Originally posted by andrewh
Yeah, I agree with you. MoxieMike has some insecurities about his decision to go with Nikon and feels the need to prove it to everyone how much better Nikon is than Canon. When the 300D first came out he had a serious case of "Canon Envy" and was posting in other threads what a lousy deal it was. Saying that this new Nikon will "blow it away" is just laughable.
I'm not going to obsess over the specs and analyze everything. The proof is in the photography. I take fantastic photos with my 300D and all my AF lenses. It's just silly to put down what Canon did with a sub $1000 digital SLR.
Nikon make fantastic cameras. Maybe better than Canon, I really don't know or care. At our level, spending a couple grand for a body and lenses, it's just ridiculous to debate which is a better make. I say get out there and take some pictures and be happy with your purchases. You can't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon. They're both really that good.
Actually, you're wrong. I posted a review of the 300d that was very favourable, thought since i've realized major issues with the lens.
That said, the canon's semi-por DSLRS all seem to suffer from focusing issues, and if you go out on a pro job, they often seem to prevent you from completing the job.
I like my Nikon because the image quality is comparable to the best cam's out there, and the focusing is dead on. Always.
That and the build of the Nikon is higher than the 300d and similar to the 10d and it makes me "forget' that I'm using it. It's transparent, and allows me, as a photographer, to worry abotu the image.
Too many people I know who have canons complain of front focusing and back focusing, of issues with the rebel's kit lens, of build quality issues (someone put a canon 70-200 lens on the rebel and it pulled the lens mount off!), and general lack of quality at ISO 1600 to make me realize how much my nikon allows me to forget it is there and just take pics!
I know one Canon shooter who I often go out with who bellyaches consistently about his rebel's inability to focus properly.
I'm not bashing canon, but rather reporting things that i've seen from other's experiences.
Seems like Canon just releases camera after camera after camera and never gets them right, whereas Nikon releases one here and there that is spot on!
I know a buncg of people who shoot Nikon stuff and we rarely talk about gear... just about the pics we've made.
And yes, some very knowledgeable people all throughout the net are saying how the d70 will blow away the rebel AND maybe even the 10d and d100!
1/500 flash sync makes it VERY viable for Photojournalists, 144 frame buffer makes it nice for sports, it has Flash Exposure compensation, it's got iso from 200-6400, 1/8000 top shutter speed, 6mp sensor....all for a $100 more than the Rebel.
Any somewhat serious shooter should realize that 1/500 flash sync is almost reason by itself to spend the extra $100 on the d70 over the rebel as 1/500 flash sync is a feature generally preserved for high end pro cameras!
Nikon really did a great job on this camera, and yes, it does blow away the 300d pound for pound. Does that make the 300d a crappy cam? No. Does it mean the 300d has some major shortcomings? Yes. lack of FEC was one that cropped up.
The front/back focusing issues is another. It's poor servo mode makes sports shooting VERY hard. (something all the soccer mom and dad's bought this for)
It's a fine camera. It's just got some serious shortcomings. Nikon's new offering kicks it's pants up and down, and basically obsoletes the D100 and 10D as well!
Would I trade my D100? Nope. Simply because I've got it paid off and would probably end up with a D2x or even a1ds mk II if it comes out with an affordable price.
But yea, I think the 300d is a nice point and shoot cam. Is it a serious amateur/semi pro's tool? No way.
