New Nikons?

[Kevin]

What? No mass hysteria here? I've been surfing a couple of other websites and there's pandemonium breaking out. Leaks of the 2 new Nikon bodies, a D300 and a D3. Supposedly the "official" announcement from Japan is coming out in less than an hour.

[samuelwil]

Kevin ... my bro called me and told me the same thing this afternoon. one is supposed to be full frame, maybe the D3. The new D300 is taking the place of the D200. the 300 is supposed to be around 12 MP's. Don't know for sure, but it has my curiosity up! Sam:unsure::unsure::coo3l:

[Kevin]

What I've seen is the D3 has an FX nomenclature, supposedly meaning full frame yet able to utilize DX lenses as well. Seemed it was to replace the D2Xs but then I saw one unofficial quote saying it was actually replacing the D2h. No mention of # of megapixels though. There are some photos floating around dpr though.

[David Cramer]

Supposedly the D3 will replace the D2h, and the D3x is due in another six months. We'll know more soon enough. The D300 looks to be interesting, although not much of a megapixel bump if it comes in at 12MP. Both should have better ISO capabilities.

[Kevin]

I read that too about the ISO. Also a new CMOS sensor.

[haibane]

Wow not fair. I JUST went canon too

[haibane]

From Thom Hogan.

"Well, as I hoped, Nikon seems to be saving up its big announcement for the Osaka Games (starts August 26th; the formal announcement is apparently scheduled for the afternoon of the 23rd in Japan). Thus, the three weeks while I was in Africa didn't see any new Nikon products announced (though Nikon did announce their 40 millionth lens sale)."

[Kevin]

Well, here's the first official news I've found from Rob Galbraith's site:

D3
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8742-9083

D300
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8742-9084

New lenses (look at those prices!!!:swoon:)
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8742-9085

[Desert Rat]

honestly don'honestly right now don't care too much about it.. I don't see a need for me to upgrade.... Maybe in a year or so I would get a new camera but don't need one.. the D2x i have does everything and then some for me now...

[stilllearning]

Supposedly the D3 will replace the D2h, and the D3x is due in another six months. We'll know more soon enough. The D300 looks to be interesting, although not much of a megapixel bump if it comes in at 12MP. Both should have better ISO capabilities.


Actually this (D3) wasn't going to be the High MP camera annouced. This was to compete against the 1DmKIII. This is what I had been hearing from those who seem to know for 6 months. March is suppose to be the annoucement for the High MP camera though I don't think it's going to beat the 21MP Canon but They also had been hinting that there is a 18 and 22 out in the field being tested. Finally some good news for Nikonians and Canonites. If Nikon can pressure Canon then that means lower prices all around and better cameras for the future. Competition is good for the consumer.

[Rudi]

Wow not fair. I JUST went canon too

Fear not! Full frame at the price you got is still full frame. Not sure how long before Nikon actually bring these out in numbers, and the full frame Nikon is sure to be more than the 5D. :)

Still, I'm SO excited about the extra competition! Lower prices and better cameras for US all! How cool is that? :D

[Jonathan]

This is great news! Especially for the nikon users. Can't wait to see what it can do and i am GLAD nikon has VR in supertele's now..even if it cost an arm and a leg

[David Cramer]

It's an interesting release. One that will leave most wildlife photographers wanting. The FF D3 certainly meets most of the wedding/pj/sports crowds needs. The D300 is an amazing package for $1800 (or a little more I suppose for the battery boost - which I would highly recommend). It will offer most of the features of the 1D MkIII minus a couple of fps, for half the price. That's only if the iso performance is much improved over the D200/D2x, and if the new AF systems works well (we know how that can go).

And those prices on the new lens...ugh. Something Nikons folks have learned to live with, unhappily.

[Rudi]

This is great news! Especially for the nikon users. Can't wait to see what it can do and i am GLAD nikon has VR in supertele's now..even if it cost an arm and a leg
Yes, in that respect they're only catching up, but glad to see them doing so (and I'm sure a lot of Nikon wildlife shooters are as well :) ).

It's an interesting release. One that will leave most wildlife photographers wanting. The FF D3 certainly meets most of the wedding/pj/sports crowds needs. The D300 is an amazing package for $1800 (or a little more I suppose for the battery boost - which I would highly recommend). It will offer most of the features of the 1D MkIII minus a couple of fps, for half the price. That's only if the iso performance is much improved over the D200/D2x, and if the new AF systems works well (we know how that can go).

And those prices on the new lens...ugh. Something Nikons folks have learned to live with, unhappily.
Yeah, they've always been pricier than the other brands. Still, it's good news for everyone that someone is bringing the fight to Canon (who have had it too good for too long). :)

[David Cramer]

I agree, Rudi. Competition is good for all of us. I was hoping to make up my mind about sticking or switching with this release. This doesn't clear the picture up for me (pun intended). I may stay with Nikon, get the D300 and test the new AF system/ iso performance. The rumored D3x will most likely be FF, so iso should be much improved. It will be interesting to see some images over the next few weeks. I'm eager to see the D3 iso performance in particular, as that will probably be predictive of the D3x.

[David Cramer]

While no sample images have been allowed, due to these being preproduction models, Bjorn Roslett has made a comment on dpreview that the iso/noise capabilities of the FF D3 are awesome. Finally!!!

[Rudi]

Yes, it's been a long wait.

[chezem]

Good to see. Stiff competition can only be a good thing. We'll all win. :cheer:

[Charlemagne]

Hmmmm. I think there was a pixel shooter member who a long time ago posted that a friend of theirs was testing a FF Nikon DSLR body, then the "friend" told this member that it was a joke, and killed the hype... hmm.. wonder who that member could be???


Charles


http://www.pixel-shooter.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5394

[imageswest]

.

[David Cramer]

Well, I just called my dealer and pre-ordered a D300, D3, 14-24 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8. :swoon:

Sweet. I've preordered a D300 plus battery pack. Now about those new VR teles.......

[Wulff]

The D300 look like a killer body at less than 1/2 the price of the MKIII and about $500-700 more than the 40D. First blush has me thinking it blows the 40D away (Canons dropped the ball here I think) and will give the MKIII a run for its money.
If Nikon glass werent so expensive, I might give it serious thought instead of the 40D.

[AFS]

Wow not fair. I JUST went canon too

+1

Unfortunately, the only lenses I still have for Nikon are dx :wacko:

This announcement shook me. I realized at about 2AM last night as I tossed fitfully in my bed that i can no longer go single system. The two together are just so much more powerful than just one.

After the hype dies down, the reviews are out, the early bugs squashed (I learned my lesson from the D200 and 1D mark III) barring any major problems, you can expect to see a D3 in my bag next to my 1D Mark III sometime in spring or summer 2008, paired up with a 200 f/2 VR, 14-24/2.8, and maybe the 24-70 2.8.
I am extremely disappointed in two things though:
1) the lack of updates to the pro fast lenses. Half of them use old designs with lots of CA and screwdriver AF. The other half are discontinued manual focus lenses.
2) the prices on the long teles makes buying long VR glass for the FF D3 (which itself necessitates longer glass than I'm used to) an expensive and difficult proposition. I'll hopefully be able to afford the new 400 or 500VR.

That way I'll have the best of both worlds. D3 with the killer wide zoom and normal zoom, the ultimate ultra fast telephoto, and a long tele with minimal flare due to the nano crystal coat (with VR no less).... and a 1D mark III with the fast L's, and the 300 IS.

I almost had a heart attack before bed last night, but now I'm absolutely thrilled. Forget financial feasibility, which was my excuse for going one system with Canon, even though I didn't really want to ( I still really really liked my Nikons), I'm going to get myself a great job and realize this dream. I'll sell my 24-105 IS, one of the 1v's, maybe my 135L, definitely my 17-55 DX and 2nd d200, maybe my 1st d200 to a buddy. I'd ideally like a D300 as well, but maybe after the prices drop. Then I can also pick up the Canon 5D replacement or a 1DsIII or something like that and have 2 for each brand.

[David Cramer]

And you can use your dx lens on the D3. My biggest gripe is the cost of the new VR teles. Fortunately, I LOVE my old beat up 400 2.8.

[imageswest]

.

[haibane]

Cliff you seriously are going to change? Honestly as others have said. Is your current camera broken?

[Rudi]

I really don't understand this hysteria that follows camera ANNOUNCEMENTS. If we actually had a camera, and knew how well it performed, I might start to understand, but it was only announced, people... chill... :) Your Canons, Nikons Pentaxes, etc, they still work exactly as they did last week, the world really is not coming to an end! rolleyes;

[imageswest]

Cliff you seriously are going to change? Honestly as others have said. Is your current camera broken?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmvvvQ0ic7s

[Charlemagne]

Yes, I will be changing back to Nikon. I only have a couple of Canon lenses, and there's no point sinking any more money into obsolete technology. Anybody want to buy a 5D with only a couple of hundred clicks on it? ;)

With the change to the FX-format sensor, with larger pixel pitch and 14-bit capture, the D3 addresses the main concerns I had with Nikon's DSLR image quality. Canon's sensors were the benchmark, but their lenses, for the most part, are a notch or two below the Nikon equivalents. Now that Nikon has pulled up their socks in sensor design, it will be a pleasure to go back to using their great glass.

I had also been looking into medium-format digital, but the only currently affordable solution (Mamiya) still leaves a lot to be desired.

Come on Cliff you know you want that H3D, and just think, it might only cost you as much as a new beamer! oh.. and I am not sure if I mentioned that I SAW THE D3 FIRST!! wooohoooo! :brows:

Charles

[imageswest]

.

[Kevin]

Anybody able to verify the buffer on the D300? On the preview at DPR it says only 9 shots! Also, shooting 14-bit RAW drops the fps to 2.5fps. Be sure to do your homework if you're seriously thinking about jumping.

And I read on RG site, iirc, that when shooting 11fps on the D3 the AF only focuses on the 1st shot and doesn't track? Can that be?

[Kevin]

just checked the RG and it must not have been that one.

One thing I have to say though is it's pretty cool to think that the D300 is really a mini D3. They really didn't scrimp on too many features. 51pt AF on a ~$1800 camera? They seem to really have narrowed the gap in the their product line which is a good thing.

Also, it seems the D300 is a Sony sensor (the new one??) whereas the D3's sensor is Nikon's LBCast sensor. Pixel pitch is huge!! It may reign as the hi ISO king.

[David Cramer]

Anybody able to verify the buffer on the D300? On the preview at DPR it says only 9 shots! Also, shooting 14-bit RAW drops the fps to 2.5fps. Be sure to do your homework if you're seriously thinking about jumping.

And I read on RG site, iirc, that when shooting 11fps on the D3 the AF only focuses on the 1st shot and doesn't track? Can that be?

Homework is important. Here are the buffer stats on the D300:
• Up to 99 shots at 6 frames per sec with 14-bit processing (Jpeg)
• Around 19 images at 6 or 8 fps in NEF/RAW with 12-bit processing

Shooting at 14-bit RAW does drop it to 2.5fps.

I'll check on your point about the D3. What I remember reading is that it uses the same exposure from the first shot on the other shots in the burst. I don't think it applies to focus.

[David Cramer]

just checked the RG and it must not have been that one.

One thing I have to say though is it's pretty cool to think that the D300 is really a mini D3. They really didn't scrimp on too many features. 51pt AF on a ~$1800 camera? They seem to really have narrowed the gap in the their product line which is a good thing.

Also, it seems the D300 is a Sony sensor (the new one??) whereas the D3's sensor is Nikon's LBCast sensor. Pixel pitch is huge!! It may reign as the hi ISO king.

We will see about the AF system. I can't help but think that more is not often better in all cases. Bjorn Roslett has commented that the iso performance of the D3 is better than Canon, and we know Canon is more than good enough. I've been "hearing" that the D300 will be quite usable up to 1600, even though it is DX, but only seeing images from the camera will convince me.

[Kevin]

Thanks David. Look on the first page of DPR's preview of the D300. That's where I noticed it said 9-shots. Then in the detailed section it said "No data".

I'll have to wait till I get home to see where I read that comment about the 11-fps. I hope I still have the spec page up. I'm thinking now it was one of the Nikon sites. There was a footnote next to the 11-fps with a reference to something being limited. Reading the footnote said something along the lines of initial focus is acquired only for the 1st shot. My initial reaction was dumbfounded as how on earth could/would that be useful. I've just checked a number of sites and can't find that page I was reading.

[Kevin]

Re: ISO performance....

We're all familiar with how well the D2hs handles noise. It seems as though they've been working hard over the last couple of years on that sensor. I remember a number of D2h shooters on Nikon Cafe whose D2h bird shots were just outrageous in quality (mostly Flew's). Extrapolating that quality out to this new D3 sensor really makes me curious to see what it'll do.

The D300, on the other hand, by using the Sony sensor, doesn't leave me with warm fuzzies that it will match or beat the 5D/Mk3 ISO performance. But, we'll see.

Also, I've read Bjorn's comments and they do offer promise, don't they? It's a good day in Nikon land. Hope they don't have the same issues like Canon with their new AF system. ;)

[David Cramer]

Here's a bit more on the D3 (http://www.thinkcamera.com/forum/forummessages.asp?URN=1&UTN=1032&SP=338123408983358208576&V=1) focusing system.

And Thom Hogan's initial impressions (http://www.bythom.com/D3comments1.htm) on the stats of the two bodies.

[David Cramer]

And I read on RG site, iirc, that when shooting 11fps on the D3 the AF only focuses on the 1st shot and doesn't track? Can that be?

Is this what your are referring to? Taken from RG site, it refers to when shooting in Dx mode on the Fx D3:

"DX Format This mode uses a 16mm x 24mm capture area and produces 5.14 million pixel photos. The D3 will shoot continuously at up to 9 fps in this mode. In DX Format mode, the camera will also shoot at 10 fps or 11 fps, but with some limitations. At 10 fps, automatic exposure locks and the exposure throughout the burst is based on the meter reading prior to the first frame in the sequence. At 11 fps, exposure also locks before the first frame plus autofocus is disabled."

So you are correct about the autofocus being disabled in order for the D3 to obtain 11fps, but that doesn't happen at 10fps DX.

[imageswest]

.

[David Cramer]

I guess they'll call that the "EOS 1D Mark III Emulation Mode"... :booty: LOL;

Bad Cliff, Bad!:chair:LOL;:bash:
;);)

[haibane]

Yes, I will be changing back to Nikon. I only have a couple of Canon lenses, and there's no point sinking any more money into obsolete technology. Anybody want to buy a 5D with only a couple of hundred clicks on it? ;)

With the change to the FX-format sensor, with larger pixel pitch and 14-bit capture, the D3 addresses the main concerns I had with Nikon's DSLR image quality. Canon's sensors were the benchmark, but their lenses, for the most part, are a notch or two below the Nikon equivalents. Now that Nikon has pulled up their socks in sensor design, it will be a pleasure to go back to using their great glass.

I had also been looking into medium-format digital, but the only currently affordable solution (Mamiya) still leaves a lot to be desired.


I beg to differ with you about canon lenses being inferior. While yes some of them aren't quite up to par on the on the sharpness factor. There are a lot more IS/USM primes out their from canon especially in the normal range eg 100mm and below. I think both sides have their pluses though

[haibane]

Bad Cliff, Bad!:chair:LOL;:bash:
;);)
IDK I thought it was pretty funny

[equetefue]

this really sucks.... I am very happy with my 30D but there are some things I really dislike from it. On the new 40D most of those issues have been addressed, and I had made up my mind on buying a 40D. Now that Nikon has issued the D300, which seems to be an amazing camera, i'm back to square one.

Do I want a 40D, 1DmkIIn, or a D300.

Help ???

[David Cramer]

this really sucks.... I am very happy with my 30D but there are some things I really dislike from it. On the new 40D most of those issues have been addressed, and I had made up my mind on buying a 40D. Now that Nikon has issued the D300, which seems to be an amazing camera, i'm back to square one.

Do I want a 40D, 1DmkIIn, or a D300.

Help ???

That's not a bad problem to have, considering all of those are excellent cameras. I believe the build quality of the 1DmkIIn and D300 will be better than the 40D, if that is a factor for you.

[Kevin]

Is this what your are referring to? Taken from RG site, it refers to when shooting in Dx mode on the Fx D3:

... At 11 fps, exposure also locks before the first frame plus autofocus is disabled....

So you are correct about the autofocus being disabled in order for the D3 to obtain 11fps, but that doesn't happen at 10fps DX.

Yeah, that's what I saw. Just got home and found it on the RG site. I'm sure I saw it elsewhere too. Not sure why they implemented that unless for bragging rights. I can't think of a scenario where that would be desirable.

[woundedmallard]

I was hoping to see an AF-S 80-400 VR f4 :biggrin:, except for the fact that I hadn't used the VR the last 3 months I was using that lens.
From all the performances I've seen out of 400 f/2.8 and 500 f/4, I didn't really see where it warranted a VR other than to jack up the price. Of course, this is coming from someone who hasn't shot that kind of glass as of yet.

I think the D300 will suit me just fine though! :biggrin:

[Wulff]

The problem Equetefue is just that in the Canon lineup theres a rather large and unnessecary gap between their "pro-sumer" 10/20/30D line of bodies and their pro line. If your a landscape/portrait shooter your fine because the 5D exist. If your sports/action/wildlife shooter Canon has basically said your SoL, thanks for your $.

Canon wants to differentiate the two segments along the AF systems primarily.
WHich is BS if you ask me. One of the most important aspects of photography is freaking focus :). There are lots of other features Canon *could* use but that life. If you want good AF you have to pay 5000+. Nikon has it right imo. The 200/300D line is nicely placed between the consumer and the pro lines and it offeres alot of advanced features. Just not all of them

That said.

Were you to switch youd take a bath replacing your Canon lenses. Nikon lenses are more expensive nor are they as comprehensive. By way of example what would you use as a 400mm lens? Nikons $6,000 400mm f2.8 non VR? Everything Ive ever read also suggest that Nikons glass isnt really any better I dont know where that comes from especially in focusing speed. Theres a good reason Im sure why at any major event be it, sports, people, wildlife whatever 90%+ of the lenses are Canon but I digress.

Your option really imo remains whether or not to step up to a $1400 40D or a 4,000 1DIIn.

And pray to (*&)(*)()*) God some talking heads at Canon wake up and realise Nikons just trumped and stomped all over them and they introduce a line somewhere in the same range. Or that the media hype in the 40D release about 30% better AF and also IQ/NR is fact and not marketing spins :)

Ill wait to see hands on reviews before deciding I think.

[Desert Rat]

Well, personally I don't see any reason for me to switch out my D2x now... I don't really want a FF camera.. Just not something I would use much... I don't have the lens I would use with it which was my 17-35/2.8 AF-S lens...

I actually like the DX sized sensor and all my lens lineup now.. it is not like your current camera does not work anymore? Why shell out all that money now or wait for a prince drop after the flurry of keeping up with the Jones get the new system now??

[Rudi]

I'm with Eric on this - your old camera still works as it did last week, and these new cameras are not even out yet. For people to consider switching on the basis of an announcement is outrageous overreaction, IMO. Not only that, what are you going to do three months from now, when Canon announces (or releases) their new offerings??? Huh??? This product hysteria is a new phenomenon, one that I have only seen after the advent of online discussion forums. One brand release something, and people jump ship because all of a sudden the brand is not considered "the best".

Bobby put it best, I think: "It's never the arrow, it's always the indian."

[Desert Rat]

Well, Rudi it is not like Nikon or Canon sent out some radio signal that tells all the old cameras to stop working correctly so you can get a new model? This camera is just announced.. You are right no hands on experience noone showing any sample images...

Well, everyone who is jumping on the bandwagon to get a new D3/D300 will sell their older models now so they can get decent prices before the market is flooded with older units and the prices drop...

I look at it this way there are individuals around who bitched and moaned about the inferior cameras Nikon made in the D200/D2x/s/D2h/d2h/s models with all the issues.

What happened when you used to use that old celluloid stuff dare I say film? When a new model camera came out it was not a earth shattering announcement that made your images better...

It is similar to the new Nikon models. Why not learn to use your current gear instead of every 2 years dropping $5000 for a new camera? Never did that with a film camera?

The current D2x i have does everything and then some for me and i can get decent shots at HI ISO setting of 500 and above.. not sure what others are doing...

So, let the hysterical crowd do what they want and wait and see what turns out in a comprehensive review of the new systems...

[Wulff]

Well that depends Rudi.
If the desire to switch/upgrade comes out of the blue then yeah I might be inclined to suggest waiting to see how things shake out :)

I know for myself though I was already planning on stepping up this fall/winter.
The 40D may be a sweet option and a well timed gift horse as the 1DIIn is more camera than I want or need...however I would love better AF and at this point an itime its the ONLY option for Canon users who want more than a

30D Consumer grade body (despite Canons claims to the contrary)

And thats Canons failing and Nikons win. Theres an undeniable huge gap in the Canon lineup. WOuld I switch for this? Not bloody likely but it does lay bare (imo) Canons poor planning.

[Rudi]

Well, Rudi it is not like Nikon or Canon sent out some radio signal that tells all the old cameras to stop working correctly so you can get a new model?

Please don't give them any ideas... :D

[Desert Rat]

Please don't give them any ideas... :D
:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

[Rudi]

I'm going to back up my old firmware from now on, just in case! rolleyes; :)

[Kevin]

Awww...Eric, you're no fun. FF would be a plus for you with your landscapes though.

I had a similar thought to John. I think it's neat that Nikon has presented a prosumer level camera that offers the same AF system as the pro level body. I wish Canon would do something like that. I wouldn't even mind if it were in a smaller body size like the xxD series and was more limited in fps. I'd just like the better AF. In that sense, I'm envious of the Nikon users.

The only thing I'd be cautious on that D300 is the sensor. I'm not convinced Sony has made great strides controlling noise. The D3 is a different story and from some reliable sources the high ISO is pretty amazing.

But, for birding (which I did briefly consider the Nikon) neither is an attractive option. Taking into account the cost of those big lenses there's no way it's a good move. So, I'll happily stick with Canon and enjoy what I've been enjoying all along. :)

[Charlemagne]

Yeah, that's what I saw. Just got home and found it on the RG site. I'm sure I saw it elsewhere too. Not sure why they implemented that unless for bragging rights. I can't think of a scenario where that would be desirable.

The only place I would find this useful is when shooting formula 1 racing or the like on a static course with no real curves.. maybe nascar :confused_1::confused_1:

Charles

[haibane]

this really sucks.... I am very happy with my 30D but there are some things I really dislike from it. On the new 40D most of those issues have been addressed, and I had made up my mind on buying a 40D. Now that Nikon has issued the D300, which seems to be an amazing camera, i'm back to square one.

Do I want a 40D, 1DmkIIn, or a D300.

Help ???

Use the 30d if you are happy with it. Buy more gear. Only reason I could see a viable upgrade IMO is either FF or 4mp is just too little lol

[David Cramer]

Looks like iso noise is a thing of the past for all Nikon and Canon pro cameras. This is from Dave Etchells' (http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1187901361.html) experience at the press release.

"The D3's high ISO is really impressive I'll remain at least somewhat skeptical until we can get a D3 back in the lab and test it under controlled conditions, but Nikon showed some incredibly impressive prints at the event. They had enlargements that must have been 30x45 inches or more in size, comparing identical shots taken with the D3 and Canon EOS-1D Mark III at ISO 3,200 and 6,400.

After the disappointment of the D2H, I have to say I was taking Nikon's claims of low noise at high ISOs with a rather large grain of salt. When I saw the aforementioned prints though, I was literally flabbergasted. The D3 didn't just surpass the 1D Mark III, it far surpassed it. Well, that may be a little strong; the Mark III is a fantastic camera, but the difference between its images and those from the D3 was anything but subtle. As I say, I'll remain a skeptic until we can test a production sample of the D3 ourselves, but if the images shown had any basis in reality (and Nikon would be foolish to have doctored them in any way), it looks like there's a new leader in the high-ISO / low-noise derby, and it's the D3."

[David Cramer]

I guess my reply to those who are questioning a "need" to upgrade, is that I don't have to, but I want to. Nothing wrong with that. The D300 will definitely be a better camera than the D200, and at a great price point, and I want to shoot with it. I'll also upgrade from the D2x when a replacement arrives with more megapixels. Again, simply because I want to.

[Desert Rat]

Awww...Eric, you're no fun. FF would be a plus for you with your landscapes though. You know noone has mentioned the file sizes this camera produces in megabytes for a RAW image?
But anyways I am actually liking the DX crop factor on the current camera I have now.. It seems to work for me?

Don't you think??
http://www.pixel-shooter.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8752

[haibane]

One thing I noticed to be a huge issue on FF. My nikon 105 2.5AI'd has some serious flare. So I had to order a hood for it, but I hope this isn't going to happen with all the other lenses.

[equetefue]

well I was planning to upgrade the 30D to the 40D regardless, because they addressed the issues that annoyed me.

I'm more wondering if for a tad more $ should I get a used 1DmkIIn or jump ship for a D300. I'm really looking for a better viewfinder,AF,noise.

[Rudi]

The D300 sensor is still made by Sony. While better than the D200, I would wait until we see just how much better the high ISO performance will be. It might not be mind-blowing. :) Plus... you've just bought the 300/4 L IS. Do you really want to take a loss and switch, then find out that in 3, 6, 12, or even 24 months, Canon brings out something that temporarily outperforms Nikon again?

[equetefue]

Do the 40D and 1dmkIIn have the same kind of viefinder the the D2H and D2x have ?

[David Cramer]

I had a similar thought to John. I think it's neat that Nikon has presented a prosumer level camera that offers the same AF system as the pro level body.
But, for birding (which I did briefly consider the Nikon) neither is an attractive option. Taking into account the cost of those big lenses there's no way it's a good move. So, I'll happily stick with Canon and enjoy what I've been enjoying all along. :)

I've read that Nikon is labelling the D300 a Pro camera, not Prosumer. Probably because of the imaging engine, af system, and build quality. This means you won't be able to get it at Best Buy, like you could the D200.

I find the D300 a VERY attractive birding camera.... if the AF and ISO perform as expected (and those are big ifs!). But I'm also keeping my sweet old 400 2.8. I'm not convinced I need VR in the long teles (or maybe I just can't see shelling out that much $$$ without being further convinced). After having the 200-400 (a great lens) and 500, I've found the 400 has the best IQ and works with all three tcs very well.

[Kevin]

You know noone has mentioned the file sizes this camera produces in megabytes for a RAW image?
But anyways I am actually liking the DX crop factor on the current camera I have now.. It seems to work for me?

Don't you think??
http://www.pixel-shooter.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8752

Those are terrible! Get yourself a new camera. ;)

[Kevin]

I've read that Nikon is labelling the D300 a Pro camera, not Prosumer. Probably because of the imaging engine, af system, and build quality. This means you won't be able to get it at Best Buy, like you could the D200.

I find the D300 a VERY attractive birding camera.... if the AF and ISO perform as expected (and those are big ifs!). But I'm also keeping my sweet old 400 2.8. I'm not convinced I need VR in the long teles (or maybe I just can't see shelling out that much $$$ without being further convinced). After having the 200-400 (a great lens) and 500, I've found the 400 has the best IQ and works with all three tcs very well.

Yeah, i hear what you're saying. And probably in all respects, it is a pro camera. I heard someone refer to it as a digital F100 (I don't know if that was considered pro or not).

But, in my situation, though the D300 has some attractive features and would be a great birding camera for current Nikon shooters, it wouldn't make sense for me to have a dual brand system. Primarily due to the $ for the glass. Both the AF of the 40D and D300 are unknowns at this point. As for the 40D, I'm confident the noise will be as good if not better than the 30D, maybe as good as the Mk3/5D but I doubt it. The D300 is using the Sony sensor and I'm just not convinced it's going to be that great. Especially because the native ISOs are lower on it than the D3 (which makes sense because they're different sensors).

So for you, David, it absolutely makes sense (and I see nothing wrong with upgrading simply because someone wants to) but for me, and maybe other Canon shooters, it doesn't make as much sense. But one thing I will say, those old AI/AIS supertele lenses would certainly be fun to shoot static birds for a reasonable amount of money. :)

[imageswest]

.

[retief]

When I started thinking about a potential switch, the sticking point was that while the MkIII would be super for me, I also needed a minimum of D200 type specs as a second body. Canon has now done that part with the 40D.

My issue with Nikon was that I needed cleaner ISO 1600 and a bit better AF than the D200, and the D300 fits this very nicely. We can rattle on all day about whether or not the ISO 1600/3200 of the D300 will be "as good" as the MkIII/5d, and frankly when all is said and done many will claim it is, and many will claim it isn't.

All I can say is, Canon, you had your chance to lure me away, but I won't be selling my trusty Nikon 400 f2.8 AFS-1 anytime soon now :biglaugh::biglaugh:

Obnoxious bit is I don't have the danged thing yet .........

[David Cramer]

In terms of Pro vs Prosumer, seems this Canadian site (http://nikon.ca/en/Slr.aspx)has another lablel. The D300 is considered an Advanced DSLR.

Like you, Bill, I'm eager to try the D300 on my 400 2.8 AFS-1.

[Kevin]

All I can say is, Canon, you had your chance to lure me away, but I won't be selling my trusty Nikon 400 f2.8 AFS-1 anytime soon now :biglaugh::biglaugh:..

Well, thank God for small favors. We've all been biting our nails fearing the day you'd join our ranks. Now my nails can grow once again. :)

joke; Mr Dewey! I'm sure you'll be quite happy with the D300. It does sound exactly what you have been looking for. :)

[Mao]

Tempting.

[Ak Photos]

It does not say full frame in the releases that I could find. THe FX is full resolution and DX is partial resolution for faster shooting..... And the ISo thing is a ploy, basicly if you read the Nikon website it says you can push it 2 stops to reach the 25K ISO, but thats nothing new. Most D-SLR allow you to push 2 stops over the top, no matter if its 1600, 3200 or 6400 ISO, so whats the big deal. The bigger question is did they fix the terrible noise issues they had at higher ISO, so can you even shoot and use ISO 1600 or anything bigger than 4x6??? Only 12mp. Kinda shocked by that.

Also the price for the D300 seems really high compared to the rest of the market.... And it his a larger MP than the D3..... Interesting...

But overall, not matter what you shoot, its good for the Market to keep the manufactures doing more R&D and making better products. But for me, I'll take my Mark 3 and the 40D I have on order, over either of the new nikons....

[imageswest]

.

[imageswest]

.

[Rudi]

Good grief... where do you come up with this nonsense? :huh: :nah:

Same place you find you Canon info? ;) :D joke;

Seriously people, chill... we know nothing until the cameras are out and we see what they're capable of...

[Ak Photos]

What Non-sense? I was reading the NIKON product specs and the PDF brochure they have on their website. And for the iso 1600, that is from shooting with my budy that shoots nikon, and we shot 1600 side by side, and the difference was huge, his was so noisy and pixelated on his d200... I want to see what the images out of the camera look like and compare them side by side to the Canon, and even maybe the Sony that is coming out or the Pro model rumored to be out in Spring... That is the only way to tell for sure. Never trust the Manufactures, as they always play their models up and downfalls down...

[retief]

Well, thank God for small favors. We've all been biting our nails fearing the day you'd join our ranks. Now my nails can grow once again. :)

joke; Mr Dewey! I'm sure you'll be quite happy with the D300. It does sound exactly what you have been looking for. :)

So, you going for the Guiness Book of Records for Nail Length? And are you talking fingers, toes or both????? Yucky-Pooooooo.........:arghh::arghh:

In all seriousness, strange state of mind for me, I would like once again to thank you and the others here who shared a lot of information a few months ago.

This has been, for numerous reasons, a very tough summer for me trying to decide which way to go. In reality, for what I do, I probably should have made a decision when I moved from the D2H to the D200, but that is water under the bridge.

The reality is that this is good for all of us, and the industry as a whole.

I must say, though, that while I think the pricing on the two new Nikons is darned good, I am really surprised that the cost of the new VR lenses stayed as high as it is. I was expecting that this would drop to be a bit closer to the the Canon prices.

[retief]

Same place you find you Canon info? ;) :D joke;

Seriously people, chill... we know nothing until the cameras are out and we see what they're capable of...

That's true, Rudi, but I do think that it is really bad form to complain about another manufacturer and totally misrepresent what is said. I am about ask Mr. AK to post the exact link where he found this, because what he says certainly matches none of the Nikon posted information I have seen. Nor does it match Rob Galbraith, LL, DPReview, etc.

Nothing wrong with Brand Loyalty, but c'mon now, let's at least be fair, eh?

[Rudi]

And as I was trying to point out, this apparent bias is (and has been) present in both camps. Point taken, though. :)

I'd like to bring this thread back on topic, so we can discuss these new cameras calmly and rationally. So, everyone, please try and remain objective or at least polite while posting comments here. Thanks in advance!

[retief]

What Non-sense? I was reading the NIKON product specs and the PDF brochure they have on their website. And for the iso 1600, that is from shooting with my budy that shoots nikon, and we shot 1600 side by side, and the difference was huge, his was so noisy and pixelated on his d200... I want to see what the images out of the camera look like and compare them side by side to the Canon, and even maybe the Sony that is coming out or the Pro model rumored to be out in Spring... That is the only way to tell for sure. Never trust the Manufactures, as they always play their models up and downfalls down...

Link to Rob Galbraith which Includes Nikon Press Release. Well, dang it, you sure are correct. Notice the "difference" from Full Frame, oh, yeah :)

Now, I can say that I shoot 1600 ISO with my D200 very often, and I don't have horrid noise and pixelation, can you show us an image or 3 from his camera? You can find plenty of mine here on the forum if you look around. The Base ISO on the D3 is 200-6400, the D300 is 200-3200, and yes, they can push beyond. Perhaps if you read what folks who have handled the camera have to say, easy to find on the net, you might actually gain some knowledge.

You call the Nikon ISO "a ploy", how is that different from Canon? Care to explain? Cite a source or two? Or perhaps show us what confuses you in the release? Maybe we can help you better understand.

[retief]

And as I was trying to point out, this apparent bias is (and has been) present in both camps. Point taken, though. :)

I'd like to bring this thread back on topic, so we can discuss these new cameras calmly and rationally. So, everyone, please try and remain objective or at least polite while posting comments here. Thanks in advance!


Well said, Rudi, and I quite agree. I guess I'm just in a pithy (don't you DARE mispronounce that :brows::brows:) this evening, cause that rotten Nikon company is makin' me wait :biglaugh:

[David Cramer]

Also the price for the D300 seems really high compared to the rest of the market.... And it his a larger MP than the D3..... Interesting...

But overall, not matter what you shoot, its good for the Market to keep the manufactures doing more R&D and making better products. But for me, I'll take my Mark 3 and the 40D I have on order, over either of the new nikons....

Kevin - What are your thoughts about the price of the D300 being high? For under $2000, it's loaded with most of the features of the MkIII at a much lower price. And it has much more than the 40D, including heavy duty weather proofing (which is important down here in windy, dusty New Mexico). Seems like an outstanding price point to me. If the AF works (!!) and the iso is decent, they will sell a gazillion of these, and Canon will lower the Mk III pricing to compete.

Good luck with your new cameras. I look forward to seeing your images from them. When are they expected to arrive?

[Phillip 200]

Hi Bill you are wasting your time with Mr AK no amount of reasoning will changes his point of view.

Hi Kevin you do realise that the only way to get the 1dmk3 to achieve 10 frames per second is with no autofocus and shutter speeds in excess of 1/250,myself I am probably going to get a d3 and keep my d2x and d200 the D3 is the perfect camera for me I do not really need any more than a 12 meg sensor if I'm being honest with myself.

Phillip.

[Kevin]

Phillip, I'm not sure you were referring to me, but the Mk3 does indeed AF during a burst of 10 shots. I tracked birds flying toward me without issue. Each of the frames was sharp.

Personally, I'm never really shooting at anything less than 1/250 when I'm shooting birds.

I think the D3 will be a great complement to your D2X and D200. Actually I think the D3/D300 is a great combo for any current Nikon shooter. It just doesn't make sense for me considering the large price differential of the large teles.

[Ak Photos]

Phillip,

First you are right, I am a Canon person and prefer their products and have no reason to switch, but I do encourage market competition as that is what keeps all the makers making new and better cameras. Sounds like most the people in this thread are die hard Nikon people and feel no matter what, that is the way to go. Which is fine. As for me, my Mark 3 has works great. I normally shoot raw /l jpg and dont need more than 5-6 frames a sec, however the few times I have taken it to the track to shoot race cars, it has worked great for me, WITH Autofocus turned on and it tracked just fine. Biggest issue was I was filling cards to fast.... I have to base my Nikon experience thru a few people I know that shoot it and the issues they have with it, esp the terrible noise issues... I hope nikon has improved the noise issue, as that and the lack of ISO 100 as standard range, were some of the complaints I heard often, esp at the photo center where I tutored.

I am not trying to attack anyone, but I guess others prefer to do that here.. And by the way no amount of reasoning will change a lot of the nikon users minds either, its called personal opinion! To each their own, and as long as you are happy with the gear you use, be it Canon, Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Leica, Hasselblad, Mamiya, or ??? that is what matters.

Has nikon set actual release/street dates for each body?

It will be interesting to see the cameras when they come out and how the different ones compare, and I don't mean the comparision by those that are either given the gear by the manufacturer or paid/sponsered by them, I much prefer the non biased reviews...

Take care and Good luck!

[David Cramer]

One of the nice things, for me, about Pixel-Shooter, was the ability to discuss Canon products and see results with a couple of photographers that I respected who had moved from Nikon to Canon. I am not a die-hard Nikon shooter, and was close to making the switch myself. This release by Nikon was the tipping point, and it's tipped me back toward Nikon. I have no doubt had I made the switch, I would happily find myself learning Canon gear and creating the kind of photography I aspire toward. And the Nikon line is still lacking an 18-22 mp top of the line camera that I want to have within the next year. If they don't produce it, I'll be back to the tipping point. Either way, life is good.

[Jim Thiel]

Well folks I thank all of you that can reasonably discuss this subject in a calm and helpful manor. I have learned a lot in the past few months.

I shoot with a D2X and my old D100. While the D2x is not perfect it sure beat the old D100. When I think back when Mr Dewey got me hooked on this bird thing, all I had was a D100 and a 70-200vr with a 2xtc. Now it was a long way from perfect but I did get a few decent shots, some even in focus. When Nikon came out with the D2X it was my dream camera. What a change it was from the D100. Then I was told by all the D2h shooters the AF was not as good as the D2h. For me it was so much better than the D100 that I did not notice. As I got better I wanted more which is normal I do believe. The new D300 seems to me it will be a perfect addition and or replacement for the D2X. I have seen so many great images posted from both Canon and Nikon shooters I think we should all be very thankful for the competition between the two companies. Both have great products and are getting better all the time. I think this forum that lets us compare and make intelligent choices is priceless. Now I say bring on the new cameras so we can see what they can do.

For all the Nikon folks that switched to Canon I say thank you as I bought their (Canon) stock a while back and have done pretty well with it. Made enough to even upgrade to some new gear.

[retief]

I know you addressed this to Philipp, but heck, I'll comment anyway.

I take people at face value, believe that what they say is what they mean and expect that they do the same for me. When I read this post, I see a mostly reasonable person, with the exception of your extrapolation of "terrible noise" from such a small sample of people. But when I read your first post, full of misinformation and what some might call outright lies, I question your motives. Especially when you claim that you got this from the Nikon website. I commented on this and even posted a link for you to a site with the actual specs, yet you ignore that.

You seem to imply that you welcome dialog and that you don't attack. I see exactly the opposite, as you won't cite the sources for your misinformation nor do you seem to want to discuss this at all.

Perhaps before you accuse those of us who shoot Nikon, and are trying to have a meaningful dialog, you should take a look at your own posts in this thread, and if you don't see your "misinformation" post as something that might be considered an "attack" by some, then perhaps you can at least acknowledge that not answering direct questions might be perceived as rude by others.

You also might take a look at some of the posts that have been made, my first in this thread for example, to get a better idea of just what most of us think about "which way to go". Seems to me that we have a more open mind than you do.

I do, however, completely agree with you that you have no reason to switch. To be completely honest, I am rather appalled by people who are invested in Canon gear, especially 1D series and 5D, who are bemoning the fact that Nikon has released the D3/D300. With the addition of the 40D the Canon side has now filled a gap, one that Nikon exploited. You have every reason to keep what you have, especially as you are comfortable with it. I just wonder why, especially in a Nikon based thread, you choose to take the stance of trying to change minds with misinformation? In many circles that would be called spreading FUD.

Phillip,

First you are right, I am a Canon person and prefer their products and have no reason to switch, but I do encourage market competition as that is what keeps all the makers making new and better cameras. Sounds like most the people in this thread are die hard Nikon people and feel no matter what, that is the way to go. Which is fine. As for me, my Mark 3 has works great. I normally shoot raw /l jpg and dont need more than 5-6 frames a sec, however the few times I have taken it to the track to shoot race cars, it has worked great for me, WITH Autofocus turned on and it tracked just fine. Biggest issue was I was filling cards to fast.... I have to base my Nikon experience thru a few people I know that shoot it and the issues they have with it, esp the terrible noise issues... I hope nikon has improved the noise issue, as that and the lack of ISO 100 as standard range, were some of the complaints I heard often, esp at the photo center where I tutored.

I am not trying to attack anyone, but I guess others prefer to do that here.. And by the way no amount of reasoning will change a lot of the nikon users minds either, its called personal opinion! To each their own, and as long as you are happy with the gear you use, be it Canon, Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Leica, Hasselblad, Mamiya, or ??? that is what matters.

Has nikon set actual release/street dates for each body?

It will be interesting to see the cameras when they come out and how the different ones compare, and I don't mean the comparision by those that are either given the gear by the manufacturer or paid/sponsered by them, I much prefer the non biased reviews...

Take care and Good luck!

[retief]

When I think back when Mr Dewey got me hooked on this bird thing, all I had was a D100 and a 70-200vr with a 2xtc.


Thank you, Jim. One of my passions in life is helping other people spend their money :biggrin::biggrin: Wait, isn't that what you do for a living??:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh: My problem is that I can't get them to spend it on me often enough ..... ;)

So, I also guess this means that you don't want Canon folks switching to Nikon? I sure know I don't want them to, they might get in the way of my D300 delivery ..... :)

[Rudi]

OK folks, lets' take a deep breath and calm down. We all have some bias, whether we're aware of it or not. Threads like this tend do de-evolve into "Nikon vs. Canon" type arguments. This is counter-productive, since that is a religious argument, one that will never be won by either side (while both sides suffer massive casualties). So, to take some license, let me just say: "Let he who is without fault cast the first stone". Anyone?... Hello???... I didn't think so! :)

I'd like to keep this discussion going, so without singling anyone out (this applies to everyone here, including myself), please be civil or I'm gonna have to ban the lot of you! :D

[Phillip 200]

Phillip, I'm not sure you were referring to me, but the Mk3 does indeed AF during a burst of 10 shots. I tracked birds flying toward me without issue. Each of the frames was sharp.

Personally, I'm never really shooting at anything less than 1/250 when I'm shooting birds.

I think the D3 will be a great complement to your D2X and D200. Actually I think the D3/D300 is a great combo for any current Nikon shooter. It just doesn't make sense for me considering the large price differential of the large teles.


Hi Kevin notice that I said 10 frames per second :cheer:not a burst of 10 shots :brows: which can take longer than a second, unless there is a revolutionary new design in how the mirror is flipped out of the way to allow autofocus and exposure calculations other than the semitransparent permanently fixed mirror approach neither Nikon nor canon will be able to with current technology allow autofocus and correct metering at 10 frames per second of:err: of I will be surprised even the new D3 will be accurate at 9fps.

On a lighter note :p I am actually quite impressed with the 1Dmk3 and was about to purchase one :arghh: with a canon mount 300-800 sigma as I felt it most fitted the digital F5 I always wanted if the D3 had not been announced I would have purchased them this week but the D3 is everything I've ever wanted in a digital SLR :cute:, the only real losers in this race is our bank accounts shocked;.

Phillip.

:notworthy::):)

[Phillip 200]

Phillip,

First you are right, I am a Canon person and prefer their products and have no reason to switch, but I do encourage market competition as that is what keeps all the makers making new and better cameras. Sounds like most the people in this thread are die hard Nikon people and feel no matter what, that is the way to go. Which is fine. As for me, my Mark 3 has works great. I normally shoot raw /l jpg and dont need more than 5-6 frames a sec, however the few times I have taken it to the track to shoot race cars, it has worked great for me, WITH Autofocus turned on and it tracked just fine. Biggest issue was I was filling cards to fast.... I have to base my Nikon experience thru a few people I know that shoot it and the issues they have with it, esp the terrible noise issues... I hope nikon has improved the noise issue, as that and the lack of ISO 100 as standard range, were some of the complaints I heard often, esp at the photo center where I tutored.

I am not trying to attack anyone, but I guess others prefer to do that here.. And by the way no amount of reasoning will change a lot of the nikon users minds either, its called personal opinion! To each their own, and as long as you are happy with the gear you use, be it Canon, Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Leica, Hasselblad, Mamiya, or ??? that is what matters.

Has nikon set actual release/street dates for each body?

It will be interesting to see the cameras when they come out and how the different ones compare, and I don't mean the comparision by those that are either given the gear by the manufacturer or paid/sponsered by them, I much prefer the non biased reviews...

Take care and Good luck!

Hi like I said to bill no amount of reasoning will change you mind:) you are more than happy with your equipment and see no reason to change.

Just a little information so you know where I am coming from I've been a professional photographer for most of my adult life, there wouldn't be enough space on this board to list the equipment I have, my personal preference for camera equipment is nikon but that doesn't mean I don't have use of all the latest canon camera equipment along with medium format and large format both digital and film, I did retire a few years ago but still do the odd assignment as for the excessive noise that you talk about with the nikon equipment I don't have a problem with either of the d200 & D2x you just have to know what you're doing.

All the Best.

Phillip.
:):)

[Rudi]

as for the excessive noise that you talk about with the nikon equipment I don't have a problem with either of the d200 & D2x you just have to know what you're doing.

That might be so, Phillip, and I would agree with you that if you know what you're doing, you can overcome a lot of obstacles as far as equipment goes. The fact remains, however, that the existing Nikon DSLRs are behind Canon as far as high ISO performance goes. That is not up for debate, that is a fact. Hopefully the new models work as advertised, but we're not talking about the new, yet to be made available models. Just because you can work around it doesn't mean that it does not exist, and in fact it begs the question - what could you achieve with a Canon DSLR if you did the same work-around? Probably use a much higher ISO setting to get the same result more easily!

[retief]

That might be so, Phillip, and I would agree with you that if you know what you're doing, you can overcome a lot of obstacles as far as equipment goes. The fact remains, however, that the existing Nikon DSLRs are behind Canon as far as high ISO performance goes. That is not up for debate, that is a fact. Hopefully the new models work as advertised, but we're not talking about the new, yet to be made available models. Just because you can work around it doesn't mean that it does not exist, and in fact it begs the question - what could you achieve with a Canon DSLR if you did the same work-around? Probably use a much higher ISO setting to get the same result more easily!

Geez-Louise, agreeing with Rudi in public is a real tough pill for me to swallow :biglaugh::biglaugh: As some of you know, it was exactly the High-ISO issue that moved me so close to a switch over the past few months, and for some of us who shoot night and indoor youth sports with "less than adequate lighting" to put it mildly, this has been a huge issue and failing, and to not acknowledge that is foolish in my opinion. From what I have heard and seen, the D300 will solve this issue for me, not sure if it will "equal/almost equal/blow Canon away", but even "almost equal" is pretty amazing.

Which brings me to a question for you Rudi, that if you can't answer directly perhaps you can point me to some info that might help. In the past, even with the few CMOS/LBCAST sensors that Nikon has introduced, they have not done any on-chip circuitry to help alleviate the problem at the chip level, but left it intirely to the photographer to deal with in Post Processing. From what I understand of the new cameras, this as been addressed at both the hardware and firmware levels, which I presume is what Canon does as well, a good example of Nikon watching and learning I think. In the Nikon's, we can often see vast differences in RAW files vs. JPG due to in-camera settings being applied to the JPG but not directly to the RAW, requiring that step to then be done in Post. I have no idea if this will be the case with the new sensors and firmware, I rather doubt it, but with the Canon is this the same? That the sensor, which is one big boon for CMOS that you can do this, has on-chip circuity to help at the "lowest level" and then added firmware?

Hope that makes sense.

Thanks,

Oh, yeah, but we DO have more AF sensors than you guys now :cheer::cheer:, which frankly scares me to death. I don't ever understand how you guys can keep up with 45, I think 51 may make me go blind :arghh::arghh::arghh:

[Rudi]

Bill, I have absolutely no idea what you're asking, so I'm just gonna say... i dont know; :D

I'll try and answer what I think you're asking - when I shoot RAW, the camera just dumps the info that it received from the sensor, and lets me deal with it. White balance, sharpness, nothing like that is set, and can obviously be tweaked in post. As to in-camera noise reduction, I have no idea at which point it gets applied, since I've never had to use it! (Harsh, I know :D). I don't know if anyone else in the Canon camp here uses noise reduction, but unfortunately, I cannot answer that for you...

[retief]

Bill, I have absolutely no idea what you're asking, so I'm just gonna say... i dont know; :D

I'll try and answer what I think you're asking - when I shoot RAW, the camera just dumps the info that it received from the sensor, and lets me deal with it. White balance, sharpness, nothing like that is set, and can obviously be tweaked in post. As to in-camera noise reduction, I have no idea at which point it gets applied, since I've never had to use it! (Harsh, I know :D). I don't know if anyone else in the Canon camp here uses noise reduction, but unfortunately, I cannot answer that for you...

Darned good job, Rudi, now get out and test some High Iso so you can answer the rest ;)

That is the same as it works with Nikon. We can "see" what the camera settings were at the time of capture and can then override them as needed with our raw files, I'm kind of wondering how much of this we can tweak in post with regards to NR. Obviously the stuff done on-chip we can't, as that aspect then just "disappears" from the data, but it would sure be nice if we could see and tweak whatever was done in the firmware.

I'll let you know when my D300 arrives ......

[Phillip 200]

That might be so, Phillip, and I would agree with you that if you know what you're doing, you can overcome a lot of obstacles as far as equipment goes. The fact remains, however, that the existing Nikon DSLRs are behind Canon as far as high ISO performance goes. That is not up for debate, that is a fact. Hopefully the new models work as advertised, but we're not talking about the new, yet to be made available models. Just because you can work around it doesn't mean that it does not exist, and in fact it begs the question - what could you achieve with a Canon DSLR if you did the same work-around? Probably use a much higher ISO setting to get the same result more easily!


Hi Rudi some are some aren't the newer models d40/x d50 d80 d2hs all showed great improvement, that being said I have never ever said to anybody that a d2x d200 is noise free and better than the canon equivalents that would just be narrowminded and stupid, what I do find strange, that it seems to be at least for some people the only criteria that is important.:wacko:

What I am impressed with is that with the canon equipment,:cute: is the lack of time and effort you have to spend to get the required result, when time is money that is important :brows:, unfortunately we get a very slanted view on the importance of this feature, high ISO noises is a nonexistent problem for 99.9 percent of the population using a digital camera, I have taken images where I've regretted wasting the electricity to produce them only for the client to be absolutely over the moon with the image ? As I say we seem to have a very slanted view on the importance of high ISO noises or the lack of it in an image.

Phillip.

:):biggrin::)

[Phillip 200]

Bill, I have absolutely no idea what you're asking, so I'm just gonna say... i dont know; :D

I'll try and answer what I think you're asking - when I shoot RAW, the camera just dumps the info that it received from the sensor, and lets me deal with it. White balance, sharpness, nothing like that is set, and can obviously be tweaked in post. As to in-camera noise reduction, I have no idea at which point it gets applied, since I've never had to use it! (Harsh, I know :D). I don't know if anyone else in the Canon camp here uses noise reduction, but unfortunately, I cannot answer that for you...



Hi Rudi this may help all the Canon sensors have on chip noise reduction/signal cleaning, it is passed through twice for all the bodies except the 5d and I believe the 1dmk3 which it goes through three times the system before you have the chance to apply any noise reduction after AD conversion.

In the new nikon models are doing exactly the same thing on chip noise reduction/signal cleaning but the AD conversion is done on chip and by a single line of pixels, the main advantage of this is increased speed and less signal noise this method reputedly gives you a two or three times cleaner signal thus reducing any apparent noise two or three times, the apparent benefit of this is a 300 percent increase in dynamic range, hopefully these figures are correct as it will probably save me hours in front of a PC, I do think thou that everybody is going to be a winner in this race.

Phillip.

:)

[Rudi]

Phillip, thanks for that info. AFAIK, all the sensors do some kind of signal amplification and noise reduction, what I was wondering is where the noise reduction that you set in-camera gets applied. Not the run-of-the-mill usual signal processing, but the noise reduction that you have control over, if you know what I mean. :)

[retief]

OK, so you just proved you are a bigger Techno Dweeb than I am :notworthy::notworthy::notworthy::biglaugh::biglau gh:

Good info, Philipp. Can you point me to where you found the info, specifically on the Nikon sensors? I may have seen the same links and just glossed over those bits.

Thanks a ton for the clarification, but I'll be Rudi will still be confused. Too much time with Foster's maybe. Although my guess is that he is more af a VB kind of guy ;)

Hi Rudi this may help all the Canon sensors have on chip noise reduction/signal cleaning, it is passed through twice for all the bodies except the 5d and I believe the 1dmk3 which it goes through three times the system before you have the chance to apply any noise reduction after AD conversion.

In the new nikon models are doing exactly the same thing on chip noise reduction/signal cleaning but the AD conversion is done on chip and by a single line of pixels, the main advantage of this is increased speed and less signal noise this method reputedly gives you a two or three times cleaner signal thus reducing any apparent noise two or three times, the apparent benefit of this is a 300 percent increase in dynamic range, hopefully these figures are correct as it will probably save me hours in front of a PC, I do think thou that everybody is going to be a winner in this race.

Phillip.

:)

[Rudi]

Actually, I'm drinking a glass of red as we speak... :)

[David Cramer]

The way I have made sense of the noise issue is that Canon is more forgiving than Nikon. If exposure and white balance are spot on, the D2x does an excellent job up to iso400. If these are off a bit, it seems more noise begins to be evident in the Nikon, while the Canon can deal with it better due to the internal processes that Phillip has outlined.

Bill - Phillip directed me to a Canon white paper on the topic once. I am not sure if these are the same ones, but I found them through google. Here is one (http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_Full-Frame_CMOS_White_Paper.pdf) and another. (http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_EOS-1D_Mark_III_White_Paper.pdf)

[Phillip 200]

Phillip, thanks for that info. AFAIK, all the sensors do some kind of signal amplification and noise reduction, what I was wondering is where the noise reduction that you set in-camera gets applied. Not the run-of-the-mill usual signal processing, but the noise reduction that you have control over, if you know what I mean. :)

Hi Rudi if I remember correctly it's done after AD conversion and placed as a tag in the raw file, this method enables you to remove that process at any point, the signal cleaning noise reduction done on chip cannot be removed at any point, the significance of the single line AD conversion done on the back of the chip is that the signal amplification doesn't have to travel as far thus reducing signal noise it sounds simple yet is a major breakthrough considering the small amount of distance the signal has to travel, a little-known fact is that the d2x uses some of the white balance information during AD conversion to equalise the gain across all the channels this is why it is particularly important with the d2x to make sure you have the correct white balance.

Phillip.


:)

[Jeff JTPhoto]

The AAfilter on the sensor also contributes to noise reduction does it not?

[Kevin]

Hi Kevin notice that I said 10 frames per second :cheer:not a burst of 10 shots :brows: which can take longer than a second, unless there is a revolutionary new design in how the mirror is flipped out of the way to allow autofocus and exposure calculations other than the semitransparent permanently fixed mirror approach neither Nikon nor canon will be able to with current technology allow autofocus and correct metering at 10 frames per second of:err: of I will be surprised even the new D3 will be accurate at 9fps.

When I said a burst of 10 shots, I was referring to 10fps. The whole point (well one of them) of trying out Mao's Mk3 was to see what 10fps was like. Additionally, when I was able to use one, the AF drama had already unfolded at Naturescapes. Because of that, I wanted to see it for myself. I specifically wanted to try it out at the locations that I always shoot at and was most familiar with: Gatorland. I knew there would be ample opportunities for me to decide for myself whether I'd ultimately get one or not.

I don't remember the exact document I was reading but I'm having a hard time believing what I think you're telling me. I'm hearing that you're saying the AF isn't activated on the Mk3 during the 10fps shooting. Is that correct? If so, I don't believe you (no offense). In the document I was reading it went into detail about how the AF in AI-Servo mode is doing predictive AF based on subject distance and movement and making necessary (calculated) adjustments to the lens. This certainly goes beyond my knowledge but if the camera isn't autofocusing during a 10-fps burst (:)) how can my shots of an incoming bird ALL be in focus? I'm not shooting at f22 or anything. Usually f5.6.

[David Cramer]

I think this Canon White Paper is describing what you are talking about Kevin. Look at the Mark III white paper (http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_EOS-1D_Mark_III_White_Paper.pdf) on page 20. Then you can interpret it for me.:wacko:

[Phillip 200]

When I said a burst of 10 shots, I was referring to 10fps. The whole point (well one of them) of trying out Mao's Mk3 was to see what 10fps was like. Additionally, when I was able to use one, the AF drama had already unfolded at Naturescapes. Because of that, I wanted to see it for myself. I specifically wanted to try it out at the locations that I always shoot at and was most familiar with: Gatorland. I knew there would be ample opportunities for me to decide for myself whether I'd ultimately get one or not.

I don't remember the exact document I was reading but I'm having a hard time believing what I think you're telling me. I'm hearing that you're saying the AF isn't activated on the Mk3 during the 10fps shooting. Is that correct? If so, I don't believe you (no offense). In the document I was reading it went into detail about how the AF in AI-Servo mode is doing predictive AF based on subject distance and movement and making necessary (calculated) adjustments to the lens. This certainly goes beyond my knowledge but if the camera isn't autofocusing during a 10-fps burst (:)) how can my shots of an incoming bird ALL be in focus? I'm not shooting at f22 or anything. Usually f5.6.

No I actually said the only way to get 10fps is to switch it to manual focus but then again, the three we've tested none of them have actually been able to do 10fps either with autofocus or without, the best attained so far is 9.7fps but that's not say under perfect conditions that it won't do 10fps, if you really think that a mk3 is going to accurately track and exposed at ten frames per second well I do not what to say.

Before you ask, this is how we tested them, set the camera to manual set the shutter speed at 1/500 switch off autofocus and then fill the buffer, continuously holding your finger on the shutter do this 4 or 5 times in a sequence allowing the buffer to empty each time before starting again.

Then download the card using the time sequence from frame 1 to the last frame divide by number of shots taken to make it very easy for us we only use whole seconds worth so any fraction of a second from the first frame will be carried over to the third 4th or fifth second, do the same sequence again but with autofocus, then a third time in aperture priority with autofocus needless to say all cameras get progressively worse, the biggest surprise was one d2x in high-speed crop mode actually did in excess of nine frames per second continuously the worst 2 cameras never tested were a d2h and a 1dmk2 where we couldn't get either to 8 frames per second.

Phillip.

:biggrin:

[jfenton]

Unless the camera is set to jpeg and single area, non continuos focus.

I'm sure that no matter who the manufacturer is, they are giving us the absolute best case info...typically in a manner whereby all those FPS would be quite useless :)

It's all in the marketing....