fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3 … 14

16 … 39 40 end

Archive 2007 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

nikt
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #1 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

By the way... although we will wait for the results, I'd prefer to have the 10MP 14bit, 6 frames per second of the Canon than the 12MP 12 bit, 6 frames per second from Nikon. Its also a LOT cheaper. If you've got Canon stuff, I don't see what all the hoopla about Nikon releasing the D300 is all about. It has nice specs sure, but the 40D didn't all of a sudden start taking crap photos.

Geez, it was only a few days ago everyone was trying to rub the Nikon users face in it, about how good this 40D is.

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:04 AM

Rampai65
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #2 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

BrianSkibinski wrote:
Anyone else notice that the D300's lcd is not really 920k pixels, but rather 920k 'dots'
From Nikon's website:
'# The 3.0-inch Super Density 920,000-dot VGA Color Monitor with 170-degree wide-angle viewing makes possible even more critical image review.'

VGA is actually about 307k pixels (640 x 480), which is not as ridiculously high as 992k (granted, it's still more than the 40d). Just worth pointing out that we have to get through the marketing speak.

Is Canon's 230,000 pixel on Canon's own website and dpreview and elsewhere correct then ?

Rob G writes : A 3-inch (diagonal), 170 degree viewing angle rear LCD that is so crisp and clear you'll never want to use another rear LCD to review your pictures again. Its 920,000-dot resolution makes it possible to judge critical focus when zoomed in to nearly full magnification. In fact, it's like looking at a screen without pixels; they're so small as to be invisible when looking at photos at even abnormally close viewing distances. The only thing we're not sure of yet is how accurate the brightness of the display is, and as Nikon has typically tuned their rear LCDs to render photos lighter than they actually are (when viewed under typical indoor conditions), even when screen brightness is adjusted all the way down, this a concern for the D3 too. But there's no question about the clarity of the display, it's awesome.

Is there something more to it than some extra dots here and there

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:33 AM

nikt
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #3 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Yes, the 230,000 resolution is correct. These screens are 320 x 240. Or about 76k. Anyway you look at it, it still 4 times more on the new Nikons.

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:43 AM

Rampai65
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #4 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

nikt wrote:
Yes, the 230,000 resolution is correct. These screens are 320 x 240. Or about 76k. Anyway you look at it, it still 4 times bigger on the new Nikons.

320x240=76,800=76,800*3 (dots for R, G and B) = 230,400
640x480=307,200=307,200*3 (dots for R, G, B) = 921,600

Anyway one looks at it, Nikon LCD is better

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:47 AM

Tentacle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #5 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Rampai65 wrote:
[...]

Is there something more to it than some extra dots here and there

Unfortunately, it's industry practice for these kind of mini screens to count subpixels.

So, 922k means 640x480 pixels, times 3. 640x480x3 = 921600

233k = 320x240 (x3) = 230.400 (Canon 30D)
130k = 255x170 (x3) = 130.050 (Nikon D50/D70(s)
118k = 243x162 (x3) = 118.098 (Canon 10/20/300D)

And so on...

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:50 AM

Rampai65
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #6 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Tentacle, Then why is every one blowing "technical" holes into what is acknowledged as a better screen ? That's my only point.

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:51 AM

MPerdomo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #7 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Rampai65 wrote:
Tentacle, Then why is every one blowing "technical" holes into what is acknowledged as a better screen ? That's my only point.

Because nit picking every technical detail is what the canon forum was invented for

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:55 AM

Tentacle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #8 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Rampai65 wrote:
Tentacle, Then why is every one blowing "technical" holes into what is acknowledged as a better screen ? That's my only point.

Because if you don't know any better, and think "Lets see, my own computer screen is 1024x786" then that tiny 3" screen would appear to be higher in resolution. Your average monitor resolution is given in pixels, not in subpixels.

I'm not saying that this new 3" screen is crap. Not at all. It has 4 times the amount of (real) pixels compared to what has gone before it. But 922k "pixels" is deceiving.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:05 AM

Leif Goodwin
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #9 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

dcmiller wrote:
are there going to be apologies to Canon FF users for our "antiquated technological thinking".

Geez, the BS all these years from Nikon users about full frame. Soon to be the coolest thing they've ever seen.

Unfortunately there has been bullshit aplenty from both sides. Most sensible Nikon users believed that Nikon needed FF to compete in the current market place.

You people should be thanking Nikon. It means Canon might be forced to compete more aggressively and drop prices.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:10 AM

Leif Goodwin
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #10 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

PShizzy wrote:
Competition is good for all. But I still believe that Nikon sorta did a disservice to their customers by not really keeping up for a while. I know of a lot of converts who came over to the Canon camp simply because they felt they would never get a good high ISO camera out of Nikon.

Honestly, we should all expect companies to leapfrog each other, the problem was that Canon did this and maintained that for years, long enough to have a lot of the Nikon people lose hope.

Max

As a Nikon user, I could not agree more.

PShizzy wrote:
If you're a Canon person, like me, your first though is: Great specs.

But your second thought: It's only gonna take a few months for Canon to bring out something better. What's sad is that for years, the Nikon camp couldn't say the same.

I disagree. These products are the result of years of development hence a lead time of 5 years is probably reasonable. What we see today is the result of decisions made years ago, with the exception of the minor updates e.g. D2x => D2xs and 20D => 30D.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:14 AM

Leif Goodwin
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #11 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

AGeoJO wrote:
There are three Nikon D3 related threads on the Canon forum while, at this particular moment, only a single one on the Nikon forum. What's wrong with that picture, huh

? Can someone explain that to me

?

It makes a welcome change. The Nikon forum used to be full of "Why can't Nikon produce the goods" threads.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:19 AM

nikt
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #12 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Tentacle wrote:
But 922k "pixels" is deceiving.

Probably true, but no different to the acknowledge standard , where everyone's been talking about 230,000 pixels. It is what it is these days. I don't see 922K as trying to fudge the numbers in a new way, its not. Its simply using the existing methods for specifications.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:23 AM

Hrow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #13 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

timbop wrote:
exactly. For us midrange budget action shooters, well, the D300 is everything canon was afraid to put in the 40D. Nikon has gotten smart; they aren't trying to come out with a huge array of bodies that intercompete. Instead, they're giving you pro features at semipro prices and the 12mpx fullframe D3 easily competes with the 5D. Not sure how anyone can argue otherwise, considering they have roughly the same sized sensor but the D3's has 14bit raw, weathersealed construction, and top shelf AF instead of the second tier canon feeds us.

Frankly, I am seriously considering the D300 pending the...Show more →

Tim, I think a lot of people are in your situation - I was. My decision to be an early adopter ot the 1DMkIII was simply based being sick and tired of the 20D AF for trying situations and not wanting to lose my prime shooting season as I am getting to an age where I can appreciate that there are a finite number of them left.

Had I not bought the M3 I would be planning on switching right now. The only reservations that I would have would be the loss of the 24-105 and the 70-200 F4 IS. Both are the best travel lenses around and they may have swayed the final decision but Nikon did a great job with the D300 and it will find its way into the hands of a lot of serious shooters.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:24 AM

Jonesy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #14 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

quote "My cheapest canon upgrade is $2200 for a used 1dm2, which means I will then need a 300/2.8 option to replace my venerable 70-200/2.8."

Why would you nee dto get rid of the 70-200 if you switched to 1dm2? I just got a 1dm2N and a 70-200 2.8 IS and now I am confused if I should just keep it or sell it for a 40D/5d combo or even switch to Nikon since I only have 3 lenses....
I don't shoot alot of sports but love wildlife and will be doing alot of portraits.studio work soon.

Aug 24, 2007 at 07:36 AM

akovacsi
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #15 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Oh damn... the release of D300 is very, very tempting... I was just thinking of upgrading my 350D (Rebel XT) to the 40D... and now Nikon D300 shows up its face...

It has made me pause and think a little...

Aug 24, 2007 at 08:22 AM

mfurman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #16 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Hrow said:
Had I not bought the M3 I would be planning on switching right now. The only reservations that I would have would be the loss of the 24-105 and the 70-200 F4 IS. Both are the best travel lenses around and they may have swayed the final decision but Nikon did a great job with the D300 and it will find its way into the hands of a lot of serious shooters.

How true. I have been waiting for the 1D mkIII's focus issue to be clarified and now I am certain that the price will have to immediately go down to the "original" $4000 and later drop to $3600 (at least). My 70-200 f/4.0 L IS and a few primes keep me in Canon camp (I have been using EOS cameras since 1990). If Canon stubbornly keeps the price of 1D mkIII high or does not release very good 5D mkIII in Feb 08, I will have to seriously look at the cost of transition.

Aug 24, 2007 at 08:52 AM

bobbydh
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #17 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

akovacsi wrote:
Oh damn... the release of D300 is very, very tempting... I was just thinking of upgrading my 350D (Rebel XT) to the 40D... and now Nikon D300 shows up its face...

It has made me pause and think a little...

Me too, I hv 5 Canon lenses, 2 bodies, but this D300 is very much tempting. I've persuade a few friends to use Canon system, but now I'll feel guilty if I jump ship to Nikon. Once I saw 40D actually I've set my mind to get 1, but now with the D300, I have to think again. I just hope Canon will develop more things after this "hard knock".

Aug 24, 2007 at 09:07 AM

dcmiller
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #18 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Things I find interesting about the about the D3

1) "gapless photosite design" If this is implemented in a way that can efficiently collect light, it's a bid deal

2) 900K LCD Is this was practical and economical, what the heck is Canon doing? They should have much more expertise in making this kind of thing? Does Canon really listen to it's western customers? This makes me wonder.

3) No dust cleaner on the D3? If Canon had come out with a new 1 Series without this feature we would have said they must be the worst company in the world. Why is Nikon getting a pass?

4) FX - If Canon had sold us on DX, and DX lenses, as the future. Then came out with FX, we would have said they were the sleaziest company ever to make a product. Why is Nikon getting a pass on this? Oh, but it's not full frame, it's FX ......

5) 11 fps without AF? wtf, marketing must have taken over Nikon. They couldn't stand to say that it's a 9 fps camera.

This part of the high-end game is just beginning. That little thing caled "image quality" has not been considered. If Nikon has elegantly implemented a gapless cmos design, THAT will be trouble for Canon. But the last new Nikon branded sensor was LBCAST. The history of Nikon "developing their own sensor" is not good.

Aug 24, 2007 at 09:23 AM

nikt
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #19 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

I'm sure 'dust cleaning' is beneficial, but if you can't implement it effectively, then its pointless. Implementing it on small sensors is much easier than implementing it on large. The 400D has 'dust cleaning'.... better to say you've got it I suppose.

It says 9 fps. Given the option to shoot 11 with caveats.... well thats the way it is. If a photographer can't see that, then he/she should keep their money in their pockets or just buy a D40x or 400D.

Of course there's going to be some whiners that keep bringing up the 'FX' stuff and Nikon said.....

Aug 24, 2007 at 09:56 AM

CKrueger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.15 #20 · �Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses

Hrow wrote:
Why should one assume that they have to move up the ISO to have a native 6400? Under that logic and using the D2Xs as the base they would have had to move the low end of the scale to 1600 to get to 6400. Obviously, that would be silly but it should clearly illustrate that there is no inherent reason to think that you can't have ISO 100 and 6400 as native settings.

And yes, being forced to use a neutral density filter is a huge price to pay for a feature that I, and most people, will never...Show more →

Personally, I would use ISO6400 very frequently.

I use ISO3200 on my 5D all the time, and I could even suffer a bit more noise without much complaint. I shoot auto racing at night, and oftentimes I'm forced to switch the flash off because the flash lights up any dust in the air, making my pictures look like I sneezed on my sensor. This means shooting ISO3200, f/1.4, 1/250. (Limiting me to only my 50/1.4.) ISO6400 would give me the ability to stop down, which would help eliminate misfocused frames. Even better, ISO12800 would give me the ability to shoot f/2.8 zooms, which would greatly increase my ability to follow action.

Anyway, for this application I really don't care how much noise there is, as long as a RAW processed by Lightroom can make a decent 8x10.

I anxiously await the day when noise and AF performance is such that I can track and shoot a slow f/5.6 zoom with no flash in dim stadium lighting. That's the day I buy a 28-300IS and go to sporting events with a single body and lens, and leave the flash home.

I can live with buying a 2-stop ND filter. I'd need a 49mm, 58mm, 67mm, and 77mm. In many cases I'd just use my CPL instead.

vyanush wrote:
To get a 5Mp camera for $5K? Quite useless, except, maybe for snapshots with 18-200 DX. But who else than Arnold Schwazenegger could come to an idea of such a >2kg "pocket camera"?

You're kidding, right? I've got plenty of 8x10's made with my old Oly E-10 (4MPixel), and there are forum full of 1D shooters here who will happily print larger than that.

Being able to use crop lenses on a FF body is something Canon doesn't let you do. If the 5D, 1DMk3, and 1DsMk3 allowed you to mount an EF-S lens, and automatically cropped out the vignetted portion of the frame, would you call this a bad feature? What if they also bumped the frame rate up for you and made the RAW files smaller?

Awesome feature, IMHO. Canon should have provided a similar option for the 1DMk3, instead of their sRAW implementation... a 2x crop with a smaller file and viewfinder masking would be welcome for anyone stuck with a "too short" lens.

Aug 24, 2007 at 10:24 AM

1 2 3 … 14 15 16 … 39 40 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 14 15 16 … 39 40 end