Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mr. Anderson said:
ok guys - lets not make this into a pissing match :rolleyes:

agree to disagree and let it go....

They wouldn't make such a wide range of cameras if there weren't a wide range of uses/users out there - pro and amateur alike.

D

ok, done... sorry got carried away and promised myself i wouldnt. stoopid :p
 
AL-FAMOUS said:
as are you mike, i currently believe that the products weigh up better (currently, if only slightly) better then there nikon couterparts.



me also, the D2x is a sweeeet camera no?



well lets see on that

the 1ds mark 2 (which i presume you mean) is a better camera in a number of areas though, thats why its that much more expensive.



yep, it did. and although isnt quite as good is in real terms the same as the xt



that just isnt true mike, there are a number of things that are worse,
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...canon_eos1dmkii,nikon_d2h,nikon_d2hs&show=all





im not saying your wrong on that, im just saying that doesnt make nikons are better.

side by side on each canon have the edge as far as im concerned and the specs are concerned

So you're saying specs should be the deciding factor?

Man. I bet you'd pick a porsche over a hybrid because the porsche has better specs.

What features, aside from 16mp and FF does the 1ds mk II have on the D2x?

Looks to me that the 1ds MK II offers only ISO 50, 16mp, and FF. It's actually infinitely slower at 4fps when you consider the HSC mode of the D2x and the ability to use iTTL for flash with the SB-800.

d2x v 1ds mk II

But like any attractive woman, i'd kick neither the 1ds MK II or the D2x out of my bed. Would you?
 
I'm using the new Canon S2 IS, and love it. The 12x zoom is nice, and I'm loving the fact that it can take 2.4 pictures per second.

I wasn't sure about the fact that it uses AA batteries at first, but it's working out great. I have two sets of 2300mAh rechargeable batteries, and can get 300-400 pictures before having to swap batteries.
 
Digital Camera Used...

Konica Minolta DiMage Z5 for teh win. It rocks always. Full manual control!
 
Nikon D100
Nikkor 80-200 f2.8
Nikkor 105 f2.5
Nikkor 180 f2.8
Nikkor 50 f1.8
Nikon 28-80 f3.5 - 5.6
Tamron 200-400 f5.6
Samyang 18-28 f4 - 4.5

And a bunch of lenses to fit on my film cameras... Nikon FG and n8008.

I'll probably buy a second [used] body sometime to help me out after I graduate from high school.

/daniel
 
I use a Fuji FinePix S7000, which is a brilliant camera for the money, even today. The JPEGs at 6mpixel are rather overcompressed, and interpolation to 12mpixel results in artifacts, which is the main reason this otherwise brilliant prosumer camera got pretty badly slammed in the pro reviews despite being an otherwise brilliant machine. I use a 2gig Microdrive and shoot in RAW mode, then convert with Photoshop CS2's RAW import direct to uncompressed 6mpixel, thus eliminating the whole quality problem :D

An interesting side note is that it actually produces better looking video than my DV Cam in reasonable light (though it suffers a lot more noise in low light than the real DV Cam) - Fuji's 30FPS, 640x480 video mode rocks!
 
Moxiemike said:
If we're talking pro gear, i'd still recommend a D2x over a 1ds MK II. The image quality differences are negligable and the speed and versatility of the D2x makes it a much better value, pound for pound, than the 1ds mk II.

Horses for courses they say Mike. And for our shop there a good number of "news" shops making the switch to Canon recently. The 1DmkII and the 1DsmkII are the primary reasons. As you mentioned the sensors are larger on these two cameras, and the theory goes is that they will have lower noise issues as the megapixel count goes up in the near future.

The other factor I hear is that they do not have to invest into digital specific lenses to get the wider field of view. And that if they truly need a longer telephoto, the 20D fill-in on a pinch.

There are other technical reasons for the switch also. But just as they switch now, they will switch yet again in 10 years (maybe less), if Nikon has what they need. Just as some will add or switch to the new Olympus E-3 that is rumored with their new fast pro-lenses.
 
Mechcozmo said:
I have a disposable camera too. Does that count?


:p ;) :rolleyes:

Depends, is it a digital disposable?
Seeing as the thread is entitled "What Digital Camera...." I would think otherwise it doesn't count....obviously :rolleyes: :p
 
efoto said:
Depends, is it a digital disposable?
Seeing as the thread is entitled "What Digital Camera...." I would think otherwise it doesn't count....obviously :rolleyes: :p

It has batteries in it. Does that count? And you can get a CD of pictures too when you hand it to the people at Dean's Photojoint.
:rolleyes:
 
Nikon D70

Nikon D70, a great camera, imho and worth (most) every cent.

Very easy to use as a point and shoot, but it also offers the sophistication of a true SLR.
 
Mechcozmo said:
It has batteries in it. Does that count? And you can get a CD of pictures too when you hand it to the people at Dean's Photojoint.
:rolleyes:

Sounds like a winner, give us the digital related spec rundown :D

Oh well, it is alright. No judgements, well few, have been passed at your disposable camera....it's okay, really. :rolleyes: :)
 
Chip NoVaMac said:
Horses for courses they say Mike. And for our shop there a good number of "news" shops making the switch to Canon recently. The 1DmkII and the 1DsmkII are the primary reasons. As you mentioned the sensors are larger on these two cameras, and the theory goes is that they will have lower noise issues as the megapixel count goes up in the near future.

The other factor I hear is that they do not have to invest into digital specific lenses to get the wider field of view. And that if they truly need a longer telephoto, the 20D fill-in on a pinch.

There are other technical reasons for the switch also. But just as they switch now, they will switch yet again in 10 years (maybe less), if Nikon has what they need. Just as some will add or switch to the new Olympus E-3 that is rumored with their new fast pro-lenses.

Your first comment is completely non-sense. the more MP you try to cram onto a sensor, at this point, be it 1.5x, 1.3x or full frame, the more dense the pixel depth is and thusly the more noise you create.

Let's not forget that Canon and Nikon both use noise reduction in their cams. The Canon image sensors aren't the reason for the "clean" canon look but rather the Digic processing. The sensor size, as they squeeze more pixels onto it, is gonna exhibit more noise.

How much will show on, say, a 24 mp images is yet to be seen. But at this point, you're not seeing direct benefits from Canon's processor per se, but rather benefits from the Digic image processing. Same with the D2x.

I forgot that you were a salesman for cameras. I know for a fact from my local pro dealer that at most cam stores, Canon sends reps into stores and tells the locals that XX newspaper is gonna switch, that XX news agency is gonna switch.

The big one is Getty. Supposedly they were going to "stop taking all nikon files"

This was complete sludge, as upon my purchase of a D2x, I'm good to go with Getty. The only cams approved by most stock agencies are the D2x, 1ds series, 14n and 14c. The latter two aren't even made anymore. So that leaves one of each brand.

Surely Canon is currently way ahead in sports, but honestly, this whole bit about news agencies switching is generally a lot of mistruth. Maybe a few are switching and they make headlines. But on most of my shoots, all of the news folks still are using old, beat up D1's or D2h's. The only people I see shooting canon are the independent event shooters.

And we're talking local and national level shoots. Two John Kerry rallies? It was all Nikon, two people with old Pentax MF gear, and one guy with a 1d.

Bush rally that I was forced to attend? (don't like bush. love assignment money). Mostly Nikon. A few more Canons floating around. Couple of Pentax MF and Olympus gear.

All of the local election coverage I've done? Nikon all the way. And not to mention the 350+ events i've done, where it's been all Nikon on the press end, save for a couple events with Canon shooters from this other Magazine.

In reality, who really cares? Most of the time, I talk to these folks about the event, the people involved, who we should be looking for. I'm more likely to say "you should want a photo of such and such" as opposed to "my D2h is better than your 20d" or whatever.

The only issue I've ever had was some douche bag with frisky shoulders who kept elbowing me and the PJ from another newspaper. He was a canon user, but i'd have dreamed of punching him if he was a Nikon or Canon guy. ;) We were more worried about getting the shot. That said, when someone shoves you out of the way, you tend to stare them down and I got a good look at his face and his gear. I had the knuckles ready, believe me!

And as you guys might know from the PC/Mac debate, PC companies offer much higher commissions. To my knowledge Canon is a little more liberal than nikon in that regard. So they definitely pass on some perks to the Canon salesmen....I'd be leery of anything a salesperson says (no offense chip, as you're generally pretty knowledgable, but the camera business is about as corrupt in sales as any...these people SHOULD ask you the tough questions. Might weed out the good ones from the baddies.)
 
Moxiemike said:
And as you guys might know from the PC/Mac debate, PC companies offer much higher commissions. To my knowledge Canon is a little more liberal than nikon in that regard. So they definitely pass on some perks to the Canon salesmen....I'd be leery of anything a salesperson says (no offense chip, as you're generally pretty knowledgable, but the camera business is about as corrupt in sales as any...these people SHOULD ask you the tough questions. Might weed out the good ones from the baddies.)

I have to agree with this. From two seperate shops I was told (after return visits and a few pushes on my part for non-BS responses) that Canon does kick the shop more than Nikon for sales of cameras and camera systems, but not for lenses which makes sense because once they sell the system the lenses are a given.
This is no different than BB selling PC brand XX vs. YY, someone is always getting paid off to sell you a given brand in retail stores. You have to do your own research as the consumer and make sure you are informed, otherwise you are at the will of the highest paying company and the rightfully greedy sale(wo)man.
 
efoto said:
I have to agree with this. From two seperate shops I was told (after return visits and a few pushes on my part for non-BS responses) that Canon does kick the shop more than Nikon for sales of cameras and camera systems, but not for lenses which makes sense because once they sell the system the lenses are a given.
This is no different than BB selling PC brand XX vs. YY, someone is always getting paid off to sell you a given brand in retail stores. You have to do your own research as the consumer and make sure you are informed, otherwise you are at the will of the highest paying company and the rightfully greedy sale(wo)man.

Plus, the idea of a news agency plugging one camera brand over the other is preposterous. Photographers are mostly stuck in their ways. So they're not gonna switch because getty tells them to. Maybe if a news agency hands them a bunch of new gear, but rest assured, these guys who bought into Nikon with the D1 were probably Nikon users from way back, and they're not gonna relearn a system after making the jump to digital. Just not the kind of people willing to do that. I know this.

Secondly, do you really think Getty would reject a photographers images, of say, something highly newsworthy, because they shoot with the wrong brand? I don't think so.

I know a highly respected PJ who's won pulitzer prizes and submits to alot of agencies, i'm sure, and she's a Nikon user. Do you think Getty is gonna turn down a Pulitzer Prize winning PJ's work because it wasn't shot on the right camera? I didn't either. ;)
 
Moxiemike said:
Plus, the idea of a news agency plugging one camera brand over the other is preposterous. Photographers are mostly stuck in their ways. So they're not gonna switch because getty tells them to. Maybe if a news agency hands them a bunch of new gear, but rest assured, these guys who bought into Nikon with the D1 were probably Nikon users from way back, and they're not gonna relearn a system after making the jump to digital. Just not the kind of people willing to do that. I know this.

Secondly, do you really think Getty would reject a photographers images, of say, something highly newsworthy, because they shoot with the wrong brand? I don't think so.

I know a highly respected PJ who's won pulitzer prizes and submits to alot of agencies, i'm sure, and she's a Nikon user. Do you think Getty is gonna turn down a Pulitzer Prize winning PJ's work because it wasn't shot on the right camera? I didn't either. ;)

It is pretty sad that when you go to a store and speak to a saleswo/man that you cannot just get answers but instead get fed whatever they are getting paid the most to say. This is not just a Canon or photographic arguement, it happens all over retail, really sucks. It would be great if we could actually turn to these sales personel and get informed and unbiased opinions and specs on products. I prefer to speak to an educated person and hear their preference, but I also like it when they tell me the truth if something is better/different and for what reasons. Too bad very few people in sales have a backbone and an honest personality :(
 
BTW Moxie, from all of the debate going on above about the D2x I headed over and read the review at dpreview as well as a few other places, that is one awesome beast! Regardless of my lack of skill to handle said beast, I want one just for the cool factor :p Thankfully I have no where near the funds to purchase one now or anytime soon, but it serves as a great goal and something fun to think about.

Of course, like most technology, in a year it will probably be the D3x with a full-frame sensor and 43Mp or something rediculous like that. Oh well, awesome cam, would love to see some work come off it so send me a link when you get rolling with one.
 
Moxiemike said:
Your first comment is completely non-sense. the more MP you try to cram onto a sensor, at this point, be it 1.5x, 1.3x or full frame, the more dense the pixel depth is and thusly the more noise you create.

You misunderstood to a degree. With higher pixel depth, the Canon 1D and 1Ds will have the chance for lower noise than comparable megapixel counts in other DSLRs.

I forgot that you were a salesman for cameras. I know for a fact from my local pro dealer that at most cam stores, Canon sends reps into stores and tells the locals that XX newspaper is gonna switch, that XX news agency is gonna switch.

And so does Nikon and Olympus now too. For our shop, we take all that rep talk with a large grain of salt.

The big one is Getty. Supposedly they were going to "stop taking all nikon files"

This was complete sludge, as upon my purchase of a D2x, I'm good to go with Getty. The only cams approved by most stock agencies are the D2x, 1ds series, 14n and 14c. The latter two aren't even made anymore. So that leaves one of each brand.

I was speaking of news organizations switching from the buys that our commercial group are actually closing.

Surely Canon is currently way ahead in sports, but honestly, this whole bit about news agencies switching is generally a lot of mistruth. Maybe a few are switching and they make headlines. But on most of my shoots, all of the news folks still are using old, beat up D1's or D2h's. The only people I see shooting canon are the independent event shooters.

And we're talking local and national level shoots. Two John Kerry rallies? It was all Nikon, two people with old Pentax MF gear, and one guy with a 1d.

Bush rally that I was forced to attend? (don't like bush. love assignment money). Mostly Nikon. A few more Canons floating around. Couple of Pentax MF and Olympus gear.

All of the local election coverage I've done? Nikon all the way. And not to mention the 350+ events i've done, where it's been all Nikon on the press end, save for a couple events with Canon shooters from this other Magazine.

Again, I am only reporting on what we are seeing in the sales end; and in the used gear that we are seeing come in. You seem to be trying to defend Nikon on all fronts. Suggesting that Nikon seems to be the only way to go. And that is not the case.

Each manufacturer is offering systems that are worthy to be looked at by every level of photographer.

In reality, who really cares? Most of the time, I talk to these folks about the event, the people involved, who we should be looking for. I'm more likely to say "you should want a photo of such and such" as opposed to "my D2h is better than your 20d" or whatever.

Agreed. But I mentioned the switching to Canon by some news agencies to balance your Nikon all the way feeling that you seem to press at every opportunity. In the end the camera is just a tool. Just as a recent article talks of a photojournalist that is using digital P&S's exclusively in his work (cameras like the Olympus C-5060).

And as you guys might know from the PC/Mac debate, PC companies offer much higher commissions. To my knowledge Canon is a little more liberal than nikon in that regard. So they definitely pass on some perks to the Canon salesmen....I'd be leery of anything a salesperson says (no offense chip, as you're generally pretty knowledgable, but the camera business is about as corrupt in sales as any...these people SHOULD ask you the tough questions. Might weed out the good ones from the baddies.)

Having worked in both industries, I think you are mistaken. Either that, or the companies I worked for kept all that extra money for themselves. If anything it is Nikon that tries to court the dealers and sales reps a bit more than Canon. And their customer base as well. Just look at the rebates generally offered by Nikon verses Canon (save for the great rebate program over the holidays by Canon on the DRebel and their lenses - that was a first in a long time for Canon).

Sorry that you have so low of an opinion of camera shops and their people. All I can say is that for our shop, we are not on commission. Just straight hourly wages. So for us, it does not matter whether one buys a Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Minolta, or what have you. Our goal is to get you a camera or lens that you will be happy with and not return in 14 days.

It just seems to me and some others that hit hard the Nikon only message. Glad you are happy with your choice of gear, but there are other choices out there. Over the years I have owned almost every major brand of camera gear. Currently for my DSLR it is a Canon 10D. Though for my style of shooting and needs I am looking at switching to the E system from Olympus. In the end I try not to be a fanboy for just one camera system.

Each system has its plusses and minuses. For a pro that need can be met IMO best by either Nikon or Canon. For a pro needs the ability to be able to rent gear that they need, but can not justify owning. And in most cities that means rental shops that have a good selection of lenses in the Nikon and Canon mounts.

You made it seem that Canon has a flawed approach by offering three different crop factors for their DSLR range. If there is a flaw IMO, it is that Canon does not offer a truly "pro" body with the 1.6 sensor. Otherwise Canon does offer the pro the ability to maximize their lens purchases by allowing the use of most any lens on each pro body from 35mm to the 1DsmkII. All without having to buy digital specific lenses to have a good wide angle zoom. At the same time though, for a pro that needs a true ultra wide zoom are better served by the Nikon and its 12-24 DX zoom. It is all about selecting the right tool for the needs you have. But to that end Olympus eats both Canons and Nikons lunch with a fast 7-14 (14 to 28 in 35mm speak) zoom lens.

Your "Fox News" approach to Nikon as the DSLR that people should buy just needs some balance, that is all.
 
efoto said:
It is pretty sad that when you go to a store and speak to a saleswo/man that you cannot just get answers but instead get fed whatever they are getting paid the most to say. This is not just a Canon or photographic arguement, it happens all over retail, really sucks. It would be great if we could actually turn to these sales personel and get informed and unbiased opinions and specs on products. I prefer to speak to an educated person and hear their preference, but I also like it when they tell me the truth if something is better/different and for what reasons. Too bad very few people in sales have a backbone and an honest personality :(

Then you need to find better places to shop. They are out there. The problem is that the better ones may charge more.
 
efoto said:
Of course, like most technology, in a year it will probably be the D3x with a full-frame sensor and 43Mp or something rediculous like that. Oh well, awesome cam, would love to see some work come off it so send me a link when you get rolling with one.


Don't count on Nikon changing to a larger sensor anytime soon. They seem to be pretty clear on the 1.5 sensor with the lens offering that they have.
 
nikon coolpix 8800 and pentax optio S5i

Hello all, I use 2 current digital cameras, a 8mp nikon coolpix 8800 and a 5mp pentax optio S5i. Of the 2, I carry the pentax more, after all, it fits in a can of altoids.
Over the years, I've had a number of digital cameras, most of which I sold after using them for a while. They were
Kodak dc25, dc210 , dc3800 and dc650
nikon coolpix 990
pentax optio S
sony cybershot 1mp (I forgot the model#)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.