To Hell with D-SLR

[Zephalephelah]

" Only the canon EOS-D1s would be fine, but I won't buy Canon."

That makes no sense at all. I'm all for brand loyalty. I've never owned an Athlon computer or an ATI video card, but I understand that they are the competition and that they are good products.

However, if I knew that ATI or Athlon completely wiped out Intel or Nvidia in every way or that Canon had what I wanted in Digital FOV, and I still hung onto my loyalty.... well, then I want someone to commit me to a mental institution for the criminally dumb. Canon is at the top of the game right now. The 1DS is the camera to beat. Don't believe me, I'm not a professional reviewer. Why don't you listen to the experts? If you don't believe them, then maybe you are right and they are wrong.

I'm all for outspoken, unpopular posting, but comeon. Be realistic. If the Canon had 8mp & cost $4000, I wouldn't hesitate. The issue for me isn't the camera or the brand, it is the price. I'm simply not going to be a test-market for the newest technology. Staying a couple steps behind keeps me up near the top and generally quite happy and I save a whole lot of money. I don't mind paying for Filet Mignon, but I'm not buying it when the cost is $60 a cut just because I can sit in a room that Bill Gates couldn't afford.

--
If a picture paints a 1,000 words, how come mine only make 3?

 

[Hubert Tse]

It is my guess that Nikon does not like the technical disadvantages
of the current state of full frame sensor technology. >

It may be a problem due to the combination of a full frame sensor and the current F-mount lenses, not just the sensor.

Best regards,

K. Tse

 

[Joe Jensen]

In my humble opinion, the FOV issue is not at all clear. From what I've read, there are very real diffraction issues with full frame digital sensors due to the angle the light hits the sensor. Maybe future sensors will use difference materials that will solve this real problem. Maybe a Full Frame Foveon will not have this problem because there won't be a layer between the lens and the sensor.

How big of a deal is the 1.5 crop factor? Years ago I used a 35-70 zoom and for interior shots I really need a 28mm. As soon as the 28-70 showed up, I swapped lenses and I've rarely felt I needed anything wider. (I'm not a huge landscape guy and I don't do architectural). I'm shooting the D100 with a 24-85 AF-S now and I love it so much I just sold all of my film gear. With the 24-85 I'm really at 36mm on the wide side. To be honest, I haven't really run into many situations where I HAD to have a wider lens. On the other hand, I shoot a lot of my kids sports and the 1.5 crop factor has been a huge advantage there.

If given a choice today of a 10M pixel 1.5 crop, and a 10M pixel FF, assuming noise and sensivity and light falloff were all the same, I'd pick the 1.5 crop. I just find myself shoot so much more on the long end.

Now, my example isnt very likely. FF has diffraction problems, and larger pixels will have lower noise and better sensitivity. So, there will always be tradeoffs.

I love the D100 and the 1.5 crop has been a benfit for my shooting style...joe

Dear everybody,

This thread follows the Bill's thread: "To Hell with digital". I'm
in a similar situation, but I have no camera to play with for the
time to come before my decision. This is why I must be quick, as
the show keeps going on.
I'd like to buy the D100, but... what bothers me is the FOV of 1,5.
I'd like to get your opinion on this, for I think it is seriously
bad. Why? Because if I pay for a special device, for instance the
new 24-120 lens, I'd be disappointed to know that I would have paid
for a 36-180 instead. Don't you feel it is bothering? Another
example: I enjoy shooting with a 50mm f/1.4. If I get the D100,
I'll have to buy a 35mm (equivalent 52 mm in 35mm format) for the
occasion, but if in the years to come I get the new D* which may
be in 24*36, this investement would have been a transition one.
I feel the uncompleteness of today's D-SLR market because of the
smaller format. Only the canon EOS-D1s would be fine, but I won't
buy Canon.
I'm waiting for replies. Don't be too offensive, the truth being
that I am only waiting for someone to convince me that the FOV
matter is not so serious and that the D100 is waiting for nobody
but me.

vn

 

[Joe Jensen]

I don't think there is an image quality issue with any of the D series cameras. The question is features. FF versus 1/5 crop. That's a feature issue, not a quality issue...joe

they build professinal cameras for PROFESSIONALS.

That 2% of the market that your so quick to ignore is the market
that the D1x and D1h is targeted at - not the other 98% of
photographers who just want something to remember what their kids
looked like one day at the beach.

For most pros I know, cost is secondary to quality. Many would be
willing to pay 8000 for a camera that they know will deliver the
quality they need. Thats why the 1ds is selling as well as it is.
The frustration comes when the camera company you've trusted for so
long hasn't delivered the quality you've come to expect. I believe
that's the contention of the original post.

--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy/portfolio
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.

 

[John W.]

" Only the canon EOS-D1s would be fine, but I won't buy Canon."

That makes no sense at all. I'm all for brand loyalty. I've never
owned an Athlon computer or an ATI video card, but I understand
that they are the competition and that they are good products.

However, if I knew that ATI or Athlon completely wiped out Intel or
Nvidia in every way or that Canon had what I wanted in Digital FOV,
and I still hung onto my loyalty.... well, then I want someone to
commit me to a mental institution for the criminally dumb. Canon is
at the top of the game right now. The 1DS is the camera to beat.
Don't believe me, I'm not a professional reviewer. Why don't you
listen to the experts? If you don't believe them, then maybe you
are right and they are wrong.

I'm all for outspoken, unpopular posting, but comeon. Be realistic.
If the Canon had 8mp & cost $4000, I wouldn't hesitate. The issue
for me isn't the camera or the brand, it is the price. I'm simply
not going to be a test-market for the newest technology. Staying a
couple steps behind keeps me up near the top and generally quite
happy and I save a whole lot of money. I don't mind paying for
Filet Mignon, but I'm not buying it when the cost is $60 a cut just
because I can sit in a room that Bill Gates couldn't afford.

A very simple statement, unless you have plenty of money ! To change from Canon to Nikon or vice versa is a major decision when you have $1,000's tied up in lenses and other 'system' items, you can't just swap the body !!

Don't forget Canon and Nikon have been swapping product superiority for years. Next years Nikon will be better than this years Canon and so on.
--
John W
No equipment worth talking about....!!!

 

[Zephalephelah]

That John, is a good point. Sometimes I overlook the obvious

" Only the canon EOS-D1s would be fine, but I won't buy Canon."

That makes no sense at all. I'm all for brand loyalty. I've never
owned an Athlon computer or an ATI video card, but I understand
that they are the competition and that they are good products.

However, if I knew that ATI or Athlon completely wiped out Intel or
Nvidia in every way or that Canon had what I wanted in Digital FOV,
and I still hung onto my loyalty.... well, then I want someone to
commit me to a mental institution for the criminally dumb. Canon is
at the top of the game right now. The 1DS is the camera to beat.
Don't believe me, I'm not a professional reviewer. Why don't you
listen to the experts? If you don't believe them, then maybe you
are right and they are wrong.

I'm all for outspoken, unpopular posting, but comeon. Be realistic.
If the Canon had 8mp & cost $4000, I wouldn't hesitate. The issue
for me isn't the camera or the brand, it is the price. I'm simply
not going to be a test-market for the newest technology. Staying a
couple steps behind keeps me up near the top and generally quite
happy and I save a whole lot of money. I don't mind paying for
Filet Mignon, but I'm not buying it when the cost is $60 a cut just
because I can sit in a room that Bill Gates couldn't afford.

A very simple statement, unless you have plenty of money ! To
change from Canon to Nikon or vice versa is a major decision when
you have $1,000's tied up in lenses and other 'system' items, you
can't just swap the body !!
Don't forget Canon and Nikon have been swapping product superiority
for years. Next years Nikon will be better than this years Canon
and so on.
--
John W
No equipment worth talking about....!!!

--



--
If a picture paints a 1,000 words, how come mine only make 3?

 

[Leon Obers]

but if in the years to come I get the new D* which may
be in 24*36, this investement would have been a transition one.

Don't fool yourselve. Within the thousands of dollars to spend now and in the future for a full frame DSLR. It is not dependend for just a lens that fits now with 1.5 factor and in future you can use FF. In future maybe you have better, and more fast designed lenses as well, so you are going to spend for new fast toys anyway.

--
Leon Obers

 

[Ronald Schroeder]

Hi vn,

You also might want to consider buying a rather old used Kodak DCS camera to start. I would suggest anything newer than the DCS200 since the DCS200 did not have removable storage media. One of my DSLRs is a nc2000e (made in 1994) which has a 1.6x CCD and only 1.3MP. You might think that is not nearly enough pixels but I have surprized my self with the quality of 4x5" prints and if you only put the pictures on a screen, even a high resolution CRT of 1280 x 1024 is only 1.3MP. Not a replacement for film but a lot of fun and a learning experience.

Ron
Brookhaven National Lab

Dear everybody,

This thread follows the Bill's thread: "To Hell with digital". I'm
in a similar situation, but I have no camera to play with for the
time to come before my decision. This is why I must be quick, as
the show keeps going on.
I'd like to buy the D100, but... what bothers me is the FOV of 1,5.

 

[Forrest41926]

A very simple statement, unless you have plenty of money ! To
change from Canon to Nikon or vice versa is a major decision when
you have $1,000's tied up in lenses and other 'system' items, you
can't just swap the body !!

That John, is a good point. Sometimes I overlook the obvious

It's more than a body, though. If you have to have an 18 mm FOV, it's a body and an $800 or $900 DX lens. That would be a pretty expensive body in film terms...

 

[ib1yysguy]

Do you actually OWN a d-series camera?? If you did i'm sure you would understand.

The D100 has soft images. The D1 has banding problems... the D1h and D1x can't hold a charge... these are quality issues.... and there are more.

--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy/portfolio
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.

 

[Forrest41926]

example: I enjoy shooting with a 50mm f/1.4. If I get the D100,
I'll have to buy a 35mm (equivalent 52 mm in 35mm format) for the

A lot ( maybe most ) of people use zoom lenses, and this probably doesn't matter nearly as much to them. But plenty of photographers still prefer to use prime lenses, for any number of reasons. Sharpness and optical speed are probably the most important of them.

Have you ever seen a seasoned pro shoot with a prime...? They know exactly where to stand before they put the camera to their eye. Actually, there's a reason they make 24, 28, and 35 mm primes, but no 26 or 31 mm primes. The fields of view these lenses provide are very natural, and particularly suited to different types of photography. It's not just that that's what everyone is used to.

So if you want your 50/1.4 back, you need a 35/1.4. Unless you want the same DOF, too, in which case you need a ( non-existant ) 35/1.0! If you want your 24/1.4 back, you're SOL.

I don't think this is a compelling reason not to shoot digital, but it is a big problem with FOV cropped digital cameras.

 

[Elis Vener]

"if I pay for a special device, for instance the new 24-120 lens, I'd be disappointed to know that I would have paid for a 36-180 instead. Don't you feel it is bothering?"
No because I know it up front.

 

[David SL]

Nikon will not abandon FF, they will wait until it's more financially prudent to enter it, in the time being 1.5x with DX lenses will satisfy both those with FF lenses and those starting fresh. This is really simple to grasp, Nikon tried to make APS a format but failed simply because the change they hoped to create in the market was too great for existing users to bare, however digital bodies are completely different...they use a single mount for multiple frame sizes and that is the key to allowing stratification at 1.5x to take advantage of cheaper and mass produced bodies as well as (when the time is deemed right) the super high end pro FF cameras to come.

It's foolish to think (especially with little evidence to suggest it) that Nikon will stay out of the FF realm.

Regards,

DSLRS were never intended to be used as an entirely new format.
They were marketed to replace film - you can't do that AND change
the format at the same time. It's just not natural!

Natural? What are you talking about? Do you mean that it was
something YOU were not used to? DSLRS were designed to allow
existing lenses to be used with digital technology.

If they wanted to stay with the 1.5x when they released the D1,
they would have made lenses at the time. They only decided later on
that it would be way way to much trouble to actually develop new
technology so they opted to stick with the smaller sensor and give
us new lenses as a stop gap. Like the little dutch boy, plug some
holes. A few years down the line when canon's perfected FF and is
able to offer more pixels and greater dynamic range as well as 100%
film/digital compatability, the little dutch boy is going to run
out of fingers and leave nikon users in a bit of a pinch.

It is my guess that Nikon does not like the technical disadvantages
of the current state of full frame sensor technology. To fill the
immediate need for ultra-wide lenses they have designed the DX
12-24 lens. I suspect that when the full frame sensor gets to an
acceptable level for Nikon they will make full frame cameras. I
also suspect that they will continue to make 1.5 factor cameras at
a lower price point. So, the 12-24 will continue to have a market
for quite sometime.

--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy/portfolio
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.

Looks like you have set goals for Nikon based on your expectations.
You disappointment has more to do with your expectations than it
does with Nikon's decisions.

--