New Canon 8MP DSLR announced



P

Phil Cook

Guest
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:09:31 -0000, Paul Saunders wrote:

>Paul Saunders wrote:
>
>> However, after looking at the price it seems I'm still going to buy the 300D.
>
>Bought the 300D. Further speculation over.
>
>For a while at least...

Ha! I was going to suggest you take a look at the recently anounced Nikon D70.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park, where the snow is rapidly melting, to the
"Westminster Gasworks"
 
Z

zeus

Guest
> Bought the 300D. Further speculation over.
Congrats, a god choice I think. Canon have a good range of DSLRs so when you are rich and want to
upgrade you will have plenty of choice.

Mark
 
D

Doug

Guest
> However, after looking at the price it seems I'm still going to buy the 300D.
>

I wouldn't do anything just yet. Nikon are about to release a model to compete with the 300D/10D
that looks very good. Whether you like Nikon or not I bet Canon reduce the price of the 300D/10D to
make sure they keep the upper hand.

Doug
 
J

John Taverner

Guest
> >Bought the 300D. Further speculation over.
> >
> >For a while at least...
>
> Ha! I was going to suggest you take a look at the recently anounced Nikon
D70.
>
Agree. The spec of the D70 looks great. Wide angle zoom and thats me fixed for landscapes. My Nikon
FM with 24mm 2.8 has seen me through 20 years and will another 20, but I am a digital convert now.

JT
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
Phil Cook wrote:

> Ha! I was going to suggest you take a look at the recently anounced Nikon D70.

Already did thanks. Very tempting. But I had a long hard think, weighed up all the pros and cons and
decided to stick with my original choice.

Without going into all the pros and cons, one important consideration was that I could either wait
until the D70 starts shipping, order it, then wait months to get one, or buy a 300D today.

Even if I sell it at a small loss in the near future (which I probably won't), think how much money
I'll save on film in the meantime. Being digital-less meant that I'd have shortly had to start
forking out money for Fuji 10-packs once more.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
John Taverner wrote:

> The spec of the D70 looks great.

It looks very good, but to be honest, I don't see that much difference between it and the 300D. They
claim better noise reduction etc, but better than what? Their previous cameras? There have been no
tests yet so nobody knows for sure how it will compare to Canon. Thus far Canon's sensors have been
superior to all others. It will take a little more than marketing hype to convince me otherwise.
Having said that, there's probably very little observable difference in actual use.

> Wide angle zoom and thats me fixed for landscapes. My Nikon FM with 24mm 2.8 has seen me through
> 20 years and will another 20, but I am a digital convert now.

Glad to hear it. Of course if you already have Nikon lenses that's a good reason to stick with them.
The new specifically digital lenses sound great, especially the 12-24.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
[email protected] wrote:

>> Bought the 300D. Further speculation over.

> Congrats, a god choice I think.

Thanks, best value for money DSLR at the moment, even allowing for the D70 I think.

> Canon have a good range of DSLRs so when you are rich and want to upgrade you will have plenty
> of choice.

That's the plan. At the moment I don't have much money to throw around. If and when I do it
won't matter.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
Doug wrote:

> I wouldn't do anything just yet.

Too late.

> Nikon are about to release a model to compete with the 300D/10D that looks very good.

Yeah, already read about it. But if I wanted it I'd be waiting for months at least.

> Whether you like Nikon or not I bet Canon reduce the price of the 300D/10D to make sure they keep
> the upper hand.

Actually I'm not sure that they will. From what I've heard they're already selling them at a loss in
order to corner this part of the market. Once new DSLR users start buying Canon lenses they'll find
it difficult to switch to another make.

The Nikon D70 is a little more expensive and it's quite possible that Canon will have something else
new very soon.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
I

Ian Dainty

Guest
"Doug" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

> I wouldn't do anything just yet. Nikon are about to release a model to compete with the 300D/10D
> that looks very good. Whether you like Nikon or not I bet Canon reduce the price of the 300D/10D
> to make sure they keep the upper hand.
>
> Doug

Just like PC's. You buy one and then find out a week later that so and so have brought out a far
superior model for hundreds less.

I'm still annoyed that I can no longer buy disc film. Thus making my disc camera a piece of scrap.
That's cost me hasn't it.

Ian.

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
 
G

Gordon

Guest
Paul Saunders <[email protected]> wrote
>Paul Saunders wrote:
>
>> However, after looking at the price it seems I'm still going to buy the 300D.
>
>Bought the 300D. Further speculation over.
>
>For a while at least...
>
My elder daughter keeps telling me I need a better digital camera. She has her eye on my Fuji 2800z
since we were on holiday together.

My main current interest is in bird-watching, having enticed many into my garden, and the 6x zoom is
not adequate. Squinting through my SLR with a 200mm tele and a 2x converter looks about right, but
I'm undecided to go for a big optical zoom, or go the digiscoping route.

It would be useful to have a scope to use on its own in the field, but either way involves big
money. :-(

Whasss the biggest optical zoom digi camera on the market Paul, you seem to be up with the market.

... and on a personal note - just how many cameras are enough for you? ;-)
--
Gordon
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
Gordon wrote:

> Squinting through my SLR with a 200mm tele and a 2x converter looks about right, but I'm undecided
> to go for a big optical zoom, or go the digiscoping route.

What's a digiscope?

> Whasss the biggest optical zoom digi camera on the market Paul, you seem to be up with the market.

I'd recommend the brand new Nikon Coolpix 8700. 8 hefty megapixels and an 8x zoom (35-280mm), a very
well specified digicam. I rather fancy it myself. You can also get a 1.5x telephoto converter for it
to boost the long end to 420mm. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04012805nikoncp8700.asp

Don't know what the price is, might cost a bit, but with 8MP you wouldn't need to upgrade for a long
time. Even if you don't think you need that many megapixels, consider the cropping possibilities.
You could crop out half the picture and still have enough pixels for a good A4 print, so that in
effect translates into an even longer zoom range.

> ... and on a personal note - just how many cameras are enough for you? ;-)

Ideally just one, but I haven't found the perfect camera yet.

Actually I'm trying to cut down. I'll be using the current roll of film in my OM1n to make
comparative test shots with the 300D, then scanning them, studying them in detail and making various
test prints. If the digital shots match the quality of the film shots, at least for purposes of
producing an A3+ print, then my OM1n will be mothballed. That will leave me with just two active
cameras, the 300D and the Horizon 202 panoramic.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
S

Ste Mc ©

Guest
"Paul Saunders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| Gordon wrote:
|
| > Squinting through my SLR with a 200mm tele and a 2x converter looks about right, but I'm
| > undecided to go for a big optical zoom, or go the digiscoping route.
|
| What's a digiscope?

It's when you use a bracket to connect a digital camera to a telescope or spotting scope, for very
high magnifications!

<snip>

| Paul

Ste
 
G

Gordon

Guest
Paul Saunders <[email protected]> wrote
>Gordon wrote:
>
>> Squinting through my SLR with a 200mm tele and a 2x converter looks about right, but I'm
>> undecided to go for a big optical zoom, or go the digiscoping route.
>
>What's a digiscope?

A telescope and adapter to fit a digital camera.
>
>
>I'd recommend the brand new Nikon Coolpix 8700. 8 hefty megapixels and an 8x zoom (35-280mm), a
>very well specified digicam. I rather fancy it myself. You can also get a 1.5x telephoto converter
>for it to boost the long end to 420mm. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04012805nikoncp8700.asp
>
Thanks, I'll have a look.
--
Gordon
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
W. D. Grey wrote:

>> If the digital shots match the quality of the film shots, at least for purposes of producing an
>> A3+ print,

> Well you've seen the part image on A3 + of Cribarth - absolutely great. That should give you every
> confidence.

Yes I was impressed with that, but you know me, I like to try things for myself. More importantly, I
want to make close comparisons between film and digital and push them both to the limit to see where
the advantages and disadvantages lie.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
P

Paul Saunders

Guest
ste mc © wrote:

>> What's a digiscope?
>
> It's when you use a bracket to connect a digital camera to a telescope or spotting scope, for very
> high magnifications!

I don't know a great deal about this sort of thing, but I thought the biggest problem with attaching
cameras to telescopes was the very small apertures. Thus you get a very dark image and need to use
slow shutter speeds. No problem for landscapes and no problem for astrophotography if on a motorised
mount, but not at all suited to bird photography.

Of course you could increase the film speed to compensate but then you'd get horrible grainy images.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749