Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 6, 2007, 7:49 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

VinnyP! wrote:
Quote:
Looking at the specs of the Canon 1D MkIII I think Nikon will be in a big hurry to release a D2 successor if they want to keep the pro market.
Will be VERY interesting to see what Nikon brings to the table. The more competition the better! But it is time to deliver a new D200. Look how quickly they upgraded the D40? I think Nikon broke their speed record there.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2007, 9:38 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
joeybob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Posts: 148
Default

Hmmm...

What will Nikon do next? The D1, D1x the D100, D2H, D70, D70s. The D50, the D80, the D200 the D40, The D2x, the D40s... Up, down, left, right, backwards, forwards. Seems to me like they are cranking the dslr's out at a rapid rate. Granted, there is competition...

Maybe they'll come out with a D150 - a trimmed down version of the D200 - kind of like the D50 to D40 move. After that, a D60 - a trimmed down D80? And then ?

My thought/concern is that as we speak - Nikon's 2 newest (non pro) dslr cameras - the D40 and D40s both require proprietary (for lack of a better word) lenses for autofocus. Perhaps Nikon is going to differentiate "pro" dslr models with a built in motor and "semi-pro" model dslr's that require lenses that only Nikon can currently supply ? Maybe the next generation of pro models will be full frame (that accept most any Nikon mount and can meter even if manual focus) and the next generation of "semi-pro" will retain the 1.5x crop factor as well as the requirement for motorized lenses...?



Just my observation... Feel free to blast back:?
joeybob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2007, 10:45 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3
Default

I am a Nikon fan and returned back to Nikon when the D-200 came out. I sold all my Canon 20D stuff. The D-200 is FAR better. HOWEVER,,,,, Nikon had better get off the dime and get shome real good R & D together if they want to compete with Canon! CAbon R & D is light years ahead of Canon. So Nikon will HAVE to come out with another top of the line PRO body to compete with Canon's new MKIII.

As for manufacturing in Japan? Nope. Too expensive. Japan is outsourcing numerous products to other countries. Thailand, Malaysia, etc. Too bad...

In the meantime, my D-200 will continue to enable me to make 30 X 40 inch prints when necessary and 11 X 14s ALL the time.

SHEP
shepseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2007, 11:48 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

shepseal wrote:
Quote:
I am a Nikon fan and returned back to Nikon when the D-200 came out. I sold all my Canon 20D stuff. The D-200 is FAR better. HOWEVER,,,,, Nikon had better get off the dime and get shome real good R & D together if they want to compete with Canon! CAbon R & D is light years ahead of Canon. So Nikon will HAVE to come out with another top of the line PRO body to compete with Canon's new MKIII.

As for manufacturing in Japan? Nope. Too expensive. Japan is outsourcing numerous products to other countries. Thailand, Malaysia, etc. Too bad...

In the meantime, my D-200 will continue to enable me to make 30 X 40 inch prints when necessary and 11 X 14s ALL the time.

SHEP
Hey SHEP,

I too am eager to see how Nikon responds to the Canon 1DM3. Lot's of luck!! And I also believe hat Canon's R&D people are more on the ball and on target. Nikon's only saving grace is the D200 IMHO. A gem of a DSLR in both design and performance. Though as good as it is it's not perfect and can stand to be improved. Which is why I'm looking forwards to hearing about the D200x (with the newly released D40x...it looks like Nikon is no longer using a "s" to mark their upgraded models).

Manufacturing in Japan...too expensive? They are still manufacturing their 2 flagship models there. The D2Hs and D2Xs. As well as their pro lenses. The ones with the gold band around the front of the lens and the gold color metal plate on the barrel. It's just the rest of their compacts and DSLRs that are being manufactured in Thailand...etc. So why not manufacture the D200x in Japan too? Just for me!! :-) I'll still buy the D200x if it impresses me even if it is still assembled in Thailand. It's not a deal breaker for me. I would just be happier if I knew it was "made in Japan".

Now if only Nikon would "accidentally" leak info about the upcoming D200x.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 6:40 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
ReneB3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 193
Default

Quote:
I would just be happier if I knew it was "made in Japan".
Now maybe it's just my age showing, but when I was a kid, this had a whole different meaning. How times have changed.
ReneB3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 9:03 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

ReneB3 wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
I would just be happier if I knew it was "made in Japan".
Now maybe it's just my age showing, but when I was a kid, this had a whole different meaning. How times have changed.
We must be roughly the same age then. Because that was the general sentiment going around when I was a kid too. Hearing the words "made in Japan" would always get people LOL!! "You drive what? a Honda?? HAHAHA!!". Not any more obvioulsy. Times definitely have changed. Even the name Hyundai is now respectable...not that I'd ever consider one....but I digress. :-)
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 3:41 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
ReneB3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 193
Default

When I was a kid, Honda didn't make cars here, just motorcycles.
ReneB3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:44 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

ReneB3 wrote:
Quote:
When I was a kid, Honda didn't make cars here, just motorcycles.
Ok then perhaps you're a little older.

Take care!

And, COME ON NIKON!! How about some info on the upcoming D200x??!!! :-)
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2007, 9:53 PM   #19
mrp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Default

Good evening

Could not help but notice that you live in Toronto as I also do.

I have a Canon 5D but has a friend who owns a D200. His camera just seems to smoke mine and I have 2 "L" lenses, the 24-105 f4 IS & the 70 - 200 f$ IS.

My pictures are just not as good as his. I admit that it may me me but I just would like you opinion of the D200 since you seem to own it and if you can compare it to the Canon 5D it would be better for me.

Thank you in advance

Stephen
mrp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2007, 10:49 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

mrp wrote:
Quote:
Good evening

Could not help but notice that you live in Toronto as I also do.

I have a Canon 5D but has a friend who owns a D200. His camera just seems to smoke mine and I have 2 "L" lenses, the 24-105 f4 IS & the 70 - 200 f$ IS.

My pictures are just not as good as his. I admit that it may me me but I just would like you opinion of the D200 since you seem to own it and if you can compare it to the Canon 5D it would be better for me.

Thank you in advance

Stephen
Hiya Stephen,

Nice to have a fellow Torontonian in the forum interested int he D200. But first of all I gotta clear one thing up for you. I don't own a D200. Heh!! I am however about to buy my first DSLR. And am looking at the upcoming "D200x" (the replacement for the D200). Which "should" show up later this year. Was hoping it would show at the PMA show but it doesn't look that way now as I think all new gear has been announced. I could be wrong.

As for the 5D vs the D200...I'd say it amounts to your intended use. If you're taking mostly landcapes (wideangle lens) and portraits (in other words stationary subjects...while on a tripod) then I'd say the 5D is a better choice. Another advantage of the 5D is that it is a full-frame DSLR. Offering cleaner pictures by far.

Also, another difference I've noticed between Nikon and Canon cameras in general is that Canon DSLRs tend to give a more "accurate" representation of what you're shooting. Nikons tend to "hype up" colors. Making Nikon pics seem more vibrant. Reds especially are a little more punchy. Not sure if this might be why you think your buddy's D200 smokes your 5D. Maybe you prefer a more punchier color pallete.

As well I find Canon's deliver cleaner pics across the entire ISO range. Right up into the high ISO speeds. Something you've probably noticed.

Disadvantages of the 5D...becauses it's a FF camera it demans high quality L-series lens. And also makes a lot of artifacts more known. Compared to using a sub-frame camera. Which I personally would find annoying as you'd probably have to spend a little more time doing PP using the 5D. Maybe it's the artifacts you're seeing on your shots that is making you think your buddy's D200 is "smoking" your 5D. Another guess.

Negatives on an other wise near flawlessly designed camera...low battery life. Putting out on average between 300-500 real world shots per charge is pathetic. Cameras like the Canon 30D puts out 900 plus on average. I believe the rated number for your 5D is 800 (Canon's own number...real world? probably close to that number). Canon seems to have found a way for their cameras to be less power hungry.

Here is a comparison of the 5D vs D200.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/5d-d200.htm

Hope this helps!

DarkDTSHD 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 12:55 AM.