Nikon maintains DSLR lead over Canon

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 08:00:45 -0700, Canonista fanboy SMS wrote:

I see. I thought it was kind of strange that they said "Automatic light
metering is possible by shooting in aperture priority mode for almost
all digital and film SLR camera bodies" then qualified it with a list of
D-SLRs that probably make up about 25% of all the D-SLRs ever sold.

I guess that's a good reason to opt for Canon bodies over Nikon, other
than the D200, besides the lens compatibility issue you mentioned.

You betcha. It's amazing how many photographers are clamoring for
Lensbabies. Ta ta, gotta run. B&H is sure to have a Cabbage Patch
Lensbaby patiently waiting for me, even if my Nikon isn't a D200.

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:52:58 +0100, Tony Polson wrote:

Pentax came to anti-shake rather later than Minolta, but their system
works far better. So far, the K10D has the best in-camera anti-shake
system of any DSLR. Not only does it give a reliable 2.5 to 3 stop
improvement, it also tilts the sensor slightly, better aligning it
towards the incident light rays.

If you can say that Pentax does it "far better" you should be able
to quantify it to some extent. Do the others brand DSLRs give a
reliable 1.5 to 2 stop improvement (justifying "far better") or
something closer to a 2.4 to 2.9 stop improvement?

I also wonder about tilting the sensor. Wouldn't that also shift
most of the sensor out of the desired focal plane if it's shifted
enough to have any noticeable effect? Where was this tilted sensor
mentioned?

Tony Polson wrote:
SMS wrote:
I guess that's a good reason to opt for Canon bodies over Nikon, other
than the D200, besides the lens compatibility issue you mentioned.


I guess that you will find just about *any* excuse to shill for Canon.

Oh please. When you're starting from scratch, you look at _all_ the
factors, pros, cons, and limitations of what's available, including what
accessories are available and compatible.

If the choice were between a Canon 5D and Nikon D200, there would be
legitimate trade-offs for each body, with the 5D winning out in noise
and high ISO performance, but the D200 winning in exposure and
auto-focus. When the choice is between a D40x and an EOS-400D, there is
no contest, and it's not just the lack of stand-alone metering.

Why does every other digital SLR, including the low-end models from
Olympus, Konica-Minolta, and Pentax, not have the issue that all the
Nikon models except the D200 have with metering with devices like the
Lensbabies? Clearly it's something that Nikon could have included on the
other bodies, since they included it on the D200.

Nikon seems to try very hard to segment their market not just by
resolution, ruggedness, and build quality, but also by defeaturing
models in a way that makes the more knowledgeable buyer eschew the lower
end models for other reasons. I don't see this from Pentax, Olympus,
Canon, or Sony/Konica-Minolta.

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:33:38 +1000, dj_nme wrote:

My guess is that this is as big as the sensor can be before the mirror
box and body have to be enlarged to allow for AS movement.

I can see why the sensor would need to be larger than "full size" with
in-camera IS, but why would the mirror box need to be larger?
The front surface of the sensor will need to be in the same place, and
the space behind the sensor will need to be larger, due to the IS
mechanism. But with the sensor surface being in the same place, the
shutter can remain where it is now.
Why does the mirror box need to be larger?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Al Gore's son was pulled over by police on the
San Diego Freeway Tuesday with marijuana, Valium,
Xanax and Vicodin on him. The kid never had a
chance. He got hooked on downers at an early
age listening to his father read him bedtime
stories.

In article , SMS
wrote:

The D200 has no need to interrogate an in-lens chip. All the others
need to, so they will only meter with AF Nikkors (and compatible
chipped independent lenses).

You can still shoot with an unchipped lens on those cameras, but to
get the correct exposure, you need to use a hand held light meter, or
meter by trial and error.

I see. I thought it was kind of strange that they said "Automatic light
metering is possible by shooting in aperture priority mode for almost
all digital and film SLR camera bodies" then qualified it with a list of
D-SLRs that probably make up about 25% of all the D-SLRs ever sold.

I guess that's a good reason to opt for Canon bodies over Nikon, other
than the D200, besides the lens compatibility issue you mentioned.

at least old nikon manual focus lenses are usable and they can easily
be found for very cheap. canon fd lenses are essentially worthless
now.

In article , SMS
wrote:

If the choice were between a Canon 5D and Nikon D200, there would be
legitimate trade-offs for each body, with the 5D winning out in noise
and high ISO performance, but the D200 winning in exposure and
auto-focus. When the choice is between a D40x and an EOS-400D, there is
no contest, and it's not just the lack of stand-alone metering.

that spot metering and auto iso works so great on the 400d. oh wait -
there is no spot meter or auto-iso. you need to move on up to the 30d
for the former and the latter doesn't even exist until the 1d mark iii.
talk about segmenting the market!

Why does every other digital SLR, including the low-end models from
Olympus, Konica-Minolta, and Pentax, not have the issue that all the
Nikon models except the D200 have with metering with devices like the
Lensbabies? Clearly it's something that Nikon could have included on the
other bodies, since they included it on the D200.

removing the mechanical coupling lever saves nikon money. not a lot of
people use old lenses on a low end body and there isn't a compelling
reason to include it. it makes a lot of sense, except to you.

pentax also removed the mechanical coupling lever, however, their
cameras can be made to take a meter reading with a button press and it
has to be done every time. it is slightly better but not by much.

Nikon seems to try very hard to segment their market not just by
resolution, ruggedness, and build quality, but also by defeaturing
models in a way that makes the more knowledgeable buyer eschew the lower
end models for other reasons. I don't see this from Pentax, Olympus,
Canon, or Sony/Konica-Minolta.

no, you seem to try very hard to make up problems for other brands just
to push canon or whatever else is on your agenda.

In rec.photo.digital Fed-Up-With-Corel wrote:

The only "photographers" clamoring for a "LensBaby" are those that fail at
knowing how to adequately compose an image in the first place and require a
cheap gimmick like a crutch to make people look at their subject. If you have to
force someone's eye to know where to look in a photo you have failed completely
as a photographer but probably never realize it.

I.e. only lame hacks would ever use or buy a "LensBaby". They need a crutch.


A "LensBaby" is just one more artistic tool in an artist's bag. All tools can
be used incorrectly or as a crutch in the right circumstances. However,
applying generalized labels to owners of a lensbaby, such as you have done,
says vastly more about you than it does about any owner of a lens baby. Don't
be confused here, that was not particularily a compliment for you.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the
machinations of the wicked.

nospam wrote:

at least old nikon manual focus lenses are usable and they can easily
be found for very cheap. canon fd lenses are essentially worthless
now.

There are adapters to use the only Canon lenses with the EOS mount.

Ironically, if you have a collection of Nikon AI lenses, you are better
off buying a Canon digital SLR, and a Nikkor AI to Canon EOS adapter
ring, than buying a Nikon digital SLR, since metering still works. This
may be cheaper than paying to get a bunch of lenses modified. Note that
on Nikon's D200 and D2x metering does work with AI lenses, but metering
does NOT work on the D50 and D70s.

"SMS" wrote in message
...
Tony Polson wrote:
SMS wrote:

Tony Polson wrote:

If you mean compatibility with *all* currently available lenses, you
would have to choose the D200, because the D80 is not compatible with
some of them.
What is the reason that Lensbabies will meter with the D200, but not the
D40, D50, D70, D70S, D80, & D100?


The D200 has no need to interrogate an in-lens chip. All the others
need to, so they will only meter with AF Nikkors (and compatible
chipped independent lenses).

You can still shoot with an unchipped lens on those cameras, but to
get the correct exposure, you need to use a hand held light meter, or
meter by trial and error.

I see. I thought it was kind of strange that they said "Automatic light
metering is possible by shooting in aperture priority mode for almost all
digital and film SLR camera bodies" then qualified it with a list of
D-SLRs that probably make up about 25% of all the D-SLRs ever sold.

I guess that's a good reason to opt for Canon bodies over Nikon, other
than the D200, besides the lens compatibility issue you mentioned.


You're talking about 25+ year old Nikkor lenses, which can still be mounted
and excellent exposures can still be made. Go ahead and mount some canon FD
glass of that era to your Canon DSLR and see what capabilities you lose.
Sheesh.


--
www.mattclara.com

"Fed-Up-With-Corel" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:15:39 -0400, ASAAR wrote:

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 08:00:45 -0700, Canonista fanboy SMS wrote:

I see. I thought it was kind of strange that they said "Automatic light
metering is possible by shooting in aperture priority mode for almost
all digital and film SLR camera bodies" then qualified it with a list of
D-SLRs that probably make up about 25% of all the D-SLRs ever sold.

I guess that's a good reason to opt for Canon bodies over Nikon, other
than the D200, besides the lens compatibility issue you mentioned.

You betcha. It's amazing how many photographers are clamoring for
Lensbabies. Ta ta, gotta run. B&H is sure to have a Cabbage Patch
Lensbaby patiently waiting for me, even if my Nikon isn't a D200.

The only "photographers" clamoring for a "LensBaby" are those that fail at
knowing how to adequately compose an image in the first place and require
a
cheap gimmick like a crutch to make people look at their subject. If you
have to
force someone's eye to know where to look in a photo you have failed
completely
as a photographer but probably never realize it.

I.e. only lame hacks would ever use or buy a "LensBaby". They need a
crutch.


Go to my website. Look at my pictures. I think I'm all right at
composition. I'm no Ansel Adams, or whatever, but I'm not ashamed to put my
pictures out there for the world to see, or to compare them to other
photographer's. I have a lensbaby. Where are your photos, Mr. Nobody @ No
place, goin' nowhere, generalizing fool?

--
www.mattclara.com