Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 70

Thread: Announcement of Nikon D70 DSLR

  1. #41
    ClubSNAP Admin Edmund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,336

    Default

    dnka and everyone else. Please DO NOT hotlink images from other websites without the prior permission of their owners. If you have obtained their permission, kindly indicate so with credits.

    I have edited the posts and changed them into links instead.

  2. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    May be true, but tough though. Would *you* abandon your Canon lens investments for these lenses (at a higher price though)?
    I almost....... but rationality came back and kick desire out.

  3. #43
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Planet Nikon
    Posts
    21,925

    Default

    The D70 looks almost similar to the D100, the grip. I can't see if the servo buttons are still infront because the lens blocked it. Similarly is the DOF preview button which is blocked (if there is).

    The shutter release button is silver though, quite a turn off in my opinion... well I mean black is cool

    Somehow I got a feeling the base is slightly different? Maybe the battery is the similar kind to D1* D2* series? The slot in ones? The bottom right hand (of the pic) seems to have a small notch for the battery, I mean, well that's what that gave me the hint to speculate that the battery might be proprietary towards D** series style?

    Well, awaiting more shots

  4. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund
    dnka and everyone else. Please DO NOT hotlink images from other websites without the prior permission of their owners. If you have obtained their permission, kindly indicate so with credits.

    I have edited the posts and changed them into links instead.
    point noted... thousand apologies

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by denizenx
    hmm they always say can work with all F mount lenses what... just that there's also this compatibility table in small font..
    if can then good for u all lor...
    Sigh,
    There is no reason why all DX lenses and the AF-S/AF-D lenses not to work. These would cover what many would buy. Why would Nikon kick themselves with support lower than D100? . The DX lens would also work on all digital bodies as they have already planned for this.

    Unlike Canon with its EF-S...

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by offspring
    I almost....... but rationality came back and kick desire out.
    I rest my case

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    Sigh,
    There is no reason why all DX lenses and the AF-S/AF-D lenses not to work. These would cover what many would buy. Why would Nikon kick themselves with support lower than D100? . The DX lens would also work on all digital bodies as they have already planned for this.

    Unlike Canon with its EF-S...
    Well I am not up to date about the new F75 mah...
    the last fully compatible body I knew was F80.
    anything less can mount the high class lenses but cannot do certain things, like F65 etc..
    hard to argue about Nikon's strategy, since I do not work for them, and they are more mysterious than others. haha..

    I wonder if the EF-S lens will work with film SLRs, after cutting the ring off...
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  8. #48

    Default EF-S lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    Sigh,
    There is no reason why all DX lenses and the AF-S/AF-D lenses not to work. These would cover what many would buy. Why would Nikon kick themselves with support lower than D100? . The DX lens would also work on all digital bodies as they have already planned for this.

    Unlike Canon with its EF-S...
    I rest my case too.

    Canon's EF-S lens are cheaper WA kit lens that do not take the place of L lens.
    It may be a temporary strategy to create affordable kit lens ($100+ mind you) for the $-conscious who buy the 300D.

    At least Canon's long term goal is definitely to come up with an affordable fullframe CCD/ CMOS. No digital lens mah.

    I wonder where will all the expensive DX lens fit into a ff?
    Also, with a constant 1.5x FLM...good and bad. With the DX, it is obvious where Nikon's strategy and thought is - No affordable full frame possible.

    Given the current market share Canon has on the DSLR, the cheaper ff may be a possibility in a few years time. Then sticking to full lens may be the smart way...

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NorthernLights
    I rest my case too.

    Canon's EF-S lens are cheaper WA kit lens that do not take the place of L lens.
    It may be a temporary strategy to create affordable kit lens ($100+ mind you) for the $-conscious who buy the 300D.

    At least Canon's long term goal is definitely to come up with an affordable fullframe CCD/ CMOS. No digital lens mah.

    I wonder where will all the expensive DX lens fit into a ff?
    Also, with a constant 1.5x FLM...good and bad. With the DX, it is obvious where Nikon's strategy and thought is - No affordable full frame possible.

    Given the current market share Canon has on the DSLR, the cheaper ff may be a possibility in a few years time. Then sticking to full lens may be the smart way...
    Poor quality too. 7 pixels of CA? I won't bother even using it.

    FF? Not in the short term. I mean, if Nikon can come up with a say D2X with 8-9MP (a guess mind you) with 1.5 FLM, at 1/2 price of a 1Ds, which would the majority choose, given that there are DX WA lenses available?

    The expensive DX? Which cost more? Get a AF-S 70-200 VR with comes an effective 300mm at f2.8 + a 12-24 or buy a 300mm f2.8? Or the same 300mm f2.8 + a 12-24 or a 400mm? Clue: Look at the list price at Nikon's side for comparision. The DX lenses will only be for WAs and only a relatively low investment. Loss? Compare that to the FD->EF mount migration

    As for the handling of DX lenses, I have made a suggestion.

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by denizenx
    I wonder if the EF-S lens will work with film SLRs, after cutting the ring off...
    According to Canon, no .

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    Poor quality too. 7 pixels of CA? I won't bother even using it.
    [/URL]
    Just wanted to point out that the 18-55 bundled with the 300D is not a must. Users could buy the body alone too. It just gives a low-cost alternative that compares well with the alternative lenses from Tamron, Tokina, etc with similar wide-angle.

  12. #52

    Default

    wow D70 ! anyone know why it is called D70 ? will there be a D80 , D90 coming as well ?

  13. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    eventually, yes. they HAVE to run out of numbers to use sooner or later...

    mabbe it's an arrangement with Canon - even first numbers are Canon's, odd ones are Nikon's...

  14. #54
    Member vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore
    Posts
    922

    Default

    Yo Larry,

    You got rid of your D100??????
    Wissen Sie, wer ich bin?
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/yp-wang/

  15. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince
    Yo Larry,

    You got rid of your D100??????
    long long time ago my fren, long time ago.

  16. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Sorry to put cold water on expectations, but D70 does not seem to come under USD1000. The following link puts its MSRP at $1400.

    http://www.image-acquire.com/nikon/n...nikon_d70.html

    But, personally I think, it should be cheaper than that. Otherwise, it wont make sense, unless they stuff it with better feature than D100 e.g. faster AF module and better FPS.

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,619

    Default

    To add some hot water, you are looking at Canadian price. So it's about US$1k for CAN$1400.

  18. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore, Bedok
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    FF? Not in the short term. I mean, if Nikon can come up with a say D2X with 8-9MP (a guess mind you) with 1.5 FLM, at 1/2 price of a 1Ds, which would the majority choose, given that there are DX WA lenses available?

    The expensive DX? Which cost more? Get a AF-S 70-200 VR with comes an effective 300mm at f2.8 + a 12-24 or buy a 300mm f2.8? Or the same 300mm f2.8 + a 12-24 or a 400mm? Clue: Look at the list price at Nikon's side for comparision. The DX lenses will only be for WAs and only a relatively low investment. Loss? Compare that to the FD->EF mount migration
    i don't know what the majority will choose, but i believe the pros still want full frame. There are some laws of physics you cannot get around, and some serious advantages of a larger sensor than cannot glossed over, among them thinner DOF, larger enlargements and existing quality lenses in the pro's inventory all optimised for a FF.

    i wouldn't buy and carry a 70-200/2.8 to use it at 300/2.8 *IF* a full frame was available. If Nikon's niche is still the pros (as compared to Canon, who targets the mass market), they'd better work on that FF.

  19. #59

    Default Agreed

    Quote Originally Posted by ST1100
    i don't know what the majority will choose, but i believe the pros still want full frame. There are some laws of physics you cannot get around, and some serious advantages of a larger sensor than cannot glossed over, among them thinner DOF, larger enlargements and existing quality lenses in the pro's inventory all optimised for a FF.

    i wouldn't buy and carry a 70-200/2.8 to use it at 300/2.8 *IF* a full frame was available. If Nikon's niche is still the pros (as compared to Canon, who targets the mass market), they'd better work on that FF.
    Whoever gets a larger market share and have larger funding for R&D. Then, a full frame prosumer DSLR is a target not too far away. Then the WA's will truely behave as wides and not some 3/4 part used glass. . Everyone paid for 100% of the glass.

    That's how I see it since Canon has not come out with DX lens. The others like Tamron are just trying to ride on the temporary development phase. Even Sigma's lastest 12-24 lens will not be digital...

  20. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST1100
    i don't know what the majority will choose, but i believe the pros still want full frame. There are some laws of physics you cannot get around, and some serious advantages of a larger sensor than cannot glossed over, among them thinner DOF, larger enlargements and existing quality lenses in the pro's inventory all optimised for a FF.

    i wouldn't buy and carry a 70-200/2.8 to use it at 300/2.8 *IF* a full frame was available. If Nikon's niche is still the pros (as compared to Canon, who targets the mass market), they'd better work on that FF.
    The pros want full frame because... of the quality and the angle of capture, at a reasonable price, right?

    Yes, there are some laws of physics but then, like everything else, it is a matter of compromise. Enlargement till what size? Why not use medium format if there is real need for it? Sigh, it is the photograph and not equipment. There is a thread in the pro digital forum in DPReview, where a Canon pro user had his photos printed using his 1D, on Vogue, Wallpaper! So why not a 8-11MP be used?

    As for lenses "all optimised for a FF", it is just an excuse not to make the adjustment.

    As for the FF thing by Nikon, I can say that there is nothing mythical about a FF despite what some thinks that it will automagically confer them with the skill to take a great photo. Nikon, if they really want to, can come out with something in 6-9 months, but the cost will be prohibitive.

    Like life, camera and photography are a matter of compromises.

    Look at the price of the package of a D2X + Dx lens (or lenses). Then see the advantages vs the disadvantage of a 1.5x FLM vs FF. YOU may not take the 300mm equivalent on a 70-200mm lens but I can bet many would.
    Last edited by Watcher; 10th December 2003 at 03:12 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •