If the 7D has those specs and that price, I'd buy one. Couldn't give a monkeys if it was 12MP instead of 12.8. If it has the same sensor technology as 1D mk III it would be an awesome camera.
But as someone else said, believe it when I see it!
Tim Ashton wrote:
Well said Marc.
Now that it is so easy to post ones work, may be fred should make it a pre requisite that any one wishing to post, publishes on line.
T
Not well-said at all, IMO. This faulty logic "litmus test" suggestion appears too often, and sometimes I feel obliged to protest it on principle.
If a poster suggests that 2 + 2 = 4, ...then that person's opinion is valid. The validity is inherent in the merit of the statement or opinion. It is neither negated by his being a first grader, nor assured by his being a professor of mathematics. Sometimes the moo that comes from a sacred cow simply indicates a stepped-on teat, ...not a revelation. Papal infallibility is a myth.
And accurate observations do in fact sometimes come "from the mouths of babes".
I suggest that anyone who cannot comment specifically relating to the subject matter, ....not attempt to turn the thread into a demand for "cerification" from the one who has.
There are photo contests galore for those inclined to enter them. There is no reason to try to turn an equipment-forum discussion into one.
"Fitting-in" is clique talk. And "respect" gained or lost because someone subjectively(!) likes/dislikes a given example(s) of anyone's work has nothing to do with the merit of a post's content.
Open participation restricted to only the "qualified"?
Bah, humbug!
Idea exchange is not art competition. It is thought exercise.
If Canon continues to perform incremental updates to their cameras, they will soon find themselves outpaced - they already have by Nikon!
Canon is in a catch 21... if they do not make drastic changes/improvements/evolution to their new dSLR, others will outpace them, and on the other hand, if they make drastic improvements in their new dSLR (ie. AF & noise) it will alienate past year's Canon buyers, and will leave them with a bad and sour feeling for purchasing when they did...
Nikon has pulled a nice move on them by releasing cameras that even today will be pretty hard to match by Canon at reasonable prices!
L. H. Smith wrote:
Not well-said at all, IMO. This faulty logic "litmus test" suggestion appears too often, and sometimes I feel obliged to protest it on principle.
If a poster suggests that 2 + 2 = 4, ...then that person's opinion is valid. The validity is inherent in the merit of the statement or opinion. It is neither negated by his being a first grader, nor assured by his being a professor of mathematics. Sometimes the moo that comes from a sacred cow simply indicates a stepped-on teat, ...not a revelation. Papal infallibility is a myth.
And accurate observations do in fact sometimes come "from the mouths of babes".
I suggest that anyone who cannot comment specifically relating to the subject matter, ....not attempt to turn the thread into a demand for "cerification" from the one who has.
There are photo contests galore for those inclined to enter them. There is no reason to try to turn an equipment-forum discussion into one.
"Fitting-in" is clique talk. And "respect" gained or lost because someone subjectively(!) likes/dislikes a given example(s) of anyone's work has nothing to do with the merit of a post's content.
Open participation restricted to only the "qualified"?
Bah, humbug!
Idea exchange is not art competition. It is thought exercise.
aero145 wrote:
Okay, are the screens on the 1D2, 1D2n, 1D3, 30D, 40D and 400D 690,000 dots?
I guess technically they should be dots (x3 colors) and pixels. The 307,000 is per color as previously noted. The older (current) canon LCD's are 230,000 dots and 76,800 pixels (320*240).
I like what takes a nice picture, and doesnt destroy my budget..its the end result that should matter, I shoot Nikon for work, Minolta for home, and I'm buying a 40D next month - Because they're solid cameras. period. That being said - white lenses are pretty slick though.... I think all the rumors and posts of UPC's and people who feed into the hype should relax until the end of the month for PMA and see what Canon (or Nikon) says is due up, surely they wouldn't leak new info before the biggest photo conference of the year....least I'd hope not
Josh OConnor wrote:
I like what takes a nice picture, and doesnt destroy my budget..its the end result that should matter, I shoot Nikon for work, Minolta for home, and I'm buying a 40D next month - Because they're solid cameras. period. That being said - white lenses are pretty slick though.... I think all the rumors and posts of UPC's and people who feed into the hype should relax until the end of the month for PMA and see what Canon (or Nikon) says is due up, surely they wouldn't leak new info before the biggest photo conference of the year....least I'd hope not...Show more →
M Vers said:
It has nothing to do with pixel peeping or bragging rights more so I wouldn't want to have to switch over from Canon to Nikon after all of these years
I agree. I am just waiting till the end on January. The move may be difficult because of the lack of Nikon fast primes though.
Pixel Perfect:
Do you mean fast AF-S primes? It is been rumoured (reputable source) that Nikon will release 7 new AF-S lenses this year. The standouts for me are:
Thank you. I heard about that too (although some of the primes may be released at the beginning of 2009) and that is why I coming back to my thoughts about Nikon. Canon is cheaper as far as lenses are concerned but Nikon has released not only good cameras but great new lenses as well (I mean mostly 12-24, non-extending 24-70 f/2.8 G and earlier 105 f/2.8 VR Macro - all AF-S and some nano crystal)
I do want Canon to come up with something good in January.
I hadn't realized the Nikon 24-70 is internal zoom. That's nice, I hate extending zooms.
I always wondered why everyone's 24/28-60/70/75 f/2.8 were extending yet a 16/17-35/40 isn't nor are the 70-200s.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I hadn't realized the Nikon 24-70 is internal zoom. That's nice, I hate extending zooms.
I always wondered why everyone's 24/28-60/70/75 f/2.8 were extending yet a 16/17-35/40 isn't nor are the 70-200s.
The new Nikon 24-70 isn't non-extending (I have one). It extends less than the Canon, but the non-extended length is slightly more than the Canon so when extended they are both the same length.
However the Nikon has much better build quality and IMHO better optical quality. Shooting wide open at f2.8 is really sharp.
DPR forums and KR both have similar credibility. Think you might want to wait for Canon to start the rumor mill going. Like many companies, they do that pretty well.
They do exist...
I think all the rumors and posts of UPC's and people who feed into the hype should relax until the end of the month for PMA and see what Canon (or Nikon) says is due up, surely they wouldn't leak new info before the biggest photo conference of the year....least I'd hope not