Rating the new DSLRs

Annika1980 wrote:
On Nov 12, 10:29 am, RichA wrote:

You shouldn't compare actual cameras with Nikon vaporware.
Or release cameras that don't work properly.


My 40D works perfectly and should therefore be at the top of your
rankings, ahead of that "might be released after Christmas" Nikon
junk.


This is actually interesting.. the troll trashing the troll...


Please.. carry on.

P.

On Nov 13, 9:16 am, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote:
wrote:
I am a firm believer in the old adage that the only intuitive user
interface is the nipple.

You are aware that 1/3rd of the babies have to *learn* that
interface?

-Wolfgang


I wasn't aware if that, so I stand corrected.

Not even the nipple is intuitive!

On Nov 13, 1:32 pm, Annika1980 wrote:
On Nov 12, 10:29 am, RichA wrote:



You shouldn't compare actual cameras with Nikon vaporware.

Or release cameras that don't work properly.

My 40D works perfectly and should therefore be at the top of your
rankings, ahead of that "might be released after Christmas" Nikon
junk.

I wasn't speaking about the 40D. Besides, even Canon should get
something on it's 4th generation right.

wrote:
On Nov 13, 9:16 am, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote:
wrote:
I am a firm believer in the old adage that the only intuitive user
interface is the nipple.
You are aware that 1/3rd of the babies have to *learn* that
interface?

-Wolfgang


I wasn't aware if that, so I stand corrected.

Not even the nipple is intuitive!



Technically, it's the sucking that's not intuitive.. Nipple feeding
requires active sucking, the tongue acting as sealant and assisting in
the motion; when baby wants to breathe, baby just stops sucking. With
bottle feeding, The tongue thrusts out to cut the flow since the bottle
will continue to drip. "tongue thrusting", as it's called, is a serious
hindrance to breastfeeding and can cause damage to the nipple as well as
preventing baby from getting fed.


And now that you guys know *way* more than you *ever* wanted to know
about breastfeeding, we go back to the Nikon/Canon holy war.


P.

David J. Littleboy wrote:
Wilba wrote:
David J. Littleboy wrote:

Anyway, ergonomics is way overrated. It's the image quality that
matters when one is showing/delivering prints.

That makes as much sense to me as this:

Anyway, image quality is way overrated. It's the ergonomics that
matters when one is capturing images.

It's not ergonomics that helps you get the hard shot, but things like AF
performance, burst rate speed, high ISO performance.

That is relevant to shots that require a high performance camera, but I'm
not referring to one particular narrow field.

And a user capable of thinking ahead. Weegee got a lot more great shots
than any of us ever will: with a 4x5 speed graphic. To say nothing of HCB
with his Leicas.

Right. They had tools that worked for them, that enabled them to do what
they wanted to do. That's what ergonomics means.

And when one is setting up studio lights, or using a tripod, ergonomics
doesn't make a lot of difference.

Yes, we can all find niches that support a particular point of view. But you
can't prove that for all photographers, in all situations, IQ is more
important the ergonomics.

Ergonomics really is increadibly overrated. And the differences are tiny
and seriously inconsequential.

Makes just as much sense as this:

Image quality really is increadibly overrated. And the differences are tiny
and seriously inconsequential.

I have no idea why you are so blind to this. :-)

On Nov 13, 6:46 am, David Kilpatrick wrote:
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...=sidebyside&ca...

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


The difference is in the lenses you chose. The Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8
weighs 754g, while the Sony 16-80mm weighs only 440g. That's over 300g
right there.

But then again the Nikkor stops up to f/2.8 throughout its zoom range,
and is a commercial-grade, metal-barreled photojournalist's lens built
to withstand a lot of abuse. Nikon also makes an 18-70 and a 18-135,
either of which weighs less than 450 g.

David Kilpatrick wrote:
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

Do you want a camera where everything is entirely different
(probably for the sake of being different) or do you want one
where you don't need to relearn everything?
Personally, I'd prefer to keep a well known, working interface.

I think the point with the Sony is that you don't need to learn.

There is no such thing.

The only interface you _probably_ don't have to learn is the human
breast, and even so 1/3rd of the babies do not get it at first.

Whether you have used another camera or not, or many, the QuickNav
thing just puts a big smile on your face no matter - when you realise
what they have done, and how it differs from the earlier methods.

"realising what they have done" is commonly called "learning".

It's not different for the sake of being different. It's different
because someone stepped back and started without baggage.

Most certainly not. It still has wheels and joysticks and
quick access buttons. It still uses letters, digits and
symbols to display the status --- it even uses the very same
symbol everyone else uses. "without baggage", my eyes!

The difference sinks in when using any other camera later on and seeing
the display (like the Canon shooting display on the 40D, or the earlier
display of the Sony A100) - and realising that the information is dumb,
you can't just press a button and then change anything you can see.

So basically the one feature you claim is so important is ...
* drumroll *

the QuickNav.


OK, it is nice.

*I* find the monitor vastly too bright for usage at night. The LCD
top display is much easier on the eyes --- and I can change any
setting I need quickly, and any I commonly need quicker than you
can use the QuickNav. Just as keyboard shortcuts are faster than
mousing through a menu, but have to be learned.

I do not imagine the principle is patentable

In the US of A, anything is patentable.

-Wolfgang

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?

So far the announced 1Ds Mk III is nothing more than vaporware so it's kind
of a moot point.

Ah, you know better than Canon what they are going to
produce. That's ... good to know. What numbers will come up
in the national lottery on the next draw?

-Wolfgang

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

*I* find the monitor vastly too bright for usage at night. The LCD
top display is much easier on the eyes --- and I can change any
setting I need quickly, and any I commonly need quicker than you
can use the QuickNav. Just as keyboard shortcuts are faster than
mousing through a menu, but have to be learned.


Well, I've reached a stage of eyesight after 25 years at the computer
screen where the top LCD is not an option - I need distance specs to
work with a camera and see the distant scene well enough, and the LCD
info now being packed into DSLRs is very different from the simple
displays of the first top plate LCDs - far too many very small, but
important, symbols.

They could do with having an auto dimming function as even the lowest
brightness is very noticeable in dark places - like concerts and events.

It is not just the Quick Navi function which sets the Sony interface
apart, it's the way settings are remembered/reset and the way each of
the three controls works. In some aspects it has gone backwards,
Minolta's MenuSec Memory was good (to be able to always go back to the
last thing you used, or start from the regular startpoint, by
preference). If I do need to use menu-item commands on the Alpha 700, it
starts at the same position every time, unlike the Quick Navi which does
return to the last item set.

David

David Kilpatrick wrote:

It is not just the Quick Navi function which sets the Sony interface
apart, it's the way settings are remembered/reset and the way each of
the three controls works. In some aspects it has gone backwards,
Minolta's MenuSec Memory was good (to be able to always go back to the
last thing you used, or start from the regular startpoint, by
preference). If I do need to use menu-item commands on the Alpha 700, it
starts at the same position every time, unlike the Quick Navi which does
return to the last item set.

The 'recent settings' menu on a D200 is a real time saver. I forget if
it was the D70 or D200 where I played with saving custom settings banks
and that turned out to be a useless & confusing exercise. Recent
settings covers it much more simply.