Pavel wrote:
I had a canon body ... shall remain nameless as I don't want to stir up the pro 10D camp.
It rained.
I no longer have it.
Guess why?
I wasn't even trying to be an outdoorsy kida guy. This time the build quality counts - for me, anyways.
But yeah ... to each their own.
That's too bad Pavel. I had a 20D that I sold with 75,000 frames on it, I shot it in snow, rain, at 16,000 feet, -20 zero, you name it. But like all cameras, weather sealed or not, I protect them since a wet foggy front element is no good. Take a look through National Geographic some time, the most popular DSLR is the 20D. I am sure that will change when the assignments that are bieng shot on the 5D's start to publish. The D200 will change that too.
The ratio of assignments shot for that mag in the last two years on digital are 4-1 in favor of Canon.
By the way, if the D200 were full frame, we would not be having this conversation.
Tom Conte wrote:
I emphatically disagree, but to each his own. For me, the 5D has a prosumer build with the same body in essence as a 20D. The VF is not 100% coverage, and yet they deleted the pop-up flash to, I suppose, make it appear more "pro". I think that's cynical marketing on their part. I wanted more info in the viewfinder, like Nikon provides, e.g., shooting mode (PASM), ISO, etc. I wanted more switches and less menu diving. I wanted a camera with a frigging metal bottom, and a solid CF card door, not plastic, for $3k.
So for me the 5D was a killer alright. It killed my loyalty to Canon. I shot 146 frames with it and sold it at a loss.
Fair enough, You have said that for you, it did not meet the mark. Just understand though that for some of us pros, the camera is not only pro in design, it is a bargain and can't be touched by too many other DSLR's, including the Canon line-up.
The D200 is an awesome camera, I just need it to be full frame. One day, they will have that, but I shoot to put food on my table so I don't have time to keep switching. There are too many great images to be made in this short life.
I agree on the rain sealing thing. I didn't worry about it much (and kinda try to refuse to even now - out of principle ) and in all likelihood I just got a bit unlucky. I don't want to make a big deal out of it on the one hand, but man it was a bummer too - and while I don't think any kind of sealing is a guarantee - it still is kinda nice to have the peace of mind that such a little bit extra gives you. In my case I get to be a bit more, no, a lot more at ease.
Of course I was thinking of selling it too - great timing eh? I'm trying to think of it in positive terms. I saved on shipping!
The ratio of assignments shot for that mag in the last two years on digital are 4-1 in favor of Canon.
That actually is nothing that would make any difference to me. Nor really should it to anyone else, plenty of examples where the majority made the wrong choice. I am not saying Canon is the wrong choice, hey it's fine for you and many others, I am saying one should make their choice based on their needs and preferences.
Unless one tends to follow the crowd, I was never really good at that.
Sorry but I lot's of people call themselves a "pro" but if you ask me a pro body is a 1D series body or a D2X or the few pro film bodies from canon and nikon. That don't weigh a ton.
Not a 5D
But then again the guy calling numbers and having 7 year olds sit in front of a bad backdrop taking shots for the yearbook is a "pro".
AUnderwood wrote:
Sorry but I lot's of people call themselves a "pro" but if you ask me a pro body is a 1D series body or a D2X or the few pro film bodies from canon and nikon. That don't weigh a ton.
Not a 5D
But then again the guy calling numbers and having 7 year olds sit in front of a bad backdrop taking shots for the yearbook is a "pro".
Let me educate you a bit since you seem to be caught up in the blind "Pro" hype. When I am hanging on a rope in freezing temperatures on assignment for Rock & Ice, National Geographic Adventure or Outside magazine, I have a light and sturdy camera in my hands as well do most other shooters of this type of genre. We are pros using pro gear, period.
And as for the comment regarding the 4-1 ratio at National Geographic, take that as an indicator of pro preference in that niche field as of late, not what you or any other person on here should be using per se.
It was great chatting with all of you, but I need to get off of here and replace the batteries in my avalanche beacon, fill my hydration pak and get my full frame, lightweight PRO camera system in order for an assignment tomorrow....
Oh Tom I've been fighting it big time. I've been waiting for Nikon to produce something like the D200. The D70 just didn't have it but this might be what get's me back to Nikon.
The D200 or the dumb canon fan base. I've never understood coming over to other forums and thumping your chest. A true pro takes photos.
I remember somewhere someone talking about how "pro" goes further than getting paid for photography. Meaning it would encompass how one conducts themselves in a deeper sense of the word.
Serious attitudes with an antagonistic bend tend to speak more of ones need to qualify ones self, possibly a deep seeded inferiority complex. Who knows ... it sure tends to make take it with large helpings of salt.
What is it with the "pro" attitude that some have to glop around? Are "pro" photographers disarming nuclear bombs or something? Let's see, no degree required, just an ability to get the shot. So, a garbage man would fall into the same "pro" category, he's getting paid for his work, for hanging dangerously off the back of the truck, in all kinds of weather too.
Let's see...
Are you a "pro" school teacher? No, it's just my hobby....
Are you a "pro" firefighter? No, I voluntarily put out my own fires, but one day.....
Are you a "pro" artist? Yes, I'm starving to death because nobody's buying my work, but by God I'm "pro"......
Are you a "pro" carpenter? No, I served a 4 year apprenticeship to become a Master Carpenter, but I can never be pro, I'm just a tradesman.....
Are you a "pro" Garbage Man? Heck yeah, I drive the truck....
I guess I have to channel Nick Lowe here
As I walk through this "pro" world
Searching for light in the darkness of ISO insanity
I ask myself, is all noise lost?
Is there only grain and hatred and misery?
And each time I feel like this inside
There's one thing I want to know
Oh, what's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding?
Don't get miffed and defensive guys, that is very dpReview like, right?
I mean....much of my best stuff was on Nikon gear, full frame film, but Nikon none the less. Now I use a different beast because I need my vision intact. If Nikon gave me a reason to switch back, I would. That does not mean you are less than anyone for deciding that what they offer now is good enough for you. It's just that from my neck of the woods and the guys I work in and around, well....we can't believe it is the year 2006 and Nikon does not have a true 35mm camera to match their sweet glass.
They will get it out at some point. In the mean time, I will keep my vision intact by other means.
You raise the specter of dpreview, and after a few 15 posts have reduced this forum to that level... almost.
I don't see how your posts add anything to the Nikon forum on FM.
I'm an amateur at photography. I have a day job, I don't brandish it (wtf, go google it). Many who do it for the love of it make damn good images. Jack's point is dead on: That you're a "pro" and use a 5D, therefore the 5D is "better" than ___ is a non-sequitor.
You raise the specter of dpreview, and after a few 15 posts have reduced this forum to that level... almost.
I don't see how your posts add anything to the Nikon forum on FM.
I'm an amateur at photography. I have a day job, I don't brandish it (wtf, go google it). Many who do it for the love of it make damn good images. Jack's point is dead on: That you're a "pro" and use a 5D, therefore the 5D is "better" than ___ is a non-sequitor.
Both camera companies make great gear, many pros use it at all levels with quite a few different models. I really don't think much is added to this forum by incessantly comparing Nikon to Canon and putting down Canon's gear on here. You gain nothing but some ray of sunshine on your egos.
I am interested in Nikon gear, that is why I come here. But when baseless crud starts to fly about a piece of gear I use, I am going to chime in. And you know what? I can. I kept one FM3A and a 24mm 2.0 AIS because for many things I do, it can not be beat.
So then I post some work because I start to hear that I am not backing up my words with pictures and that is STILL not good enough for you.
Read this again: I love Nikon gear and would switch back if they gave me what I had before, their system working the way they designed it to.
Since when is there a law against a person who uses Canon in coming over here and reading about Nikon experiences? If your peers talk unfounded cr@p, you are going to hear from me once and awhile, plain and simple.
The D200 might have kept me with Nikon a little longer if the timing had been different. But back in 10/2003, I was told by a good source that Canon would come out with 3 more FF cameras and Nikon none in 3 years, so I had to switch.
Now, it is up to you, the reader, to extract some good out of this post and turn the tide from that of a classic dpReview one. If you reply in the defensive, close minded fashion that others have on here, then it is you, not me, my friend, that is lessening the quality of your experience on this site.
By the way, I have been fighting a cold I must have caught on my flight home a week ago. If I had not had it, I would not be on here so much and would be less "Feisty" about all this.
I'll give it, you, and me a rest. Now let's see what that D200 can do..
Edited by Film_Ruled on Jan 05, 2006 at 05:27 AM GMT
