.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

Raphael Bustin writes:
FF is going to have to come **way** down in price
before it reaches any sort of mass market.

But it has already come way down in price, from the EOS-1DS to the 5D.
Why would we expect it to not do keep coming way down in price again
and again, just like any other high tech device? For that matter,
look at what a D40 costs, compared with a Nikon D1 of a few years ago.

A quick googling finds:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography..._vs_aps-c.html

"In fact Canon have said that they intend to eventually go the full
frame route for all their DSLRs except for entry level models..."

I'll interpret "entry level" as meaning the Digital Rebel series and
Nikon equivalents up to and including the D80. So the claim is that
FF will reach the Canon 30D/Nikon D200 level. It will surprise me if
that doesn't happen this coming year. If Nikon comes out with such a
model, I can't say I'd buy one immediately at that price, but it would
at least get me interested.

On 02 Dec 2006 08:43:26 -0800, Paul Rubin
wrote:

Raphael Bustin writes:
FF is going to have to come **way** down in price
before it reaches any sort of mass market.

But it has already come way down in price, from the EOS-1DS to the 5D.

Right, from $8000 to $2500. When it drops to $1000,
call me.

In fact, the mass market doesn't buy camera bodies, it
buys *cameras.*. Tiny, cheap ones. Disposable ones.


Why would we expect it to not do keep coming way down in price again
and again, just like any other high tech device?


Why? Because the vast majority of the "mass market"
is already well-served by existing digital cameras, both
P&S and DSLR.

I expect them to get cheaper, faster, lighter. I expect
them to get more and more "features." But in terms of
image quality, they're already delivering what the
"mass market" needs, and then some.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

Raphael Bustin writes:
before it reaches any sort of mass market.

But it has already come way down in price, from the EOS-1DS to the 5D.

Right, from $8000 to $2500. When it drops to $1000, call me.

In fact, the mass market doesn't buy camera bodies, it
buys *cameras.*. Tiny, cheap ones. Disposable ones.

Well, there's THAT mass market, which is not the entry level DSLR market.
The prediction was about non-entry-level DSLR's, which is $1000-1500 I guess.

I expect them to get cheaper, faster, lighter. I expect them to get
more and more "features." But in terms of image quality, they're
already delivering what the "mass market" needs, and then some.

But FF is a "feature" just like 3CCD in camcorders, which in fact has made
its way to the consumer level. And FF lets you use those nice wideangle
primes which are useless on the D40/Rebel-D.

"Raphael Bustin" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 09:36:37 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


I'll bet you 18,500 zorknids that full frame never makes up one percent of
the digital SLR market -- whether Nikon ever makes such a dSLR or not.


I suspect that "full frame" DSLRs -- as a portion of the overall
DSLR market -- willl be roughly the same as the top-end Nikons
and Canons (eg. F4, EOS1v) were to to the general 35 mm
film SLR market.

That sounds about right to me. While I don't really know what percentage of
SLRs sold the high-end Nikons and Canons made up, it must have been pretty
small. I've owned a lot of SLRs since about 1960, *none* of them high-end
professional bodies. And never felt the desire for one.

Neil