[tooki]

http://www.nikon-euro.com/DoesNotDisappoint/

http://nikonimaging.com/global/index.htm

(Make sure Flash is active.)

See also discussion at http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID86/16831.html

tooki

[production_coordinator]

I've been in the market for a LONG time... but didn't want to buy the 70 at the end part of the life cycle... and couldn't afford the 200. I considered the 50, but just couldn't do it for some reason. If either the 50 or 70 have significant upgrades... I'm sold.

10MP is what I would LOVE to have!

[tooki]

I bought my D70s in January, knowing that it was already towards the end of its life cycle. Why?

1. I was tired of waiting and knew that the D70s would handily meet my needs.
2. Because with Nikon's history, if they announce the D80 (or whatever it gets called) in August, you'll actually be able to get your hands on one in May of the following year. I had a devil of a time getting a D70s in 2006, and it (as the D70) has been out since early 2004! I knew I wasn't willing to wait that long.

tooki

P.S. And I've been thrilled with the D70s. In a way, I'm glad it's no more than 6MP -- my computer slows enough with opening RAW files from it. 10MP take way longer to open, and not for a whole heck of a lot of extra image detail.

[OreoCookie]

That would be great. The D70 is a great camera and I would have gotten one if I hadn't opted for a new bike instead

Also, I still have a 5 MP digital SLR, so it's not such a pressing matter, although I was surprised how much better the image quality of the pics was that I shot with my F80 + Tokina 2.8/28-80 lenses.

[MrForgetable]

i saw that this morning! seems like nikon is trying to steal some of the sales sony is expecting with its new Alpha dSLR. both are getting zeiss lenses though.. hmmmmmmmmm this could be tasty.

[cory5412]

Interesting! I wonder if this will be a very tempting upgrade from the D50, and how it will fit into the "family"

Specifically, of course, I wonder what they intend to do to give you more control, flexibility, etc.

Of course, I've been very happy with the D50, but in a few years, this D70 successor may be just the ticket, especially if it gets to the price-points I've seen D70s and D50 selling at.

[dale]

My dad bought a D50 a few days ago on my recommendation. I fancied getting a d70, but thought the MP count a bit on the low size (yes, I know its not just about the MP count). I will now definately buy a nikon myself so that we can share kit.

I am hoping that this is a good few quid cheaper that a canon eos30d, with as many features. 11 point AF would be good!

18 days to go!!

[dale]

It also says new addition to the line up. I am wondering if this will plug the gap between the d70 and D200. Maybe a d130 or something.

[tooki]

Not likely. From all the clues, it's a replacement for the D70, not another member of the family.

tooki

[davesimondotcom]

Looks like something to keep in mind when I want to upgrade from the D50.

[powerbook867]

Looks like Canon needs to get their act together a little quicker...

I have been debating updating my Canon 10d (6 megapixel) but I can't justify the pixel increase of the 30d (going from 6 to 8 is probably not worth it) and can't justify the cost of the 5d (even with the full frame sensor)...

I honestly thought for about 20 minutes about selling all my gear and buying a D200, but I can't justify that either...Guess I'll just have to keep saving my $$.

Looks like you Nikon guys have something nice coming down the pipe in a couple of days..

[dale]

I'm not a Nikon guy yet, but I will buy Nikon.

It means I can share kit with my dad, who bought a d50 a few days ago. The MP count is alright on the Nikon. I thought a 6MP camera seemed low, but I guess in reality, it is not.

I have read that 6 to 8 to 10 doesn't make a massive difference anyway, unless you plan to produce massive prints. DOn't know much about the Canon 10d, but the canon 20d seems to be getting rave reviews.

It is just kit at the end of the day, but seing as I haven't bought a camera yet, I can hold out a few more days before I make my d50 v. new nikon decision.

To tell you the truth, I am half hoping the new Nikon will be too much for me, so I will buy the cheaper d50 and invest money in things that might help my creativity, such as technique books covering composition, creativity, light etc... I think these will help me take uch better pictures than an aditional 4 mega pixels.

[dale]

sorry, I think that should have said 30d, not 20d

[X-Ray]

H-m-m (warning: en Francais):http://www.photim.net/nci/discu.php3...71502MIKL#O147

[Peter]

http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/26/n...pics-revealed/

Nikon D80!

[powerbook867]

Thanks Peter. The more I keep analyzing things, the more I am leaning towards a 5d. My biggest complaint is lack of any weather sealing...GRRRR.. (+cost of course...)

The D80 looks nice though...Anyone hear anything about the price?

[OreoCookie]

Well, a D80 will probably cost a fraction of a 5d …�the closest approximation that Nikon has is the D200 which I would gladly take any day over a 5d. I just don't like Canon's UI. (I know, I know, it's a matter of taste.)

I've tried to use a 20d (which is very similar to a 5d as far as the user interface goes) and it looked like I have never held a slr in my hands before

[dale]

It was when I held a Nikon D50 and a Canon Eos 350d (rebel XT)that I made up my mind for Nikon.

I don't want to spend mega-bucks on a camera, and the Canon just felt too small. It felt like I was clasping it with my finger tips rather than holding it.

Good luck with your 5d, powerbook867. It has a very similar sensor to the 30d so you should get some great photos out of it. Like Oreocookie says though..... check out the Nikon 200 as well, it is supposed to have good proofing against the elements.

[OreoCookie]

The sensor is nothing like the 30d, the 5D's fullframe sensor is in fact the reason why the camera costs more than $3,000. You can get some nice glass for the difference of a 5D to a D200 …

I hope I will have saved up some money for the D80 when I get to the States … I hope the viewfinder will be acceptably large. This is actually the reason that kept me from buying a D50 or a D70s.

[mac128k-1984]

I'm hoping there's no huge time span between the unveiling and the camera being available.

Right now I'm in a quandry, if Apple, as everyone expects, releases the new desktop line at WWDC I was going to be ordering one. I've been saving my money and I have enough cash to purchase it. Now with the impending unveiling of the camera I'm not sure which to get. I can only do one or the other.

My main machine right now is a intel mini running aperture. While its handling everything I'm throwing at it, some aperture tasks are rather slow even though I have 2 gig of ram,but then I suppose I can thank the GPU for the sluggish behavior.

I'll have to see what both companies do in August before I start agonizing over which one to buy

[dale]

OreoCookie, you are right.

I think I read somewhere that the technology that the sensor behaves very similarly through the ISO range to the 5d. I am no expert though, and I cannot remember where I saw the article.

mac128K, what camera do you have now, and what do you think of the quality of the photos you can take with it?

This should probably be the deciding factor as to which new kit you spend your money on. Of course.... this being a mac forum.... if you put it to a vote, I would expect one outcome

[powerbook867]

I have 2 reasons why I would have a hard time going to Nikon…

1) Glass – I have some nice lenses that performs very well. My 17-40 and 70-200 2.8 are awesome and pricey. Between those two and my old 28-105 and 50 macro, I have well over 2k invested in just lenses.

2) ISO Noise – I have read a bunch of reviews of the D200 and seen multiple samples of the 400-1600 iso performance. It’s enough that images at high ISO require more work. Now I don’t shoot a ton at high ISO, but an example would be a camping trip I’m planning in the Badlands this September. I’ll be waking up at 4:15 for sunrise shots…high ISO. I’m going to be taking a lot of them..

Now number two may be acceptable…but I would have to eBay my gear (or at least some of it depending on whether I want to keep the 10d as a backup body should I ever decide to start actively searching for photography gigs again…)

I love the weather sealed body, the 10 megapixels would be a fairly significant bump up (wish it was full frame though) and there are some nice Nikon lenses…I have some time before my trip and will probably wait till late August to decide….

[mac128k-1984]

Originally Posted by dale

mac128K, what camera do you have now, and what do you think of the quality of the photos you can take with it?

I have the D70, very pleased with it. The camera body is only one part of the equation, good quality glass is another piece and of course a photographer who can frame a picture, and get the various settings down are the other part.

With that said, I think my pictures have been pretty good quality wise. The lenses I have are top quality, I'm working on improving my skills so that leaves the camera body.

I've been lusting after the D200 but to be honest it was going to be in my long range plans. Now that Nikon coming out with a new camera body I'll wait and see what that includes.

[iomatic]

The 5D rocks.

Nikon's great, but CMOS and L glass rock the hizzy.

[OreoCookie]

I don't think it's the fact that Canon is using a CMOS sensor (vs. CCD), but a fullframe sensor which increases the pixel size.

[powerbook867]

ok, I din't think I can switch to nikon...I just love my canon gear....

Went to the zoo today and had some fun with my wife and daughter (even though it was 97! )

http://www.josefstuartphotography.co.../birdsmall.jpg

but it still looks like you guys are getting a nice new camera to play with!

[Edit: changed image to link. Please be mindful of our image rules. --tooki]

[iomatic]

Do you mean that the fact that Canon's CMOS sensor size rocks the hizzy?

Quite agree.

If you mean to say the full frame sensor size = lower pixel density compared to a "crop-camera", you'd be right. However, to frame the same image with a full-frame camera, pitted against a similar megapixel-count APS-C format camera, the 5D would trump it, i.e., you'd frame the same scene with a shorter lens on a crop camera vs. a longer one on a full-frame camera. Though these little details are nothing compared to the incredible low-noise CMOS sensor, and subsequently crystal clarity (with some caveats) of L glass.

And, full frame.

Ah, full frame.

Oh joy!

Like I said, I've been a Nikon shooter, and they're quite adequate, but Canon's offerings are quite awesome right now. Great tools.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I don't think it's the fact that Canon is using a CMOS sensor (vs. CCD), but a fullframe sensor which increases the pixel size.

I don't know about the UI, but I set it on M, meter, and change my ISO and aperture/shutter settings. I don't know what else one would need.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by iomatic

If you mean to say the full frame sensor size = lower pixel density compared to a "crop-camera", you'd be right. However, to frame the same image with a full-frame camera, pitted against a similar megapixel-count APS-C format camera, the 5D would trump it, i.e., you'd frame the same scene with a shorter lens on a crop camera vs. a longer one on a full-frame camera. Though these little details are nothing compared to the incredible low-noise CMOS sensor, and subsequently crystal clarity (with some caveats) of L glass.

I don't mean to be nitpicky, but I'm not so sure about this. With noise, Canon simply has an advantage, but the user has to be willing to pay for that, too.

Also, I think you are underestimating the importance of the lenses. It is much easier to design digital lenses for an aps-sized sensor. Each test I've seen so far has revealed weaknesses of Canon lenses on full-frame sensors. That's why tests of Olympus' 4/3 lenses usually conclude that the image quality is excellent -- simply because it's easier to design lenses for a smaller sensor.

[iomatic]

Right, the CMOS is quite good.

I do not underestimate lenses. In terms of glass, the zooms come close, but not up to prime lenses in the L lineup. Certainly, there will be distortions, but again, I've seen one sample (i.e., no accounting for manufacturing defects) of a 16-35 test, or the 17-40 pitted against the Zeiss prime (fercryinoutloud), and yes, indeed, the zoom will totally suck. Duh. No doubt distortion exists on wide angle, but the Canon long lenses also reign supreme. I'm not a fanboy, I just shoot all manner of digital (Leaf, etc.), and the Canons just so far, at least today, have quite the edge in dSLR performance.

I repeat: FULL FRAME !

Some of the lenses, if calibrated properly, will be awesome. I've seen awesome images with Canon kit lenses, and rich snobs showing off their pictures of tens-of-thousands of dollars of L glass, and crap for photos. So, bottom line, it's the photographer that makes the pictures, and if you have great tools, it certainly doesn't hurt.

[OreoCookie]

True, the photographer is still the key element. However, what I meant to say was that Canon has to invest a lot more in lenses than other manufacturers, because designing lenses for full-frame digital sensors is a lot more difficult than designing them for APS-sized sensors. (Older lenses, not specifically designed for digital slrs will not produce optimal results either.)

My only point is that this puts Canon at a disadvantage at times as well: the cameras and the lenses will cost more. That's the great thing about competition: sometimes you have two sensible solutions to a problem, and you don't know which one will prove as the `better choice". Canon has always had my respect for building nice cameras and lenses.

(Don't worry, I'm not the kind of person that takes pictures of his tiles in the bathroom to find out how bad the distortion of his lenses really is )

[dale]

I think it is in our nature as technically minded people to optimise our technology choices. Sometimes though, I think we lose sight of the fact that the two choices at hand are so good, that we are only talking small percentage differences.

Canon are great at some stuff, Nikons great at others. Where these cameras are not great, they are still very good. One manufacturer will always be putting its nose slightly ahead of the competition, but that is all it will be - a fractional lead. To me, if you already own glass, stick with that manufacturer. buy more kit when the new kit will give you a distinct advantage over what you already have, not fractions!

Finally, do we really gain anything by agonising over the choices we make, when the competition is so close? Best thing is make a choice between two very good offereings and enjoy what you have bought! Something newer, better greater shinier will always come along in the not too distant futures, but the increases will be no substitute for the amazing shots and memories you have captured in between technology changes.

[tooki]

CMOS is not superior to CCD -- it's the same, all else held equal.

In fact, CMOS's main advantage is that it's cheaper to make. But because a CMOS sensor doesn't have as big a photosensitive site for each pixel, their nature is actually to have more noise than CCDs. It's a tribute to clever Canon engineering that their CMOS sensors work well. It's also highly likely that their support electronics are designed to minimize noise, too.

In the end, though, CCD and CMOS are effectively the same in image quality. The miniscule differences observed can clearly be attributed to all the other factors in the image path, including the support electronics and post-processing (in-camera or not).

And I don't buy that Nikon has appreciably worse noise than Canons: in tests, it's barely measurable, and in image comparisons, undetectable. Furthermore, Nikon's noise tends to have more pleasing patterns than the Canon noise. In the end, it's a toss-up again.

The full-frame sensor certainly is capable of delivering lower noise. But a DX/APS-C sensor from a year from now will, too. It's not as though the technology has stopped evolving.


Regardless, this thread was not intended to be a Canon-vs-Nikon debate: it's to stir interest around the new Nikon that's coming. If you aren't interested, leave the thread!

tooki