Leaning towards D70.. but.. I don't understand...

M

Monster

n00b
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
11
I've read that the amount of "mega pixels" is NOT the ultimate, end-all deciding factor (or shouldn't be) for basing a decision on purchasing camera X. However, it's my understanding that, while it may not be a deciding factor, more mp is better in a "general" way. It shouldn't be the sole deciding factor, but it should be part of the buy/don't buy equation.

Having said that, i've been looking at the Canon Digital Rebel and the Nikon D70. Reading reading LOTS of reading. I've seen the D70 advertised as 6.1 and 6.2 mp, and the Digital Rebel advertised as 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 mp. Are these varying mp amounts just a bunch of typos? Is there a 6.1 D70 AND a 6.2 D70 (same question for Digital Rebel)?

I go to Nikon's site and the D70 is listed as a 6.1, no 6.2 mentioned. Canon shows a 6.3, but doesn't say anything about a 6.1 or 6.2. Just how are these mp quantities being measured if they are being advertised with such a varying amount of mp? If there are in fact different versions of the cameras mentioned, are the differing amounts of mp insignificant and therefore not really important enough to be a factor in the buy/don't buy equation?

In case ya haven't guessed it yet i'm new to this. I really want to try this photography thing as a hobby (get away from gaming for a while). However running into this type of confusion so early on is very frustrating, ESPECIALLY because you'd think that camera A is X-amount MP. Period. Not this or this or that amount. Very confusing...
 
I might be able to help, i recently had to decide on the same cameras. As for exact megapixel size im not sure on the exact specs for the 300d or the d70. Your best bet is to trust what is on the manufacturers website, not a review site or anywhere else. I wouldn't base the decision between a 300d and a d70 by the differences in 6.1 or 6.3 megapixels. You would be happy with either but the d70 sports some newer and more refined features than the 300d. Specifically the d70 has faster continuous shooting, and also has a faster flash-sync speed. Which once you get more experienced with your camera may become really important to you.

Also as a side note, i bought the Canon 10d, i had to decide between the 10d and the d70, both were very good cameras and it came down to wanting to stick with canon lenses. I figured if i was going to invest in camera equipment that i wouldn't want to switch later on so i decided to go with the canon. Both canon and nikon make great cameras and both have great lenses to support their cameras. Its just a matter of personal preference.

EDIT :: also if you are looking for a good review site, I really like the www.dpreview.com review site.
 
Yes, my dad's planning to get a D70 this summer... I also don't understand some things.
One thing's for sure, 6 megapixles is really the boundry... you don't need much more. 8mp cams sure are nice and detailed, but face it, its like the difference between a 911 carerra and a carrera 4s... they are both faster than most other things. What I don't get is the D70's price.. about $1000, while other cameras which SEEM better to noobs like me, for instance that big 8mp sony one, are cheaper, at about $800. I think it may have something to do with the fact that the D70 can use any camera lens, and that's what makes the difference. Also, the faster shooting.
Keep in mind, though, all these wonderful cameras do have a drawback: Storage. I'm thinking of getting one of those 4GB creative players with it and just ripping out the Microdrive... Has this worked for anybody???
 
Yeah that price difference you've mentioned is also confusing. "Bigger n better" (alledgedly) yet costs less than a "lesser" model. I think I read that the 8 mp (the one I looked at.. think it was a Canon) did NOT have the ability to use different lenses. Not too sure about that but I do know that i'm going to have to invest in another lense(s) in order to get the pics I want to get.

I was also looking at storage. Not sure if I want to pay the price for the convenience of having one storage device, or save a lil money and have to deal with swapping out storage devices when necessary. Guess I should get a camera first tho eh? Hehe...
 
Well, storage is funny..
4gb microdrives sell for $500.
4gb microdrive mp3 players sell for $200
add some warranty voiding, and dead mp3 player, and a format of the card, and you should get a 4gb microdrive for $200.
I just wanna know, did this work for anybody yet?
 
I think you're splitting hairs over 6.1- 6.2 MP. Anyhow, the nice thing about such a huge image (to me) is the ability to crop the hell out of it and still have an image large enough to print. (I have a D70, BTW)
 
leaning twoards a D70 vs what?

we cant compare cameras if you only mention one ;)

as for why its more expensive, you have interchangeable lenses, a larger sensor surface so you can have shallow DOF and much less noise, and higher shooting speeds...

and as rage said 6 megapixles is enough and produces some truly amazing images... (i have a 10D btw)

also the 6.1 6.2 blah blah, just typos, there is only 1 D70...
 
Yeah, you are definitely splitting hairs here as one person said earlier. There is only one 300d model and only one D70 model. You won't find a camera that has two different models under the same name. As for the 6.1 vs 6.2 vs 6.3, these are minute differences that can either be explained by a typo or the differences between some terms: effective megapixels, and total megapixels. There is a difference between the total number of megapixels on an image sensor (the total megapixels), and the amount of pixels that the sensor is able to use (the effective megapixels). On image sensors in digital cameras, there are often times some pixels on the edges of the sensor that don't form part of the image -- they're used for the calculation of certain light levels. Therefore a camera might advertise 6.3 MP and only have 6.1 MP effective resolution....some sites will say 6.1 MP and some sites will say 6.3 MP. It's just up to them which one they want to use, or which one they see most often on other sites. Since manufacturers don't really emphasize the difference between real and effective pixels, those differences are not very important and shouldn't be the deciding factor in choosing a camera. A difference of 2 or 3 MP is a reason to choose one camera over another, not a difference of .2 or .3 MP. That said, the 300D and D70 are both very capable cameras, but the D70 is targeted to a more professional audience than the 300D. So take that for what it's worth. Good luck.
 
FLECOM:

It was vs. a Digital Rebel. Sorry I thought I wrote that down.

mdude:

Cool. I never knew about "total" vs. "effective". Makes more sense to me now. It appears to be just another way of marketing I guess. Thanks for the explanation.
 
As far the MP of the output image, the Canon is 6.3 and the Nikon is 6.0. I wouldn't split hairs over 0.3MP. The image size of the Canon's pictures is 3072x2048, the Nikon's is 3008x2000. That's not a big deal.

Now for my opinion. If you're going with an entry level DSLR, and you're just going to stick with the stock kit lens, go with the D70. Hands down, the D70 and kit lens spanks the Digital Rebel and it's kit lens.

If you plan to buy more lenses and accessories down the road, I'd lean more towards the Canon 300D, because I find Canon has a wider selection of lenses and accessories than Nikon.

When I dicided to purchase a DSLR, I looked at the Canon 300D and 10D and the Nikon D70. To make a long story short, I went with the 10D based on the accessories and lenses I was going to purchase initially and later on. I didn't like the 300D because of the cheezy plastic feel, but mainly because it lacked some features the 10D has that I use every day.
 
well if you buy me a 1D MarkII (8mp) i will happily use it... but i like my images noise free ty so no p&s for me kthx
 
Wait, so if I just want a good, professional camera to make better pictures than those pocket-sized snappers, should I just shell out the $1 grand and get a D70? I am not planning to get anything other than the stock lens, just want a camera that is good out of the box. D70's the choice, then, right?
 
krizzle said:
Wait, so if I just want a good, professional camera to make better pictures than those pocket-sized snappers, should I just shell out the $1 grand and get a D70? I am not planning to get anything other than the stock lens, just want a camera that is good out of the box. D70's the choice, then, right?
Click to expand...

No. The whole point of an SLR is the fact that you can buy better lenses. An expensive P&S will be more versitile then a kit setup DSLR.
 
krizzle said:
Well, storage is funny..
4gb microdrives sell for $500.
4gb microdrive mp3 players sell for $200
add some warranty voiding, and dead mp3 player, and a format of the card, and you should get a 4gb microdrive for $200.
I just wanna know, did this work for anybody yet?
Click to expand...

If youre lucky. The newer mp3 microdrives WILL NOT work as people figured this trick out.
 
[TQ] said:
No. The whole point of an SLR is the fact that you can buy better lenses. An expensive P&S will be more versitile then a kit setup DSLR.
Click to expand...

even the kit lens with a D70 is going to be much more versatile than any advanced P&S.

As for the other question, maybe you should get a used DSLR like a D60 or D30 instead of paying $1000 for a D70 body (I haven't seen a D70 kit for under $1000 but I guess they exist somewhere), and only pay like $500-$800 for those and save a few bucks. After all, for a beginner, the D30 or D60 is going to be as capable as a 1D MKII. Ha, even a D2000 is probably as capable! It's because a beginner can't harness the power of a 1D as a professional can. It's kind of like those people that you see sometimes at the ski resort that go out and purchase the $500 ski jackets and $900 pair of skis, and they are taking lessons on the bunny slope. Who needs a pair of Olympics-worthy skis if you don't know how to use them. This is like the case with a professional dSLR such as the 1D MKII and an extensive L zoom. Just a thought.
 
Bucket don't be so sensitive, obviously I was excluding the lone 8mp DSLR that up until a few months ago didn't even exist.
 
agentzero9 said:
Bucket don't be so sensitive, obviously I was excluding the lone 8mp DSLR that up until a few months ago didn't even exist.
Click to expand...


Then dont make generalizations that any camera with 8mp is bad, any small ccd camera with 8mp is bad.
 
mdude85 said:
even the kit lens with a D70 is going to be much more versatile than any advanced P&S.
Click to expand...

How so?

The kit lens is what? 28-80 or something?

Where as a high quality point and shoot is generally 20-ish to 200mm.

All the while the same control over the basics of the camera. Also, with a DSLR it is kind of assumed you will be doing at least a little post processing. Is he ready to do this, is he willing to learn?
 
[TQ] said:
How so?

The kit lens is what? 28-80 or something?

Where as a high quality point and shoot is generally 20-ish to 200mm.

All the while the same control over the basics of the camera. Also, with a DSLR it is kind of assumed you will be doing at least a little post processing. Is he ready to do this, is he willing to learn?
Click to expand...

the amount of zoom doesn't really affect the quality of a camera, because if it did, a 10x digital zoom would be something to brag about ....... second, typical P&S cameras with a 3x zoom tend to have a range of 30-100 mm, similar to a D70 kit lens, except that the D70 kit lens is going to give you sharper and clearer images than a typical P&S, even if the D70 kit lens isn't Nikon's best consumer grade zoom. But there really is no P&S that offers a prime lens, so every P&S which has a zoom is going to suffer from the slings and arrows of a zoom lens -- less clarity for instance -- than a prime lens that can attach to a DSLR and provide high clarity images.

Even the most basic 35 mm attachable lenses are better than the best fixed lenses on P&S, IMO. Also, since the dSLR has a much bigger sensor than the P&S, it's going to have much less noise at high ISOs, even if we were to assume for a moment that the attachable glass and fixed glass was of comparable quality.

Now, as you said, he will have to do some editing with dSLR images compared to P&S....a lot of P&S these days edit the image internally --sharpen it up, adjust the colors, etc etc, and all of this is after you take the shot. If you select an auto mode on a P&S, much of the pre-shot lighting is done for you. With dSLRs, esp. if you shoot in RAW, you may have to do a slight amount of post production editing, if you want slightly sharper images or what have you. But that doesn't mean the quality of P&S is better...it's actually worse, as I'm sure you def. know.

By the way the D70 kit lens is 18-70 mm (27-105 on 35mm). Plus any kit lens on a DSLR is highly configurable compared to a fixed lens on a p&S.
 
Your not reading everything here. I think everyone will agree that a P&S is a lesser camera then a DSLR. What i said is that out of the box a high quality P&S is more versitle then an out of the box DSLR.
 
[TQ] said:
Your not reading everything here. I think everyone will agree that a P&S is a lesser camera then a DSLR. What i said is that out of the box a high quality P&S is more versitle then an out of the box DSLR.
Click to expand...

You just contradicted yourself? You said a P&S is a lesser camera than a DSLR, but a high quality P&S is more "versatile" (whatever this means) than an out of box DSLR (with a kit lens?)

The truth is the best quality P&S, which is probably the Powershot Pro 1 , probably can't even match the quality and versatility of even the most entry level DSLR, EOS 300D with an 18-55 kit lens, even though the Pro1 has a modified L lens.
 
The comparison people are making between the 8MP digicams and the 6MP DSLRs don't really work.

Digital SLRs always will have better quality and less "noise." I used to have a really good sourse to cite for this...and I can't for the life of me remember it.

I too went with the D70. My dad has the D100, and my uncle has the 10D. In handling those two cameras, I liked the feel of the Nikon and its buttons and menus. The Canon felt a little...short - my pinky always fell off the grip and under the camera. Plus, I can borrow Nikon lenses from my dad (like his 80-200 f/2.8).

In my opinion, the lens issue is huge. Once you pick your camera body, you're somewhat locked into a "system." You can't use Canon lenses on a Nikon body, after all. Also, look into Sigma lenses. Quite a few of their lenses are absolutely awesome. Picture quality with the Sigma glass (especially their EX line) is top notch, right up there with Nikkor glass. Plus, it's a little less expensive. I've had great results with the Sigma lenses I've acquired since getting my D70 in March.

The best thing to do...go handle the cameras and see which you like more.
 
mdude85 said:
You just contradicted yourself? You said a P&S is a lesser camera than a DSLR, but a high quality P&S is more "versatile" (whatever this means) than an out of box DSLR (with a kit lens?)
Click to expand...


I'm not talking about quality...

1. Capable of doing many things competently.
2. Having varied uses or serving many functions: “The most versatile of vegetables is the tomato” (Craig Claiborne).
3. Variable or inconstant; changeable: a versatile temperament.
4. Biology. Capable of moving freely in all directions, as the antenna of an insect, the toe of an owl, or the loosely attached anther of a flower.
Click to expand...

I said that out of the box, a high quality point and shoot (IE one that costs about as much as either canons and especially nikons entry level DSLR kits) will be more versatile. I think it's rather obvious.

The truth is the best quality P&S, which is probably the Powershot Pro 1 , probably can't even match the quality and versatility of even the most entry level DSLR, EOS 300D with an 18-55 kit lens, even though the Pro1 has a modified L lens.
Click to expand...


Yes he'll get better quality shots with a DSLR, however he wont be able to take as many shots as easily. He made it clear that he didnt want to spend money after the initial purchase. That said, in my opinion he is better off with a high quality point and shoot. You really havnt given an opinion on mine...you simply keep trying to convince me that a DSLR is better quality then a P&S...which i agree, so your wasting your time.
 
per tq, if your buying a dslr, you damn well better be ready to learn post processing and a good work flow... because that's what it takes to produce truely breathtaking images.

per the 6 vs 8mp debate, as noted, 8mp cameras like the pro1 will produces images which are noticably lower in quality then the 300d or d70... unlike an 8mp dslr (of course)... someone explained it to me once, let me see if i can get it right (if not, feel free to correct me, I no longer have the email). Basically they are both using sensors that are the same size, one is just being foced to produce 8mp images, so the 6mp dslrs are not working as hard and the image quality is better as a result, you're not trying to fit soo much information onto the same senosr...

as for ps being more versitile... erm, they will be easier that's for sure.

dlsrs are for photographers. ps are for those who want to take casual photos. quite simple. just choose a camp and go for it.
 
Right...and anyone who buys a DSLR and intends on keeping the kit lens as their one and only lens is wasteing their money.

And your statement that Post Proc. is the only way to get a great photograph is just silly.

This is straight out of hte camera except for a resize. The less you have to do in PS, the better a photographer you are.
bird(redo).jpg
 
[TQ] said:
Right...and anyone who buys a DSLR and intends on keeping the kit lens as their one and only lens is wasteing their money.

And your statement that Post Proc. is the only way to get a great photograph is just silly.

This is straight out of hte camera except for a resize. The less you have to do in PS, the better a photographer you are.
Click to expand...

right on.
 
lol, alright, just repeating the consensus of dpreview... which could be wrong. i dont have a lot of experience in photography, but i do in engineering music, and anyone that takes a bare mix and burns it to cd is just plain crazy. it has nothing to do with record skills, engineering is simply needed... so i applied the arguements i read in dpreview... not saying they are correct, just backing up my assumptions.
 
esr2 said:
per tq, if your buying a dslr, you damn well better be ready to learn post processing and a good work flow... because that's what it takes to produce truely breathtaking images.

per the 6 vs 8mp debate, as noted, 8mp cameras like the pro1 will produces images which are noticably lower in quality then the 300d or d70... unlike an 8mp dslr (of course)... someone explained it to me once, let me see if i can get it right (if not, feel free to correct me, I no longer have the email). Basically they are both using sensors that are the same size, one is just being foced to produce 8mp images, so the 6mp dslrs are not working as hard and the image quality is better as a result, you're not trying to fit soo much information onto the same senosr...

as for ps being more versitile... erm, they will be easier that's for sure.

dlsrs are for photographers. ps are for those who want to take casual photos. quite simple. just choose a camp and go for it.
Click to expand...

Actually the sensor in a DSLR is larger. The photodetectors are farther aprart, therfore there is less noise and better image quality. The image sensor in your P&S camera is very small.

Here is a graphic that shows the sizes of different sensors compared to 35mm film:
original.jpg
 
[TQ] said:
Right...and anyone who buys a DSLR and intends on keeping the kit lens as their one and only lens is wasteing their money.

And your statement that Post Proc. is the only way to get a great photograph is just silly.

This is straight out of hte camera except for a resize. The less you have to do in PS, the better a photographer you are.
Click to expand...

TQ, your reputation precedes you and I can see why. Do you not read? I never said post production was the only way to get a good photograph, nor did I say that keeping a kit lens as the only lens was a good idea. I said that sometimes when shooting in RAW, post production in the raw program is sometimes needed. And I never even touched on anything close to the kit lens comment -- I did however say that a dSLR and its kit lens are going to give you more versatility and quality than any P&S. Are you making this stuff up, or do you actually think I said it?
 
Do you not read? I never said post production was the only way to get a good photograph, nor did I say that keeping a kit lens as the only lens was a good idea.
Click to expand...

You didnt say it was a good idea, but the original poster did.
 
yeah... i guess when i keep reading things like this in the canon 300d forum...

I have done a lot of macro photography with slide film and have been happy with my results.

Now I have the digital rebel and have been very disappointed with my photos. However, I have not done any post processing as I am just starting to learn it. Is that where my answer lies? Is it not possible to get great macro photos like I have seen on this site straight out of the camera?
.
Click to expand...

and checking with a friend who actually, gasp, shoots models for a living, apparently a lot of people post process.

-esr
 
esr2 said:
yeah... i guess when i keep reading things like this in the canon 300d forum...



and checking with a friend who actually, gasp, shoots models for a living, apparently a lot of people post process.

-esr
Click to expand...


I'm not reall sure what your talking about...

What is the canon 300d forum?
What does a guy with no knowledge of photography and is interested in macro photography have to do with this thread

Oh, and here is a cookie for you and your friend. I'm sorry you had to go ask a pro if it's ok to post process

:confused:
 
I was firmly set on the D70... but for the same price I can grab the reb with kit and EF 28-200 lens... damn, looks like ill need to spend more time with both models again... i assume the reb is built better then the s400.
 
the forum is the 300d forum on dpreview, i thought most people would make that connection as dpreview is one of the most frequented photography forums out there and [h]ard doesnt have a 300d forum.

Oh, and here is a cookie for you and your friend. I'm sorry you had to go ask a pro if it's ok to post process
Click to expand...

Dont be sorry at all. When I'm looking for new recording techniques, I call a friend whos a grammy award winner. If I need to settle a little discussion on post processing, I call a friend who shoots for GAP and others. It makes sense, at least to me, to call people that are successful in the field I am attempting to dable in and learn from their expereinces. I'm looking at doing a website for an NPO. who do I call for php help? some enthusiest? no. someone who runs sites for the NBA. it's really pretty obvious that, given you know people, you ask them what their expereinces are, if they you know... actually do this sort of stuff.

-esr
 
esr2 said:
the forum is the 300d forum on dpreview, i thought most people would make that connection as dpreview is one of the most frequented photography forums out there and [h]ard doesnt have a 300d forum.



Dont be sorry at all. When I'm looking for new recording techniques, I call a friend whos a grammy award winner. If I need to settle a little discussion on post processing, I call a friend who shoots for GAP and others. It makes sense, at least to me, to call people that are successful in the field I am attempting to dable in and learn from their expereinces. I'm looking at doing a website for an NPO. who do I call for php help? some enthusiest? no. someone who runs sites for the NBA. it's really pretty obvious that, given you know people, you ask them what their expereinces are, if they you know... actually do this sort of stuff.

-esr
Click to expand...


Dpreview is a great site but their forums are shit.

Do your self a favor

For canon gear
www.photography-on-the.net

For nikon gear
http://www.nikonians.org/

For general purpose photography forums
http://www.fredmiranda.com/

Also, i dont think anyone will tell you not to ask a pro for advice...but why brag about it...thats just lame :rolleyes:

As anyone will tell you, dont base your purchase on what body you like better, but what lens selection you like better. If you like the canon lenses get a canon camera, if you like the nikon lenses get a nikon body.

Neither will let you down, i can assure you of this.
 
tq, thanks for keeping this civil. I wasnt bragging, i was backing up my point. all too often people just aspouse random stuff in fourms with no clear connection.

thanks for the nikon and canon links, ill spend time camping in both places. I'm leaning towards the D70 for higher ISO capability at current.. i dunno though, i'm still open... I'm thinking of goinging with just prime after the kit on either cameras so ill look into both selections of prime lenses. it seems canon has more options then nikon at current.

thanks.

-esr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top