Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 27, 2007, 8:46 AM   #11
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

DarkDTSHD wrote:
Quote:
Hello Mark1616,

Long time no see. I'm sort of flattered you remember me and my comments back to 2005. But you are wrong in that not all my posts have been about DSLRs and lenses. Hardly.

About "pro photographers" using XT's, D80's...that's news to me as I can see limitations in using those cameras and I'm just a novice (in the digital photography area). But sure, a good photographer should be able to get good shots, using most cameras. As it should be in any art form.
With the first point I did cheat somewhat and looked at your history for topics posted as I always like to see any work posted by people to get a feel for the sort of photography they do etc and it did seem to me out of the 49 topics started over half were directly about dSLR's (nothing wrong with that btw, just something I noticed).

Now with the 2nd point, when referring to someone who is a pro photographer, don't forget that anyone making a living from photography is pro and I go to quite a few functions through work where there a photogs shooting at them capturing the people and creating shots to be taken away included in the event. These guys are the ones who are using the lesser gear. Also there are some pro wedding photogs known to me who are still using D100's, D70's and 10D's, again not those at the top of the game but they are making a living. Now the latter guys have spent the money on good flash, flash bracket and good glass.

When it comes to the launch date then it is down as Oct over here in the UK.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 9:11 AM   #12
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I just want to add a few points regarding the AF systems on the D300(/D3) as to whether this feature alone is worth $500 premium:

1. According to specs the D300 is more sensitive -1 to +19EV (vs -0.5 to +18EV), so it should have a slight edge over the 40D in both lower (and brighter) light

2. 15 of the AF points in the D300 are crossed points against only 9 (and too widely spread I might add) in the 40D. Also like the Canon's 1D series, theses 15 AF points can be grouped in various manners, that is not possible on the 40D

3. The AF points on the D300 can be linked to the 1005-area metering sensors to track for color - Another big plus IMO

4. Lenses and bodies don't always match (just ask Mark1616) - Imagine all the front/back focus issues now part the past... Every cameras need this!

5. The D300's AF in Liveview can be linked to the sensor (not yet on the Canon). In this mode the AF point can be moved to anywhere on the LCD screen, unrelated to the other 51 AF points

6. Liveview on the D300 can be zoomed-in 10x and with 4x times as many resolution as the Canon's rear LCD - This a mighty powerful feature:
I've have found shooting lanscapes at night with Liveview on my Minolta D7 and A2 to be highly effective since optical viewfinders are pretty bad @ night.
-> For night shots one can also not rely on the camera's metering - It is imperative to review the shot (which was a two-steps on previous dSLRs) and what's better than Liveview with a histogram overlay?


BTW I have also noticed a lot of skepticism regarding the new 12 Mpixels sensors:
Wasn't the old Sony designed D2x sensor also a cropped 12Mp as well?
How likely can they messed this up by redesigning this old sensor to the D300?
Why would the engineers improve this sensor A/D from 12-bit to 14-bit to digitize more noise?

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 10:51 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Mark1616 wrote:
Quote:
DarkDTSHD wrote:
Quote:
Hello Mark1616,

Long time no see. I'm sort of flattered you remember me and my comments back to 2005. But you are wrong in that not all my posts have been about DSLRs and lenses. Hardly.

About "pro photographers" using XT's, D80's...that's news to me as I can see limitations in using those cameras and I'm just a novice (in the digital photography area). But sure, a good photographer should be able to get good shots, using most cameras. As it should be in any art form.
With the first point I did cheat somewhat and looked at your history for topics posted as I always like to see any work posted by people to get a feel for the sort of photography they do etc and it did seem to me out of the 49 topics started over half were directly about dSLR's (nothing wrong with that btw, just something I noticed).

Now with the 2nd point, when referring to someone who is a pro photographer, don't forget that anyone making a living from photography is pro and I go to quite a few functions through work where there a photogs shooting at them capturing the people and creating shots to be taken away included in the event. These guys are the ones who are using the lesser gear. Also there are some pro wedding photogs known to me who are still using D100's, D70's and 10D's, again not those at the top of the game but they are making a living. Now the latter guys have spent the money on good flash, flash bracket and good glass.

When it comes to the launch date then it is down as Oct over here in the UK.
Hiya Mark1616,

And I thought you remembered me for me. Any how I do that on occasion too. Just out of curiosity more than nything else. A chance to see what might be some good photography.

I also frequent www.pbase.com. Also looking for good photography. Then I bookmark the work from that photographer so I can go back to appreciate them again later. It's like a good painting. If you have an emotional connection with it you could stand and look at it for hours.

Regarding what you meant by "pro photographers" using average run of th mill gear...sure. There are tons of those. So the word "professional" can be fairly grey at times.

I was in Hong Kong last November. Visiting historic Stanley Park. And there was a Chinese photographer taking wedding photographs. And just for fun I stood in the background and watched him work.

The poses he had the couple in were God aweful. At lest to my eyes. Down right tacky and childish. But obviously this guy is getting work as a "pro photographer". And as to what kind of gear he was using...I didn't really pay attention to that. He looked like he was still in high school. A teenager. Wearing army camaflogue pants and a t-shirt.

Any how there are all types and skill levls among "pro photographers". Working amongst the many. Not necessarily at the "top of the game". How many Anne Lebowitz's are there? How many "pros" are really good enough to shoot for National Geographic magazine? Etc.

And about the launch date for the 40D...guess all we can do is wait. Just another month. How hard can that be?

NHL,

Skepticism regarding the 12.4 MP Sony chip? Really? That's news to me. Of the many test reports for the D2X or D2Xs I didn't notice any negativity directed towards the chip. As a matter a fact most of the comments were very favorable. What have you heard?

As for every camera "needing" the ability to fine tune the AFto a lens I think this feature of the D300 is more a "good to have" feature. More than a necessity. As many good photographers have managed to make very good livings without this feature built into their cameras over the decades.

Thanks for your input.

Let me guess. You're shooting with a Nikon right now. And where are you from? Curious.


DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 1:01 PM   #14
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

DarkDTSHD wrote
Quote:
... Of the many test reports for the D2X or D2Xs I didn't notice any negativity directed towards the chip. As a matter a fact most of the comments were very favorable. What have you heard?
That's exatly my point! Most forums implied that this is Sony 1st attempt to squeezing more pixels in the D300 will lead to more noise when in fact they are already manufacturing 12+MPixels sensor for the D2X more than two years ago!

The easy thing to do would be to re-use this old D2X's sensor on the D300 when the new D3 moves up to full-frame. Why then spend more money to develop a new 14-bit sensor with zero gain?




Quote:
Let me guess. You're shooting with a Nikon right now.
Wrong - I'm a Canon guy (but do have a few Nikons)

I was quite deceived when Canon released last year their 8Mp 30D among a flood of 10Mp dSLRs (even Oly beat them to the punch). Now some 18 months later, they are repeating exactly the same thing all over again. I can bet the next Sony, Pentaxes or Samsung will have more than 10Mp as well...

To the sayers of no one needs more megapixels - That's just bull:
1. So who's buying that 21Mpixels camera then?
2. Did anyone hear about cropping?
3. According to Photozone, the MTF's on Nikon lenses are always higher than on comparable Canon's - Are Nikon lenses any sharper? Probably not - but the extra Mpixels surely help on the resolution chart...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 3:29 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
DarkDTSHD wrote
Quote:
... Of the many test reports for the D2X or D2Xs I didn't notice any negativity directed towards the chip. As a matter a fact most of the comments were very favorable. What have you heard?
That's exatly my point! Most forums implied that this is Sony 1st attempt to squeezing more pixels in the D300 will lead to more noise when in fact they are already manufacturing 12+MPixels sensor for the D2X more than two years ago!

The easy thing to do would be to re-use this old D2X's sensor on the D300 when the new D3 moves up to full-frame. Why then spend more money to develop a new 14-bit sensor with zero gain?




Quote:
Let me guess. You're shooting with a Nikon right now.
Wrong - I'm a Canon guy (but do have a few Nikons)

I was quite deceived when Canon released last year their 8Mp 30D among a flood of 10Mp dSLRs (even Oly beat them to the punch). Now some 18 months later, they are repeating exactly the same thing all over again. I can bet the next Sony, Pentaxes or Samsung will have more than 10Mp as well...

To the sayers of no one needs more megapixels - That's just bull:
1. So who's buying that 21Mpixels camera then?
2. Did anyone hear about cropping?
3. According to Photozone, the MTF's on Nikon lenses are always higher than on comparable Canon's - Are Nikon lenses any sharper? Probably not - but the extra Mpixels surely help on the resolution chart...
Hello NHL,

About your comment about the 12 MP chip. My mistake. I guess I misread.

Deceived? Do you mean you bougtht the 30D just before every one else began releasing their 10 MP DSLR's?

Regarding MP...I do agree, given the choice, having more MP is better. Only if the companies also manage to keep the noise to a minimum throughout the ISO range. Especially at high ISO's. Something Nikon hasn't been doing very well. I am very eager to see if Nikon has changed this in the D300/D3. Or, as one of the others said, then Canon will again be the better choice. If clean, noise free pictures (well virtually noise free), is important to you.

But I don't think, MP, should be a major deciding factor as to which camera one should pick. It certainly isn't here. D300 vs. 40D. I have a Sony DSC-H1 now. A 5.1 MP camera. So if Igo with either DSLR I would already be doubling the MP count (and then some if I get the D300).

There are other more important factors that would be influencing my decision. Such as whether both companies can give us DSLR's that work as advertised. How well will each perform? All we can do now is "speculate" and wait for the test reports. A "long wait". I want to read them both NOW!!
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 5:05 PM   #16
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

DarkDTSHD wrote:
Quote:
Deceived? Do you mean you bougtht the 30D just before every one else began releasing their 10 MP DSLR's?
Not really - I can't help to notice that someone must have slept at the wheel since there's was virtually no significant improvement between the 20D and the 30D some 18 months later while the competition was already on the 10Mp bandwagon... I picked up a 1D MrKII instead for its faster AF since it's also an 8MP!




Quote:
Regarding MP...I do agree, given the choice, having more MP is better.
It is better especially when one can do a 2x crop like on the D2X -> It's almost like having a longer lens when you are birding... (for free). Still very useable as the results would be similar in resolution to what I would get on my older 10D




Quote:
If clean, noise free pictures (well virtually noise free), is important to you
I don't know - Have you done prints much?
Noise free pictures tend to look like plastic on print especially facial skin -> It's why there's a very useful function in Photoshop to "add noise" to makes it looks more like film! :lol: :-):G
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 6:54 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Hey NHL,

I think most of us were shocked last Feb 2006 when we found out how little had changed from the 20D in the 30D. It was a joke. Not so with the 40D. This is one of the reasons why I've waited. I wanted to see if the replacement for the 30D would have significant changes. And of course if these changes fit my style of shooting.

How's the 1D Mark2?

Regarding MP and cropping...I have to admit to not really doing much cropping. Or any real cropping. Don't get me wrong. i know cropping can do a lot for some photos. Possibly giving them more impact. I just havn't been into that. But the only cropping I do is to frame my pictures for 5x7 prints. That's it.

Printing? Nope. Not at all to tell you the truth. Not yet anyways. I usually take my pics to the local developer. Cheaper. As i''ve only printed 4x6 or 5x7 prints.

"Plasticy"? I think that's a personal thing. I tihnk some people would prefer a grainless picture. Others would prefer to see some grain. For that "film look". To each his own I think.

Where are you from?
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 7:34 PM   #18
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

DarkDTSHD wrote:
Quote:
Where are you from?

NHL is one person you can really get a position on.

If you go tohttp://www.multimap.com/maps/?t=l&ma...7.2407|14|4%20 you will get a good idea based on his grid location.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 7:25 AM   #19
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Mark1616 wrote:
Quote:
NHL is one person you can really get a position on.
That's close enough with some amount of dithering - You wouldn't want anyone to lob a howitzer or enter my exact coordinate into their cruise missile would you? :-) :lol: :-)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 7:37 AM   #20
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I already heard that many foreign governments have your location entered into their missile guidance systems just in case there becomes an international photographic war and they need to take out the people with the knowledge.:blah:
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:32 AM.