Nikon D2H vs Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Just to know the interested (not me) know that c|net "asked Sports
Illustrated contributing photographer David Bergman to take the two
top action-photography contenders out on assignment"

Here's are the reviews written by him

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6501_7-...?tag=cnetfd.sd

There's no comparison; the Canon has it all over the Nikon. Notice that the
only advantage of the Nikon was that it's the one to get if you already have
an investment in Nikon lenses and gear.

Nikon needs to get moving, and fast on the digital front. They have nothing
to compete with the MkII or the 1Ds.

"Mike Henley" wrote in message
om...
Just to know the interested (not me) know that c|net "asked Sports
Illustrated contributing photographer David Bergman to take the two
top action-photography contenders out on assignment"

Here's are the reviews written by him

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6501_7-...?tag=cnetfd.sd

There's no comparison; the Canon has it all over the Nikon. Notice that the
only advantage of the Nikon was that it's the one to get if you already have
an investment in Nikon lenses and gear.

Nikon needs to get moving, and fast on the digital front. They have nothing
to compete with the MkII or the 1Ds.

"Mike Henley" wrote in message
om...
Just to know the interested (not me) know that c|net "asked Sports
Illustrated contributing photographer David Bergman to take the two
top action-photography contenders out on assignment"

Here's are the reviews written by him

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6501_7-...?tag=cnetfd.sd

From: (Mike Henley)

Just to know the interested (not me) know that c|net "asked Sports
Illustrated contributing photographer David Bergman to take the two
top action-photography contenders out on assignment"

1D MK II: "In a league by itself."

Nuff said.

From: (Mike Henley)

Just to know the interested (not me) know that c|net "asked Sports
Illustrated contributing photographer David Bergman to take the two
top action-photography contenders out on assignment"

1D MK II: "In a league by itself."

Nuff said.

"Bowser" wrote in message
...
There's no comparison; the Canon has it all over the Nikon. Notice that
the
only advantage of the Nikon was that it's the one to get if you already
have
an investment in Nikon lenses and gear.

Nikon needs to get moving, and fast on the digital front. They have
nothing
to compete with the MkII or the 1Ds.


It;s true, they don't, but it's undeniably true that they will. If you need
it now, Canon is where it's at, if not, then there's no reason not to stick
with what you've got. This is digital we're speaking of, not film, where
there's only IS to lure you to Canon. And digital turns around fast--two
years is nothing to wait, I wait that long just to buy some lenses. I've
been dreaming of a Nikon scanner for 4 years, and got one just two months
ago, and it's an amazing machine--well worth the wait!

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

"Bowser" wrote in message
...
There's no comparison; the Canon has it all over the Nikon. Notice that
the
only advantage of the Nikon was that it's the one to get if you already
have
an investment in Nikon lenses and gear.

Nikon needs to get moving, and fast on the digital front. They have
nothing
to compete with the MkII or the 1Ds.


It;s true, they don't, but it's undeniably true that they will. If you need
it now, Canon is where it's at, if not, then there's no reason not to stick
with what you've got. This is digital we're speaking of, not film, where
there's only IS to lure you to Canon. And digital turns around fast--two
years is nothing to wait, I wait that long just to buy some lenses. I've
been dreaming of a Nikon scanner for 4 years, and got one just two months
ago, and it's an amazing machine--well worth the wait!

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com