If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon
Dear experts,
I've always used Nikon, and have a number of FE and FM cameras, and whole bunch of fixed focal length lenses. I took my equipment to the store the other day, and noticed a few issues. The focusing screen in that D70 was just a matte/Fresnel. There was no split in the middle where you can focus by lining up two lines together. And it's hard to tell in the small viewfinder if the picture is in focus. The other thing I noticed is that the viewfinder screen is smaller. I'm older now, and it seems I need my glasses to focus through there. And, in the catalog, there is no diopter (?) correction for the D70. They have some for other Nikons, but not the D70. So, this brings up the question, if there is any real advantage to buying a Nikon digital so that I can use my old fixed manual focus sharp lenses, if I can't focus them. I could buy used Nikon autofocus lenses if I bought the Nikon. But then I could just buy used Canon lenses too if I bought a Canon. I understand that Canon has brought out a newer camera lately. Does anyone know how it compares on these issues? Does it have a diopter? Does it have different screens? How does the Canon compare in any other area that you think is significant? Advantages? Disadvantages? Thanks a lot |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
The focusing screen in that D70 was just a matte/Fresnel. There was no split in the middle where you can focus by lining up two lines together. And it's hard to tell in the small viewfinder if the picture is in focus. Bingo. Not just because it's digital - because it's auto-focus. You'll find this with film AF cameras too. It's nearly impossible to manually focus sharply with the current SLR focus screens. They seem to have cut a corner here since "nobody would want to focus manually with an AF camera". Sadly, there's not an after-market option to add a split prism or other style of focusing screen. (If somebody knows of one for the N80 or D70, please tell!) This may help - it's a viewfinder magnifier for Nikons. It looks a little goofy, but it's on my to-buy list anyway... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=37321&is=GREY and it needs this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...u=37445&is=REG The other thing I noticed is that the viewfinder screen is smaller. I'm older now, and it seems I need my glasses to focus through there. And, in the catalog, there is no diopter (?) correction for the D70. They have some for other Nikons, but not the D70. Interesting point. I hadn't noticed. I would speculate that if the viewfinder screen is smaller, it's because the image being cast onto the sensor / viewfinder is smaller. (Though I'd think that should be correctable in the viewfinder regardless. Hmmm.) If you search on "nikon diopter d70" at http://www.bhphotovideo.com, you will see there is a full range of them. There is also a minor adjustment built into the body. If you're fortunate not to have an astigmatism, they will work OK; otherwise, you'll need to keep your glasses on when shooting. I could buy used Nikon autofocus lenses if I bought the Nikon. But then I could just buy used Canon lenses too if I bought a Canon. Very true. Ironically, some of Nikon's very good lenses are manual-focus only, such as their 50mm f/1.2. How does the Canon compare in any other area that you think is significant? Advantages? Disadvantages? Let the religious battles begin. :-) After much debate, it's usually apparent that both are excellent systems. Canon seems to lead in some areas, and Nikon in others. Aside from the obvious things like lens selection available, look at subtler things too like compression tech (number of images per MB), battery life, continuous rate buffer sizes, etc. Cheers, Richard |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
says... And, in the catalog, there is no diopter (?) correction for the D70. They have some for other Nikons, but not the D70. The D70 has a small slider on the right side of its eyepiece, allowing small adjustment from -1.6 to +0.5 diopter. There are also optional stronger replacement eyepieces listed in the Accessories section of the D70 web page at www.nikonusa.com. The builtin slider still works to modify those lens by -1.6 to +0.5. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
MarkČ wrote:
The latest from Canon is the full-frame 5D, which will have a large, bright viewfinder, more in keeping with what you're used to. It also accepts different screens, and has diopter adjustment. $3K gets you 12.8 megapixels, and the above. A friend and I were debating the longevity of "digital"-specific lenses. He made an interesting observation about the prospect of full-frame CCD sensors becoming the new trend... * With the smaller sensors, we're "beyond" the resolution of the mass market needs, even at 6 or 8MP. (i.e., it's good enough for most 35mm purposes, and while consumers may ask for higher resolution, there aren't enough willing to pay for it.) * The pros need higher-res imaging, but they can just as easily switch to a medium-format body with a digital back and bear the cost of a really expensive sensor. (i.e., there's already a solution for this market segment) * At a manufacturing level, full-frame sensors will always be more expensive to make because they have a higher probability of defects and fewer of them fit on a manufacturing wafer (more scrap material, lower # units per batch, & higher defect rate). * "Digital" format lenses are cheaper to produce (and sell), and can be smaller and lighter because they require less glass for the same result. Looking at the above if I were a camera manufacturer, I'd be focusing on increasing resolution by improving density of the smaller sensors at the same / less cost, not on physically increasing the size of the sensor. It'll be very interesting to see if Canon's 5D is setting a new trend, or a short-lived idea. Cheers, Richard |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article ws.net,
"Mike Warren" wrote: Yes, Manual focus is more difficult on most dSLRs. The full frame ones would be better since the focus screen is bigger. It's the same thing with 35MM autofocus cameras. The N8008s doesn't have a split image device either. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Richard H. wrote:
MarkČ wrote: The latest from Canon is the full-frame 5D, which will have a large, bright viewfinder, more in keeping with what you're used to. It also accepts different screens, and has diopter adjustment. $3K gets you 12.8 megapixels, and the above. A friend and I were debating the longevity of "digital"-specific lenses. He made an interesting observation about the prospect of full-frame CCD sensors becoming the new trend... * With the smaller sensors, we're "beyond" the resolution of the mass market needs, even at 6 or 8MP. (i.e., it's good enough for most 35mm purposes, and while consumers may ask for higher resolution, there aren't enough willing to pay for it.) * The pros need higher-res imaging, but they can just as easily switch to a medium-format body with a digital back and bear the cost of a really expensive sensor. (i.e., there's already a solution for this market segment) * At a manufacturing level, full-frame sensors will always be more expensive to make because they have a higher probability of defects and fewer of them fit on a manufacturing wafer (more scrap material, lower # units per batch, & higher defect rate). * "Digital" format lenses are cheaper to produce (and sell), and can be smaller and lighter because they require less glass for the same result. Looking at the above if I were a camera manufacturer, I'd be focusing on increasing resolution by improving density of the smaller sensors at the same / less cost, not on physically increasing the size of the sensor. It'll be very interesting to see if Canon's 5D is setting a new trend, or a short-lived idea. Cheers, Richard 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. The other side of the business coin you describe above is this: Canon makes most of their money from the sale of lenses. As sensors grow both in size and pixel density, we are quickly reaching a point where lens quality is paramount. Sensors are now capable of revealing lens' optical flaws. From a marketing standpoint, this could be good for Canon, since it would then "justify" the purchase of their highest quality (and, by far, their highest priced) lenses. It is already happening. More and more advanced amateurs seem to be gravitating toward larger, faster, more expesnive glass. This is where Canon will make a mint. If they were to limit themselves to small sensors (which also lead to lower threshholds for noise), they'd only be inviting lesser lens manufacturers to nab their cash cow (lenses), since everyone could churn out small-sensor-optimized lenses. I think Canon is not only on the right track business-wise, but they are also in a position of command in terms of utilizing the larger sensor's capacity for high-res/low-noise imaging. -Mark |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article Pmm3f.1415$UF4.617@fed1read02, "Mark=B2" mjmorgan(lowest=20
even number says... At this point, the 5D isn't for the masses. A quickie indicator of this = is=20 its lack of built-in flash. This is for people who wouldn't likely neith= er=20 want/need nor be satisfied with the pop-gun sized built-in flash. It is = for=20 serious photographers who want their wide angle lenses to work...and who= =20 want the high res of 12.8MP without sacrificing quality to noise. They h= ave=20 also indicated a plan to keep both the 1.6 crop-factor sensor range, and = the=20 full frame sizes in the future. Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I popped=20 into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling around with=20 the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much interest he had in=20 the camera and he said that he had taken about 10 orders for it, but=20 amazingly all of them were from people who were not regular=20 photographers. They were mostly rich folks who had bought the camera=20 (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because it was the newest thing and=20 they had to had it. The other side of the business coin you describe above is this: Canon makes most of their money from the sale of lenses.=20 I disagree. Most of their money comes from selling office equipment and=20 supplies. On the imaging side the bulk of the revenue that funds their=20 operation is made from P&S digital cameras.=20 --=20 DD (everything is temporary) www.dallasdahms.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
DD (Rox) wrote:
In article Pmm3f.1415$UF4.617@fed1read02, "MarkČ" 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. The other side of the business coin you describe above is this: Canon makes most of their money from the sale of lenses. I disagree. Most of their money comes from selling office equipment and supplies. On the imaging side the bulk of the revenue that funds their operation is made from P&S digital cameras. Since this is a discussion about photography equipment, I thought it would go without saying that I was referring to SLR photo equitpment $$ coming from sale of lenses, as opposed to bodies. -Though actually, I suspect that with the huge successes of digital bodies, that may be swinging a bit. I don't know. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon User to Canon help me I'm slipping... | Richard Favinger, Jr. | Digital SLR Cameras | 141 | April 29th 05 02:52 PM |
A fully manual dSLR | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 130 | April 18th 05 04:00 AM |
Lift off with the Nikon D70!!! | Dallas | 35mm Photo Equipment | 132 | August 23rd 04 06:37 PM |
Canon 10d or Nikon D70. | Dmanfish | Digital Photography | 102 | August 18th 04 12:26 PM |
FA: Camera Collectibles for Auction on e-Bay: NIKON CANON PENTAX MINOLTA TAMRON | z-ride | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 22nd 03 10:17 PM |