DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

D100 vs Canon 10 D etc

Larry, thanks again. I have narowed it down to Digital....(if you look at my earlier posts...I have narrowed it down to Canon 10D and Nikon D100 or the D70 when it comes out will warrant a look as well)

I curently own a nikon 5700 (close to your 5000 but with a gangly but useful mega zoom) and just purchased a Canon Powershot S50 for keeping on my person all the time (hate missing a shot due to no camera on pocket) Both of these cameras will be staying in my arsenal as I like them both for varying reasons.

The 5700 while doing wonderfully with most still subjects is just a little tough to use on faster moving subject (not impossable...just a challenge) and with the ability to change lenses and get brighter glass and also higher ISO levels (with reasonable noise levels), I think that it will expand my photography to include wildlife....the occational weddings my friends wish for me to shoot and the like.

So in effect....I want a camera that is best for me in my Nature/Landscape/Macro (which a DSLR will probably be best as you can "basicly" change i's personality with a change of lens. (yes, I know the body is still the body).

One of the biggest points I have been looking at is durability (ooops....drop...cool...it still works) not that I abuse my equipment....but nice to know the frame would be up to it if I did.

The other one I seem to be edging toward Nikon is due to a spot meter. There are times it is invaluable...and center weighted or averaged metering just dosnt cut the mustard. I use it on both of my current cameras on a regular basis.

Menus...I can learn.....handling...while important.....isnt as important as the end result....id shoot with a shoe box if the result was wonderful (taking into account equal talent on the other side of the lens.)

I have found your information very valuable.

Thanks!!

Roman
 
Roman

Picked up the thread a just now, so missed that you are already digital. With that understanding, I suggest you continue to wait eagerly for slightly more than a month. PMA comes up in early February, and I expect that around that time the successor to the D100 and possibly the 10D will be announced.

The D100 is coming up on the two year mark and certainly due. Then there is the already announced D70. The Canon has only been on the market a year, but that was the shelf-life of the predecessor - the D60. The much more expensive flagship D2X should also appear about that time, and while it will be out of the reach of many of us, it will give a clear indication where Nikon - and the whole technology - is going. A preview, if you will, of what we WILL be able to afford in a couple of years when it trickles down.

Canon is being very aggressive in wanting to dominate the market. They have already stated that they plan 20 new consumer/prosumer models in 2004, with Sony being the prime target. The others need to keep up as well, so I expect PMA time to be extremely interesting.

There are also rumours of an upcoming price war that will see a lot of camera selling for considerably less money than now, if it materializes.

Digital camera sales have jumped from around 25 million units in 2002 to something between 40 and 44 million this year once the score is counted. It is no longer a fringe item, but a major profit centre for not only the old line camera makers, but for consumer electronics, PC companies, film companies and even office machine companies. In time there will be a shake-out, but the next few years may be quite bloody.

And it will be our gain.

larry!
 
after 30 years of film i picked up a d100 this year .......... my main use for it is for the local paper ....... sports.......etc........ i gotta say i'm very pleased with it ......... it has improved the look of the finish product........ higher percentage of quality shots....... and my lense fit it.......... life is good.........

do enjoy the ride...........

i am gazer
 
Yep....somthing tells me that the D70 might be a bit more than expected....(just a hunch...based on the market exploding)I am assuming that Nikon didnt just whip this up as a response to the 300D, but have been developing this all along..and wasnt going to be pushed (well at least too much) into the market with that design till its really ready....(this spring). I too agree that the future of digital imaging is heating up nicely from a consumer point of view.

Roman
 
My research involves photo identification of White Sharks, and up to two years ago, I used a film camera and a Nikon Coolscan 4000ED... Two years ago, Nikon introduced the Coolpix 5000, and I decided that the necessary resolution threshold was attained at which I could use a digital camera. For me and my work, resolution and response are two extremely important factors. A couple of weeks ago, I was standing in a shop about to buy a D100 with a rare grant that I had just received. I hesitated... and a day later, the D70 details were released, and I was really glad I did not spend that money on two year old technology... Is the D70 the ultimate solution? No, I do not think so... but an upgraded D100 including the D70 features with maybe a 8 megapixel CCD would probably be... but when will the Dx00 be released? Or does Nikon consider the D70 to be the answer to the 300D or the upgrade for the D100... Confusing! Any thoughts on the matter?
 
Odds are the D70 will be closely matched to the 300D - to offer a competitive Nikon alternative to the consumer without cannibalizing sales from higher end cameras. Slimmed-down feature set, resolution (most people by ONLY on the number of Megapixels w/o looking at sensor size, fps, etc), average 2-3 fps, avg dile transfer buffer/timing etc.

The unfortunate fact is that as bottom-end entries into the DSLR market, either the 70 or the 300D will be worth zippo 12 months from now. They are DSLR versions of the coolpix xxxx designed to take some % of their buyers into higher-end DSLRs from either manufacturer.

If I had the grapefruits to snap pics of GWSharks, waiting for a 70 or 100 to transfer pcis to the card, etc would be a royal PITA. I'd be tempted to get a niced used D1X, D1H or even an F5 (C$1900 MINT in Canada). High FPS, great resoltuion, H20 resistant (in case fishy nips your housing) and parts available globally.

The Nikon vs Canon debate is meaningless. EVERY @#$%^ DSLR has issues.10ds are slower than molasses and have back-focus issues. 1Ds have noise and banding issues. the 1Ds costs as much as your car. Some have issues with anything other than Canon lenses (Sigma compatability issues) -- which costa god awful fortune.

D100s have noise issues, D1s have magenta skin color and noise/banding issues. the S2 is slow (fps), the Fuji sftwrae sucks and it takes RAW pics that need a bloody Cray Supercomputer to manage at 12MB each. N80-based bodies like the D100 and S2 will not meter with Ai/AiS lenses.

The 300D is slow (fps), will have little value in 12 months with 1500 for sale on eBay and little features. The D1H is only 3MB. The D1X has a skinny buffer. The Olympus could or could not be an orphan -- or a raging success - but you take the risk.

You get my drift. Every user has a sweet spot of needs/desires/ergos that are different than any one elses. The toughtest thing is picking any camera that will not piss you off to no end, keeps its value, evolve with you and let you concentrate on taking pics vs fixing photos on expensive production software.

Just My 2 cents
 
Very Confusing, but the camera's will evolve as quickly as computers. With better computer they make better camera's etc. So, does waiting make sence?? As confinced as i was, i bouth the 5700, after 12years making pictures with my F601 (6006). What a disapointment. Not with picture quality but in handling the camera. Should I buy the D100 or wait for the D70. More buttons, more feature's etc. The digatal camera stands where the analog film camera stood, say 50 years ago. And still evolving. Next year an other will come with better specs. The question you must ask yourself is...what i want to do with the camera. A lot of this subject is discusted in this forum.
The D100 is a wonderfull camera but for most, a lot of money. The 300D en the D70 will be the first camera in a price class for the common people as myself, as where i stood 12 years ago when i want to buy the F601 (F401,F801). It was then confusing and still it is.
 
Robert

Thankyou for your 2 cents worth. At last a sensible concise treatise on the current state of DSLRs. An excellent and valuable posting and IMHO worth much more that just 2 cents.

craig
 
Thanks for your response, Robert... But you missed my point! I am well aware of the fast moving digital technology, and I agree that waiting for a newer model as a buying strategy is lost in advance. The FACT remains that the D100 is TWO years old! And I find it outrageous that Nikon has not come up with an upgrade for the D100 while releasing its response to the 300D in the form of the D70 which incorporates NEW technology. On the digital market, two years equals prehistoric times. WHY would anyone buy a D100 when the D70 is available, that was the question? Of course I would go for the D1x, but we are talking about a whole different category of prices. I would prefer buying the D200 (let's call it that for the sake of this argument) than the D70 for the enhanced quality and features, but I REFUSE to buy a camera that is two years old. My three cents worth...
 
Michael,

You raise a good point. However, I've concluded you can go two ways when buying a digicam:

1. A non-DSLR or entry-level (skinny features, high MP, slow FPS, etc) for roughly US$1000+ that will be worth (in the market, not to the owner) bupkus as a trade in. It's like buying those lenses that come with most camera kits - they'll do the job, sorta sharp, sorta fast on a sunny day, but they're paperweights when you want to get a 105/1.8 or 80-200VR, etc because they're inexpensive (there are exceptions like the 50/1.8D) and everybody and his dog has 2 of them -- and they all want that 85mm f1.8, etc.

2. A high-end pro DSLR that has all the great features but sacrifies MPs for FPS & pic quality (large sensors w/large receptors) customizability and robustnest -- that will hold its value with much higher upfront costs.

It doesn't mean the entry DSLRs are crap, but as a local camera shop owner stated to me one day, the Canon Rebel DSLR was the brightest thing Canon's done in a long time - and the biggest mistake a new average Joe could make if they wnat to move fwd with the hobby (equipement wise).

It takes great shots, but lenses 2, 3,4 will cost almost as much (each) as the camera was new and the trade-in or resale value of the body will be zippo in 12mos.

Think of it. The (arguably) BEST DSLR out there is the Canon 1Ds -- and it's technology really hasn't evolved since it's first release.

It works, has a full-size sensor, robust and access to good lenses and all it's foibles are known and lots of software is out there for RAW management, etc. The same with the Nikon D1/1H.

While a sweet review is nice for a D2H (just to pick a new costly cam) or what have you, owners are the ones, after 100s of shots, who will be doing the real product testing - at their expensive. No one like spending $$$$ on a possible orphan.

New technology is not always great. In many cases it's released for marketing purposes more than for the actual benefit of the end picture -- hence the great MegaPixel war. "My cam have more MPs than yours does - the pics are 1/2 noise, but hey the average consumer doesn't read detailed reviews, right?"

More tech also translates into more software control of the camera - it's a given. Less expensive cameras will take any control of what the software does, tweaking if you will, away from the user, they have to in order to keep from sucking sales from their next higher model.

More software interprolation means more chances for someone in the software lab to screw up or decide "that's good enough until the next version".

I like the idea of less computer and more camera in any given body, but that's my pref.

Look at the D2H - new sensor has noise issues. The Fuji S2 takes great pics - but having used one for awhile, managing 12MB pics with that !@#$% software, 256-512MB cards and only an average harddrive can be hell. They also have color artifacts on fine lines (e.g. dog hair) at 45 or deg angles (green pixels all over my mutt).

My solution was to bite a BIG bullet and get a USED pro DSLR (D1H) and then start the $$$ vs quality juggling act on lenses.

My logic (possibly screwed) was that someone else ate the depreciation, it will last , is proven and the I'll get a greater % of the higher upfront cost back at trade/sale time.

But hey, different strokes for different folks.
 
Back
Top