Selection Dilemma: D-70 or 20D

Owamanga wrote:
[]
You need NO add-on to get the f/2.8 36 - 432mm zoom lens I
mentioned, all included in the basic camera.

I got that, it's just they sell a 1.5 tele thingy to make it reach
about 650mm. $500 looks very steep for that, even if it is a good
brand.

I wouldn't consider it on bulk grounds alone.


That's what the wife's for. Chief lens-carrier when I am out. I got a
belt-holster for the flash gun, CF cards fit in front trouser condom
pockets, filters in main pockets and the other lens goes into stroller
cup-holder or wife's fanny-pack. Tripod attaches to stroller.

Big padded camera bag stays in the car. This holds spare batteries for
flash and camera, data cables, more filters, stepping rings, cleaning
kit, IR remote control, portable HD/Card reader thingy for off-loading
the CF cards and some mylar sheets for reflectors, a pen, some tape,
N80 film body and some film. The D70 body goes with me.

Truly, all you are saving is having to carry one or two lenses - you
can still use (and might need to carry) the rest of the kit I
mentioned (okay, not the spare body).

There's where we differ. I take the camera and a couple of spare
batteries and a CF card in a body belt. No extra lenses, no filters, no
flash, nothing. Most of the places I travel I don't have a car (who wants
the hassle of driving and parking in Euopean cities!). I'm often away all
day (perhaps looking at geology) and carrying everthing including lunch.
I find I'm much more likely to carry my point-and-shoot than I ever was
with an SLR, especially in the evenings for those night-time shots.

Oh, and my wife has a similar photographic outfit!


Cheers,
David

On 6 Jan 2005 08:01:13 -0800, "Siddhartha Jain"
wrote:

Owamanga wrote:
Personally, I've yet to try a P&S that doesn't suffer significant
shutter-lag - a bloody annoying feature which alone, would (and did)
prevent me from purchasing one - even for the wife.

I had an Olympus C-750UZ and I am no digital P&S fan either. But
interesting things seem to be happening in the P&S arena.

Check the Ricoh R1V's specs:
"Incredibly, it takes only less than 0.8 seconds for the Caplio R1V to
be ready to shoot photos after it is turned on. Moreover, the release
time is almost instantaneous-as short as 0.05 to 0.1 seconds,
calculated from the time the user presses the shutter button, and a
miraculous 0.003 seconds or less from the time the focus is locked.
This assures that the Caplio R1V will be ready when an exquisite
picture-perfect moment presents itself. A hybrid auto focusing system
also ensures the camera to capture quality images of fast-moving
objects. Furthermore, with a shooting interval of 0.9 seconds or less,
continuous shooting is smooth and stress-free."

Well that sounds good.

..and FZ20's tele lens addon gizmo (fixed glass, no moving parts) is
available at a complete rip-off price of $500 - WHAT? that's almost
as
much as the camera. And the likelihood of being able to use that lens
on any future kit is something close to zero.

This is a Leica lens thats at a constant aperture of 2.8 throughout the
zoom range and IS. How much would a similar 35mm SLR lens, say 28-300mm
IS f/2.8, cost?

Eh? I.S. is already built into the P&S camera. Why would they need to
also put it in the 1.5 x tele-zoom lens addon thingy?

...I am looking at part number DMW-LTZ10, looks like it's made by
Panasonic, not Leica, and doesn't have any electronic connections for
IS function. f/2.8 is, as you mention available across the zoom range.

He

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&sku=336626

$450 for a bit of proprietary shaped plastic and melted sand? Hmm...

However, my choice would probably be the FZ3. Less MP but then smaller
too with a similar lens.

My choice would be a main-brand DSLR with a reliable source of
backwards compatible lenses and addons that will outlast the body.

--
Owamanga!

Willem wrote:

Try this link:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/20dd70.htm

Willem

Having read the above site I'd not recommend it to anyone seeking
comparison information about those cameras. Ken Rockwell bases many of
comparisons between the two cameras on things that make no difference
when you shoot RAW mode - and he does not undestand RAW at all.

He also gives the D70 bonus points for faster flash X-sync at 1/500 but
discounts the 20D's ability to shoot at lower ISO 100 (they're a
wash-out unless you want to shoot outdoor action shots with flash).

-Dave

Willem wrote:

Try this link:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/20dd70.htm

Willem

Having read the above site I'd not recommend it to anyone seeking
comparison information about those cameras. Ken Rockwell bases many of
comparisons between the two cameras on things that make no difference
when you shoot RAW mode - and he does not undestand RAW at all.

He also gives the D70 bonus points for faster flash X-sync at 1/500 but
discounts the 20D's ability to shoot at lower ISO 100 (they're a
wash-out unless you want to shoot outdoor action shots with flash).

-Dave

Owamanga wrote:
..I am looking at part number DMW-LTZ10, looks like it's made by
Panasonic, not Leica, and doesn't have any electronic connections for
IS function. f/2.8 is, as you mention available across the zoom
range.

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&sku=336626

You are looking at the wrong product

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo

Its Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. A review he
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/

- Siddhartha

Owamanga wrote:
..I am looking at part number DMW-LTZ10, looks like it's made by
Panasonic, not Leica, and doesn't have any electronic connections for
IS function. f/2.8 is, as you mention available across the zoom
range.

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&sku=336626

You are looking at the wrong product

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo

Its Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. A review he
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/

- Siddhartha

On 6 Jan 2005 08:31:37 -0800, "Siddhartha Jain"
wrote:

Owamanga wrote:
..I am looking at part number DMW-LTZ10, looks like it's made by
Panasonic, not Leica, and doesn't have any electronic connections for
IS function. f/2.8 is, as you mention available across the zoom
range.

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&sku=336626

You are looking at the wrong product

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo

Its Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. A review he
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/


Thread confusion. I was looking at *addons* for the FZ20, to see how
it compares if you wanted to retain some of the flexibility of an SLR.
They *do* offer lenses that can be added to the FZ20, both a wide and
a tele-zoom. My comments are just that these lenses are *damn*
expensive for what they are, and it would seem they are not made by
Leica either.

These addons are mentioned in this FZ20 review:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pa...ew/index.shtml

--
Owamanga!

On 6 Jan 2005 08:31:37 -0800, "Siddhartha Jain"
wrote:

Owamanga wrote:
..I am looking at part number DMW-LTZ10, looks like it's made by
Panasonic, not Leica, and doesn't have any electronic connections for
IS function. f/2.8 is, as you mention available across the zoom
range.

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&sku=336626

You are looking at the wrong product

He
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo

Its Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. A review he
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/


Thread confusion. I was looking at *addons* for the FZ20, to see how
it compares if you wanted to retain some of the flexibility of an SLR.
They *do* offer lenses that can be added to the FZ20, both a wide and
a tele-zoom. My comments are just that these lenses are *damn*
expensive for what they are, and it would seem they are not made by
Leica either.

These addons are mentioned in this FZ20 review:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pa...ew/index.shtml

--
Owamanga!

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
Owamanga wrote:

[Snip]
..and FZ20's tele lens addon gizmo (fixed glass, no moving parts) is
available at a complete rip-off price of $500 - WHAT? that's almost

as

much as the camera. And the likelihood of being able to use that lens
on any future kit is something close to zero.


This is a Leica lens thats at a constant aperture of 2.8 throughout the
zoom range and IS. How much would a similar 35mm SLR lens, say 28-300mm
IS f/2.8, cost?

However, my choice would probably be the FZ3. Less MP but then smaller
too with a similar lens.


Siddhartha,

It is really interesting that you mentioned FZ3 / FZ20 in a post
originally for 20D / D70 !

I was looking at FZ15, but due to a higher price range, was considering
the FZ3. My only concern with FZ3 was that it mentioned lack of 'manua'
controls.

I have already troubled Hans (in an another poet, if you are not that
regular) and he urged me to go for FZ3 despite this doubt I had.

I am basically looking for a camera within thie FZ3's price tag, which
will last me from my current amateur level (this will be my 1st "real"
camera") to a somewhat advanced level of photography for hobby (not pro).

The other issue, 3MP FZ3 instead of 4/5 MP for FZ15/20 respectively, is
something which I am hoping will not dissappoint me, as newarly all
pictures will be for online sharing and not printing.

I hope I am making the right decision in going with the FZ3, which will
be around $100 less than FZ15 (The max I really could spend - after
stretching a lot ) and $200 or so less than (FZ20) ?


TIA

Abhinav

Abhinav Modi wrote:
The other issue, 3MP FZ3 instead of 4/5 MP for FZ15/20 respectively,
is
something which I am hoping will not dissappoint me, as newarly all
pictures will be for online sharing and not printing.

I hope I am making the right decision in going with the FZ3, which
will
be around $100 less than FZ15 (The max I really could spend - after
stretching a lot ) and $200 or so less than (FZ20) ?

I would choose the FZ3 over the FZ15/20 only if the bulk of the camera
was an issue for me. It won't be an issue for me but definitely for my
wife. So for her, I would get the FZ3.

As you mention using the camera for mostly online photo sharing, I
doubt 3MP vs 4/5MP will matter much for you. For web sharing, even 2MP
cameras produce nice pics. So if you are on a tight budget, go ahead
and get the FZ3.

- Siddhartha