My hands on D200 experience (longish)

Douglas... wrote:
Mark² wrote:


Wrong, Douglas!!!
It uses CMOS!
-Not a CCD of ANY brand name!
Sheesh. You really stuck your foot in it this time...


It's a Sony sensor with dual photo receptors. Get it right too Mark.

Your pride is making a fool of you.

"Douglas..." wrote:

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji.


Complete and utter nonsense.

Douglas... wrote:

It's a Sony sensor with dual photo receptors. Get it right too Mark.

It is not. You have no idea what you're talking about.

--
Jeremy |

According to the PopPhoto & Imaging magazine (Dec, 2005) the D2X does have a
Sony-manufactured sensor, but it's a CMOS sensor, as opposed to the S3 Pro's
CCD, not sure who the manufacturer is... In any case, even they were both
Sony, they're obviously not the same. That's a fact...

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

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji.


Complete and utter nonsense.

"Dimitri Cohen" wrote:
According to the PopPhoto & Imaging magazine (Dec, 2005) the D2X does have a
Sony-manufactured sensor, but it's a CMOS sensor, as opposed to the S3 Pro's
CCD, not sure who the manufacturer is... In any case, even they were both
Sony, they're obviously not the same. That's a fact...

The S3 Pro has a Fujifilm made "SuperCCD SR II" sensor. If I remember
right that is the 4th generation of that technology from Fujifilm.

Obviously it is in almost no way similar to the CMOS sensor in
the Nikon D2x.


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

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji.


Complete and utter nonsense.



--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

About the 200-400:

It IS big. I just got mine last week & was very, VERY scared about the
quality of the images to be taken with it. I was amazed beyond belief.
I'm still taking test photos, but have found that a monopod will give me
fine results, & that occasional hand-held shots in brighter light work fine
& are VERY sharp.

This lens is nearly as sharp as my prime lenses. At last I REALLY get my
money's worth.

JimmyG wrote:
About the 200-400:

It IS big. I just got mine last week & was very, VERY scared about
the quality of the images to be taken with it. I was amazed beyond
belief. I'm still taking test photos, but have found that a monopod
will give me fine results, & that occasional hand-held shots in
brighter light work fine & are VERY sharp.

This lens is nearly as sharp as my prime lenses. At last I REALLY
get my money's worth.

Good for you!
I'm jealous...and wish that Canon would release such a lens.
I couldn't afford it right now, but would eventually appreciate a purchase
like that.
I've always had my eye on Canon's 400mm 2.8 IS for it's incredibly sharp
renditions, 2.8 aperture and IS effectiveness, but the verstility of the
200-400 range...WITH the retention of tack sharp imaging...makes the
one-stop trade-off more acceptable.

Have you posted any samples?
If not, there are many here who would appreciate it.
That isn't a lens too many people have...

-Mark

"Dimitri Cohen" wrote:

According to the PopPhoto & Imaging magazine (Dec, 2005) the D2X does have a
Sony-manufactured sensor, but it's a CMOS sensor, as opposed to the S3 Pro's
CCD, not sure who the manufacturer is... In any case, even they were both
Sony, they're obviously not the same. That's a fact...


The Nikon D2X has a 12.6 million pixel CMOS sensor with the pixels
arranged in the conventional Bayer pattern.

The Fuji FinePix Pro S3 has a 6 million pixel Super CCD sensor with
twin receptors per pixels in a completely different pattern that is
unique to Fuji.

The two technologies are completely different.

Of course, to a profoundly ignorant dumbass Aussie who makes a living
by peddling the illusion that a 4 x 6 inch print can be scanned and
enlarged to any size you like while gaining quality it never had, the
differences between Nikon's 12 MP CMOS and Fuji's 6 MP Super CCD
sensors must seem like mere minor details.

;-)

In article aVzdf.9915$nh2.9379@fed1read01,
says...
About the 200-400:

It IS big. I just got mine last week & was very, VERY scared about the
quality of the images to be taken with it. I was amazed beyond belief.
I'm still taking test photos, but have found that a monopod will give me
fine results, & that occasional hand-held shots in brighter light work fine
& are VERY sharp.

This lens is nearly as sharp as my prime lenses. At last I REALLY get my
money's worth.

Lucky fish.

I managed to shoot a few frames with it on a D2Hs on Friday afternoon.
Unfortunately I couldn't really get to play with it because of time
constraints, but the images that I shot are unbelievably sharp wide
open. Even on the limited resolution of the D2Hs I was seeing things in
the detail that I couldn't believe.

--
DD
www.dallasdahms.com
Central Scrutinizer

DD wrote:

Anyway, I walk right up to the display and the first lens I see is the
one I have been dreaming about for weeks...the 200-400mm f/4 VR AF-S.
DAMN! That is a BIG lens!

It is a very big lens. I have been using one for some time now, and I
have a few comments on this lens. First of all, I never use the focus
limit switch. The lens never seems to be in the right half of its focus
range and I am tired of fighting with this 'feature.'

The VR works very well, but it is no substitute for putting the lens on
a tripod. The long focal length simply overpowers the VR as a handheld
lens. The VR is great if you can otherwise steady the lens on a
beanbag, car, or something like that. Of course, there are a few who
call me "Old Shakey" so most people might get better results from VR
than I do.

The lens is solid as a rock. I dropped it from a waist pack to the
concrete once. The only thing that happened was the lens hood was
scratched. No damage at all and lens still performs great. The fall
probably caused more damage to my heart than to the lens. This lens
fits Lowe's #3 lens case with the hood reversed.

This lens works well as a close-up lens, despite the almost six foot
minimum focus distance. It really gives you the perfect depth of field
for isolating flowers and insects from their backgrounds. The lens is
also sharp as a tack.

One complaint I have about the lens is the tripod mount. The mount gets
in the way of handheld use and is obnoxious to attach and remove.

Another big lens is the 17-55mm f2.8 Nikkor. It is almost as big as the
200-400mm f4 VR! This lens and the 60mm micro-Nikkor alternate as my
'normal' lens. I like the WA zoom and the fast speed. Autofocus is very
fast and absolutely silent.

With both of these zooms the on-camera flash of the D70 is absolutely
useless except as a commander for other flash units. Both lenses leave
a huge shadow at the bottom of the picture at almost all focal lengths.
Both lenses take 77mm filters, which is very nice.

Did Nikon have the new 18-200mm zoom there? How about the new macro
flash unit?