Rating the new DSLRs

On Nov 12, 2:08 pm, David Kilpatrick wrote:
RichA wrote:

It's all well and good to spend your afternoons gazing at 100% crops
of ISO3200 images, but buyers in this segment of the market look for
build quality and ergonomics. I really don't see the A700 selling too
well at its $1600 (in Canada) price point.

I actually saw it for $1399. Also, it feels like plastic, but
according to Sony, it's magnesium. Very odd.

I've been shooting alongside the D300 with the A700 this week. The
ergonomics of the A700 are so far ahead it's not worth talking about -
simple processes which take 10-15 seconds to complete on the D300 take 5
seconds on the A700, just because of the way the interface has been
completely rethought. Yet the Nikon ergonomics are highly rated by
Nik/Can users with experience of both systems.

As an example - changing the ISO with the camera at eye level on a
tripod. Sony - press ISO button, rear screen lights, ISO highlighted;
touch ANY control (front wheel, rear wheel, joystick) and you change the
ISO. The front wheel usefully steps in full stops 100-200-400 etc and
the rear wheel and joystick both use 1/3rd steps. End of process, it
normally takes two touches, single handed (all steps are right handed,
which will not suit left-handers, and the entire Sony design is VERY
right-handed). If you are adjusting one parameter, none of the controls
can affect any other hidden parameter. If you are finding it hard to
remember which of the three top buttons does what function, they can all
be set to jump to a screen where all the functions display and the
joypad scrolls through them then selects your choice with a centre
press. This is slower; I leave my buttons set to go directly to their
purpose.

Nikon - press ISO button (left hand). Nothing happens because you can't
see the top LCD, but peering into the finder you see the ISO. If you
take your finger off the button, display goes; you need to keep the
button pressed while remembering which of the control wheels does the
change. If you turn the wrong one, nothing happens. If you think the
joystick will do the job, beware, because what it will actually do is
change your active focus point while the focus display is not visible.
So, you want the back panel to display, and press the INFO button.
Nothing happens. It won't work if you press INFO when the ISO button is
pressed. What you must do is press INFO first, to use the back LCD
display, and then within 20 seconds (easy enough) press the ISO button.
Although only the ISO number is highlighted as active, the greyed-out
remaining controls can be adjusted - as with the focus position.





The D200 is not that complicated. The thumb dial is your main command
dial, which also adjusts your shutter speed. If you want to change
ISO, just press the ISO button and rotate the thumb dial. The same
logic is used for WB, JPEG/RAW Quality, exposure mode, flash mode,
exposure compensation and bracketing. The front dial controls the
secondary functions for each button where applicable, and doubles as
your aperture control. I find that I rarely need to go into the menu
system while shooting.

My experience with the A700 was limited to holding it in my hands, and
I did not get a chance to shoot with it. It was just way more plastic
than I expected for a camera that was supposed to compete with the
Nikon D300 and the Canon 40D. And it seems to be designed for people
with much larger hands than mine.

Anyway, none of this really matters that much. I am a firm believer in
the old adage that the only intuitive user interface is the nipple.
Everything else is learned.

On Nov 12, 7:32 pm, David Kilpatrick wrote:

The weight difference is over 1/2lb but I doubt that is the mag alloy.
Hasseblad use pure magnesium for the inserts in the famous A12 magazine
back. The mag alloy is probably nearly as light. I imagine the weight is
down to loads of other stuff inside the Nikon, such as the larger 100
per cent prism (the 95 per cent of the Sony is disappointing after using
the absolutely accurate finder of the D300).


David


According to the product specs, the weight diffence between the D200
and the A700 is 152g, significantly _less_ than 1/2 lb. (227g).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp..._d300&show=all

On Nov 13, 4:05 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:
"David Kilpatrick" wrote:
It's like buying an exciting sports car with a stick shift when every
other make has automatic.

Hmm. I haven't driven a car since 1986, but my understanding is that you
have this exactly backwards, that a sports car with an automatic is a joke.

No, you are right: anything claiming to be a sports car with an
automatic gearbox is beyond a joke.

acl wrote:

On Nov 13, 4:05 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:

"David Kilpatrick" wrote:

It's like buying an exciting sports car with a stick shift when every
other make has automatic.

Hmm. I haven't driven a car since 1986, but my understanding is that you
have this exactly backwards, that a sports car with an automatic is a joke.


No, you are right: anything claiming to be a sports car with an
automatic gearbox is beyond a joke.


You wanna run for pinks, sonny?

On Nov 12, 9:39 pm, acl wrote:
On Nov 13, 4:05 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:

"David Kilpatrick" wrote:
It's like buying an exciting sports car with a stick shift when every
other make has automatic.

Hmm. I haven't driven a car since 1986, but my understanding is that you
have this exactly backwards, that a sports car with an automatic is a joke.

No, you are right: anything claiming to be a sports car with an
automatic gearbox is beyond a joke.

Some are jokes that outrun the manual box competition.

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

Even with 10 MP the old Mk III still will blow that 21 MP
monstrosity away for image quality.

Willing to put your money where your mouth is?

The 1D Mk III will blow it away in every conceivable category on
prints up to 20" x 30" and leave it so far in the dust when the ISO
goes past 800.

Willing to put your money where your mouth is?

-Wolfgang

Charlie Self wrote:
On Nov 12, 9:39 pm, acl wrote:
On Nov 13, 4:05 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:

"David Kilpatrick" wrote:
It's like buying an exciting sports car with a stick shift when every
other make has automatic.
Hmm. I haven't driven a car since 1986, but my understanding is that you
have this exactly backwards, that a sports car with an automatic is a joke.
No, you are right: anything claiming to be a sports car with an
automatic gearbox is beyond a joke.

Some are jokes that outrun the manual box competition.

Ah, but it's not always the raw performance that is
important - sometimes it is the satisfaction that one gets,
rather than the actual performance. Personally if I was
looking at a sports car, I'd rather drive a slightly slower
car with a manual transmission than a faster car with an
auto tranny. Conversely if I was looking for a vehicle to
comfortably get the family from A to B, then I'd pick
something with a slushbox.

To bring this back on-topic, if resolution was the sole
factor, we'd all be using field cameras loaded with 8x10
sheet film. There are different factors that we all consider
when rating a camera, and sometimes it will vary depending
on what our needs are at that moment - for some it may be if
it's price fits into our budget, for others it may be the
availability of certain lenses, another might value the
ergonomics more, another might look at the burst speed, or
it's compactness.

On Nov 13, 1:28 pm, Charlie Self wrote:
On Nov 12, 9:39 pm, acl wrote:

On Nov 13, 4:05 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:

"David Kilpatrick" wrote:
It's like buying an exciting sports car with a stick shift when every
other make has automatic.

Hmm. I haven't driven a car since 1986, but my understanding is that you
have this exactly backwards, that a sports car with an automatic is a joke.

No, you are right: anything claiming to be a sports car with an
automatic gearbox is beyond a joke.

Some are jokes that outrun the manual box competition.

....but this line of thought leads to 3 ton cars with truck engines...
hmm, wait...

wrote:
On Nov 12, 7:32 pm, David Kilpatrick wrote:


The weight difference is over 1/2lb but I doubt that is the mag alloy.
Hasseblad use pure magnesium for the inserts in the famous A12 magazine
back. The mag alloy is probably nearly as light. I imagine the weight is
down to loads of other stuff inside the Nikon, such as the larger 100
per cent prism (the 95 per cent of the Sony is disappointing after using
the absolutely accurate finder of the D300).



David



According to the product specs, the weight diffence between the D200
and the A700 is 152g, significantly _less_ than 1/2 lb. (227g).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp..._d300&show=all


I weighed the A700 with 16-80mm CZ and the D300 with 17-55mm 2.8 and the
overall weight difference was nearly 500g

Maybe the D300 is heavier than the D200 - or maybe one weight includes
battery and the other doesn't? I did my weighing with batteries in. The
D300 did have its polycarbonate screen protector on and that might add
20-30g. Also, I did not check whether either camera had a CF card in, it
was not for publication, I was just comparing weights because the
difference struck me when picking up the D300 after using the A700 for a
shoot.

David

David Kilpatrick wrote:

As an example - changing the ISO with the camera at eye level on a
tripod.
Sony - press ISO button, rear screen lights, ISO highlighted;
touch ANY control (front wheel, rear wheel, joystick) and you change the
ISO. The front wheel usefully steps in full stops 100-200-400 etc and
the rear wheel and joystick both use 1/3rd steps.

Nikon - press ISO button (left hand). Nothing happens because you can't
see the top LCD, but peering into the finder you see the ISO. If you
take your finger off the button, display goes; you need to keep the
button pressed while remembering which of the control wheels does the
change. If you turn the wrong one, nothing happens. If you think the
joystick will do the job, beware, because what it will actually do is
change your active focus point while the focus display is not visible.
So, you want the back panel to display, and press the INFO button.
Nothing happens. It won't work if you press INFO when the ISO button is
pressed. What you must do is press INFO first, to use the back LCD
display, and then within 20 seconds (easy enough) press the ISO button.
Although only the ISO number is highlighted as active, the greyed-out
remaining controls can be adjusted - as with the focus position.

Canon 20D:
press (and release) ISO button, turn thumb wheel.
Anticlockwise - 100, clockwise - 1600.
If you don't know current ISO, turn a few clicks anticlockwise
(you are now at ISO 100), then one click for 200,400,800,1600,
H (== 3200, if enabled).

Easy operation, becomes second nature after a while.
(Yes, one must _learn_ ones camera! What a novel idea!)

It'd be nice to see the ISO setting in the viewfinder. After all,
the 40D does that.
But then the 20D is from 2004-08 ...


-Wolfgang