«

Quote from http://www.dpreview.com/

"It's not clear at this stage if any decision has been made to include
this with the SD10 digital SLR kit but to me it would be a logical move
and would at least bring the SD10 in to line with other digital SLR's
from a power supply point of view."

Now George, you can pe proud, your favorite dSLR is in line with other
dSLRs (but only from a power supply point of view). In any other regards
is way behind. Maybe they upgrade the sensor to a Bayer sometime???

chibitul wrote:

> Quote from http://www.dpreview.com/
>
> "It's not clear at this stage if any decision has been made to include
> this with the SD10 digital SLR kit but to me it would be a logical move
> and would at least bring the SD10 in to line with other digital SLR's
> from a power supply point of view."
>
> Now George, you can pe proud, your favorite dSLR is in line with other
> dSLRs (but only from a power supply point of view). In any other regards
> is way behind. Maybe they upgrade the sensor to a Bayer sometime???

Actually the SD10 used with NiMHs is pretty economical - the camera has
a 4.8v power requirement, unlike (say) my Minolta A2 which has a 6v
nominal voltage, and only tolerates the lower 4.8v output of NiMHs
because it's set up to do so.

The Sigma charger and batteries look favourably priced but of course you
need two chargers as well as two cells - it ain't going to do two at
once - which really means you need two complete kits to be able to keep
shooting.

With my Ansmann charger and eight NiMHs I can charge in the car or from
power points, and so far, this works fine.

David

chibitul <> wrote in message news:<ch1b1tul- >...
> Quote from http://www.dpreview.com/
>
> "It's not clear at this stage if any decision has been made to include
> this with the SD10 digital SLR kit but to me it would be a logical move
> and would at least bring the SD10 in to line with other digital SLR's
> from a power supply point of view."

Are you talking about the SD9/10's 2000+ shots per charge using its
current Powerpack?

"chibitul" <> wrote in message
news:ch1b1tul- ...
> Quote from http://www.dpreview.com/
>
> "It's not clear at this stage if any decision has been made to include
> this with the SD10 digital SLR kit but to me it would be a logical move
> and would at least bring the SD10 in to line with other digital SLR's
> from a power supply point of view."

The SD-9 was rushed out and the weird battery system was a result of
converting the SA film camera to digital. With the SD-10 they were able to
correct several of the problems with the SD-9. What hurt the SD-10 is that
by the time it came out, there were much higher resolution digital SLRs
available for lower prices. The Canon 10D is higher resolution, lower noise,
less expensive, and has a better selection of higher quality lenses, as does
the Canon EOS-300D. Then Nikon put the final nail in the coffin of the SD10
with their D70. Now there are three digital SLRs that are higher quality and
lower cost than the Sigma SD10. If Sigma could offer the SD10 for around
$800-900, with three EX lenses and an EF500 flash, then they could have a
chance in selling these to beginners. Due to its low resolution and tiny
sensor, the SD10 is strictly an entry level camera. Canon and Nikon dominate
the prosumer and professional segments.

> Now George, you can pe proud, your favorite dSLR is in line with other
> dSLRs (but only from a power supply point of view). In any other regards
> is way behind. Maybe they upgrade the sensor to a Bayer sometime???

Sigma is building the Kodak DCS14/c. While this camera solves several
issues, the sensor is a larger, higher resolution Bayer, the Nikon version
of this camera has been poorly received due to the high noise of the Kodak
sensor.

For now, the only decent professional D-SLR is the Canon EOS-1Ds.

That depends what you want to do with the camera. I've seen
the results from the current (i.e. 'old') Kodak and they are
extremely imressive at ISO 80. The Kodak certainly isn't
an all-rounder due to the noise problem at higher ISOs but
is as good as, if not better than, the Canon as a landscape/
studio camera. Considering the price difference between
the Kodak and the Canon, the Kodak
now seems a real bargain - about 2000 to 2300 UK pounds.

Sigma is building the new Kodak to Nikon's specification.
It will be interesting to see whether this leads to any
difficulties.

Graham


"Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
news:_r1tc.11969$ ink.net...
>
> Sigma is building the Kodak DCS14/c. While this camera solves several
> issues, the sensor is a larger, higher resolution Bayer, the Nikon version
> of this camera has been poorly received due to the high noise of the Kodak
> sensor.
>
> For now, the only decent professional D-SLR is the Canon EOS-1Ds.
>
>

On 2004-05-26, Steven M. Scharf <> wrote:
> The Canon 10D is [...] less expensive

Only by Preddy math. If you compare prices at the same store (B&H):
SD10: $1349
10D: $1449 (if you ask via email)

You'll find the same approximate differential at almost all stores
that carry both.

Yes, you can get lucky and find the 10D for less. So far, most of those
have been pricing mistakes with % off deals. (I.e., the next time
those vendors do % off, they usually exclude DSLRs even if they honor
the price this time.) Does anyone else think that this means the 10D
is really "less expensive"?

--
Erik

"E. Magnuson" <> wrote in message
news:yC3tc.29378$ ...
> On 2004-05-26, Steven M. Scharf <> wrote:
> > The Canon 10D is [...] less expensive
>
> Only by Preddy math. If you compare prices at the same store (B&H):
> SD10: $1349
> 10D: $1449 (if you ask via email)
>
> You'll find the same approximate differential at almost all stores
> that carry both.
>
> Yes, you can get lucky and find the 10D for less. So far, most of
those
> have been pricing mistakes with % off deals. (I.e., the next time
> those vendors do % off, they usually exclude DSLRs even if they
honor
> the price this time.) Does anyone else think that this means the
10D
> is really "less expensive"?
>
> --
> Erik

Steven is starting to make some wild claims just as he accuses George
of.

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message news:<Xu8tc.55404$ .net>...
> "E. Magnuson" <> wrote in message
> news:yC3tc.29378$ ...
> > On 2004-05-26, Steven M. Scharf <> wrote:
> > > The Canon 10D is [...] less expensive
> >
> > Only by Preddy math. If you compare prices at the same store (B&H):
> > SD10: $1349
> > 10D: $1449
> > Erik
>
> Steven is starting to make some wild claims just as he accuses George
> of.

It isn't hard to check this on B&H's website:

Sigma SD10, 10.2 Megapixel = $1349 (7561 pixels per $1)
Canon 10D, 6.3 Megapixel = $1499 (4202 pixels per $1)

So the SD10 is about half the price. But B&H isn't the best place to
bargain shop, this is more the going rate...

Package Includes:
Sigma SD10 Body
18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens
50-200mm f/4.0-5.6 Lens
64MB Memory Card
Deluxe Case
Deluxe Lens Cleaning Kit
Tripod
-----
$1199

http://www.expresscameras.com/cart/p...=15620&start=1

> Package Includes:
> Sigma SD10 Body
> 18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens
> 50-200mm f/4.0-5.6 Lens
> 64MB Memory Card
> Deluxe Case
> Deluxe Lens Cleaning Kit
> Tripod
> -----
> $1199

I've got the perfect cleaning kit. It's a porcelain receptacle in the
other room.

Kibo informs me that (Georgette Preddy)
stated that:

>"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message news:<Xu8tc.55404$ .net>...
>> "E. Magnuson" <> wrote in message
>> news:yC3tc.29378$ ...
>> > On 2004-05-26, Steven M. Scharf <> wrote:
>> > > The Canon 10D is [...] less expensive
>> >
>> > Only by Preddy math. If you compare prices at the same store (B&H):
>> > SD10: $1349
>> > 10D: $1449
>> > Erik
>>
>> Steven is starting to make some wild claims just as he accuses George
>> of.
>
>It isn't hard to check this on B&H's website:
>
>Sigma SD10, 3.4 Megapixel = $1349
>Canon 10D, 6.3 Megapixel = $1499
>
>So the SD10 is about half the value for money of the 10D.

Good boy, Preddiot. You make a lot more sense when you let the nice
nurse give you your medication.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------