Nikon D70 question

I'm seriously thinking about getting a D70, but when I look at comparison
photos on the Net I'm not impressed. All the photos look kinda fuzzy to me,
and the reviews all say you can do this or that to sharpen them up, and
that's what a digital SLR is like. I've also heard complaints about dust
getting on the CCD. Yet, this camera is very highly rated. I have some
other Nikon lenses to use with it, but comparison photos from an Olympus
8080 look better to me.

Convince me why I should by the D70, as it seems to get rave reviews even
though other fixed lens cameras get better reviews on picture quality.

Thanks

Sheldon
(E-Mail Removed)




Sheldon

Sheldon wrote:
> I'm seriously thinking about getting a D70, but when I look at
> comparison photos on the Net I'm not impressed. All the photos look
> kinda fuzzy to me, and the reviews all say you can do this or that to
> sharpen them up, and that's what a digital SLR is like. I've also
> heard complaints about dust getting on the CCD. Yet, this camera is
> very highly rated. I have some other Nikon lenses to use with it,
> but comparison photos from an Olympus 8080 look better to me.
>
> Convince me why I should by the D70, as it seems to get rave reviews
> even though other fixed lens cameras get better reviews on picture
> quality.
> Thanks
>
> Sheldon
> (E-Mail Removed)

Go here and look and then post back if you still feel the same about any
fuuzy picture issue or any other for that matter.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1034

I have a Nikon D100 which is almost the same camera. I would buy a D70 in a
second if I didn't have the one I do.

J.

> I have a Nikon D100 which is almost the same camera. I would buy a D70 in
> a second if I didn't have the one I do.

I guess what scares me is that when you look at the reviews in PC World they
love the D70, but they give the picture quality a very good, while they give
fixed lens (zoom) cameras, costing far less, picture quality reviews of
"outstanding." Unless interchangeable lenses is more important than image
quality, why would someone "settle" for lesser quality at that price? It
makes no sense. Shouldn't the Nikon blow away the lesser cameras?

Sheldon wrote:
>> I have a Nikon D100 which is almost the same camera. I would buy a
>> D70 in a second if I didn't have the one I do.
>
> I guess what scares me is that when you look at the reviews in PC
> World they love the D70, but they give the picture quality a very
> good, while they give fixed lens (zoom) cameras, costing far less,
> picture quality reviews of "outstanding." Unless interchangeable
> lenses is more important than image quality, why would someone
> "settle" for lesser quality at that price? It makes no sense. Shouldn't
> the Nikon blow away the lesser cameras?

Why would rely on a PC mag to review a camera?

"Jimmy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cpadnZfx463m4XXcRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Sheldon wrote:
>>> I have a Nikon D100 which is almost the same camera. I would buy a
>>> D70 in a second if I didn't have the one I do.
>>
>> I guess what scares me is that when you look at the reviews in PC
>> World they love the D70, but they give the picture quality a very
>> good, while they give fixed lens (zoom) cameras, costing far less,
>> picture quality reviews of "outstanding." Unless interchangeable
>> lenses is more important than image quality, why would someone
>> "settle" for lesser quality at that price? It makes no sense. Shouldn't
>> the Nikon blow away the lesser cameras?
>
> Why would rely on a PC mag to review a camera?

Or a public newsgroup. ;-)

Jimmy,
So you're saying the PC Mag was wrong? Critique the message but not the
messenger, me thinks.
Paul

"Jimmy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cpadnZfx463m4XXcRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Sheldon wrote:
>>> I have a Nikon D100 which is almost the same camera. I would buy a
>>> D70 in a second if I didn't have the one I do.
>>
>> I guess what scares me is that when you look at the reviews in PC
>> World they love the D70, but they give the picture quality a very
>> good, while they give fixed lens (zoom) cameras, costing far less,
>> picture quality reviews of "outstanding." Unless interchangeable
>> lenses is more important than image quality, why would someone
>> "settle" for lesser quality at that price? It makes no sense. Shouldn't
>> the Nikon blow away the lesser cameras?
>
> Why would rely on a PC mag to review a camera?
>

Personaly, I have found that camera reviews in computer magazines in,
general,
seem to be authored by people with only a basic understanding of the
subject.


"Paul Schilter" <paulschilter@comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:UYadnRdx06z-joveRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Jimmy,
> So you're saying the PC Mag was wrong? Critique the message but not the
> messenger, me thinks.
> Paul
>
> "Jimmy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:cpadnZfx463m4XXcRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Sheldon wrote:
>>>> I have a Nikon D100 which is almost the same camera. I would buy a
>>>> D70 in a second if I didn't have the one I do.
>>>
>>> I guess what scares me is that when you look at the reviews in PC
>>> World they love the D70, but they give the picture quality a very
>>> good, while they give fixed lens (zoom) cameras, costing far less,
>>> picture quality reviews of "outstanding." Unless interchangeable
>>> lenses is more important than image quality, why would someone
>>> "settle" for lesser quality at that price? It makes no sense. Shouldn't
>>> the Nikon blow away the lesser cameras?
>>
>> Why would rely on a PC mag to review a camera?
>>
>
>

"Patco"
> Personaly, I have found that camera reviews in computer magazines in,
> general, seem to be authored by people with only a basic
> understanding of the subject.
>


I am afraid to say I have to agree with you in regards to all and any
reviews on any topic.

What most people tend to forget is that reviewers for magazines have
three factors to consider in doing their review.

1) Readership...

If the mag you're reading cannot provide you with the reviews you want
to see, then you will not buy the magazine and they loose business.
In respect of this, they will make sure they have enough providers of
loner cameras, or give away cameras to play with and test for the
reviews. Give enough bad reviews, and you wont get them, hence they
become vague on the issues.

2) Advertising budget...

helps keep the mag afloat, and if they dont have the advertisers, they
wouldnt be able to afford to giv out the magazine. What would happen if
the larger providers of advertising budgets decided to pull an add and
stop providing cameras in the first place.

3) Branch exchange...

No matter how much you would like to many times, to keep the proper
level of objectivity and to be crude enough to display a end-user styled
reaction to a new item, you can't. You woul dburn bridges in not only the
1 and 2 above, but the branch as a whole would wonder why you make them
look so odd. Believe me, it has happend to me in other industries because
I dont hold back if someone asks me for an oppinion.

Finally, when you do read reviews of any kind, to avoid falling for the
trap number 1 and 2 above... look critically at the magazine contents as
a reader.

If you see for instance a review of 1 Canon, 1 Kodak v.s. 3 Nikon
cameras, and then you see in the advertising index that there are 4 times
more ads for Nikon in the magazine, dont expect to get a fair review of
the Kodak and Canon cameras.