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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 11, 2008, 12:20 PM   #21
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
JimC wrote:
Quote:
Personally, I would have preferred that Sony would have taken the same approach that Nikon used with the D3 and D700, and used a lower resolution full frame sensor with higher usable ISO speeds.
Why?
Because I like being able to take photos of live music in dimly lit restaurants, where light is sometimes so low that even ISO 12,800 is borderline with an f/2.8 zoom, if you want many photos without blur from subject movement (and a zoom is nice for framing flexibility).

Quote:
First of all, they could (since they make the sensor for Nikon)
I wouldn't be too sure about that, based on comments I've read from people like Thom Hogan on this subject.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2008, 12:28 PM   #22
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
Because I like being able to take photos of live music in dimly lit restaurants, where light is sometimes so low that even ISO 12,800 is borderline with an f/2.8 zoom, if you want many photos without blur from subject movement (and a zoom is nice for framing flexibility).
Get a Nikon... :-) :lol: :G
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2008, 12:31 PM   #23
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Nah.... My Sony A700 does just fine with my primes (although being able to use zooms in very low light would be a good thing), without the higher cost of a Nikon body (and I prefer the Sony A700's AF system, control layout and menus over the Nikon D300's anyway). I'll admit that the full frame D700 is tempting (other than I'd still prefer Sony's control design and menus) -- but, it's not *that* tempting, especially considering that my Minolta primes are all stabilized on the A700 (and I sometimes shoot at shutter speeds slow enough that I'm grateful for that). If I were going with a full frame model, I wouldn't be very impressed with the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 over the Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8 either, from photos I've seen from both lenses.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 2:52 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Welp it's now official! Canon has announced the 5D Mk2. Due out at the end of November for an attractive sum of $2700.00 US. That's $300.00 less than the D700 or A900. Good thinking Canon! Anything to gain more of an edge in what is quickly becoming a crowded DX body FF DSLR market.

Get a 5D Mk2 JimC! (wink) It's got the low light ability of the Nikon FF bodies. And 21MP. As well as a 1080p movie mode. Nice! Along with many other cool features. And as I said...I'm looking forwards to the test reports. I'm sure these three will be put head-to-head-to-head.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 12:14 PM   #25
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

DarkDTSHD wrote:
Quote:
Welp it's now official! Canon has announced the 5D Mk2. Due out at the end of November for an attractive sum of $2700.00 US. That's $300.00 less than the D700 or A900. Good thinking Canon! Anything to gain more of an edge in what is quickly becoming a crowded DX body FF DSLR market.
But, Canon didn't really upgrade the body. I'll see if Sony may have something else "up their sleeves", and I'm in no hurry to upgrade anyway (I've only had my Sony A700 since last October, and I like it, especially with the latest Sony A700 Firmware Update: Version 4.0). I also appreciate the A700's AF system (very snappy), control layout, etc. Canon's AF isn't bad either, though. Here's one interesting view on it:

Comments on AF tests of 8 popular advanced amateur and pro level dSLR models

The AF tests from PopPhoto that NHL compiled in this thread are also interesting:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=84

In any event, I like my Sony A700's responsiveness, even though most models in this niche are going to be relatively close together. You can get more in focus frames in a finite period of time using some models that have a faster frame rate (Canon 40D, Nikon D3), but you're also going to have a higher percentage of out of focus images if you do that. The Sony AF system is very fast *and* accurate at 5fps.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 3:12 PM   #26
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Again I repeat:

1. For web posting no one needs a +21Mp camera
2. You only need theses type of camera for LARGE prints, and in print noise is not prevalent and it's even preferable to a 'plastic' look of a noiseless picture (and why there's an add-noise function in Photoshop)
3. Most people don't shoot @ ISO-22600, if anyone need this for action shots in the dark then this is the wrong type of camera!

Do photographers in this market care about high-ISO (i.e. 50-400)? http://www.mamiya.com/products/defau...Specifications
NHL 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 9:14 PM.