"David Dyer-Bennet" <dd-> wrote in message
news:...
> "\"\"\"\"\"\"" <> writes:
>
> > I'm looking to buy a digital camera very soon, I narrowed my choices
down to
> > the following three:
> > Nikon d100
> > Nikon d70
> > Fuji s2
> > I'd like to hear your opinions on why you favor one over the other
or you
> > think one better than another.
>
> Well, I chose the S2 over the D100 back in December 2002, and I'm glad
> I did. The S2 has a significantly better sensor, especially for
> low-light work (noise levels). On the other hand, the user interface
> is considerably clunkier. I'm a long-term photographer and a computer
> geek, so I'm able to find my way around it fine, and don't mind the
> things it can't do, but I won't argue it's the perfect choice for
> everybody.
>
> I don't know the D70 first-hand. It's obviously considerably
> cheaper. I understand it loses some burst shot capability.
The reverse is true. The D70 does not really have a burst mode in the
traditional digicam sense of a set number of frames that can be shot
before the camera shuts down for several seconds to write to the card.
You can just keep going (or restart at any time after stopping a
continuous burst) until the card is full, albeit at a slower rate once
the buffer is full -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page10.asp
The only advantage the S2 has in continous shooting is that with RAW it
can manage 7 frames before its buffer is full, whereas the D70 can only
manage 4. But as the S2 must come to a dead stop for 8 seconds once its
buffer is full, whereas the D70 can just keep on chugging on
indefinitely, even if at only 1 fps, to me the D70 has the advantage.
And with JPEGs (which I would be using if I were shooting continously)
it is the hands down winner.
There appears to be no aspect of continous shooting at which the D100 is
better than (or as good as) the D70.
--
Apteryx
Treat anger like gold. Spend it wisely or not at all.
Similar Threads
