That message of mine wasn't even so much posted as a question, or ...
in fact it was.
I wanted to ask if there really are any remarkable differences worth
of bothering?
I am far from brand comparison or megapixel counting, although there
certainly are differences between the opposite ends of the quality gradient.
F90x was very comfortable to hold and handle, as is D70s, but I've
never tried 1Ds mark II.
Anyway I'm peeking much higher when talking about the pro-level gear,
although I do not think it would ever happen to me :(
My Hasselblad is so uncomfotable to hold in one clear purpose - I
should use a tripod with it while shooting.
And yet I mostly prefer D70s because it's light enough to carry,
comfortable and does the job well.
And I have the lenses, that matter!
Peeter
At 22:24 9.05.2006, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Peeter Vissak <pv@xxxxxx> writes:
> Others than the already existing huge lens' pool - what are the major
> differences in the real push-the-button-world?
> Or - are there any at all?
It's all highly variable. The Nikon D200 offers a feature package
that Canon has nothing to compete with near that price point. The
Canon 5D offers a feature that Nikon has nothing to compete with. You
have to decide which is more important to you; and then realize that
things *will* change in the future, as new models are released.
Nikon seems to have a better flash system, and that seems to have been
consistent for quite a while. But even that isn't sculpted in stone.
I haven't compared the high-ISO performance of the pro-model Nikons
and the pro-model Canons, but I hear from many sources that Canon has
been consistently better there. But that's at the 1D level and up.
And the simple objective measures may not accurately represent your
preferences on appearance, and the question of how much
noise-reduction should be in-camera and how much in post-processing is
very much an open issue.
You won't go really badly wrong choosing either way, so far as anybody
can tell about the future. Which isn't very far.
One annoying fact is that lots of people seem to think Nikon's extreme
wideangle lenses are much better than Canon's. But it's Canon that
has the full-frame sensor. Oops; everybody loses. You can get pretty
darned wide with the Canon or Sigma 10mm-xx zoom on a crop-factor
body, but nobody thinks those zooms are as good as the Nikon 14mm.
They're a lot cheaper, though.
If you're buying the extreme equipment at one end or the other of
focal length, that might drive your choice of system. If you're
buying a general-purpose assortment you're in good shape either way.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/>
<http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
