File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Will Canon release any new 1ds mark 3 this year?
>> Anonymous
No. They already released it a year ago lol. (And STILL haven't fixed the focusing glitches from what I've heard)

5d mark 2, or whatever they'll call it, should be out by the end of the year, though.
>> Anonymous
do you think they gonna release anything in 40d price range? Or will it be 5dmark2 + point and shoot cameras?
>> Anonymous
40d came out last year, so probably not
>> Anonymous
>>239391(And STILL haven't fixed the focusing glitches from what I've heard)

1D ? 1Ds

people really need to learn the difference, it's not like these are new cameras
>> Anonymous
So buying a 40d would not make me stupid after the release? Except if I wanted a 5dmk2..

Or should I wait to be for sure?
>> Macheath !8b4g0BkNZg
What are the rumors of a 40D successor? I'm hoping it's released no sooner than next year.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>239400
Photokina (one of the big photography trade shows) is coming up at the end of next month (September 28-29). If nothing else, it would make sense to wait until after that. If a 5D or 40D replacement is going to be announced, there's a good chance it'll be announced at that, at which point prices will drop on the older models (at least on the used market).
>> Anonymous
a 40D replacement?

not likely

something between a 40D and a 5D, probably if Canon actually cares

so we'll see a super high end 40D or a new 5D, or both if they want to do it for the lulz
>> Anonymous
>>239398
Don't they have the same focusing system?
>> Anonymous
the problem is on the 1D, but it's not on the 1Ds

but yes
>> Anonymous
>>218629 Upgrading from Rebel to Rebel doesn't feel like much of an improvement.

As much as I like Canon, they are putting me in a bad position.

You've got your Rebel user, all fun and games.

You want to upgrade, you've got the $1,000 40D body.

Okay, good stuff. It doesn't have that many more features than the XSi but fine, it's faster and better than what the XSi does.

Great, what happens to someone who has a 20/30/40D?

You want to upgrade, you've got the $2,000 5D that is 3 years old. Sure, it's an oldie but a goodie, but it's still freaking 3 years old.

Or you've got the $4,500 1D or a $7,000 1Ds.

With the D700 and the upcoming D3x, Nikon will have a superior body than Canon at every single price point.

The D80 replacement will be better than the XSi.

The D300 is better than the 40D.

The D700 is better than the 5D.

The D3 is better than the 1D.

The D3x will probably be better than the 1Ds.

And that pains me a lot as a Canon guy that they've been slacking off so much for 3 years.

The last 3 bodies released are a joke. The 40D was less than spectacular. The XSi and XS are there for the low end.

The only reason I am still sticking with them is the unbeatable lens selection Canon still has. Which you will say matters a lot more than a full frame sensor with usable ISO 25,600, but hey, it's a fucking full frame sensor with usable ISO 25,600.

And that's just my rant.
>> Anonymous
>>239411
I think it's just far less critical for 1Ds owners, as they usually don't need the problematic continuous focus modes.
>> Anonymous
maybe

but canon only released the firmware fix, that didn't fix anything, for the 1d but not the 1ds
>> TF2 Thread Expert - Read over 13,474 threads about TF2 !!JZq2GjLgspr
>>239413

>40D
>less than spectacular

lol.

40d is great with great build quality / ergonomics / framerate / control layout.

the pricepoint is much more affordable than the D300 (d300 body $1600, 40D body $1000).. thats $600 you could spend on a couple of pretty decent prime lenses right there with a negligible difference in image quality between the two bodies, and the 40d actually outperforms it at higher ISOs.

basically, nikon cant compete with Canon on price for similar cameras.. they both have extremely similar image quality, so youre paying for brand name.
>> Anonymous
>>239417

it falls short on many levels

just because it's $1,00 now doesn't make it any better. it was $1,200 when introduced

d300 has

the better viewfinder
the better screen
the better body for construction and seals
51 motherfucking AF points
"true" 6 and 8 FPS, the 40D _does not_ shoot at 6.5 if you ever used one, it chugs and drops to 5
dual mode live view
micro adjustments for individual lenses
better shutter life, 150k vs. 100k
best noise control of all APS-C cameras, sorry, i like canon as much as the next guy but to say the 40D performs better is a goddamn lie
VGA resolution screen

easily worth the $500 difference

but to answer your question, yes the 40D is really less than spectaculr if you look at it coming from the great 30D which rocked the market for 18 months along with the 5D (for much longer)

it's not big enough a step up for Rebel users, it will work fine, no question about that but for people wanting a little bit more, it's really less than spectacular

why did you get all butthurt anyway
>> Anonymous
>>239417basically, nikon cant compete with Canon on price for similar cameras..

nikon d40 $450
canon xti $580

nikon d60 $600
canon xs $700

nikon d80 $800-900 depending on kit
canon xsi $900

you're right, nikon can't compete with canon on price for similar cameras

they're cheaper LOL

then moving on to the high end

canon 40d $1,000
nikon d300 $1,500

canon 5d $2,400
nikon d700 $3,000

canon 1d $4,000
nikon d3 $5,000

you're right, nikon can't compete with canon on price for similar cameras

they're more expensive and better LOL
>> Anonymous
>>239433

removing that trip.. forgot i had it on for /v/'s tons of TF2 threads

not butthurt, just stating facts based on my experiences and shooting style

>the better viewfinder
legitimate advantage

>the better screen
barely use my screen except to check histograms

>the better body for construction and seals
seals = legit, construction/controls and ergonomics i prefer canon

> 51 motherfucking AF points
i only use center AF point

>"true" 6 and 8 FPS, the 40D _does not_ shoot at 6.5 if you ever used one, it chugs and drops to 5

>dual mode live view
does it AF during live view? if so, advantage, if not, live view is rarely useful.

>micro adjustments for individual lenses
not familiar with what this means

>better shutter life, 150k vs. 100k
legit, but with how fast technology advances, not that big of a deal

>best noise control of all APS-C cameras, sorry, i like canon as much as the next guy but to say the 40D performs better is a goddamn lie
tests seem to show otherwise, but shooting RAW tends to make the differences negligible

>VGA resolution screen
nice to have, but high resolution doesnt mean much on a small screen. ever compared a 1080p and a 720p 32" tv? cant tell the difference.
>> Anonymous
>>239453

forgot the FPS one.. also moot point.. none shoot RAW that fast anyway, and fuck JPEG
>> Anonymous
soooo guys.. im pretty newbie on this, should I buy the d300 or 40d ?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>239453not butthurt, just stating facts based on my experiences and shooting style

fine on your shooting style, but on paper, it's pretty damn fucking hard to say the 40D is better

if you don't need the d300's features, that's great for you but the fact remains that the d300 is a better camera feature for feature

that out of the way, i'll now address the points

>> i only use center AF point

that's fine, but when you need to track moving subjects, the 51 point is infinitely superior

>> does it AF during live view? if so, advantage, if not, live view is rarely useful.

yes, both passive and active

>> not familiar with what this means

you can make micro adjustments for individual lenses if they have focus shift yourself without sending your lenses out for calibration

>> nice to have, but high resolution doesnt mean much on a small screen. ever compared a 1080p and a 720p 32" tv? cant tell the difference.

there's a huge difference when using live view and magnified at 10x, reviewing pictures and general interface

>> forgot the FPS one.. also moot point.. none shoot RAW that fast anyway, and fuck JPEG

uh, the framerates are rated for RAW, friendo

the 40d does 5-6 FPS

the d300 does 6 and 8 if you attach the grip

all on RAW
>> Anonymous
don't get me wrong, man

i would love a 40d just as much as the next guy but i don't actually own a nikon or a canon so i think i can say i'm impartial when it comes to judging which is better. i won't say what i use to avoid ridicule

besides, they are in 2 different classes, the 40d is above amateur, the d300 is nearly pro
>> Anonymous
>>239461

40D!
>> Anonymous
Is this thread real?

On the nearly useless spec sheet, the D300 is better than the 40D. For most users, I'd wager the D300 would be a better shooter, too, just because of the 100% viewfinder versus 96% (?). For 90% of photography, motherfucking AF points and motherfucking FPS are useless. Sports and wildlife shooters are the only people who need those crazy things. No one needs a big screen, it's there for checking focus (which you do zoomed in anyway), composition (which you don't need resolution for), and the histogram (which you really don't need resolution for). And having shot with the 40D a few times I don't see how even the biggest gadgetwhore could complain about it.

But really, "the best camera" is the one you like shooting with the most. If someone likes Canon's layout better, the 40D is better. If someone like's Nikon's, the D300 is better.

/thread.
>> Anonymous
>>239504

So theres no practical difference?
>> Anonymous
>>239511
Proper weather sealing on the D300 is a pretty big draw. Though I bet the 40D could withstand a light drizzle.
>> Anonymous
>>239511
For most photographers and applications, the only difference between one DSLR and another is the ergonomics.
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
I'm a Canon user but as far as I'm aware from many comparisons and reviews I've looked at the D300 is the better dSLR.

Remember, this is coming from someone who sucks Canon's huge cock.
>> Anonymous
>>239511

for like 90% of the market.. every shot i've seen posted here with a d300 could have been taken easily with a d50.

>>239516

you get all your canon shit at a discount, dumbass. that probably has something to do with your fanboyism.
>> Anonymous
>>239514For most photographers and applications, the only difference between one DSLR and another is the ergonomics.

and lens catalog once you grow up from your beginner camera
>> Anonymous
>>239513
Or you could just buy a Pentax....
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>239528

you're thinking of Olympus, you clown
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>239518
>you get all your canon shit at a discount, dumbass. that probably has something to do with your fanboyism.
I'm really confused by this flame, given that Beethy was (a) praising Nikon and (b) copping to being an irrationally huge Canonfag...
>> Anonymous
>>239514
Definitely. If I didn't shoot sports for news I'd do everything with a D80. The D40 is fantastic but I can't get to adjustments fast enough, the D80 is just that much faster and has some more resolution.

I shoot indoor sports and concerts in crappy indoor lighting, so I need the framerate and low-light performance of the D700. I'd be happy with the D300 (or the 40D) but the bigger, brighter finder of the D700 and the great high-ISO performance of the D700 is more than worth the extra money because I use it every day.

I'll use the D700 until the D4 comes out in 2011.
>> Anonymous
>>239535D4

D5, there won't be a D4
>> Anonymous
>>239532
you have any idea how weather proof the e510 is??
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Why is there such a big diffrence between the 1ds mk3 and the nikon d3 - since several posts here mark that the nikon brand is MUCH better.. the price diffrence is nearly the double!

Is the d3 to prefer or 1dsmark3?
>> Anonymous
the canon.
>> Anonymous
>>239556
Because of what? The price?
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>239539
Nikon didn't skip the F4 like Canon skipped the G4.
>> Anonymous
>>239539
There's going to be a D3x, then a D4. The D3x isn't for me because I need the framerate and I don't need the resolution. I always shoot in JPG BASIC and print at 20x30" quite often. RAW is useless.

>>239545
The D3 isn't a competitor for the 1Ds MkIII, that will be the D3x. Speculation can show that the D3 will be 24.4MP which was apparently confirmed in the botched firmware for the first production run D3's. The D3 instead is competing with the 1D MkIII for sports, action, and news.

The D3 has a bit more resolution, full-frame, better noise performance, and a number of focus and processing tricks that put the D3 on top of the 1D mkIII.

The 1Ds mkIII is for portraits and landscapes basically anything that sits still and you can put the camera on a tripod. If you've got $8000 and don't need the speed and ergonomics of the D3, it's the best. If you're shooting anything that moves, the D3 is king.

The D3 just works in a much wider range of situations.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
If you're buying a camera in the mid-to-high range today, I'd go with Nikon. Their midrange and high end bodies are whuppin' up on Canon right now.

If you're buying a low-end camera today (e.g., Rebel series, D40/60 series), I'd go with Canon. Canon has a better selection of lenses fully compatible with its low end bodies (i.e., 100%).

So, right now, I'd recommend the D300 over the 40D.

But more than that, I'd recommend waiting a month until after Photokina.
>> Anonymous
>>239589midrange

you mean middle end
>> Anonymous
>>239520
The same goes for lenses. Every system except Four-Thirds offers wide primes, every system offers normal primes, and every system offers medium telephoto primes.

If for some reason you're big on zooms, every system offers wide, standard, and telephoto zooms.

That's all you need for 90% of photography.

Professionals who shoot specialized things where they need T/S lenses, etc. can afford to shell out for multiple systems.
>> Anonymous
>>239654

not all manufacturers offer contemporary lenses with built-in ultrasonic motors

not all manufacturers offer fast f/1.4 and f/1.2 lenses

not all manufacturers offer less expensive f/4 variants instead of one f/2.8 model
>> Anonymous
>>239662
>not all manufacturers offer contemporary lenses with built-in ultrasonic motors

You probably focus and recompose anyway, that eats up more time than any motor will save or cost you.

Also l2/pre-set, hyperfocal, etc.

Also I lol'ed at "contemporary lenses."

>not all manufacturers offer fast f/1.4 and f/1.2 lenses

Not all users are quite so anal about pushing a stop, or quite so hell-bent on having nothing but at all but an eye pupil in focus.

Again, I'm not saying every system or camera works for everybody. I'm saying that for the typical documentary/portraits/landscapes most people shoot, the only difference is ergonomics.

>not all manufacturers offer less expensive f/4 variants instead of one f/2.8 model

Good, this is usually a better approach. Someone too stupid to save up for a few months probably doesn't need more than a Powershot A-series. There's a small number of people who genuinely, financially would have a hard time saving up, but again, I'm talking about the majority.
>> Anonymous
Im gonna have to say that going with Nikon is overall a better option.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
Can't anyone like both brands? I played with camera all day today and the only ones I didn't like were sonys, they were just complete crap.
My hands feel better on nikons, but for the past couple weeks, my Elan 7 hasn't left my side and even on the kit lens I got some GREAT slides this week( I blame the velvia 50). If I had to start over, I'd probably go with and XSi, it's a fuckton of great camera in a tiny package. Would I ever graduate to a 40d? Probably not, because the 20d,30d, and 40d are all the same camera and they all feel awkward in my hands. Between teh weather sealing and what I feel a more rigid construction, I'd have to go D300, I'd have already done so if the D700 hadn't been announced the week before I was gonna order one. But I'm still waiting to see how the 5D II plays out.
For me, I'm trying to get the newest camera I can with my dollar if the price is justifiable.

Also, got to play with a casio exlim today, hilarious, I seriously can't think of a single creative reason to have 60fps, except I could use it in engineering for one of our ongoing projects.
>> Anonymous
don't buy a DSLR for the camera body. Buy Canon or Nikon based on the family of lenses. Canon's lenses are much better than Nikon's.
>> Anonymous
>>239711
Canon and Nikon both make fantastic lenses, to say one's lenses are better than the other is ridiculous.
>> Anonymous
>>239542
It fares better than most others in dusty conditions (as the anti-dust actually works). As for water, it's probably no better and no worse than other cheap DSLRs. My E-410 had been in the rain a couple times; I tried to cover it with an umbrella, but some water still got on it. No problems. I had a weatherproof lens, though.

Now E-3 and especially E-1, those are fucking tanks.
>> Anonymous
I'd go with any Nikon.
>> Anonymous
I love both brands and I'd be glad to use both if I had the money. I just went with Nikon because of the old Nikon film gear my dad left over. AI-s lenses, fuck yeah.
>> Anonymous
>>239433
You don't seem to understand here though. They're not the same class of camera. A viper, and a Porsche Turbo may both be super cars but one is 90,000 and one is 200,000. It's not the same thing. Of course it out preforms it, if you're buying them in kit packages, theres an 1,000 price difference.

And really kiddies, this "it has 900345342 auto focus points" is embarrassing to read. Are you serious? I've never, ever needed more than 3. I'm going to get "well you don't do this, or that, and that needs it man." Please.

A lot of the way Nikon handles things, weather you want to admit it or not, is a trick. Sure, tell me I don't know. Thats really not about to change years of experience. I like to buy cameras that capture an image, and thats it. The Body, and interfaces are thing of nightmares. Nikon consistently, out of all manufacturers, finishes dead last in usability of interface.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>240044

2/10
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>240044
$BIGNUM autofocus points is very useful if you're tracking a moving object (so it's more likely to always be near an AF point) or shooting from the hip (my EOS 40D with its nine AF points will often hit behind the thing I'm shooting for if it doesn't happen to land on one of the AF points). So, yeah:
>I'm going to get "well you don't do this, or that, and that needs it man." Please.
you're right that you're getting that. Doesn't make it any less true. Never assume that the way you shoot is the only way anyone should ever need to shoot.
>> Anonymous
>>240046

keep in mind, everyone, that this is a gearfag speaking.
>> Anonymous
>>240044

please be a troll
>> Anonymous
>>240044
I never used more than one focus point, but the 3D tracking in the new D300, D700, and D3 has really impressed me. I can drop my focus point on the player I'm shooting, and the camera will track that player and has successfully done so through a crowded basketball, hockey, or lacrosse game. Being able to frame the shot without losing my focus has been something that's greatly impressed me.

As for useability, Nikons get out of the way a lot faster than any Canon. Everything on average is much faster for me, a huge bonus because I have to get everything right in-camera, I don't have time to be fucking with pictures in photoshop on deadline.

If I was a studio, wedding, or portrait photographer I'd use a canon any day. The 1Ds MkIII is by far the sharpest camera on the market. I'd be happy as shit to use a 1D MkIII to shoot sports with no complaints, and I'd probably be happy using a 40D too. It's just that my Nikons are that much faster at getting the results I need in-camera, without having to mess with the pictures in photoshop.

On average the Nikons are more comfortable and more logically laid-out than the canons, FOR ME. For what I do and for how I use the cameras, Canon has nothing close. For what 90% of photographers do, Canon probably has the advantage in it's wide choice of lenses and who don't need the speed and versatility of the higher-end Nikons.

All that said, hand me any camera and I'll take pictures with it, it doesn't matter. I have my preferences but in the end they all give the same results: pictures.