Comparison, Accuracy, etc.

I noticed a few threads about certain things missing from one preview or spec list or the other, as well as a lot of miss-information being quoted by people on this forum and several others. Then there is the mass of miss-information that is the common salesman. In the interests of knowing the whole story myself, I compiled a list of all the features and specs by combing this site, the press releases, and the manufacturer's web sites to compare the "big three" mid-level offerings, the 40D, D300 and A700. I hope this is a comprehensive list but I am putting it out here because if I missed anything, I would like to update or correct it. For those who said they are looking to help friends or family that might be comparing and contrasting these three, by all means, please feel free to use it. Anyone else who might feel I am remiss for leaving off any of the other offerings (Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic etc.), I am mostly interested in APS-C cameras but if you would like to add another camera(s) to it, I would love to see it. Let me know what you all think.











Again, I hope this is a help to some. And thank you for any feed back. Just for reference, I do not currently own any SLR lenses in any system, so I am choosing which cam I will go with fresh. Yes I have been leaning very heavily towards Sony since the announcement (asked about lenses and almost ordered last week), but have been forced to hold off at least a little while. Hence, taking a double look to make sure it's the right choice.

ntnt

You can compute pixel pitch for D300 and A700, since you know the number of pixels and the area of the chip.

Great table!

One question though - on the A700; is the Raw+ really only Raw+JPG (Fine)? I was really hoping it would be Raw+Jpg (X Fine). I guess there is a part of me that would like the best JPG's i can get, AND the best RAW....

EDIT:

Damn.. looked on the DP preview, and indeed, it shows as just fine. Oh well, i think i can live (as long as AF and ISO are better).

All three probably have on chip a/d and NR. Being able to do that is one of the primary reasons to use a cmos sensor rather than ccd.

I have realized, when i have take a look at the pdf manual user brought in another thread ..., that we will have to buy the LCD plastic protector (that was by default with the 7D).

Does anybody know the price of this protector ? ... Because with the quality of LCD that we have ... i'm sorry but i will not want to go outside with my camera without the plastic LCD protector ... Too many time i can remember bringing my camera with me on my shoulder and having knock something on my lcd and said to me (that's ok ! there is a plastic protector ... and it's scrapt i will only have to change it, instead of sending my camera to the store for repair ...).

i will have to order an LCD protector soon ...

Regards,

Frank

Thanks for all the work that went into this! I thought I'd help fill out some of it, as I've been watching the 40D (since it's the only one available); the D300 looks good, too, so I might be able to add a bit to it.

As an aside, I'd assume the A700 uses 12-bit A/D conversion. As for the D300, you might note that it's 12/14-selectable.

Why is the D300's reduced RAW format characterized as lossy and the other two aren't?

The D300 has two LV modes, and I think the focus method is different for each. The D300 also notes AF tracking by color and/or scene recognition.

The D300 has electronic grid overlays (it also has too many extras, compared to the others, to put a separate row for each; you might want to have an "extras" row where you lump everything unique to a camera).

You list DRO as a row - I think you can conceptually equate it with D-lighting in the Nikon (which I believe they've updated and made available for RAW ... sounds like DRO, doesn't it?).

Both C&N have up/downloadable picture profiles.

40D (the source for most of this is Canon's web site):
EC = + - 3 EV
Shutter speeds are only in 1/3 stop increments, not 1/2.
Flash guide# is 13
It has a DOF preview button and will also do it through LV.

On the interchangeable focus screens, I think Canon owners can do it themselves (they used to be able to; Canon owners please correct if I'm wrong); the A700 requires a trip to the shop.

Once again, thanks for putting this all together.

Rich

I stuck with it because DP and another review both listed it that way. On Sony I do not see it listed as one or the other, though at least one additional web site listed file sizes for RAW + Fine and RAW + XFine. Since the majority indicated RAW + Fine only, that's what I stuck with.

Pixel Pitch, yes I meant to calculate and forgot to go back and add it in later. I was hoping to find it posted since I was feeling lazy last night. I will add it to my file, but it might be a while before I update on here. By the way, anyone know a way to post Docs to the board, rather than having to convert every update to a photo, upload to photobucket, then re-post on here? Just curious.

That is probably true. I did not post it though because I cannot find anything to back that up other than common sense. None of the tech sheets, press releases, or anything from the manufacturers says it, and the only things I wanted on the list were published stats or those items that could be calculated from published stats.

Sony does not list the price for the "official" plastic protector yet that I can see. My preference on my digitals has been to use the disposable ones ment for PDA's and such. They are very cheap, prevent scratching in all cases for me, and take the least away from the screen clarity, at least compared to the more substantial plastic ones sometimes provided (at least in comparison to my friend's D200 protector).

RichV said:

As an aside, I'd assume the A700 uses 12-bit A/D conversion. As for
the D300, you might note that it's 12/14-selectable.

Click to expand...

I think the A700 is 12 bit too or else it would be in the press release, but I cannot find any published stat yet either way. I only wanted that which could be read in some "official" source, or that which could be calculated, therefor I left it blank for now.

RichV said:

Why is the D300's reduced RAW format characterized as lossy and the
other two aren't?

Click to expand...

This is what it says both on here (see the full spec sheet) as well as a couple other review sources said to be attributed to Nikon. The other two do not say one way or the other. Again, common sense would dictate that they are also lossy as well, but I tried to keep assumptions (no matter how likely) to a minimum.

RichV said:

The D300 has two LV modes, and I think the focus method is different
for each. The D300 also notes AF tracking by color and/or scene
recognition.

Click to expand...

As I understood it, Live View is a single mode, but you are right that the two focus modes. I thought I had that noted it sufficiently with "contrast detect for live view" in the AF section, but it isn't as clear looking back at the list (I was working very late at night), so I will edit it. As for the tracking and scene recognition, this is what is meant by predictive tracking w/color recognition (per a Nikon spec sheet I have), but I perhaps should add some notes at the end?

RichV said:

The D300 has electronic grid overlays (it also has too many extras,
compared to the others, to put a separate row for each; you might
want to have an "extras" row where you lump everything unique to a
camera).

Click to expand...

I did see all of these, and I agree it would be a huge set of rows. Notes it is!

RichV said:

You list DRO as a row - I think you can conceptually equate it with
D-lighting in the Nikon (which I believe they've updated and made
available for RAW ... sounds like DRO, doesn't it?).

Click to expand...

I was thinking about this, and I also wanted to put the DR of the sensor itself for all three, but it seems none of that information is published. At least it isn't published anywhere I have found it so far. As for D-lighting, I am not fully familar with it. I really wasn't sure what it does, though my feeling was that it was somewhere between DRO+ and a color mode fine tuning as well. They also do not point it out on the D300 (though I have read about it in the past)

RichV said:

Both C&N have up/downloadable picture profiles.

40D (the source for most of this is Canon's web site):
EC = + - 3 EV
Shutter speeds are only in 1/3 stop increments, not 1/2.
Flash guide# is 13
It has a DOF preview button and will also do it through LV.
On the interchangeable focus screens, I think Canon owners can do it
themselves (they used to be able to; Canon owners please correct if
I'm wrong); the A700 requires a trip to the shop.

Click to expand...

I will update the EC (DPreview has it wrong), I already added the DOF preview, but apparently that was after the file conversion, you are right on the screens, and I have seen both 13 and 12 on the flash from various Canon literature as a choice since I personally feel all on board flashes are slightly over-rated.

RichV said:

Once again, thanks for putting this all together.

Rich

Click to expand...

Thank you for the help! Perhaps this can become the difinitive list I hoped for after all!

You know it is interesting that there was such a big deal that these cameras have wireless and GPS but it is only with additional accessories. Sony does offer a GPS that works with "virtually any digital camera"

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665078257&tab=Features

GPS Unit Kit GPS-CS1KA

Keep track of your digital photos with satellite precision. The GPS-CS1KA calculates when and where your pictures were taken and the included software can place them on a virtual map, for the entire world to see.

I do think that C&N having these features is great but since they are accessory features that can be added I would not be surprised to see Sony release an accessory to compete.

All in all a very nice list that is the most complete that I have seen to date.
--
Capturing small moments of the beauty God has created,
Daniel H.

I tend to agree with you. Sony is often rather abused for coming up with ad-on optional accessories that add functionality like that. Not so much in cameras per-se, but in electronics in general. I say 'abused' because they were the first to come up with a mobile dock for lap tops years ago, and everyone berated them because they had the audacity to charge for it. Well at the time my 505 was one of the smallest lap tops, and not too badly priced either (I think $1200). The dock added on greater battery capacity, 10 key, optical drive (this was when the super skinny DVD-roms did not yet exist) and a few extra connections and made the package about the size of an average lap top of the day. Not bad for $400, but people thought it was stupid because "those features should be included anyway!" Of course they were included on other $1600 notebooks. I liked the idea that I could buy part up front and the other part later, when I didn't want the bulk I didn't have to carry it, and when I didn't mind, I had all the other features. Watch though, when, not if, but when Sony releases some second grip with wireless, GPS, and cellular modem or something for $500, people will say it too is rediculous. By the way, anyone know what the Nikon wireless grip costs?

Did you list image stabilization? Sorry, I'm too tired to go back and check your chart. Thanks for this great graphic. ChaCha

chacha1 said:

Did you list image stabilization? Sorry, I'm too tired to go back
and check your chart. Thanks for this great graphic. ChaCha

Click to expand...

I checked: it's there. The fact that I could not remember seeing the image stabilization row on first reading is an indicator of how thorough your charting was.

Wow, you put a lot of work into it. I'm very grateful, although it will probably be two years before I can replace my a100 with the a700.

Many thanks,
ChaCHa

Other things:

Flash

Nikon cameras (d70 and up) also have built-in wireless flash from the pop-up flash.

VF

A700 should also have HSS indication (A100 does). Probably shows ISO while changing (like A100).

LCD

'Xtra fine' is a marketing gimmick. Probably also has brightness adjustments (like a100).

Image processor

All these are marketing gimicks as the name of their computers, not really useful.

If you repost a picture it will update automatically using the original link, at least that is the way it works with pbase.
--
dhaslam
http://www.pbase.com/dhaslam/galleries

I was thinking about it
After reading...............then the difference between the three look narrowed.
--
Mark K
http://forev.net/markk

I am very glad some folks have found this work useful. I hope it is for more than just those that commented, I know it has been interesting for me. Is there anything else glaringly wrong or missing with these updated images?

Addressing your points Chych

chych said:

Other things:

Flash
Nikon cameras (d70 and up) also have built-in wireless flash from the
pop-up flash.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I am not sure I understand the whole wireless. I've been told that both Alphas both do wireless as well, but I guess I don't get the difference between Nikon wireless, Sony wireless, Minolta wireless, and basic slave firing in response to on board firing that I seem to be able to do with just about any other camera too. I know if people talk about this or that having it, it must be something more, anyone care to enlighten me?

chych said:

VF
A700 should also have HSS indication (A100 does). Probably shows ISO
while changing (like A100).

Click to expand...

I listed what was shown in the simulated view in Simon's preview here, and someone was commenting on the lack of ISO, but then you might be right. I will update it when I know for sure. As for HSS, I suppose this is another point of ignorance for me. That or it is really late, I cannot seem to recall what HSS stands for.

chych said:

LCD
'Xtra fine' is a marketing gimmick. Probably also has brightness
adjustments (like a100).

Click to expand...

I know, I copied exactly what was said in the spec sheets for each camera.

chych said:

Image processor
All these are marketing gimicks as the name of their computers, not
really useful.

Click to expand...

I agree in the sense that the name does not matter. I know in the case of the Canons at least, the name is updated with each generation so it has some value in knowing what is new and what isn't. It is somewhat strange to me though that even though Sony makes a big deal about all the updates in the A700 image processor, they did not call it a Bionz 2 or Second Generation, or anything else denoting the updates. I wonder why?