D50 Vs D70s.

[jbarrick]

Thanks for all the advice.



From what I have found the price is $800 for the D50 18-70mm lens and $800 for the D70s 18-70mm. Canon 350D new is going for a little over $1000 with the 17-85mm Lens, used for $929 at B&H. At this point I like the D70s, although I will be keeping an eye on pricing over the holidays. One thing I can say is Canon has a much clearer upgrade path. In my case the price will determine which path I will take.

__________________
Jeff

Canon S2IS & Sony VCL-DH1758 Tele Lens

[rjseeney]

In terms of upgrade path, Nikon has a pretty clear one, with models matching offerrings from Canon every step of the way except for the the full frame models (even here the d200 arguably matches the 5d). Again, (as was said) unless you need the extra control, or beefier feel of the D70, the D50 is probably the best deal. Make sure you handle both cameras, as feel is an important consideration.

Alright, here is the same set of test images at 1/8 seconds (ISO 1600)

Nikon D70s >>>

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...D70SLL1603.HTM

Nikon D50 >>>

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD.../D50LL1603.HTM

Enjoy.

My comment from earlier stands here as well. Unless you shoot test charts at high iso's and slow shutter speeds (and underexpose those images), I don't put much stock in these tests. I've never encountered a situation where I needed to shoot 1/8 exposures at 1600 iso in 15 years of shooting. These tests are just not real world situations. Real world you would be using a flash and a lower ISO.

[BenjaminXYZ]

My comment from earlier stands here as well. Unless you shoot test charts at high iso's and slow shutter speeds (and underexpose those images), I don't put much stock in these tests. I've never encountered a situation where I needed to shoot 1/8 exposures at 1600 iso in 15 years of shooting. These tests are just not real world situations. Real world you would be using a flash and a lower ISO.

Arguably, I sometime shoot stage shots indoors from a distance too far away for a flash to be effective. On the other hand, I might not be getting an external flash so quickly even if it can reach that sort of range. As a result, my high ISO evaluation still stands. (It is as important to me as ergonomics to some)

Anyway, I was just concerned about "how good" the high ISO performance of the Nikon D50 & D70s can be. Naturally, if the D70s or D50 can alreadyperform so well at "longer" seconds exposure at ISO 1600, I can expectthem to perform even betterwith shorter exposures.

[TDN]

jbarrick wrote:

From what I have found the price is $800 for the D50 18-70mm lens and $800 for the D70s 18-70mm

__________________

Oh, wow where did you find that deal?

Yeah if you really want the 18-70, I guess buying it in kit with the D70s is a very good choice then. I don't think you'd be disappointed.

[jbarrick]

Best Buy



$799 free shipping
__________________
Jeff

Canon S2IS & Sony VCL-DH1758 Tele Lens

[JimC]

rjseeney wrote:

I've never encountered a situation where I needed to shoot 1/8 exposures at 1600 iso in 15 years of shooting. These tests are just not real world situations. Real world you would be using a flash and a lower ISO.

Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D, ISO 3200, 28mm f/2 at f/2.5 (1/2 stop down from wide open), 1/6 second. No, it's not print quality, and yes I could have used a brighter lens. It's also a tad soft from motion blur and my focus was off.

But, for web size viewing, it works OK. They asked me not to use a flash there (I did once and they complained) I like to take snapshots while we eat out from time to time, and the ability to use higher ISO speeds comes in handy for that purpose.




Instead of a Piano Player at the bar, they sometimes have a small band on one side of the dining area, too.

Every once in a while, the light gets to be pretty good, thanks to a tiny lights clipped on to the music stands in front of the performers, so I'll manage to squeeze off some with the 100mm f/2 at much faster shutter speed. :-)

Minolta 100mm f/2, wide open at f/2, ISO 3200, hand held at 1/20 second. Straight from the camera jpeg with no Post Processing except for rotation and downsizing. Yes, it's a tad soft, too.. But, the higher ISO speed capability allows me to capture memories that I couldn't get otherwise.




I'm in Linux right this minute.

But, I'll probably boot back into my Windows partition later. I've got some photos of a guitar player from another restaurant I can try to find, where I needed to underexpose slightly to get my shutter speeds up to 1/8 to 1/10 second at f/2 and ISO 3200.

[JimC]

JimC wrote:

I'm in Linux right this minute.

But, I'll probably boot back into my Windows partition later. I've got some photos of a guitar player from another restaurant I can try to find, where I needed to underexpose slightly to get my shutter speeds up to 1/8 to 1/10 second at f/2 and ISO 3200.

I'm back in Windows. Brightened a bit and cropped from a larger image. Then, downsized for posting here.

Hand Held, Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D, ISO 3200, Minolta 100mm f/2, wide open at f/2, 1/10 Second (would have required 1/5 at ISO 1600 if exposed the same way, and you really don't want to underexpose much at higher ISO speeds). lol

Sure, they're just snapshots. But, it's a way to capture memories when light is very low and you can't use a flash. I'd love to have ISO 19,200 available.. :-)