thw2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #7 · Mike Johnston on Sony vs. Nikon vs. Canon | |
Tom K. wrote:
Johnston is very well respected in the photography world.
Ha, ha.
This is the same guy who once bashed Canon's full frame offerings when there was no D3/D700/A900. Now, why will someone who used to bash the FF system suddenly become interested in comparing THREE FF cameras? This is what he used to say:
"Nikon, meanwhile, with the introduction of its professional über-kamera the D2x, has shown its firm allegiance to the APS-size sensor that gives a 1.5X effective crop. Its digital "format" is uniform, from the entry-level D70 to the D2's (yes, there's the choice of a further crop with the D2x, but that doesn't count because the whole sensor is still 1.5X). Nikon has also quietly begun building up a collection of its DX lenses, made expressly for its digital format.
Not to beat around the bush: I firmly believe that what Nikon is doing will prove to be smarter in the long run.
The path Canon is taking gives it an advantage right now, because so many photographers want, or think they want, "full frame" (i.e., 35mm-sized) sensors, so they can use their old 35mm lenses on their DSLRs. I've opined before that this is "oldthink," and I still think so. What sensor development up till now has firmly demonstrated is that sensors are getting exponentially better as time passes. Right now, in my opinion, we're beginning to enter the stretch of time when the "enough is enough" influence will begin to kick in. That is, in five or six years, we're going to know approximately what the market demands in terms of ultimate pixel size from a DSLR-type camera. And we're also going to have a pretty good idea of what it doesn't demand."
.... Mike Johnson
Sorry, Mike Johnson is no different from Ken Rockwell, the mother of all BS.
|
But as any normal human, he has his personal opinions and prejudices. And we can always agree to disagree.