Nikon D50 clearly beats Canon 350D at dpreview.com

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by ThomasH, Jul 30, 2005.

  1. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    Astonishing is the advance in the noise level, which the D50
    brings with it. The evolution of the sensor technology is not
    over. Every new camera might raise the bar to a new level!

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page17.asp

    I also cannot stop to wonder, why Canon cripples their lower
    level cameras so much. Nikon's strategy to provide the majority
    of features with every lower priced body addresses much better
    the needs of the public. For example observe that the D50
    shoots very consistently 1 frames per sec RAW, whereas the
    EOS D350 goes into a chaotic spread of time periods. I call
    it a blunder (see the bottom of this page):

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page5.asp


    Considering all such observations, I am not surprised that Nikon
    sold 2005 almost the same number of DSLR's like Canon, despite the
    resolution advantage of Canon cameras, and until the D50, also
    a noise level advantage of the leading Canon CMOS technology.
    Canon was recently forced to fix and repair a lot of stuff:
    Camera readers because of the Lexar blunder, camera grips, their
    software is catastrophic (I am still in talk with them about
    Digital Photo Pro displaying only a half of an image or the raw
    converter not allowing to change destination directory!!)

    I think that most surprising to some might be the almost
    negligible difference between 6 and 8 mpix images in real
    applications and in print up to 13" width. Simple math
    explains this with ease: 6pix image has 3000 pixels along
    the longer edge and the 8pix image has 3456. Its mere 15%
    difference. I am glad that Nikon focuses on the more essential
    issues of ergonomics, dynamic range, color accuracy, and they
    also tackle with the noise so well.

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page19.asp

    D50 is a great little camera! I like the competition between
    Nikon and Canon, as a user of *both* these systems!

    Thomas


    PS: So Mr GTO, what do we learn here: Opinions may vary, so do
    not write such comical canon glorifying articles like yours, because
    your reasoning sounds as if your would be trying to convince
    yourself of something. Maybe you should read dpreview again???
     
    ThomasH, Jul 30, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ThomasH

    Lilo Guest

    I do not understand what he meant by saying "canon cripples" their Rebel
    XT and went on to say the D50 is step down from D70.
     
    Lilo, Jul 30, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ThomasH

    Leonard Guest

    So as to be able to sell more of the higher level cameras.
    The D50 loses the second command dial, the compression in NEF
    format, the DOF preview etc. Whether this counts as crippling
    or not varies from one photographer to another.
    I call it irrelevant. If you need to be shooting continuous for
    much longer than is needed to fill the buffer you should be
    using JPEG to get a longer run at full speed (or a more expensive
    camera). Both the 350D and the D50 are bad enough in RAW continuous
    with a full buffer that you don't want to go there.

    - Len
     
    Leonard, Jul 30, 2005
    #3
  4. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    Precisely, I was on purpose provocative in reversing the title of
    the thread. The matter of fact is that these both entry level cameras
    are close contenders and that we all profit from a competing offering
    on the market. The title of the thread should be rather like "How
    D50 and EOS 350D compare at dpreview", instead it contained an
    opinionated rant. I wanted show how easy it is to reverse such
    arguments and provide a "proof of the opposite." :)


    It is a time for the next generation of DSLR I am sure. Neither
    Canon nor Nikon have provided so far the "2nd from the top"
    body corresponding to the F100 and EOS3. I have used the
    EOS 20D for over a month, and boy, I sure do not want to have
    a camera with this ergonomic misery. However, EOS-20D has a
    magnificent sensor which is hard to beat. Even at ISO 1600
    it clearly beats what I would achieve from Fuji Press 1600.
    I am curious what will follow next... from both Canon and Nikon!

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Jul 30, 2005
    #4
  5. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    Precisely, I was on purpose provocative in reversing the title of
    the thread. The matter of fact is that these both entry level cameras
    are close contenders and that we all profit from a competing offering
    on the market. The title of the thread should be rather like "How
    D50 and EOS 350D compare at dpreview", instead it contained an
    opinionated rant. I wanted show how easy it is to reverse such
    arguments and provide a "proof of the opposite." :)


    It is a time for the next generation of DSLR I am sure. Neither
    Canon nor Nikon have provided so far the "2nd from the top"
    body corresponding to the F100 and EOS3. I have used the
    EOS 20D for over a month, and boy, I sure do not want to have
    a camera with this ergonomic misery. However, EOS-20D has a
    magnificent sensor which is hard to beat. Even at ISO 1600
    it clearly beats what I would achieve from Fuji Press 1600.
    I am curious what will follow next... from both Canon and Nikon!

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Jul 30, 2005
    #5
  6. ThomasH

    Bob B. Guest

    Did someone say it could be? Someone asked a question, I answered it.
    Yes, I gave an opinion. No one asked for any measurements.
    You should be.

    Thanks for your opinion, but that is exactly the kind of thing to 'get
    into' in a newsgroup.

    Or were your comments some sort of joke? Too subtle for me I guess.

    Bob B.
     
    Bob B., Jul 31, 2005
    #6
  7. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    Opinion may vary. I genuinely dislike EOS-20D because of its
    clumsy controls.

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Aug 4, 2005
    #7
  8. ThomasH

    Skip M Guest

    Having used the 20D for nearly a year now, I'm not sure what you mean by
    "clumsy controls." Everything works with the turn of a dial, easily
    accessed. Are you used to a different layout? Because I've used Canon
    cameras for over 20 years, the controls may make more sense to me than they
    would to someone coming from a different brand.
     
    Skip M, Aug 4, 2005
    #8
  9. ThomasH

    Zed Pobre Guest

    There are a couple of exceptions, and my previous camera was also a
    Canon. ISO level isn't displayed in the viewfinder, and changing it
    requires a hitting a hard-to-reach button on the top right and
    watching the top LCD... a bit annoying if the camera is
    tripod-mounted at eye-level already. (To be fair, I've never seen
    *any* camera get this right). Same with metering type, AI focus and
    rapid fire mode. Mirror lockup is even worse -- buried in a menu
    three levels deep, though you can partially mitigate that by sticking
    it on a preset, assuming you haven't used the alternate settings mode
    for anything else. The depth of field preview button is also somewhat
    inconveniently placed for me, though I can reach it without removing
    my eye from the viewfinder if I shuffle my grip a bit.

    On the whole, it's not bad, though. I ended up borrowing a Minolta
    for a short time once and absolutely couldn't stand it. The last time
    I used my father's Nikon, I liked it a little better, but now that I'm
    thinking about it, I can't remember why.
     
    Zed Pobre, Aug 4, 2005
    #9
  10. ThomasH

    ASAAR Guest

    Not surprising, as DSLRs don't use EVFs, where most exposure
    information, including ISO and other settings can usually be seen.
    :)

    For those that *must* use optical viewfinders, it would still be
    useful to have some of this data visible in a mini-display that
    shares space with the optical viewfinder. It might not be cost
    effective in a $1000 DSLR, but I'm sure the extra expense could
    easily be absorbed in high end DSLRs costing more than $4000.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 4, 2005
    #10
  11. ThomasH

    Zed Pobre Guest

    Am I supposed to take from the smiley that you're joking completely?
    If not, I'm not really sure what to make of this line, since of course
    you don't need an EVF to display that information. The 20D displays
    metering, aperture, shutter speed, focus indicators, AE lock, flash
    information, remaining burst count, and WB modification all through
    the viewfinder. They just omit, for some strange reason, ISO value.
    If they made the WB, burst count, and focus confirmation displays
    half-height and stuck an ISO indicator below them, I'd be a lot
    happier.


    Er, no, this information is visible in optical viewfinders in just
    about any DSLR. It's just that ISO information is always missing.
    The really funny thing is that Nikon used to provide this... on its
    film DSLRs! For some incomprehensible reason, they stopped displaying
    it on their digital models.
     
    Zed Pobre, Aug 4, 2005
    #11
  12. ThomasH

    ASAAR Guest

    I wasn't joking at all. The 'smiley' if it was there for any
    reason, might have been to indicate that I wasn't trying to
    proselytize on behalf of EVFs. I know that they aren't necessary to
    display that information, as the example I gave was not to replace
    DSLR's optical viewfinders with EVFs, but to add the information to
    the optical viewfinder's display.
    Having never used a 20D (or similar, capable DSLR from any
    manufacturer) I wasn't aware of what it does or doesn't display).
    But, from several Canon P&S's that I've used that had optical
    viewfinders, absolutely *no* information was provided in the
    viewfinders. The only way any information could be seen was in
    either the LCD display, or in a small monochrome display on the top
    of the camera. When you described the lack of an ISO display in the
    viewfinder, adding that it could be seen in an LCD display on the
    top of the camera, but especially that "I've never seen *any* camera
    get this right", it sounded as if you were saying that you've never
    seen a camera that displayed ISO information using the viewfinder.
    As every EVF-using P&S I've seen is able to "get this right" by
    displaying ISO information in the viewfinder, it seemed reasonable
    to mention that *they* are examples of cameras that get it right.

    Had you mentioned in your earlier message any of the other data
    bits (WB, AE lock, flash, etc.) visible in the viewfinder, and that
    the lack of ISO was probably due to lack of space, my reply (if any)
    would not have been the same.

    You may have hit on the reason - not enough space. I imagine that
    the DSLRs (Canon, Nikon, etc.) provide far more data than used to be
    included in the viewfinder of Nikon's film DSLR <cough> :)

    Seems strange though, since the ISO was constant (until replaced
    by a different film). But with digital cameras, where the ISO could
    not only be easily changed at any time, but might even have
    different values depending on the camera's mode, it's more important
    to have an ISO reminder than with film SLRs.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 4, 2005
    #12
  13. ThomasH

    Skip M Guest

    I agree on the mirror lockup, it might as well not be there, as far as I am
    concerned, way to complicated to get to, and get out of, to use unless it is
    absolutely necessary.
     
    Skip M, Aug 5, 2005
    #13
  14. ThomasH

    measekite Guest

    I do not own either and do not intend to get a DSLR until the next
    revisions. But I did take a look at the Canon DRXT and the Nikon D50.
    I liked the Canon because it is 8MP, the lenses are somewhat cheaper and
    reviews claim that the digital electronics are more advanced. I liked
    the Nikon better from a look and feel aspect and it balanced much better
    in my hand. It just felt better and seemed to be better constructed.
    Too bad it is 6mp.

    I want to enlarge to at least 11x14 and feel the more MP the better.

    I thought the grip on the DRXT was poor so the only real Canon choice is
    the 20D and then you are battling price.
     
    measekite, Oct 3, 2005
    #14
    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.