You have to take these numbers into the equation when shooting the same focal lenght in both cameras.
Best,
Dioni
Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler (Albert Einstein)
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D2X and F6 : OFFICIAL PRESENTATION to RESELLERS
- Thread starter daytontp
- Start date
Best,
Dioni
Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler (Albert Einstein)
1 euro = 1.22 USD
So his price of 2200 euros is about $2600 USD. It'll probably be less since US sales tax is a lot less than European VAT.
Dirk Vermeirre
Veteran Member
5200 Euro must be in dollars, I assume that the TVA is the same in France as in Belgium (21%), minus the TVA of 21% makes with the rates of today 5264$.
I'm a very happy S2 user but could be that I will go for a 2DX soon.
With very kind regards,
Dirk
'Equipment is not the issue. It's all about vision.'
http://www.pbase.com/dievee
I'm a very happy S2 user but could be that I will go for a 2DX soon.
With very kind regards,
Dirk
'Equipment is not the issue. It's all about vision.'
http://www.pbase.com/dievee
R
Ron Parr
Guest
We're in agreement here! I'm not the one arguing against this idea.
--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
D
David Martin
Guest
I would guess that they bothered because they are indeed looking to produce a digital back D3, but they were able to design the camera but not the digital part of it at this stage.
I am not in the habit of knocking Nikon on this forum, but just the same it is clear that there are a number of issues and that not everything has gone as Nikon would wish.
The LBCAST initiative seems to have not worked, or at least have gone back to the drawing board, so it is possible that the sensor they were hoping to use is the problem.
At a guess, Nikon do not know themselves whether they can get a sufficiently high performance from a 1.5 factor sensor at reasonable noise levels - that is surely why they have chosen a 100-800 ISO range, and so they may regard the next generation as problematic.
I think that people often have too deterministic a view of R & D.
Canon have chosen to cover their bases by having several sensor sizes, and they can see how the various issues pan out, instead of trying to be certain about the way things will go ahead of time, and my guess is that Nikon are attempting a similar fall-back position, by having a digital back ready if they cannot get the perfoemace they hope to from a 1.5 crop, or the market indicates that it wants to go to a FF format - SUV's may not meet most rationalists criteria as appropriate transport, but they sell by the trckload!(joke!)
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
I am not in the habit of knocking Nikon on this forum, but just the same it is clear that there are a number of issues and that not everything has gone as Nikon would wish.
The LBCAST initiative seems to have not worked, or at least have gone back to the drawing board, so it is possible that the sensor they were hoping to use is the problem.
At a guess, Nikon do not know themselves whether they can get a sufficiently high performance from a 1.5 factor sensor at reasonable noise levels - that is surely why they have chosen a 100-800 ISO range, and so they may regard the next generation as problematic.
I think that people often have too deterministic a view of R & D.
Canon have chosen to cover their bases by having several sensor sizes, and they can see how the various issues pan out, instead of trying to be certain about the way things will go ahead of time, and my guess is that Nikon are attempting a similar fall-back position, by having a digital back ready if they cannot get the perfoemace they hope to from a 1.5 crop, or the market indicates that it wants to go to a FF format - SUV's may not meet most rationalists criteria as appropriate transport, but they sell by the trckload!(joke!)
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
JC
Veteran Member
2200 Euros = $2692 US. Of course, you'd need to deduct the amount of the VAT, and even then the US usually gets camera cheaper.
JC
JC
davexl
Veteran Member
Ah, of course. Thanks for that.
I still think I would prefer the 8mp/1.3x over the 4mp/1.5 anyday, and trying to spin it down to a 21% difference (therefore negligible) is just rationalising, but that is just me. Whatever works for you I say.
Thankfully the D2x is sounding pretty tasty. Those specs at that price look very good. Assuming the noise is ok, and they can make enough of them!
Regards,
David F.
Melbourne, Australia.
http://www.pbase.com/davexl/
I still think I would prefer the 8mp/1.3x over the 4mp/1.5 anyday, and trying to spin it down to a 21% difference (therefore negligible) is just rationalising, but that is just me. Whatever works for you I say.
Thankfully the D2x is sounding pretty tasty. Those specs at that price look very good. Assuming the noise is ok, and they can make enough of them!
--
Regards,
David F.
Melbourne, Australia.
http://www.pbase.com/davexl/
To me this is the big surprise. Integrated optics correction. Very cool. Fewer problems with "bad sample" lenses. Maybe even lighter, non-pro grade lenses will become more popular.
24-48mm equivalent with a 12-24mm lens doesn't seem so bad for those times when you've just gotta have wide or normal and fast. I don't know why you're complaining so much about something that seems like a brilliant cheap way to get extra flexibility out of an otherwise high-resolution body. If you've just gotta have 8fps all the time, then get the D2H. If all you care about is specific raw numbers, then you want a Kodak FF or the Canon MkII.
A Owens
Veteran Member
It means that vertical grip and larger battery compartment are all cast as part of the main body. The F5 is made in this way, though the viewfinder is detachable. Personally I like it as it makes is simpler and stronger and more weatherproof. Conversely it means that you cannot make it smaller and lighter by removing the battery grip.
If this rumour is true, it sounds like Nikon have 'monobloced" the viewfinder and "unmonobloced" the vertical battery grip.
Notwithstanding that; an F100 with updated focus CAM, the build quality, speed and exposure system of an F5 would be the best camera in the world; bar none.
R
Richard Greenough
Guest
Aren't sports and wildlife photography obvious (oops) applications for such a feature (moving subjects make faster fps necessary and cropping usually happens anyway)? Neither are my interest but if I wanted to make money building pro cameras I would pay attention to those two groups of photographers.
The dynamic range teaser in the original post is what makes me more interested in this camera. I live in the Northwest where shooting blinding white glaciers and shadowy fir trees in the occasional sunlit shot is just asking too much of my D100. I've spent years avoiding learning how to combine two shots in PS to add DR, and maybe D2X will continue my lazy ways.
A Owens
Veteran Member
Danny Brenner180445
Veteran Member
The D2X will sell in the U.S for $3950. Availability= Dec 2004/Jan 2005
SkyEye
Active member
OK, so what exactly is DXO?
Albert C. Lee
Leading Member
Josiah Chieng
Well-known member
Josiah was here
DXO is basically software that corrects lens issues (distortion, chromatic abberation, vingetting, etc). You shoot the DXO test targets with the lens/camera combo, then feed the results into the software. Then the software determines how to fix the lens abberations and applies this filter to all shots taken with that lens. Very cool and long overdue IMHO.
ghpoty
Veteran Member
Probably D2X is not for me, but I would like a revised D2H at 6-8MP.
Possibly like the Olympus E1 system where distortion etc is corrected by the cameras computer.I would agree this is quite an advancement.
Similar threads
- User review
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum