How far have we come? D7000 versus D70s at 800 ISO

D7000 intro'd this year, D70s, 2005, predecessor D70 introduced Jan
2004.
Cost: D7000 $1175.00. D70s $170 used in mint condition. Original
price, about $800.00 I think.

Pushed one stop, fill-lighting used to brighten dark areas. 60%
sharpening, no noise reduction. Both RAW.

D70s top strip, D7000 below.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/134402165/original

 

Yeah - well aren't you one of the posters who repost crap comparisons
from idiots at DPReview etc, when they claim that the D80 is at least a
stop better than the D70, the D90 at least a stop better than a D80, the
D7000 at least a stop better than the D90 etc...
So you're surprised when the cumulative increase in performance is
somewhat underwhelming?
But the D70 also had crap base ISO dynamic range, colour moire from
too-weak AA filter and poor internal processing of jpegs, bloom, and a
sensor that acted like a dust magnet. Sometimes one or more of these
faults would be an issue, but normally not.

As far as the price comparison goes, the D7000 has a better viewfinder,
better AF system, better construction, better LCD, faster, and with a
much better feature set than the D70/s.

 

But no conclusions were drawn, it was simply a comparison.

 

Hit Cmd and minus keys, Mac. Probably Alt. and minus for Doze.

 

It makes a mug of you though, incessantly whining about image quality of
various slrs for the past 7 years, then showing how little has changed.
Perhaps the manufacturers don't listen to you.

 

Here's yet another Rich Anderson "comparison" that tells us precisely
nothing. Why not display both images (D70/D7000) at the same size?
Then we might be able to judge any differences.

 

Have you tried ctrl | 0? to reduce the screen size? Or even ctrl | -.

HTH

 

I had a similar issue with Firefox and played around with the settings
until it worked. However, IIRC my issue was not limited to PBase.

 

Perfect, Paul, illustrates the improvement nicely.

Thanks,
David

 

Thanks Paul.

That shows a very significant improvement in image quality, which
means that Rich should be very happy indeed with his new D7000.

The fact that Rich obviously isn't happy suggests that he is suffering
a severe bout of Buyer's Remorse. It was probably brought on (a) by
the non-availability of his chosen Panasonic LUMIX GH2 and (b) by
Rich's perception that his friend's GH2 produces better results than
his D7000. An erroneous perception, of course, but it is enough to
make Rich seriously unhappy with his purchase.

I'm very glad Rich isn't one of our customers. He seems to be every
camera store owner's recurring nightmare. ;-)

 

No problem here with Firefox.

 

Now compare those results with ISO 800 Slide film.

 

What are are you talking about? I've never experienced buyer's
remorse. If something I get doesn't do what I expected, I get rid of
it and move on. The D7000 does show improvements in many areas, but I
thought that the comparison was interesting because the image from the
now hyper-affordable used D70s is quite good.

 

Slide film? Not a good idea as more and more places are dumping E6
processing. I found an old roll of slide film and took it to a local
store to see if they could process it. They didn't even know what
slide film was!

 

bullshit.

 

As with most of your "comparisons", this one was meaningless.

Why bother?

 

Just keep telling yourself that, luddite.

 

What is meaningless about it?

 

Most of your "comparisons" are meaningless because there is an absence
of any control, discipline or objectivity, so no valid conclusions can
be drawn. It's a pity, because a properly controlled comparison is
often of great value.

When Paul Furman posted a version of your D70/D7000 "comparison" which
provided a proper comparison between the results from the two cameras,
the verdict was virtually the opposite of your claim.

Your comparison of Nikon and Olympus 50mm f/1.8 lenses was fatally
flawed because only one of the shots was correctly focused.

Comparisons are only meaningful if they are properly controlled to
remove all variables other than the one that is being compared. You
don't take enough care to do this, which is why your "comparisons" are
meaningless. The answer is to take more care.

 

Rich's second home Henry's ships processing, including E-6 to:

Silvano Color Labs
355 Weston Rd, York,
ON M6N 4Y7

http://www.silvanoimaging.com/E6.html

All Rich had to do was walk over to the other counter in the Henry's he
lives in.

Mike