Comments on: It’s Nikon Night!

By: Snicker

Snicker — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:58:36 +0000

The lady with the lamp picture is extremely underexposed. Any camera would give noise (even 5D mkII ;)).

By: Gal

Gal — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 01:14:37 +0000

I find the Nikon layout of buttons and interface a lot more efficient than Canon’s. I think the ergonomics of the Nikon bodies lend themselves better to quick adjustments actually, and things just make more sense.

By: Akram

Akram — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:50:26 +0000

That is SOOO stupid! How come u will compare 120% crop to 100%… Are you seriously a photographer?

By: David

David — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:20:50 +0000

Quote “Canon need only improve on the optical quality of their 18-200 and 17-85. ;)”

Hopefully they will do just that.

By: David

David — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:29:25 +0000

multiple focus points is for woosies – real men use more direct print buttons!

By: David

David — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:26:03 +0000

yep, it’s an interesting strategy. The biggest battle is for new DSLR owners, Rebel/500D/D5000 territory – once they get them then it’s what to upgrade to, and Canon plays smart going for the $1200 price point, and giving a fair amount of bang for the buck on the 50D. Where Canon drops the ball though is the leap from $1200 to $2700, a niche for a would-be 7D.

By: David

David — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:13:51 +0000

I agree the D300 is a great camera, and if all there was to choose from was the D300 and 50D I’d probably go with the Nikon. I have a 50D because I like a crop body in addition to FF ones. Whether I upgrade it to a 60D I’ll have to see what Canon does. I don’t think it’ll go head to head with the D300 though but we’ll see. It’s priced for upgrade from the Rebel line and 2K would be too much a jump from $900.

By: denz

denz — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:58:39 +0000

maybe they got a better sensor but in wrong implementation. don’t compare the specs, compare the real world output.

By: denz

denz — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:51:23 +0000

dxomark? it’s so easy to tell that this camera is 2 stops better than that one. look at the sample images here and tell me now if how much better the D300s against Canon G10 (only a P&S). http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d300s/sample.htm
too much grain….

By: denz

denz — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:45:11 +0000

features are only important to hobbyist, image quality is for Pro. here’s the link:
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d300s/sample.htm
Go Fitch

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:20:34 +0000

The Nikon 17-55 is better than the Canon equivalent. IS is highly overrated and unnecessary for any good photographer.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:17:59 +0000

That is blatantly false. The Nikon 17-55 is an excellent lens, with sharpness that rivals the best primes at F4-5.6.

It’s also much better built than the Canon 17-55. My own copy handled an accidental hit into a brick wall with nothing more than a tiny ding. The brick chipped off, rather than anything happening with the lens.

It costs as much as it does because it has excellent build quality and sharpness. Most Nikon shooters who actually use it are satisifed with it. I know I was with mine.

By: Guy

Guy — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:27:13 +0000

Perhaps Dave, I haven’t played with those cameras.. I was more talking about the “prosumer” end..

You’re also right, the d300 is ~$400 more than a 50d, so they’re not *really* comparable.. but.. seeing as how they’re the most closely priced, it’s impossible to not compare them. On that note, comparing the d300 and the 50d, I happen to think the d300 *crushes* the 50d, and DESPITE the d300 being $400 more, I find it to be well worth the extra cost. So, in that sense, they are comparable. If I was looking to purchase a dslr for <$2k, the d300 is hands down the one to purchase now.

I look forward to canon coming out w/ something to compete with the d300, because right now, I happen to feel the "gap" between the 50d and the next full frame camera is simply too large (dollar wise). Also, for those that are looking for a "prosumer" type camera, and stepping up from the xsi/40d, the 50d is simply not worth it.

By: Vincent

Vincent — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:10:07 +0000

Hi. from B&H, durability: Canon and Nikon are both durable cameras. But, I do notice from B&H, that while Canon cameras may look scratched and “dinged” from customers trying them out, I do notice the Nikon grips falling off (from a D700 and D300)!! My friend shoots with a Nikon, and he’s taken his camera hiking, and he has dropped it a few times on solid rock (butt first, thankfully)…and he’s still got it. He has a D200. I have a 20D, and now a 40D. My 20D’s gone to the beach…a fake beach on a rainy day, fell from 3 feet high to a hardwood floor during one of my wedding jobs, and it’s still taking photos up to this day! =).

So basically…HOORAAH to Canon and Nikon for really kicking each other’s butt! And Hooraah for Sony for joining in! GOod years ahead for us, customers (that is if we don’t get too trigger happy spending on new toys).