GSteele wrote:
Full Frame..Full Frame..Full Frame..Full of Crap......
Cheez..............will this never end! FF (FF meaning the holy 36mm x 24mm sensor) fanatics feel that the DOF issue is of monumental importance is justifying their frenzy over FF. Landscapers swear by FF. Portraitures feel nothing else will give them that fine edge of control as much as a FF sensor.
Will the measurebators please learn something about photography before trying to make a determination of which format is KING! You can design, engineer, philosophize something to death, but if you don't know how to use it, what good will it do you?
Personally I believe that all the top end camera's have more than enough resolution to satisfy every photographer and most every Pro (Pro, being defined as someone that makes a full time living taking photographs). Hell at times I think there is too much resolution. I am tried of my 2 gig CF cards being eaten up with 12 megapixel images and holy cow on having to process them all, my harddrives are bursting at the seams and my DVD burner is on overtime.
Now for you measurebating pixel heads. Now when you look through your viewfinder WYSIWYG, No More No Less. We are talking here about the Pro lines, semi-pro and others, you get a little more than what you see, but you get the idea. All you want is for the sensor to capture, as accurately as possible, what you see. For the landscapers wishing for something more, it just ain't happening. Oh, you would like more pixels! I doubt seriously that unless you are printing wall murals that you can see the difference between a 10 megapixel capture vs a 16 megapixel capture. Funny thing about printer's, they seem to do their own thing interpolating an image. They don't do a pixel for pixel print. For you DOF fanatics during portraits and believe that 1 or 2 inches difference if DOF will either make or break you prize winning capture or that you will end up selling it for bazillons of dollars. Get a Life and learn how to use your FEET, APERTURE or LENS SELECTION to adjust your point of focus and DOF, to get that earth shattering Bokeh that you so dream about.
As for me, if Nikon ever comes out with a so called FF sensor, I won't be standing in line for one. Now give me what I have along with 16 bit color depth and greater dynamic range and I will be standing in line for one (even though it will eat up my CF cards quicker). That way I can be like the BIG BOYS with their MF digital backs. Although I have the X I still use the D2H more than it. The reason is simple. Most of my photography isn't intended for public display, but are captures for either me, my family or friends. Post processing is fast and the pictures will easily make excellent 11x14 prints. Now when I am out taking photographs for public display and/or for sale then I will put up with the extra post processing involved using a higher megapixel camera. BTW for those who may not know, I do have a FF 14 megapixel sensor, Nikon compatible camera, I just find their really isn't any need for it any longer.
Don't like the thread, just don't read it. Why do you care that some people want something different?
Why do people buy a 300HP sedan when 80HP is all that they need? Why people buy SUV when they never really go off-road or fully utilize the extra cargo space?
SamppaM wrote:
What is the street price (with or without taxes) of D2X in Canada?
Priced recently drop from CDN$6100 to 5700, but you can get even better deals than that. I know I can get it for $5450 or better. That is picking up in store and full refund in 14 days if I don't like it.
Online order have gone to as low as $5100 (that I heard of).
Tax is 15% in my provice, as low as 7% in some other provices.
So, it's about $3900 EURO before tax, and about $4500 EURO after tax. Not that much cheaper after all. This is mostly due to the CAD and EUR dollor exchange rate. It would be something like $3200 when the currency was like 1 to .6 back in Jan.
For the statement that the D200 would be a camera that would be a clear victor up against the 5d or the 20D for that matter - you are running with something here. A camera that has not been used by any of us yet. Has a small amount of resolution over the 20D and a small amount under the 5D so lets just agree to say - so what! Other than that compared to the 20D it has all the same main attractions. Same crop, same fps, same focu aproach, same build style same medium quality viewfinder compared to the best there is. So what you must mean is that it is in the subtle things where you declare it the champ and thus it is by no means likely to be a certain thing with everyone. Yet to declare them a tie you get frothy at the mouth. I don't get it. btw that statement takes nothing away from the D200 - unless one holds the ridiculous position that the 20D is a piece of Cr*p. ...Show more →
The problem with this logic is that the D200 and 5D are totally different cameras for different shooters.
The 5D is solely for people who demand full frame on the cheap. If you dont mind a crop, you can get essentially the same camera for half the price in the 20D.
The D200 is looking like Nikon's take on combining the market position of the 20D and the market position of the F100. Part prosumer camera for serious amateurs, part professional build for anyone who wants a backup to their D2X, or a body that is a bit lower-key than the D2X (no vertical grip makes it stand out a bit less).
And as a side note, let it be said that the 20D is a great camera. Killer features at an incredibly low price.
look at the shots put up by andi_farrington. I think they are great examples of fantastic use of narrow dof at the extremes.
Interesting shots. But, I've seen similar shots from DX cameras. FWIW, I don't like those kind of shots. It bothers me a great deal, to have part of a person's face so far OOF and I can't foresee any time when I would do that intentionally.
Don't like the thread, just don't read it. Why do you care that some people want something different?
Why do people buy a 300HP sedan when 80HP is all that they need? Why people buy SUV when they never really go off-road or fully utilize the extra cargo space?
Get a life...
If you wish to debate, then have at it, or is it the fact that you couldn't find any inaccuracies that bothers you. You should take your own advice, if you don't like what I say then just ignore it, rather than respond with a personal attack. Don't be so angry!
If you or I had a 300 hp sport coupe and raced Mario Andretti who had a 250 hp sedan on a road course, who do think would win? It wouldn't be either one of us that for certain. It isn't always the better equipment that always gets the results, it is how you know to use it, that does.
GSteele wrote:
If you or I had a 300 hp sport coupe and raced Mario Andretti who had a 250 hp sedan on a road course, who do think would win? It wouldn't be either one of us that for certain. It isn't always the better equipment that always gets the results, it is how you know to use it, that does.
I love it when people say things like that. What does that suppose to mean?
Don't you know that Mario Andretti will most likely do even quicker laps with the faster car. Why do you think that all the F1/DTM/Le Mans/WRC teams spends millions of dollors on R&D and fine tuning their car for that extra 0.1 second?
Why bother with the 85mm f1.4 or the 70-200 f2.8 VR. Just get a 50mm f1.8 prime and use your "skill". Show me how you can get the boken of the 85mm f1.4 or 70-200 f2.8 VR with the 50mm f1.8. I would love to know.
BTW, I think you shouldn't use AF/Metering and should stick to M mode, forget about the SB-800, just get yourself one of those bad ass Mag-Lite. You even get different light pattern, woohoo! Skills can make up for everything!!!
Of course it depends on the purpose. I want a full frame digital 645. Even the 1Ds MK II is still lacking compared to the 6x7, but it is good enough most of the time. I'm too old and lazy to do 4x5 at this point.
sl1200mk4 wrote:
Why bother with the 85mm f1.4 or the 70-200 f2.8 VR. Just get a 50mm f1.8 prime and use your "skill". Show me how you can get the boken of the 85mm f1.4 or 70-200 f2.8 VR with the 50mm f1.8. I would love to know.
BTW, I think you shouldn't use AF/Metering and should stick to M mode, forget about the SB-800, just get yourself one of those bad ass Mag-Lite. You even get different light pattern, woohoo! Skills can make up for everything!!!
Oh yes Obi Juan, the force is strong with this one! His mastery of terminology and technique of the Dark Side is amazing. Please, do show us your "Boken".
I know this is way off of this topic, but I am really confused. Canon always goes about obsoleting things. You can use this lens only on that camera...this one doesn't fit and so on and so forth. I can stick my grandfather's old Nikon lenses on my Brand New D2x and guess what they work. Truly wonderful. Great Nikon glass on a great camera. While all you people are debating what full frame is, try sticking a lens made for the AE-1 on your new 5D and tell me how it works. That is the reason why I can't see every purchasing a Canon camera, I can't use the equipment I already have sometimes. They make me go out an purchase L glass, like it some religion. Like it adds something to the experiance of being there. Just like some so called full frame is suppose to. Being there is the issue with the lens and the camera and knowing how to use it.
I really enjoy using my Contax & Leica stuff on my Canon. It's all relative, this debate is meaningless. Get a Camera and go shooting, Nikon, Canon, Pracktica who cares...
GSteele wrote:
Oh yes Obi Juan, the force is strong with this one! His mastery of terminology and technique of the Dark Side is amazing. Please, do show us your "Boken".
There is no Japanese word that ends with the h sound... That's why I kept on hitting instead of h.
So, what if you need to buy L lens in order to benefit from FF. It's not like Nikon didn't ditch the D-TTL and went with i-TTL. It's not like my 18-70DX will work on film or FF (oh wait we don't have one).
What's wrong with having FF, enjoy more DOF control, bigger/brighter viewfinder?
Edited by sl1200mk4 on Nov 13, 2005 at 03:24 PM GMT
By simply looking through the viewfinder of a FF camera tells of the obvious advantage. It is like coming home!
As digital cameras get better they will reveal weak spots of the available optics. It is rediculous to hold it against these cameras that they are that good.
Full does not mean anything, people are drawn into this marketing ploy, shortly before having to replace all of their canon lenses when each new camera (with a new lens mount) comes out
Bright viewfinders, why not buy medium format or large format? Shallow depth of field, mm horses for courses but their again go to medium/large format for even smaller DOF. And dont bang on about digital medium format is to expensive because then why not buy a camera with a DX (cheaper to make) sensor.
Why does it matter, i dont think people that are using the D2X are having trouble creating great images because their sensor size is smaller than canons marketing people believe it should be.
sl1200mk4 wrote:
What's wrong with having FF, enjoy more DOF control, bigger/brighter viewfinder?
Nothing wrong with it, but it's not worth the ridiculous premium to me.
Additionally, there are major tradeoffs to shooting FF, ones that I would not be happpy to make, and would definitely increase my unwillingness to pay a stiff premium for the larger chip
As usual this discusssion seems to degenerate to the religion of Nikon vs. Canon. I would like to see a FF 27 megapixel version of the D2X and I would also like to see a pro Canon with APS-C sensor. In five years this may all be a moot point. Sensor prices will drop and N & C will probably have every format covered. Meanwhile a mixed system is a possibility. None of my Canon, Nikon, Mamiya or Contax cameras and lenses ever fought it out in my camera bag; they all get along.
I would like to see a FF 27 megapixel version of the D2X and I would also like to see a pro Canon with APS-C sensor. In five years this may all be a moot point. Sensor prices will drop and N & C will probably have every format covered. Meanwhile a mixed system is a possibility. None of my Canon, Nikon, Mamiya or Contax cameras and lenses ever fought it out in my camera bag; they all get along.