bobbytan wrote:
The 7D is supposed to be an entry-level $2,000 FF DSLR .... and it will certainly be better than the 5D, as it will have a high-def 3" screen, live view, 14-bit A/D converter, Digic III, and probably an improved AF system. For the price of a D700 you can probably get the 3D with 16-18 megapixels, dual-core Digic III, useable higher ISO i.e. lower noise, micro adjust, etc, etc.
My opinion! 4D is for upgrate, 7D for all others, Market is to fight for it. Why should Canon accept Nikon earning their acre without doing anything for it, than reaching the goal? They will just set their 3 year old level Nicon just reached down in price level and cpresent some new landmarks Nikon again can not afford. That would destroy D700s beeing. D3 is already destroyd by Nikon itsself. No thinking person would spend money for it after introduction of D700.
Edited by Ralph Conway on Aug 06, 2008 at 09:45 PM GMT
Edited by Ralph Conway on Aug 06, 2008 at 09:46 PM GMT
Common Canon, it's time to kick some A$$!
or should I say: Common, just rob my cA$$$$H
I think the new 5D-II is just the 40D in the 5D's body, but at 12 MP for $1,999.
Enough to keep potential-D700 buyers at bay...
Edited by Sam tran on Aug 06, 2008 at 11:46 AM GMT
I do not care about names. Or luck in Japan. Their luck is to sell in huge numbers TO US.
Call it "rebellion" or some other stupid stuff, like Teddybear on sunset stripp AB2 DH10. I would purchase an "Intruder 3point23 if it gives me what I need and I can pay it.
WebDog wrote:
OK weather sealed body is cool but then, how many of your lenses are sealed
Only two. The not one 50mm 1.4 is most used indoor. Kamera is always used.
Ralph Conway wrote:
I do not care about names. Or luck in Japan. Their luck is to sell in huge numbers TO US.
Call it "rebellion" or some other stupid stuff, like Teddybear on sunset stripp AB2 DH10. I would purchase an "Intruder 3point23 if it gives me what I need and I can pay it.
If you really don’t care about names you would call it a Canon *D, wouldn’t you?
Ralph Conway wrote:
In my opinion you are wrong. Ask Nicom users, Or all users, They all have pronlems with F/B - focus. A friend of mine brought back a 70-200 2.8 and got his money back, because Nikon was not able to serve the problem. Micro adjustment does give "pros" the chance not to wait for 6-8 weeks to get back their adjusted cams or lenses. They can not wait. They have to earn money. That is why it was done. And to safe money that has to be spend in adjusting, too. Adjusting a dearranged Rebell costs about € 175 - Canon is paying to CPS. What did that sold camera bring them at least? Nothing. ...Show more →
Well, this is called a "difference of opinion" because I think you're wrong.
I don't want to have to hassle with something I never had to put up with before. I know I didn't think it was a problem with the 5d or 1ds2 from previous generations, nor did I find it to be a problem with the 1d3 (AF issues aside).
I don't know how long you've been shooting, but it has never been a problem before in my 30+ years. The number of bad lenses went up with the number of forum participants on the internet. As for returning lenses, IMO it's primarily the people that don't understand which end is the business end of a lens that do all the whining, gnashing of teeth, and returning of lenses...
A client just left the studio a short while ago. I'll be shooting several different properties where his company has recently completed large jobs. I'm not going to whine about my lenses, I'm going to use them the way they are. They work, my cameras focus, and if the shots are bad, it's not the fault of the camera or some mythical micro adjustment problem.
It's not a simple put a lens on a body and it works. The AF in modern cameras works through a complicated exchange of parameters and settings between the camera's and the lens computers. They talk to each other and make decisions. Not you. You are given an option to affect this process and shift the settings to your liking. You don't have to if you don't need.
In a way it's similar to an option to work with RAW images instead of relying on camera's jpeg interpretation.
I have used 2 copies of the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS and also the Nikon 70-200 VR... and Canon's is noticeably soft at 200mm- so unacceptable that I switched to the f/4L IS instead, which has been amazing. The Nikon 70-200 is sharp at all lengths, if I were still a nikon user, and if I switch back over, that would be a must have. It blows away the 2.8 IS by a lot.
From my experience, Nikon 70-200 VR is inferior than a Canon 70-200/2.8, especially at outer zones. Some of the people compared with its predecessor 80-200/2.8 AF-S and found the later is much better.
I have also tested 2 70-200 VR's on Velvia and Provia slide film -the only way to compare at the time, two different brand lenses- at far distances against my 70-200/2,8 IS. The 1st one was unacceptably soft up to f/5,6 at the center @200mm because ,probably, of element missallignment. The corners were even worse -they didn't improve at all ! The same applied at all focal distances. The second one was comparable to my lens ( which -by the way- wasn't as good as my 70-200/2,8 non-IS ) at the center, but the corner problem was there also.
Your observations and mine are -probably- different, because of different format and maybe copy differentiation due to bad (?) quality control of both companies. Up to now Nikon used the DX ( 15x23mm ) format, and the area it covers is the one that their lens has the best performance. On full frame format their lens performs as I claim, something that the testers of dpreview also note. orangefirefish wrote:
I have used 2 copies of the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS and also the Nikon 70-200 VR... and Canon's is noticeably soft at 200mm- so unacceptable that I switched to the f/4L IS instead, which has been amazing. The Nikon 70-200 is sharp at all lengths, if I were still a nikon user, and if I switch back over, that would be a must have. It blows away the 2.8 IS by a lot.
phuang3 wrote:
From my experience, Nikon 70-200 VR is inferior than a Canon 70-200/2.8, especially at outer zones. Some of the people compared with its predecessor 80-200/2.8 AF-S and found the later is much better.
Ah, I see, that book, that girl (Charlotte K. Lowrie) did NOT write about 5D MK II two month ago is offered now again, same specs same release date (10th of November) at a special preorder-price. :-)!
Hell - how she was able to do "200 beautifull pictures" wit an NOT EXISTIG camera within the last couple of weeks?
but then, how many of your lenses are sealed