Nikon D100 vs Canon EOS 10D

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by balrog, Oct 19, 2003.

  1. balrog

    MarkH Guest

    Then again there has recently been announced a 12-24mm Sigma lens that will
    work on the 10D and unlike the Nikon lens it will also work on a film body
    or full frame digital. Of course I have no idea how good this new lens is,
    but it would seem likely that what Sigma can do, Canon can do - and for the
    sake of competing probably will do. Canon does not seem to be the sort of
    company that likes to be left behind in any area.

    The smartest move I have seen from Nikon is the release of the D2H, this
    might stem the tide of photojournalists abandoning Nikon to change to the
    Canon 1D, which is something that I noticed when looking at the
    international photographers at the Rally of New Zealand earlier this year.
     
    MarkH, Oct 23, 2003
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. balrog

    Tim Smith Guest

    I for one would be very interested in hearing how your evaluation came
    out. I have a Nikon F100, and four lenses for it, and am in the market
    for a dSLR, so I should be a good candidate for a D100, no?

    But I just don't like the feel of the D100, compared to the E-1. I
    believe that from an image quality POV (ISO 400 and under), there's
    not much to choose.

    I'm about to go for an E-1, get the lenses for it as they become
    available (uh, I believe I'll pass on the $7k 300mm), and sell off
    most of the Nikon lenses.

    That's a radical step, sure, but I want to get a dSLR camera that I
    will be happy using (a different criterion from a pro), and the D100
    does not seem to be it. I like the more compact size and lighter
    weight of the E-1.
     
    Tim Smith, Oct 23, 2003
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. balrog

    ThomasH Guest

    Thanks for the hint.
    I agree on the D2H, istead of chasing pixel records they focused
    on the essentials, such as speed of shooting and foremost: wireless
    image saving!

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Oct 23, 2003
    #23
  4. balrog

    Chris Brown Guest

    An unfortunate choice of acronym...
     
    Chris Brown, Oct 23, 2003
    #24
  5. balrog

    Gavin Cato Guest

    Really? By whom?

    There are several pro nikon lenses that comfortably outdo the canon
    equivalent.
     
    Gavin Cato, Oct 23, 2003
    #25
  6. balrog

    Charlie Ih Guest

    I believe that APS stands for Active Pixel Sensor which has quite
    while to be used in professional/prosumer DC's or may be never.
    APS has an "amplifier" for each pixel and is being used for
    advanced imaging applications. CMOS normally has a fixed "noise"
    pattern background. Somehow Canon has managed to reduce that noise
    to a point that it can compete with CCD. Kodak is still
    fighting that noise in the their 14n.

    The sensor size in Canon 10D and that in Nikon D100 is about the
    same. The "pushed" ISO rating of 10D is 3,200 and that of D100
    is 6,400. This may be an indication that CMOS may still have
    a slightlY higher noise. This is purely speculation. I hope
    that experts can correct me on that.
     
    Charlie Ih, Oct 23, 2003
    #26
  7. balrog

    ThomasH Guest

    Yes, Really! This fact is so known for several years already,
    that its difficult to guess how you could have stayed oblivious
    to this fact, unless that you only rarely read any sort of serious
    lens test reports.

    How about you would take a look at photozone.de "AF SLR LENS
    TEST GUIDE". Klaus calculates his well known and regarded list
    with average test ranks, based on results collected from all photo
    magazines (its not a user query.) See where the test labs from
    around the world place Canon L glass and follow-up on this. Visit
    also prominent web sites, such as http://www.luminous-landscape.com/
    and search the google archives of the rec.photo.equipment.35mm.
    Be specific here...

    By the way: I am a Nikon user since the time of the manual Nikkormats!
    I am hardly trying to make Nikon look bad. I am a Nikonite, but
    the matter of *fact* is that Canon took Nikon's place as the number
    one pros preferred tool of work, foremost due to its EF lens series.

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Oct 23, 2003
    #27
  8. balrog

    Gavin Cato Guest

    Right. For the 300/2.8, and the big primes all with IS - perfectly
    understandable the pro's will go to Canon.

    Now,

    1) The Nikon 70-200/2.8 handles better than the Canon. It is significantly
    sharper at wide apertures. They are about the same from f/8. It has far
    better bokeh. In Canon's defense, they had their 70-200 IS out about 4 years
    before Nikon.

    2) The Nikon 17-35/2.8 is still the king. Canon's 16-35 and 17-40 do not
    even come close!

    3) The Nikon 85 1.4 and 200mm f/4 macro both have better optics than their
    Canon equivalents, the 85. 1.2 and the 180mm f3.5 macro. The 85 1.4 is a
    whole lot cheaper as well.

    There is the reverse as well. The Canon 24-70 outdoes the Nikon 28-70. The
    Canon 300/2.8 outdoes the Nikon 300/2.8, and it has IS as well. But the
    above lenses are important for me.

    Regards

    Gavin
     
    Gavin Cato, Oct 23, 2003
    #28
  9. Is it possible to make 85mm 1.2 lens with Nikon mount? I think not, the
    same way as 50mm 1.0 lens is possible with Canon and not with Nikon mount.

    Bye, Dragan

    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Oct 23, 2003
    #29
  10. balrog

    BoodieMan Guest

    I didnt know Nikon made a 70-200/2.8, I thought (at least when I shot
    D1h's for the newspaper) that it was an 80-200/2.8 (the one I used was
    an AFS lens), and compared to the Canon 70-200/2.8, was much slower in
    AF operations.
     
    BoodieMan, Oct 29, 2003
    #30
  11. balrog

    Chris Hoopes Guest

    The older Nikkor lens was an 80-200/2.8 - the newer version is the
    70-200/2.8.
     
    Chris Hoopes, Oct 29, 2003
    #31
  12. balrog

    Vin Guest

    Hi,

    The new one is a 70-200/2.8 AFS VR
    where as the older ones are 80-200/2.8 in AFS (no VR), AFDn (with Tripod), AFD and AF(non D)

    Vin.
     
    Vin, Oct 29, 2003
    #32
  13. balrog

    ThomasH Guest

    Magnificent user reviews and reports of Nikon gear are on:
    http://www.naturfotograf.com/

    Especially see:
    "The Long March Towards Revolution: AFS 70-200 mm f/2.8 G ED IF VR Nikkor Reviewed"

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Oct 29, 2003
    #33
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.