Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon D100

Go to last post
The spec looks more F80

a big issue for low light work is the auto focus module - the D1, D1X, F5, F100 all use the excellent CAM1300 module

the F80 etc and now the D100 use the much slower CAM900

interesting to see how it does perform

why pick on dumming down the autofocus? seems a common theme
Peter Lindsey said:
They are a great idea and were implemented ni the Nikon F80.

I have a grid-screen in my EOS3, it really helps with horizons and
framing. The ability to switch it off in the Nikon lines is cool.
Click to expand...
 
Matt,

Nikon owns the PATENTS for VR (Vibration Reduction). It is not copying anything, if you can fault Nikon, it's for being slow in putting its own technologies to market.

As for the motor-in-lens autofocusing, it's not an exclusive Canon idea either. The Nikon F3AF was using the same principle, back in 1983.

Nikon people can't be idiots. The company that is singularly responsible for introdocing not only Japanese cameras and lenses but also high quality Japanese goods in general to the West cannot be manned by idiots.

Regards,
Otel
Matt Kim said:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=2208728

Matt
Peter Gregg said:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=2242296
Click to expand...
--
http://www.wherearethetoonsnow.com/
Click to expand...
 
Even some Minolta Maxxum lenses are white. It's just a color.
Valliesto Bailey said:
As a Nikon user what is your feeling about the white Nikons?
Joe Hoddinott said:
Valliesto Bailey said:
I think they have just had to sit and watch Canon technology
advance for so long, it must be hard for them to feel good about
Nikon. But if they try to claim it as something Nikon has invented
then they are idiots. It is sad to watch a proud company like Nikon
have to copy white lenses, just to try to cover up the fact they
have lost major market share.
Click to expand...
Forgive the intrusion, but Nikon has had White lenses in the past.
This is nothing new.
--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.biggerboatstudios.com
Click to expand...
--
Valliesto
Click to expand...
 
To keep you lusting the better (=more expensive) models.

Vesa
david morrell said:
The spec looks more F80

a big issue for low light work is the auto focus module - the D1,
D1X, F5, F100 all use the excellent CAM1300 module

the F80 etc and now the D100 use the much slower CAM900

interesting to see how it does perform

why pick on dumming down the autofocus? seems a common theme

Peter Lindsey wrote:
Click to expand...
 
Peter,

I posted this in MIB's post "D-60 or D-100" however I would of posted it here instead:

I really like this forum. Until I bought my D-30 8 weeks ago I didn't give a hoot about Canon. I thought that Canon was a consumer elcheapo knock off of Nikon. You know a Nikon wannabe.

Well I have learned alot in the past 14 weeks. (Took 6 weeks to research D-30 before I bought)

1.) Canon is a very high tech company. Nikon no longer competes with them on state of the art features. (Tables have turned.)

2.) Canon's first venture into DSLR's under $3m was a great success due to thoughtful engineering and the use of a sensor that gave excellent results.

3.) Canon glass is supurb. High tech elements and IS put them out front.

4.) I believe that Canon will become the dominant leader in Consumer, Prosumer and Pro gear in the next 10-20 years. They have been on a steady path to success. (Look at the 900 series from Nikon, great cameras, now look at all of their other consumer cameras. (They can not compete with the G1/2 or the little S-30/40's)

The D-30 was the first of it's kind. Now that Nikon has their own D-30

people are nervious. Well don't be. If you are going to jump ship every time a new camera comes out then your going to loose a lot of money. Please save time and send that money right to me. I will send you a thank you note.

Last week people were talking about purchasing a Sigma because of a new sensor. That is not a rational thing to do. Now Nikon has a new camera and later this week Oly will introduce a whole new SLR design with a family of lenses.

Relax, this is the best thing that could happen to photography. Competition will give us higher quality at lower prices with more features. Now take your D-30's and 1D's and go have fun!

I am excited to see the new Canon! I cann't wait to get my new "used" film body in to check out the 16mm end of my 16-35L. Heck I can't wait to get out the door today and go to work! It keeps me away from this darn forum.

Please excuse the typo's I'm half awake and my spelling is bad when I am awake yet alone groggy.

BTW Nikon makes great stuff, I would be proud to shoot with either.

Regards,
--
Jeff Morris

Adams, Gutmann, Steichen, Stigletz, Weston. they lead by example.
--Jeff MorrisAdams, Gutmann, Steichen, Stigletz, Weston. they lead by example.
 
It's my understanding that making lenses white is more for function than fashion.

On long lenses, a black lens barrel will get much hotter in the sun. Excess heat can affect the function of the lens' motors and elements, and it can also cause visible heat waves inside really long lenses. Not to mention, black lenses could get almost too hot to touch in direct sunlight.
Valliesto Bailey said:
I think they have just had to sit and watch Canon technology
advance for so long, it must be hard for them to feel good about
Nikon. But if they try to claim it as something Nikon has invented
then they are idiots. It is sad to watch a proud company like Nikon
have to copy white lenses, just to try to cover up the fact they
have lost major market share.
Click to expand...
--Curtis CleggFalls church, [email protected]
 
Otel Garcia said:
As for the motor-in-lens autofocusing, it's not an exclusive Canon
idea either. The Nikon F3AF was using the same principle, back in
1983.
Click to expand...
I don't know whose idea it was but anyway, 1981 Canon made a
"New FD35-70mm f/4 AF" lens and although the Canon Camera
Museum Lens department doesn't tell more it could be that
this was an autofocus lens which had motor and AF sensors in it.

I remember there WAS such and it looked quite clumsy.

A bit later (seems to be -85 ?) they also made an AF body (T80)
with couple of AF lenses using the old FDn mount.

Maybe someone remembers more?

I was about 20 at that time so I should remember...

Vesa
 
Yeah i find it a bit weird that in all the litrature around no mention on the FPS.... ! Except ofcourse what is thought to be 2.5 from Rob's forum... no official mention though...
Mike Salzlechner said:
1) Only uncompressed RAW ?

2) No mentioning on FPS and buffer size even thought there is a
paragraph about image processing speed.

--
Michael Salzlechner
StarZen Digital Imaging
http://www.starzen.com/imaging

E-10 / D30 Photo Albums
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=1605723
Click to expand...
--dizzynoodle
 
Jeff Morris said:
1.) Canon is a very high tech company. Nikon no longer competes
with them on state of the art features. (Tables have turned.)
Click to expand...
Even though I'm a former Nikon user who switched to Canon I have to disagree here. Canon stumbled badly in the DSLR market, letting Nikon get a huge lead with it's D1 line. The D30 helped stop the bleeding a bit, but now we have the EOS-1D, which is an otherwise excellent camera, stumbling out of the gate with banding problems and poor availability. Hopefully the D60 will be competitive with Nikon's announced D100.

Paul
 
Otel Garcia said:
Matt,

Nikon owns the PATENTS for VR (Vibration Reduction). It is not
copying anything, if you can fault Nikon, it's for being slow in
putting its own technologies to market.
Click to expand...
Sorry, Canon had it on comsumer cameras first. Nikon got
around the patent with a couple of changes and was able to
get it through... It was JVC and Panasonic that had it in their
video cameras first.
Otel Garcia said:
As for the motor-in-lens autofocusing, it's not an exclusive Canon
idea either. The Nikon F3AF was using the same principle, back in
1983.
Click to expand...
Actually, Minolta was the First.
Otel Garcia said:
Nikon people can't be idiots. The company that is singularly
responsible for introdocing not only Japanese cameras and lenses
but also high quality Japanese goods in general to the West cannot
be manned by idiots.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. Nikon started making only lenses for military equipment.
Canon's first camera was produced in 1933, Nikon's was in 1948.

Anyhow, let's see how many Nikon bodies the new VR SWM will work
on... I can use my 100-400L IS USM lens on Canon's First EOS
camera, the EOS 650.

Matt
Otel Garcia said:
Regards,
Otel
Matt Kim said:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=2208728

Matt
Peter Gregg said:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=2242296
Click to expand...
--
http://www.wherearethetoonsnow.com/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
-- http://www.wherearethetoonsnow.com/
 
I guess you can call the white lens a badge. I am not sure of Nikon's reasoning for white lenses, maybe the Nikon users requested them. I could understand someone not wanting to be the only black lens is a sea of white ones. I would wear my black lens as a badge, a symbol of my choice.

But to me it seems that Nikon got sick of the following situation: Imagine a Canon magazine ad that simply stated "Canon, the professional's choice" over a picture of the photographer's area of any major sporting event. It would look like a forest of white lenses. So what does Nikon do, they start making white lenses too. (Sorry for the rant, I just like to see innovation)

The D100 seems like it will be a great camera. Especially if you are using a D30 in addition to your D1x.

Sure you can have your new 400mm/2.8 in Apricot, Cherry or Ocean Blue. That is a sickening thought.
Joe Hoddinott said:
Valliesto Bailey said:
It is no intrusion, we are all friends here (well most of us). The
only other Nikons I know of that are white are some of the long
primes. I was under the imperssion that this addition of white
lenses was a recent introduction, is it not?

As a Nikon user what is your feeling about the white Nikons?
Click to expand...
(Stepping gently)

Honestly, it's a moot point for me. I personally prefer a black
lens, simply because as a photographer (the so called silent
observer) should not intrude on an event and black recedes. Sounds
funny, but again, as long as there are no "Hassleblad" M&M colored
lenses, I'm easy.

The other white Nikon's I've seen are long primes, yes, but I don't
own any nor do I get to play with any. :( I'm not sure of their
age on the market, but it's nothing that came out yesterday or
should be concidered "new."

After reading this I've come to see that the white lens is a Badge
for Canon that I didn't realize was so important. I can see how
the reaction of seeing a new competing VR lens shelled in white can
seem like an arrogant slap in the face to Canon and their white IS
lenses. Canon lens technology has long impressed me with the
weight (or lack thereof) and IS. I'm a fairly big guy, so weight
doesn't necessarily bother me, but it would be nice to have IS (VR)
lenses. Though I'm not sure image stabalizing would make a huge
difference in my shooting.

I make frequent use of a pair of d30's that a studio I work for
because they are small and lightweight compared to my d1x & are
easy to be discreat with. This D100 announcement is very welcome
because it will mean I don't have to carry 2 types of lenses... or
borrow cameras fom the studio :)

Thanks for listening.

--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.biggerboatstudios.com
Click to expand...
--Valliesto
 
Curtis Clegg said:
It's my understanding that making lenses white is more for function
than fashion.

On long lenses, a black lens barrel will get much hotter in the
sun. Excess heat can affect the function of the lens' motors and
elements, and it can also cause visible heat waves inside really
long lenses. Not to mention, black lenses could get almost too hot
to touch in direct sunlight.
Click to expand...
Valliesto,

It seems that we may have missed a rather logical and very important point. (Gets out white paint.)

:)--Regards,Joe H.---------------------------------------www.biggerboatstudios.com
 
I'm sure many of those cameras made by Canon since 1933 are classics. Especially that landmark 1959 Canonflex.

It seems to me we are taking this "war" more seriously than the camera makers themselves.
Matt Kim said:
Matt
Member said:
Regards,
Otel
Matt Kim said:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=2208728

Matt
Peter Gregg said:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=2242296
Click to expand...
--
http://www.wherearethetoonsnow.com/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.wherearethetoonsnow.com/
Click to expand...
 
The 35-70 AF went with the T80 as it was the only camera it could AF with.

Nearly every manufacturer flirted with motor-in-lens AF in the period, but when Minolta brough out their motor-in-camera AF that blew away all the opposition, people like Nikon retrenched and eventually brought out their own in-body systems.

It was Canon that made motor-in-lens AF successful, but they had to go back to first principles and design new kinds of electric motor to do it

This took them a couple of years, and Minolta collected a lot of AF sales in the interim.

However look at the relative sales now.

I think a similar position has existed with exchangeable lens SLR digicams. Canon got off to a slow start compared to Nikon and even Minolta, as they took the time to build a technology base.

Now wait for the momentum to build up!
vpera said:
vpera said:
As for the motor-in-lens autofocusing, it's not an exclusive Canon
idea either. The Nikon F3AF was using the same principle, back in
1983.
Click to expand...
I don't know whose idea it was but anyway, 1981 Canon made a
"New FD35-70mm f/4 AF" lens and although the Canon Camera
Museum Lens department doesn't tell more it could be that
this was an autofocus lens which had motor and AF sensors in it.

I remember there WAS such and it looked quite clumsy.

A bit later (seems to be -85 ?) they also made an AF body (T80)
with couple of AF lenses using the old FDn mount.

Maybe someone remembers more?

I was about 20 at that time so I should remember...

Vesa
--Derek
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top