Why we should all hope the D2X is great

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by McLeod, Feb 23, 2005.

  1. McLeod

    McLeod Guest

    I won't ever be buying one but any advance in design, image quality,
    or features only makes the other manufacturers try harder. I was
    really happy to see the Minolta come out with a body based system of
    image stabilization because the other camera manufacturers must now be
    taking good looks at that feature, especially if it sells well. Until
    digital took over Canon claimed the photojournalist market by dropping
    their lens prices to reasonable rates. Up until the 80's Nikon had
    owned that market and had got complacent. I am happy whenever I see
    new features become standard items on cameras. I think people looking
    for failure are a little messed up.
     
    McLeod, Feb 23, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. McLeod

    Brian Baird Guest

    Well, certainly I hope the D2X can provide some competition to Canon's
    rule of the professional market. Unfortunately, that just doesn't seem
    like it will be the case for those individuals who want low noise
    performance or full-frame imaging.

    Nor does the D2Hs seem like it will pull a significant share of the
    market from the 1D Mark II. It doesn't even look like it will retain
    the customers Nikon does have. So, a lot of hopes are pinned to the D2X
    to answer the Canon call.

    So, I would like to see Nikon compete with Canon on the high end. The
    problem is, they're not doing a very good job as far as I can tell.

    The thing is, I really, really want a full-frame 16+ megapixel camera.
    I want low noise and I don't want to pay for it. So the faster the two
    knuckleheads at the top race to get ahead of the other, the closer my
    dream comes to being a reality.
     
    Brian Baird, Feb 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. McLeod

    Alan Browne Guest


    Altogether well said.

    Looking for 'failure' is not all bad. Making it one's sole mission in life is.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 23, 2005
    #3
  4. McLeod

    Alan Browne Guest

    Me too. That, I agree with.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 23, 2005
    #4
  5. McLeod

    Brian Baird Guest

    I think you're disagreeing more with your idea of Brian than actually
    WITH Brian.

    Brian finds this hilarious when his closet conservative friend accuses
    him of all sorts of liberal treachery, even when opinions on the subject
    have not been offered.

    Ok, I'll stop referring to myself in the third person now... Or will he?
     
    Brian Baird, Feb 24, 2005
    #5
  6. McLeod

    Sheldon Guest

    This is all a bit like rooting for a team. We are all diehard fans of one
    brand or another, and win or lose we will still be diehard fans.
    Competition is good for everybody. It's just that some companies tend to
    take a wait see, while others try to be on the cutting edge. The hope is
    that everybody keeps moving forward.

    Personally, I'm very happy with my D70, and will be until something comes
    along (from Nikon) that blows it away at a reasonable price. Heck, my old
    F's still take great photos. I just have to work around the fact that they
    don't focus for me, and I have to think a bit more when it comes to
    exposure.

    And I kept my old point and shoot digital until it would still point, but
    wouldn't shoot anymore. Just remember, it's not the camera but the person
    behind the lens that makes or breaks a picture.
     
    Sheldon, Feb 24, 2005
    #6
  7. McLeod

    Frank ess Guest

    How does his employer refer to him? ... them?
     
    Frank ess, Feb 24, 2005
    #7
  8. McLeod

    Brian Baird Guest

    "HEY! YOU!"
     
    Brian Baird, Feb 24, 2005
    #8
  9. McLeod

    Alan Browne Guest

    Just accept the two phrases as the simple statements they are. I'll even
    upgrade the second sentence as follows:

    "I agree with Brian on this."

    How's that?

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 24, 2005
    #9
  10. McLeod

    Brian Baird Guest

    Nope.

    I demand total loyalty to my reality. Anything less would be...
    unacceptable.
     
    Brian Baird, Feb 24, 2005
    #10
  11. Or, are we? I like my Canon but I no die-hard Canon fan. Nor am I a
    Nikon hater. And I own a nice film Minolta SLR too.

    Die-hard fanatism only produces an Apple ;-) Very nice but over-priced.

    - Siddhartha
     
    Siddhartha Jain, Feb 24, 2005
    #11
  12. McLeod

    C J Campbell Guest

    Yeah, but the price of those PowerBooks G4s has been dropping precipitously
    lately. No doubt Apple is getting ready to roll out a new product line, but
    I am looking at replacing the ThinkPad. For what I spend on the G4 I can
    replace the ThinkPad and all my software and still have money left over. The
    only downside is the PowerBooks is 1.67 GHz while the ThinkPad would be 1.8
    GHz. OTOH, I would be getting a bigger hard drive, more memory, a 17" screen
    instead of a 15" screen, and a better DVD writer. Also, IBM has been making
    noises that the ThinkPad is a money loser, so getting another one could mean
    an orphaned machine. I could go Dell, but that is no cheaper. I think the
    PowerBooks is bug ugly, but I could probably live with it.
     
    C J Campbell, Feb 24, 2005
    #12
  13. McLeod

    Stealth Guest

    IBM sold off the entire ThinkPad line to a company in China about a month or
    two ago...
     
    Stealth, Feb 24, 2005
    #13
  14. There's at least one person here who just likes to make images.
    Oh sure, the equipment for doing that is cool in and of itself.
    But that's a distraction from the main point, as far as I'm
    concerned.
     
    Ben Rosengart, Feb 24, 2005
    #14
  15. Ben Rosengart, Feb 24, 2005
    #15
  16. McLeod

    DoN. Nichols Guest

    [ ... ]
    However, the PowerBook is running a RISC processor, while the
    ThinkPad would be a CISC processor. CISC is better to an
    assembly-language programmer, but RISC can produce much faster code
    using the output from a compiler (which describes most programs these
    days, except for extreme die-hards), so you will probably get better
    performance from the PowerBook. Note that I am not a particular fan of
    either Microsoft's OSs or those from Apple, preferring a nice unix
    system, but from here, it looks like a wash in speeds. If I had a
    PowerBook I would probably install some unix variant like OpenBSD on it.
    Ugly doesn't bother me, as long as it does what I ask of it.

    And for the purposes of this newsgroup, I would think that the
    better DVD writer would be a win -- transfer your camera's flash cards
    (or whatever format it uses) into the computer, and then immediately
    burn a DVD-ROM of it to protect against crashes. *And* you would not be
    entrusting your photos to a machine running the target of all those
    virus-writers out there. :) (The thought of having a particularly good
    image get infected with a virus is particularly painful, though there
    are ways around the problem once it occurs, as long as the image data is
    preserved.)

    Enjoy,
    DoN.
     
    DoN. Nichols, Feb 25, 2005
    #16
  17. McLeod

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    The Mac OS *is* a Unix variant like OpenBSD. (More like FreeBSD, from
    the user's perspective.)
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Feb 25, 2005
    #17
  18. Fanatism also produces the likes of Digital. Very nice, but no longer
    in production ;-)

    - Siddhartha
     
    Siddhartha Jain, Feb 25, 2005
    #18
  19. McLeod

    DoN. Nichols Guest

    However, from dealing with OS-X (the only version which is built
    on a unix underpinning) by long distance (e.g. making suggestions to a
    friend and then seeing what he turns up), certain parts of it are *very*
    difficult to get to -- with even the root account locked out (except
    perhaps when booting to single-user mode.)

    Filesystems are really strange on there -- especially with older
    disks mounted from earlier versions of Mac's previous OS.

    And the GUI designed to maintain compatibility with older
    programs, and to preserve the "Mac experience", is a major overhead,
    even compared to running X11 (the usual Unix windowing system) on the
    same hardware.

    So -- *I* would kick aside the OS-X, and install OpenBSD from
    scratch, so I had a unix that *behaved* like a unix. :)

    Enjoy,
    DoN.
     
    DoN. Nichols, Feb 25, 2005
    #19
    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.