Below are the opinions of a former Canon evangelist (owning a D60
has tempered my enthusiasm).
Received my D100 five days ago and shot it alongside my D60 at a
wedding on Friday. Took some images in a fairly well-controlled
environment comparing D60/D1x/D100 files both raw and jpeg. Not
controlled enough to post samples without getting rightfully flamed
in the forums so another test is coming.
Nikon lens used for comparison: AF-S 28-70 2.8D
Canon lens used for comparison: 28-70 2.8L USM
Summary of my initial impression: My D100 produced STUNNING images.
Large fine jpeg images with low or no sharpening on the D100 blow
away the low sharpened (can't turn off agressive sharpening on the
D60) large fine jpegs from the D60 and beat out the D1x images by a
smaller margin.
D100 images:
+almost zero jpeg artifacts in jpeg large/fine
+images that were not sharpened in camera when shooting jpeg or
when converted to 16bit tifs from raw were amazingly sharp
+grain is tight (noise is low)
+native Adobe RGB color space makes for much more latitude in
making substantial adjustments
-sharpening adds noise to open sky and low contrast areas rather
than only sharpening the edges
D1x images:
+almost zero jpeg artifacts
+noise is low
+native Adobe RGB color space makes for much more latitude in
making substantial adjustments
-images softer when not sharpened than the D100 images
-sharpening adds noise to open sky and low contrast areas rather
than only sharpening the edges
D60 images:
+RAW files sharpened when converting look beautiful, much better
than the in camera sharpening (less agressive)
+open sky and low contrast areas are very smooth indicating that
Canon's sharpening only affects the edges rather than the entire
image
-RAW files not sharpened when converting look like a bowl of slimy,
old oatmeal, yuk! (they are quite soft)
-jpeg large/fine images look very compressed and sharpening is
agressive even at the low sharpening setting
-sRGB native color space makes major adjustments in exposure and
color very difficult to pull off
In the field the D100 performed beautifully. 1600 ASA images look
about the same as 800 ASA D60 images if slightly cleaner. AF with
no AF assist light enabled worked miracles with scenes where I
could hardly see my subjects. The buffer cleared plenty fast for
jpeg images (useless for NEF or tiff files unless you absolutely
have to have a raw image to work from...that's ONE raw image, any
more and you'll need to take break while counting to
1000...slowly). ISO Auto setting is ingenious and works beautifully
but only is useful in shutter priority and manual modes (it appears
that you get 30 second exposures in aperture and program before it
shifts ISO up to give you more sensitivity). The battery lasts
forever (this coming from a D60 user who is used to long battery
life).
I returned the rental AF-S 28-70 f2.8D and 85 f1.8D this morning
and bought myself a used 28-85 2.8-4D for $375 in new condition at
Pro Photo Supply. I guess that means I'm committed and have a
boat-load of Canon gear to unload.
I'm thrilled that Nikon has given me a camera that provides the
image quality and operational responsiveness that Canon could not
seem to combine in one machine.
