Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

Chris Down wrote:

I was listening to the radio the other night (BBC Radio4) and the discussion
was about the greats of artistic photopgraphy. One of the points that was
made was how some people who were at a level of genius with 35mm could not
perform in medium format, and that some of the medium format greats were
hopeless with 35mm.

Don't believe everything you hear on the radio?

By all accounts they are as different as painting in water colours on the
one hand and oils on the other. Sadly I missed most of the show as I was
driving and arrived at my destination (Anyone hear all of it?)

Find someone who is laughing themselves sick? The whole thesis makes
absolutely no sense unless one is willing to argue that there is a
class of (say) painter that can only create "good" works on a sheet of
3:2 canvas, but would be "hopeless" if the substrate was square (or
some other aspect ratio).

John A. Stovall wrote:

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 23:15:51 -0700, "Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even
number wrote:

DD (Rox) wrote:
In article Pmm3f.1415$UF4.617@fed1read02, "Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest
even number says...
At this point, the 5D isn't for the masses. A quickie indicator of
this is its lack of built-in flash. This is for people who wouldn't
likely neither want/need nor be satisfied with the pop-gun sized
built-in flash. It is for serious photographers who want their wide
angle lenses to work...and who want the high res of 12.8MP without
sacrificing quality to noise. They have also indicated a plan to
keep both the 1.6 crop-factor sensor range, and the full frame sizes
in the future.

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling
around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much
interest he had in the camera and he said that he had taken about 10
orders for it, but amazingly all of them were from people who were
not regular photographers. They were mostly rich folks who had bought
the camera (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because it was the
newest thing and they had to had it.

There will always be people like that.
I've seen people hauling around Leicas for the same reason: They think they
look cool holding one. I'm sure that happens with all sorts of
things...cars...motorcycles...guns...and cameras. Meanwhile, those who
actually know how to use a camera are using them well, regardless of how
many dorks with money there might be--posing in their mirrors holding their
new toy.

No, you put your Lecia and Zeiss lenses on your Canon 1DsMkII. The 5D
is a big disappointment in that there are problems with it using them.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/292899 (problems with Zeiss)

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/292634 (problems with Lecia)


No doubt Canon want to sell EF lenses to 5D users, rather than seeing
them use Leica and Carl Zeiss glass instead.

The huge interest in using Leica and Carl Zeiss lenses on Canon DSLRs
makes me wonder whether it would make good commercial sense for Leica
to manufacture lenses with the Canon EF mount.

"Sheldon" wrote:

I wouldn't go so far as to say that Canon is an evil company, but if you
have a bunch of Nikon lenses it just makes sense to go Nikon. The D70
definitely has a diopter adjustment, and you can get lenses for the
viewfinder. There is an LED that tells you when you are focused even with
manual focus, older lenses. It works. And as for the focusing screens:
Those split screen focusing aids were nice, but didn't work with all lenses.
I eventually switched all my screens to a blank screen on my old F's.

Seeing that you already have some Nikon lenses, I think you would be better
off with the Nikon.


That's poor advice, given that the OP's Nikon lenses are manual focus.
The D70's metering doesn't work with pre-AF Nikkors, so choosing the
D70 means you have to buy a hand held light meter too. Or, you can
shoot by trial and error using the histogram.

Alternatively, buy a Canon DSLR and use all your Nikon manual focus
lenses with an adapter. You get metered manual and aperture priority
AE (automatic exposure) working with the lenses stopped down.

Ironic but true. The best DSLR for manual focus Nikkors is a Canon!

;-)

Alternatively, the OP could buy a Nikon D2X or D2Hs, both of which
offer full metering - including Matrix - with manual focus Nikkors.

"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I popped
into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling around with
the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much interest he had in
the camera and he said that he had taken about 10 orders for it, but
amazingly all of them were from people who were not regular
photographers. They were mostly rich folks who had bought the camera
(with one of the crappy kit lenses) because it was the newest thing and
they had to had it.

The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with the
24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try for a
little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the local Calumet,
yesterday, and his comments were pretty much diametrically opposed to
those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like me, part
time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost of the 1Ds MkII.

I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look at
those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally recommended by the
sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who would
like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken are from
people who can *afford* one, none of whom are photographers in the true
sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as the
thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the first place.
Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who will ever see
another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is hardly
"crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for the 5D, too.
Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time to tell all the world
about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is about time to take a break,
because you are starting to sound like StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon
mention can go unremarked upon by you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced.
I've enjoyed some of the interplay with you, but your inferences about the
people who are buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not
appreciated.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"wilt" wrote in message
oups.com...
I asked him how much interest he had in
the camera and he said that he had taken about 10 orders for it, but
amazingly all of them were from people who were not regular
photographers. They were mostly rich folks who had bought the camera
(with one of the crappy kit lenses) because it was the newest thing and

they had to had it.

On another newsgroup was a poll "Are you upgrading from your 20D to
5D?" about 2/3 of the responses were 'No'.
Those who are upgrading are either must be firmly convinced of
visible superiority of 5D FF images (which is not quite so dramatic a
difference as testing is showing), or they feel that the 1.6 crop is
too restricting in use of existing arsenal of lenses, particularly in
the wide angle range, and either have an employer paying for the
upgrade (so even the backup to the 1DsII is FF) or have the resources
to spend nearly incremental $2000 for FF.

For many, the 5D doesn't offer enough of an advantage over the 20D to
justify the price, for others, it does. Even though the resolution is a
bigger jump over the 20D than the 20D was over the 10D, it is being seen
that much of that improvement is lost in the lenses, in the real world, not
in the lab. Many others feel that the 10-22 EF-S mount lens combined with
the 17-85 IS gives enough wide angle and a good carrying around lens, so the
full frame sensor is moot. And many don't even know how a spot meter can be
an advantage (or detriment) so that doesn't affect many 20D owners. They
like the apparent reach that they get with the 1.6x sensor and feel that the
5fps is an advantage over 3fps. The 5D wasn't built with these people in
mind.
Some of us don't feel that way, though. Some of us want wide and superwide
fixed focal length lenses, not available for the 20D, some of us want WA
zooms that are faster than f3.5, others missed the spot meter from their
film cameras, or appreciate the heft of the 5D.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

In article .com,
wrote:
Chris Down wrote:
By all accounts they are as different as painting in water colours on the
one hand and oils on the other. Sadly I missed most of the show as I was
driving and arrived at my destination (Anyone hear all of it?)

Find someone who is laughing themselves sick? The whole thesis makes
absolutely no sense unless one is willing to argue that there is a
class of (say) painter that can only create "good" works on a sheet of
3:2 canvas, but would be "hopeless" if the substrate was square (or
some other aspect ratio).

It seems to me that it is more a format size issue. Medium format has less
DoF at the same aperture number as 35mm.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

I'm with Chris on this... I tried a Yashica medium format with waiste
level finder the other day and I couldn't do anything with it, give me
my D70...



wrote:
Chris Down wrote:

I was listening to the radio the other night (BBC Radio4) and the discussion
was about the greats of artistic photopgraphy. One of the points that was
made was how some people who were at a level of genius with 35mm could not
perform in medium format, and that some of the medium format greats were
hopeless with 35mm.

Don't believe everything you hear on the radio?

By all accounts they are as different as painting in water colours on the
one hand and oils on the other. Sadly I missed most of the show as I was
driving and arrived at my destination (Anyone hear all of it?)

Find someone who is laughing themselves sick? The whole thesis makes
absolutely no sense unless one is willing to argue that there is a
class of (say) painter that can only create "good" works on a sheet of
3:2 canvas, but would be "hopeless" if the substrate was square (or
some other aspect ratio).

"Skip M" wrote in message
newsor3f.1432$UF4.1026@fed1read02...

"sierra" wrote in message
ups.com...
"Money spinner" - yes "Profit spinner" - no.

Mass market - GM, Ford, VW - losses

Porsche - profits


Porsche was nearly out of business 10 years ago, the Boxter is what saved
them, a (relatively) mass market Porsche.

Chrysler-profits-|
|--DCX-losses.
Mercedes-losses-|

The mass market drives profits in a properly managed company, which, at
this point, GM and Ford are not. Toyota, Honda and Renault/Nissan are
largely mass market manufacturers, and very profitable.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

Porsche owns over 18% of VW now.....

Tony Polson wrote:
John A. Stovall wrote:

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 23:15:51 -0700, "Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even
number wrote:

DD (Rox) wrote:
In article Pmm3f.1415$UF4.617@fed1read02, "Mark²"
mjmorgan(lowest even number says...
At this point, the 5D isn't for the masses. A quickie indicator
of this is its lack of built-in flash. This is for people who
wouldn't likely neither want/need nor be satisfied with the
pop-gun sized built-in flash. It is for serious photographers
who want their wide angle lenses to work...and who want the high
res of 12.8MP without sacrificing quality to noise. They have
also indicated a plan to keep both the 1.6 crop-factor sensor
range, and the full frame sizes in the future.

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling
around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much
interest he had in the camera and he said that he had taken about
10 orders for it, but amazingly all of them were from people who
were not regular photographers. They were mostly rich folks who
had bought the camera (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because
it was the newest thing and they had to had it.

There will always be people like that.
I've seen people hauling around Leicas for the same reason: They
think they look cool holding one. I'm sure that happens with all
sorts of things...cars...motorcycles...guns...and cameras.
Meanwhile, those who actually know how to use a camera are using
them well, regardless of how many dorks with money there might
be--posing in their mirrors holding their new toy.

No, you put your Lecia and Zeiss lenses on your Canon 1DsMkII. The
5D is a big disappointment in that there are problems with it using
them.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/292899 (problems with Zeiss)

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/292634 (problems with Lecia)


No doubt Canon want to sell EF lenses to 5D users, rather than seeing
them use Leica and Carl Zeiss glass instead.

The huge interest in using Leica and Carl Zeiss lenses on Canon DSLRs
makes me wonder whether it would make good commercial sense for Leica
to manufacture lenses with the Canon EF mount.

I've often wondered why they don't.
Perhaps they figure their legions of posers wouldn't feel quite as proud
carrying around a "mixed emblem" necklace (camera). After all...one musn't
confuse one's uppity friends by sporting TWO logos around one's neck...

Skip M wrote:
"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling
around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much
interest he had in the camera and he said that he had taken about
10 orders for it, but amazingly all of them were from people who
were not regular photographers. They were mostly rich folks who
had bought the camera (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because
it was the newest thing and they had to had it.

The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with
the 24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try
for a little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the
local Calumet, yesterday, and his comments were pretty much
diametrically opposed to those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like me,
part time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost of the
1Ds MkII.

I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look at
those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally recommended by
the sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who would
like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken are from
people who can *afford* one, none of whom are photographers in the
true sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as
the thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the first
place. Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who will
ever see another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for the
5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time to
tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is about
time to take a break, because you are starting to sound like
StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go unremarked upon by
you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced. I've enjoyed some of the
interplay with you, but your inferences about the people who are
buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not appreciated.

Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed playful
banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming tiresome.
-Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...