Very interesting Canon lens review site

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/20D/index.htm

Review of 18-55mm:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/

Anybody wanting a lightweight 20D outfit should consider the kit lens,
in addition, of course, to whatever else takes your fancy.

Deryck

deryck lant wrote in message ...
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/20D/index.htm

Review of 18-55mm:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/

Anybody wanting a lightweight 20D outfit should consider the kit lens,
in addition, of course, to whatever else takes your fancy.

Deryck

The review, and Canon, say that this lens is for the Digital Rebel.
It's not for the rest of the lineup.....

Bob

The message
from (Bob S) contains these words:

deryck lant wrote in message
...
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/20D/index.htm

Review of 18-55mm:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/

Anybody wanting a lightweight 20D outfit should consider the kit lens,
in addition, of course, to whatever else takes your fancy.

Deryck

The review, and Canon, say that this lens is for the Digital Rebel.
It's not for the rest of the lineup.....

The new 20D has the same lens mount as the Digital Rebel and so will take
the EF-S 18-55.

Although I have an extensive Nikon collection I am considering the 20D with
the 18-55. I go on long walks photographing the landscape and wild flowers.
The 18-55 is very good stopped down and has excellent macro coverage at
2.5x1.7 inches. Weighs only 6.7oz.

The 17-85 has more barrel distortion and is no sharper than the 18-55 and is
almost 3 times the weight. You are paying a lot for the IS.

Deryck G0KOR

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:49:19 +0100, deryck lant had this to say:

Although I have an extensive Nikon collection I am considering the 20D
with the 18-55.

Heeeeeeeaaaathhhennnnnnnn!!!!!

--
DD™
"And that's all I got to say about that" ~ FG

The message pan.2004.10.06.16.09.34.417000@realphoto
from Dallas contains these words:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:49:19 +0100, deryck lant had this to say:

Although I have an extensive Nikon collection I am considering the 20D
with the 18-55.

Heeeeeeeaaaathhhennnnnnnn!!!!!

--
DD™
"And that's all I got to say about that" ~ FG

I am not deserting Nikon. I wanted a mature digital design that was light to
carry. The D100 replacement will be a killer camera (12Meg?) to be revealed
at PMA, but not available until much later in the year. The DX 18-70mm is a
really excellent lens but does not focus anywhere near as close as the 18-55.
Photographing tiny wild flowers is one of the jobs to be covered by one
universal lens.

I have 4 Micro Nikkors from 55mm to 200mm. None could be considered a
universal
lens on an APS sized sensor.

Nikons are designed by photographers and make the best handling cameras.
Canon
is ahead in sensor design at the moment. The next couple of years will reveal
very interesting new designs from Nikon.

Deryck

deryck lant wrote:

Nikons are designed by photographers and make the best handling cameras.

Maxxum 9. Maxxum 7. No Nikon or Canon comes close for design for use.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

The message
from Alan Browne contains these words:

deryck lant wrote:

Nikons are designed by photographers and make the best handling cameras.

Maxxum 9. Maxxum 7. No Nikon or Canon comes close for design for use.

When I bought my F2's thirty years ago I found perfection. They kept getting
better - the F100 is a joy. I still use the F2's for studio use with tungsten
lighting. Never needed a service although a lube might be in order now.

Deryck

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:00:18 +0100, deryck lant had this to say:

I am not deserting Nikon. I wanted a mature digital design that was light
to carry. The D100 replacement will be a killer camera (12Meg?) to be
revealed at PMA, but not available until much later in the year. The DX
18-70mm is a really excellent lens but does not focus anywhere near as
close as the 18-55. Photographing tiny wild flowers is one of the jobs to
be covered by one universal lens.

I have 4 Micro Nikkors from 55mm to 200mm. None could be considered a
universal
lens on an APS sized sensor.

Nikons are designed by photographers and make the best handling cameras.
Canon
is ahead in sensor design at the moment. The next couple of years will
reveal very interesting new designs from Nikon.

Phew!

I'm hearing stories of a Fujifilm S3 being 12MP and full frame. Dunno how
true it is.

--
DD™
"And that's all I got to say about that" ~ FG

Dallas wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:00:18 +0100, deryck lant had this to say:


I am not deserting Nikon. I wanted a mature digital design that was light
to carry. The D100 replacement will be a killer camera (12Meg?) to be
revealed at PMA, but not available until much later in the year. The DX
18-70mm is a really excellent lens but does not focus anywhere near as
close as the 18-55. Photographing tiny wild flowers is one of the jobs to
be covered by one universal lens.

I have 4 Micro Nikkors from 55mm to 200mm. None could be considered a
universal
lens on an APS sized sensor.

Nikons are designed by photographers and make the best handling cameras.
Canon
is ahead in sensor design at the moment. The next couple of years will
reveal very interesting new designs from Nikon.


Phew!

I'm hearing stories of a Fujifilm S3 being 12MP and full frame. Dunno how
true it is.


I read an article in one of the more popular photo mags who did a
preliminary review of the S3. It has 6MP large pixels and 6MP small
pixels (they call them S and R pixels, but I forget which is which).
Thile Fuji claims 12MP, I think the results are a touch less. The
benefit from having large and small pixels was to allow better low-light
sensitivity (large pixels) while retaining fine detail (smaller pixels).

C&M writes:

Dallas wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:00:18 +0100, deryck lant had this to say:

I am not deserting Nikon. I wanted a mature digital design that was light
to carry. The D100 replacement will be a killer camera (12Meg?) to be
revealed at PMA, but not available until much later in the year. The DX
18-70mm is a really excellent lens but does not focus anywhere near as
close as the 18-55. Photographing tiny wild flowers is one of the jobs to
be covered by one universal lens.

I have 4 Micro Nikkors from 55mm to 200mm. None could be considered a
universal
lens on an APS sized sensor.

Nikons are designed by photographers and make the best handling cameras.
Canon
is ahead in sensor design at the moment. The next couple of years will
reveal very interesting new designs from Nikon.
Phew!
I'm hearing stories of a Fujifilm S3 being 12MP and full
frame. Dunno how
true it is.

I read an article in one of the more popular photo mags who did a
preliminary review of the S3. It has 6MP large pixels and 6MP small
pixels (they call them S and R pixels, but I forget which is
which). Thile Fuji claims 12MP, I think the results are a touch less.
The benefit from having large and small pixels was to allow better
low-light sensitivity (large pixels) while retaining fine detail
(smaller pixels).

Not exactly. The idea is that the big sensels (S) will collect more
light, so they will saturate first. In which case you can use the
value from the adjacent small sensel (R), which presumably won't be
saturated. So dynamic range (or exposure latitude) is increased. The
S3 has the same pixel count as the S2, but with the SR sensor for more
latitude. I don't think they are claiming increased spatial resolution.

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.