New D70 kills Canons 10D and D300 for 999

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Hugo Drax, Jan 28, 2004.

  1. Hugo Drax

    Bo Stevens Guest

    Where as identifying zealots is relatively trivial.
     
    Bo Stevens, Jan 31, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Hugo Drax

    Bo Stevens Guest

    I find most racists are easily identified. They are the ones who resort to
    calling others racist when their points of view do not match their own.
     
    Bo Stevens, Jan 31, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hugo Drax

    Bo Stevens Guest

    Again, see "Pizzi Principle".
     
    Bo Stevens, Jan 31, 2004
  4. Hugo Drax

    Mark M Guest

    No, Pizzi.
    *I* just answered your question (about the Nikon film scanner).
    You do realize, don't you, that Mark H is a different person from me...Mark
    M.
    He's Mark H...I'm Mark M. If you were confused about this, then this might
    explain some of your confusion.
     
    Mark M, Jan 31, 2004
  5. Hugo Drax

    MarkH Guest

    When did I say that I would NEVER believe you?
    Maybe renting a lens is cheaper where you are than where I am? But I
    would have to rent 2 lenses and get hold of 2 camera bodies and buy film
    and have it developed.
    When did I ever say that I would NEVER believe you.
    I mean that the 70-300 VR is very new and the places that do rentals are
    unlikely to have that lens available yet.
    I never said that.
    I never called you a liar or a cheat. I did say you were incorrect about
    Canon only claiming 2 stops of IS.

    It seems a little dishonest of you to claim that I think you are a liar
    and a cheat and that I would never trust you. If you could understand my
    posts you would realise that I have repeatedly asked for you to back up
    your claims, I have been inviting you to prove what you are saying so
    that I could believe it. You are the one that wont provide any reason to
    believe you.
     
    MarkH, Jan 31, 2004
  6. Hugo Drax

    MarkH Guest

    I answered that question on my first post on this thread, when I
    conceded that for all I knew the Sigma 50mm may indeed be a better lens
    than the Canon.
    I don’t think so.
    But what is your basis for that assumption? It seems that the only
    assumption you could make is that the VR in the 70-200 is more advanced
    than in previous Nikon VR lenses.
    I answered that question before you asked me.
    I quoted you . . .
    OMG, you have actually provided some details of your test!
    You are actually answering my questions in a rational way, bloody hell!
    If you posted your tests I would consider it some evidence that the
    Nikon MAY be better, I would still look for other tests to confirm or
    refute your results.
    Until now you have revealed nothing about HOW you testing was done.
    This is the first post where you have explained how your ratings were
    calculated, how could I have given YOU any credibility.
    On the contrary, I have found this post to be very informative.

    I have learnt that according to one persons testing:
    Nikon’s latest VR and Canon’s latest IS both perform equally well on the
    normal setting, Nikon’s VR works better on ‘panning’ mode. Both are
    equally sharp at f8 and higher, Nikon is slightly sharper at wider
    apertures.

    Of course since the lenses were used on different bodies it is possible
    that the sharpness tests were not 100% accurate, did you check to make
    sure the focus was in exactly the right place on both cameras? At wider
    apertures the focus does become more critical. Assuming that your
    findings were indeed accurate then it does indicate that both lenses are
    really good and the Nikon has the slight edge. Whether the
    stabilization on the Nikon is better would depend on whether you are
    using the panning mode, if you do then the Nikon would seem to be the
    best lens for its VR.

    Obviously I have no idea of why the Nikon lens got a lesser rating in
    the Photozone site, I am now very curious about that (but reviews CAN be
    wrong).
     
    MarkH, Jan 31, 2004
  7. Hugo Drax

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Feb 1, 2004
  8. Hugo Drax

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Feb 1, 2004
  9. Hugo Drax

    DM Guest

    Omygodomygodomygod... all the Drebals are gonna stop working! Help!
     
    DM, Feb 1, 2004
  10. Hugo Drax

    Azzz1588 Guest



    I tried to warn everyone when he first showed up here........ :)

    He has gotten better, at least he dosnt instantly threaten legal
    action against people he dislikes now...

















































    "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."
     
    Azzz1588, Feb 1, 2004
  11. Hugo Drax

    ralford Guest

    Actually, this thread had been a fine dataset for populating the kill file
    with those with too much time and too little information. It is amazing how
    quickly one can clean up a newsgroup by plonking the persistent posters to
    these threads.

    Cheers,

    rma
     
    ralford, Feb 1, 2004
  12. Hugo Drax

    Mark M Guest

    You must be in a giving mood.
    Oh! --You meant on a 100 scale?
    OK... Maybe.
     
    Mark M, Feb 2, 2004
  13. Hugo Drax

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Feb 2, 2004
  14. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Yes you do. Liar.
    I only said ONE Nikon lens is better than ONE Canon lens.
    Only a totally dishonest liar like you would have me say that
    the whole Nikon system is better. Go on, google me and
    prove me wrong. Or apologize. Oh yeah, you are way too
    arrogant to do that.
    I hope you are talking to a mirror.
    Did anyone tell you that ganging up on a single individual is
    the typical behavior of cowards?

    (Go ahead and keep insulting me. But never actually test the
    lenses. God forgive you will actually come to my same
    conclusion...)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
  15. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    You said you would rather believe a website that doesn't even tell
    you how the ratings are calculated.
    Yeah yeah, fine. Keep believing whatever you want. I have actually
    tested the lenses, you haven't. The only way you have to disprove
    me is to accuse me of being a liar. Fine again, for all I care you could
    even accuse me of murdering someone...
    ??? First of all it's 70-200VR, and it's not as new as you would think.
    Still newer than the Canon. At least get SOME information before
    you start accusing me of posting lies.
    Yeah, I made ONE mistake, Canon claims 3, but it's actually 2.
    You are calling the Nikon 70-300VR, hmmm, let's see, who's
    more informed about the two lenses?
    Why should I? So that you will accuse me of having rigged the test?
    Thanks but no thanks. If you think I'm lying, it will surely not change
    my life. People I love and people I work with know I'm no liar.
    You see, if you really CARE about knowing the truth, you would
    do the test yourself. But you have proven that all you want is to bash
    someone who dares to claim that ONE Nikon product is better than
    ONE produced by Canon. Someone even accused me of having claimed
    that the entire Nikon system is better. I'm still waiting for the google
    link...
    Hey, the zealots will believe him without even checking, and he KNOWS
    that, that's why he can LIE so blatantly.

    Hey, you win. Argument's over. I'm tired.
    Nothing can possibly be better than Canon. I must have been drunk
    when I did the tests. On second thought it's much easier to think that
    I'm a liar. Anyone who dares to say that a non-Canon product might
    be better is certainly one.

    Happy now?
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
  16. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    If it's so, then why did you have to LIE about me claiming that
    the Nikon system is better? I'm still waiting for the google link.
    Or your apologies, when hell freezes over... (Arrogant people
    like you are just incapable of such gestures...)

    Don't try to weasel out, you must prove to everybody that I
    actually said that the Nikon SYSTEM is better, not that I claimed
    ONE Nikon lens is better than ONE Canon lens.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
  17. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Ever heard of the Merriam-Webster? A TAD more authoritative.
    No "spirited and original." It would be a very audacious claim,
    since the Latin root doesn't mean anything like that. You have
    studied Latin, haven't you? ;-)
    Come on, don't deny it, you really meant that claiming a Nikon lens
    can be better than a Canon one would be... preposterous.
    Now you're trying to weasel out, as usual.

    BTW, I'm still waiting for you to prove your slanderous allegation
    by which I claimed that the Nikon SYSTEM is better than Canon's.
    Or for your apologies, when hell freezes over...
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
  18. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Really?
    You have hinted I can't read English.
    You have hinted I have comprehension problems.
    You have accused me of being a liar...with a LIE.
    Because you are a self-centered right-wing hate-monger
    with a BIG chip on his shoulder?
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
  19. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Prove it. LIAR.
    Or provide an apology.

    (You won't do either, obviously...)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
  20. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    You have alleged I claimed the Nikon SYSTEM is better
    than Canon's. Now put up or shut up.

    LIAR.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.