D70 comment

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Paul Fedorenko, Dec 7, 2004.

  1. I was browsing a camera shop earlier today and took a look at a D70. Talked
    to one of the sales people about it for a bit, too. I must say, the camera
    has a really good feel to it. Feels nice and solid. It gave the impression
    of being something that wasn't likely to fall apart the first time I sneezed
    on it too hard (got that from Canon's D Rebel).

    Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I could count
    the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.

    I think that'll be my next camera once I get tired of my F717.

    If I'd had 3 grand on me, I would've bought the two (camera and telephoto)
    on the spot. Sweet.
     
    Paul Fedorenko, Dec 7, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Fedorenko

    GTO Guest

    The 300 f4 AFS is sharp. The tripod mount is questionable. The D70 is fine.
    But remember, the D70 is not exactly build for heavy Nikon lenses. Too much
    torque might break the mount out the plastic. For the 300 f4, I would buy
    the next generation of D100 or the D2H (once the price of the D2H is coming
    down).

    Gregor

    "Paul Fedorenko" <> wrote in message
    news:nS8td.22664$...
    >I was browsing a camera shop earlier today and took a look at a D70.
    >Talked to one of the sales people about it for a bit, too. I must say, the
    >camera has a really good feel to it. Feels nice and solid. It gave the
    >impression of being something that wasn't likely to fall apart the first
    >time I sneezed on it too hard (got that from Canon's D Rebel).
    >
    > Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I could
    > count the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.
    >
    > I think that'll be my next camera once I get tired of my F717.
    >
    > If I'd had 3 grand on me, I would've bought the two (camera and telephoto)
    > on the spot. Sweet.
    >
     
    GTO, Dec 7, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Fedorenko

    Seymore Guest

    Yea... I'm also looking at the D70, but I already have a number of D
    lenses. (sold a N90s) But, you may want to keep the 717. It's nice,
    sometimes, to whip it out for a quick shot. I think it'll be more
    "portable". (JMPO)

    Seymore...
    www.SonyCams.com
    Sony F717 / TRV70
    Nikon FM2, SB22 Speed-Light Flash
    Nikon MF 50mm 1.4 -- AF 24-50mm 3.3-4.5
    Nikon AF 60mm 2.8 -- AF 35-135mm 3.5-4.5
    Tokina AT-X 100-300mm 4
    remove "REMOVE" to reply directly


    "Paul Fedorenko" <> wrote in message
    news:nS8td.22664$...
    > I was browsing a camera shop earlier today and took a look at a D70.

    Talked
    > to one of the sales people about it for a bit, too. I must say, the

    camera
    > has a really good feel to it. Feels nice and solid. It gave the

    impression
    > of being something that wasn't likely to fall apart the first time I

    sneezed
    > on it too hard (got that from Canon's D Rebel).
    >
    > Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I could

    count
    > the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.
    >
    > I think that'll be my next camera once I get tired of my F717.
    >
    > If I'd had 3 grand on me, I would've bought the two (camera and

    telephoto)
    > on the spot. Sweet.
    >
    >
     
    Seymore, Dec 7, 2004
    #3
  4. "GTO" <> wrote in message
    news:AQatd.39516$...
    > The 300 f4 AFS is sharp. The tripod mount is questionable. The D70 is
    > fine. But remember, the D70 is not exactly build for heavy Nikon lenses.
    > Too much torque might break the mount out the plastic. For the 300 f4, I
    > would buy the next generation of D100 or the D2H (once the price of the
    > D2H is coming down).


    Or simply support the lens with one hand all the time.

    There is an earlier version of the 300/4 with a sturdier tripod mount. It's
    the one I have, and have used extensively for astrophotography.
     
    Michael A. Covington, Dec 7, 2004
    #4
  5. Paul Fedorenko

    C J Campbell Guest

    "GTO" <> wrote in message
    news:AQatd.39516$...
    > The 300 f4 AFS is sharp. The tripod mount is questionable. The D70 is

    fine.
    > But remember, the D70 is not exactly build for heavy Nikon lenses. Too

    much
    > torque might break the mount out the plastic.


    Anybody heard of this actually happening to a D70? The 80-400mm VR is a very
    popular lens for the D70.

    Besides, you should always support the camera by the lens whenever you use a
    telephoto. While it is true that thirty years ago it was possible to damage
    cameras with the weight of long lenses, modern lenses are lighter and the
    cameras are stronger nowadays, so I wonder if it is as common a problem as
    it used to be.
     
    C J Campbell, Dec 7, 2004
    #5
  6. Paul Fedorenko

    Jon Pike Guest

    "Paul Fedorenko" <> wrote in
    news:nS8td.22664$:

    > Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I could
    > count the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.


    You choose to focus on some -odd- things ;)

    --
    http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet
     
    Jon Pike, Dec 7, 2004
    #6
  7. no. i believe it is a myth. then again i don't think that the digital
    rebel has cheap construction either. i have heard of lots of stories of
    them being dropped and surviving. i think it is conditioning that makes
    people believe that a light weight product is a cheap product. it is the
    reason why many cheap products have weights inside of them (ie. desk
    phones). but just because something is light does not mean it is poor
    construction.

    "C J Campbell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "GTO" <> wrote in message
    > news:AQatd.39516$...
    >> The 300 f4 AFS is sharp. The tripod mount is questionable. The D70 is

    > fine.
    >> But remember, the D70 is not exactly build for heavy Nikon lenses. Too

    > much
    >> torque might break the mount out the plastic.

    >
    > Anybody heard of this actually happening to a D70? The 80-400mm VR is a
    > very
    > popular lens for the D70.
    >
    > Besides, you should always support the camera by the lens whenever you use
    > a
    > telephoto. While it is true that thirty years ago it was possible to
    > damage
    > cameras with the weight of long lenses, modern lenses are lighter and the
    > cameras are stronger nowadays, so I wonder if it is as common a problem as
    > it used to be.
    >
    >
     
    Christopher Muto, Dec 7, 2004
    #7
  8. Paul Fedorenko

    leo Guest

    Christopher Muto" <> wrote in message
    news:Vfitd.4937$Wy.2507@trndny06...
    > no. i believe it is a myth. then again i don't think that the digital
    > rebel has cheap construction either. i have heard of lots of stories of
    > them being dropped and surviving. i think it is conditioning that makes
    > people believe that a light weight product is a cheap product. it is the
    > reason why many cheap products have weights inside of them (ie. desk
    > phones). but just because something is light does not mean it is poor
    > construction.


    Maybe the difference between black ploycarbonate and silver color body. They
    are both plastic, but D70 does have a steel subframe. Nevertheless, if you
    drop either cameras, even if the body doesn't crack, you don't feel too easy
    with so many intricated parts getting such a shock.
     
    leo, Dec 7, 2004
    #8
  9. "Christopher Muto" <> wrote in message
    news:Vfitd.4937$Wy.2507@trndny06...
    > no. i believe it is a myth. then again i don't think that the digital
    > rebel has cheap construction either. i have heard of lots of stories of
    > them being dropped and surviving. i think it is conditioning that makes
    > people believe that a light weight product is a cheap product. it is the
    > reason why many cheap products have weights inside of them (ie. desk
    > phones). but just because something is light does not mean it is poor
    > construction.


    Well said. And remember, the heavier they are, the harder they hit when
    dropped!
     
    Michael A. Covington, Dec 7, 2004
    #9
  10. "Jon Pike" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95B829F78F4AELessThanPerfectInc@24.71.223.159...
    > "Paul Fedorenko" <> wrote in
    > news:nS8td.22664$:
    >
    >> Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I could
    >> count the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.

    >
    > You choose to focus on some -odd- things ;)


    Yes... with my 300/4 I've managed to photograph a nebula in another galaxy
    (NGC 604 in M33). Much more interesting than a nose hair. The picture is
    somewhere on www.covingtoninnovations.com/astro/exhibit.html.
     
    Michael A. Covington, Dec 7, 2004
    #10
  11. "Christopher Muto" <> wrote:

    >no. i believe it is a myth. then again i don't think that the digital
    >rebel has cheap construction either. i have heard of lots of stories of
    >them being dropped and surviving. i think it is conditioning that makes
    >people believe that a light weight product is a cheap product. it is the
    >reason why many cheap products have weights inside of them (ie. desk
    >phones). but just because something is light does not mean it is poor
    >construction.


    I even read a message from a guy who was afraid the Nikon F6 might
    break. He felt it was too light.

    Peter
     
    Peter Rongsted, Dec 7, 2004
    #11
  12. "Paul Fedorenko" <> wrote in message
    news:nS8td.22664$...
    >I was browsing a camera shop earlier today and took a look at a D70.
    >Talked to one of the sales people about it for a bit, too. I must say, the
    >camera has a really good feel to it. Feels nice and solid. It gave the
    >impression of being something that wasn't likely to fall apart the first
    >time I sneezed on it too hard (got that from Canon's D Rebel).
    >
    > Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I could
    > count the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.
    >
    > I think that'll be my next camera once I get tired of my F717.
    >
    > If I'd had 3 grand on me, I would've bought the two (camera and telephoto)
    > on the spot. Sweet.


    One grand for the camera? OK. Two grand for a 300mm f4? Canon's is half
    that.
     
    you know who maybe, Dec 7, 2004
    #12
  13. "you know who maybe" <> wrote in message
    news:Lrktd.9914$...

    > One grand for the camera? OK. Two grand for a 300mm f4? Canon's is half
    > that.


    Well... about $1500 (Cdn) for the camera and $1009 for the lens (used). So
    about $2500, plus taxes...
     
    Paul Fedorenko, Dec 7, 2004
    #13
  14. "Jon Pike" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95B829F78F4AELessThanPerfectInc@24.71.223.159...

    > You choose to focus on some -odd- things ;)


    Yes... Yes, I do. Then again, the longest lens I'd ever used was a 70-210
    mm zoom, and this thing was 300 mm plus the 1.5x multiplier for the sensor.
    I was also in a camera shop, with a dark parking lot outside, so there was a
    general lack of subject matter.
     
    Paul Fedorenko, Dec 7, 2004
    #14
  15. Paul Fedorenko

    paul Guest

    Extra battery, 2Gig microdrive, warranty, etc.

    Paul Fedorenko wrote:
    > "you know who maybe" <> wrote in message
    > news:Lrktd.9914$...
    >
    >
    >>One grand for the camera? OK. Two grand for a 300mm f4? Canon's is half
    >>that.

    >
    >
    > Well... about $1500 (Cdn) for the camera and $1009 for the lens (used). So
    > about $2500, plus taxes...
    >
    >
     
    paul, Dec 8, 2004
    #15
  16. The D70 rocks! I've been waiting to try digital for about five years, and
    a month ago the D70 stole my heart. Nikon hit the price/performance sweet
    spot right on the nose with this one.

    How hooked am I? I've started trading in current Leica rangefinder gear on
    more lenses for it. It is one killer camera.

    Paul
     
    Paul Chefurka, Dec 8, 2004
    #16
  17. Paul Fedorenko

    Jon Pike Guest

    "Michael A. Covington" <>
    wrote in news:41b5c7e6$:

    >
    > "Jon Pike" <> wrote in message
    > news:Xns95B829F78F4AELessThanPerfectInc@24.71.223.159...
    >> "Paul Fedorenko" <> wrote in
    >> news:nS8td.22664$:
    >>
    >>> Then I put a fixed length 300mm f4 lens on the thing. I swear I
    >>> could count the hairs in the nose of the guy across the room.

    >>
    >> You choose to focus on some -odd- things ;)

    >
    > Yes... with my 300/4 I've managed to photograph a nebula in another
    > galaxy (NGC 604 in M33). Much more interesting than a nose hair. The
    > picture is somewhere on
    > www.covingtoninnovations.com/astro/exhibit.html.


    What did you use to guide your camera steadily?

    --
    http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet
     
    Jon Pike, Dec 8, 2004
    #17
  18. "Jon Pike" <> wrote
    >> Yes... with my 300/4 I've managed to photograph a nebula in another
    >> galaxy (NGC 604 in M33). Much more interesting than a nose hair. The
    >> picture is somewhere on
    >> www.covingtoninnovations.com/astro/exhibit.html.

    >
    > What did you use to guide your camera steadily?


    A Meade LX200 telescope (8-inch Schmidt-Cassegrain) and an SBIG STV
    autoguider making constant corrections. The latter may have been overkill,
    but I have it, so I use it.

    > http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet

    My daughter was on Neopets as "cathyc"... see also her web site
    www.alifepets.info where you can find other artificial-life games to play.


    --
    Clear skies,

    Michael A. Covington
    Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur
    www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html
     
    Michael A. Covington, Dec 8, 2004
    #18
  19. "Michael A. Covington" <> wrote
    in message news:41b5c7ab$...
    >
    > "Christopher Muto" <> wrote in message
    > news:Vfitd.4937$Wy.2507@trndny06...
    > > no. i believe it is a myth. then again i don't think that the digital
    > > rebel has cheap construction either. i have heard of lots of stories of
    > > them being dropped and surviving. i think it is conditioning that makes
    > > people believe that a light weight product is a cheap product. it is

    the
    > > reason why many cheap products have weights inside of them (ie. desk
    > > phones). but just because something is light does not mean it is poor
    > > construction.

    >
    > Well said. And remember, the heavier they are, the harder they hit when
    > dropped!
    >
    >
    >


    Was in Qebec early September and sheltering from the rain when a man next to
    me dropped his older Pentax (K model I think) onto the pavement.
    One horrible sounding thud.
    Glass of the lens cracked and lens mechanism didn't work on manual anymore.
    Reinforced to me the necessity to always keep a strap around wrist or neck.

    Gerrit - Oz
     
    Gerrit 't Hart, Dec 9, 2004
    #19
  20. Paul Fedorenko

    bob Guest

    "Gerrit 't Hart" <> wrote in
    news:41b7c152$0$30192$:

    > Was in Qebec early September and sheltering from the rain when a man
    > next to me dropped his older Pentax (K model I think) onto the
    > pavement. One horrible sounding thud.
    >


    I dropped a Nikon FM with a small telephoto lens. Two of the four screws
    that attach the lens mount to the body pulled out of the body, with broken
    bits of the body attached. The lens survived just fine.

    Bob
     
    bob, Dec 9, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bad Dog

    Comment about Firefox

    Bad Dog, Oct 2, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    420
    Old Gringo
    Oct 2, 2005
  2. History Fan

    Firefox extensions comment

    History Fan, Nov 17, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    472
    History Fan
    Nov 17, 2005
  3. firemarsh
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    447
    firemarsh
    Jan 21, 2004
  4. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,315
  5. charlie
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    767
Loading...

Share This Page