Nikon made me buy Canon

"Zebedee" wrote in message
...

I am unhappy with Nikon. I advise everybody to follow my lead and ditch
their increasingly incompatible lens system and go for Canon instead.


Well gooooollie! We's shor iz lucky to hav sum yung feller to lead us like
that thar Pied Piper chap.


What, you didn't realize how incredibly arrogant your statement above is?

"Zebedee"
A reply from Nikon

"Sorry, to make the D70 able to communicate with lenses which do not have
electronic contacts would have pushed the price up and out of the range we
were producing it for. The only digital SLR which are able to communicate
with such lenses are the flagship, professional range - the D1/D1H/D1X and
D2H.
Generally, Nikon have a much greater degree of compatibility with older
accessories and products than other manufacturers, but in this case we felt
we had to take this route as most user of the D70 do not own, or do not want
to use, manual focus lenses and even those that do do not want to pay more
for the camera to do so.
Again, sorry you are unhappy with this."

Is it just me or does "to make the D70 able to communicate with lenses which
do not have electronic contacts would have pushed the price up" sound like
complete bull****.

Nikon has, IMO put a spoiler into the D70 so that their customers have to
buy AF lenses. They haven't done that with the D1 etc.

So what's the cost difference? Well, it's more complicated and expensive to
put blocks in to stop meters from working.... Nice bit of blatant
profiteering, Nikon. And here's news. I use Canon now because it's cheaper.

--
Yours

Zebedee

There are ways to make some of your old glass work;
http://home.carolina.rr.com/headshots/Nikonhome.htm
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_CPUconversion.html
;o)-max-

Jose Marques wrote:

You're unhappy with Nikon because you believe they "nobbled" the D70 to
force people into buying AF lenses. You realise that Canon "nobbled" the
300D to make people buy the 10D don't you? The 300D firmware contains
code that supports many of the features available in the 10D. However,
Canon made the extra effort to write the 300D firmware such that these
features could be disabled and shipped it as such. Are you going to
recommend ditching Canon now?
NB. Hacked firmware is available for the 300D that re-enables these
features, however, installing it will void your warranty.

The 10D is mechanically far superior to the 300D. Not only because the
outer shell is magnesium (which is not that important), but the inner
parts are of higher quality and are going to last longer.

Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway

"pioe[rmv]" wrote:

The 10D is mechanically far superior to the 300D. Not only because the
outer shell is magnesium (which is not that important), but the inner
parts are of higher quality and are going to last longer.

This is _completely_ the wrong question to be asking at this point in time.

The 10D is already _long_ past its sell-by date: it's almost 18 months old.
Buying a digital camera that stale is a seriously bad idea.

Even worse, between the 1Ds and 1Dmk2, Canon is clearly busting their butts
on larger, higher-pixel-count sensors. But Canon has a problem. Even if they
could make these sensors for free, there's no way they could recoup R&D and
fab line costs selling small numbers of expensive pro cameras. They have to
have volume sales. So they either get those sensors into cheaper cameras or
they go broke.

So the writing is on the wall that the 6MP dSLR is about to be extinct.

Given that, the 300D makes a lot more sense than a 10D. At least it'll
function as a second body, light-weight go anywhere camera, or, worst case,
toy to give to a niece, when the next generation of dSLRs hits the stores.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in
:
The 10D is already _long_ past its sell-by date: it's almost 18 months
old. Buying a digital camera that stale is a seriously bad idea.

It is a seriously good idea, if one needs a Canon at that feature and price
range right _now_ - and not in December.

--
Matti Vuori, http://sivut.koti.soon.fi/mvuori/index-e.htm

I use my D-70 on a Meade 10 inch 2500 mm telescope. You can't get much
more manual thatn that. Set the meter to spot, and adjust the shutter
speed to give the proper exposure.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

I use my D-70 on a Meade 10 inch 2500 mm telescope. You can't get much
more manual thatn that. Set the meter to spot, and adjust the shutter
speed to give the proper exposure.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

In article ,
Roger Halstead wrote:
I use my D-70 on a Meade 10 inch 2500 mm telescope. You can't get much
more manual thatn that. Set the meter to spot, and adjust the shutter
speed to give the proper exposure.

According to the D70 user manual, page 183, the spot meter works only with
CPU lenses. So either your telescope has a CPU in it or the manual is wrong
(or your telescope attaches to a Nikkor with a CPU in it).



--
The Electronic Monk was a labor-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video
recorder. [...] Video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving
you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electronic Monks believed things for
you, [...] -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

"Steven M. Scharf" writes:

What's kind of funny about this, is that when Canon moved to the EOS mount
15 years ago or so, Nikon attacked them because Canon made a clean break.
Canon realized two things: 1) the mechanical linkage between the body and
camera was too slow, and too prone to damage, and the motor belonged in the
lens, and 2) they needed a physically larger mount to support their long
lenses, both physically and optically. And of course Canon realized that the
downsides of continuing with the FD mount were great enough that their
existing customer base would just have to accept the fact that the FD mount
was still usable, but was obsolete.

Actually, I'm sure Canon was wrong about the lens belonging in the
motor. It's made their lenses heavier and more expensive than they
need to be. Yes, you want extra motor power for huge optics; but you
can do what Nikon has done and do that *for those lenses only*,
without having to pay that price for the vast majority of lenses sold,
where it's of no benefit.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

In article , says...
Actually, I'm sure Canon was wrong about the lens belonging in the
motor.

Yeah, that's why they didn't put the lens in the motor, they put the
motor in the lens... and developed the hypersonic motor for small,
lightweight, quick focusing lenses.