New D70 kills Canons 10D and D300 for 999

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

  1. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    The Nikon 70-200 has a THIRD generation VR, which in Canon
    terms would be the LATEST.
    Photozone is ludicrous, check the Sigma lens ratings.
    If you accept the above, then you would have to accept
    that most Sigma lenses are better than Canon's.
    Double standard again?

    Unfortunately Photodo has no rating for the Nikkor
    70-200VR, I guess it's too new.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 29, 2004
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Yeah, that's the website Preddy quotes all the time, where
    the Sigma 50mm is rated higher than both Canon and Nikon...

    A Canon or Sigma zealot is usually content with whatever
    he/she reads that "proves" his/her religion is the "winner",
    people with a penchant for factual truth, instead, always
    CHECK how the ratings are calculated. Photozone is
    just a blast, by their own admission, they don't even
    know... :) My guess is that ratings are probably based
    on reader's input and since Canon and Sigma zealots are
    typically the most biased people in the world, they always
    rate their stuff five stars.)

    Gavin and I have actually TRIED both Canon and Nikon
    lenses and have drawn our own conclusions from real-world
    use. I believe this approach is just slightly more reliable... ;-)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 29, 2004
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    You go girl! ;-)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 29, 2004
    #83
  4. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    I have actually used BOTH of them, so what I say comes from
    DIRECT EXPERIENCE. I know, it may be shocking for you
    that someone actually dares to compare a Canon product to
    one made by another company...
    The Nikkor is a much more modern lens and it sports a more
    advance stabilization system. This is FACTUAL, check it out.
    I never said there was a "remarkable" difference. They're both
    excellent lenses. Only the Nikkor is more modern and takes
    advantage or newer technology. The problem is that you just
    can't accept the fact that a non-Canon product can actually be
    BETTER than Canon.
    Ditto as above.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 29, 2004
    #84
  5. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Not all, unless you can prove that I ever tried to sway any
    reader by posting disinformation. I'm sure you would get
    pretty riled up if I told someone to not buy a Canon product
    because of a reason I made up. That's what Spadaro does.
    But then again, I understand that you will use a double standard
    for me...
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 29, 2004
    #85
  6. Hugo Drax

    fuzzface Guest

    Hah, I'm not English nor American, I'm doing not too bad huh? I'm Dutch, I
    can speak and write English, French, German, Spanish and a little Italian.
    How far do YOU go
    Pretty lame to make a point of this without knowing ones background.

    yours truly....
     
    fuzzface, Jan 29, 2004
    #86
  7. Hugo Drax

    Gavin Cato Guest

    I love how they class the Nikon 17-35/2.8 as a average lens on that site,
    when anyone who even knows a fraction about wide angle lenses knows it's the
    best option available on either camp.




    ]
     
    Gavin Cato, Jan 29, 2004
    #87
  8. You mean better then the $70 plastic-mount Cannon? No! Say it isn't so.

    The Sigma 50mm is widely held to be the sharpest, best built 50mm D/SLR lens
    ever made. Yes it is $200, but it is also metal.
    http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#F50
     
    George Preddy, Jan 29, 2004
    #88
  9. Hugo Drax

    Bo Stevens Guest

    This may come as a shock to you but your opinion is not fact. I already
    know what you think, I am asking for you to demonstrate how the Nikon lens
    is overall a better lens. Features? Picture quality? Size and weight?
    What is it that you think makes it a better lens? The fact that it says
    "Nikon" on it? While that might be enough for you, I would rather see
    something tangible to support your audacious claims.
    Much more modern? Is that your way of saying that Nikon was the last to
    market with this technology? It seems to me that Canon is on their 3rd
    generation which means they have a lot more experience in this area. I have
    no idea which is better but I would suspect that Canon's system having more
    time to be refined is at least as good as Nikon.
    What is this newer technology? I for one have not derived any conclusions
    regarding the two lenses, I am asking you to support your assertions and
    conclusions. If you have nothing to offer in this area then I see no
    reason to continue with this dialog.
    To late, you already judged me as zealous.
     
    Bo Stevens, Jan 30, 2004
    #89
  10. Hugo Drax

    Bo Stevens Guest

    LOL. You crazy man. :)

    I am not the one who is riled, it is you. I could really care less what
    you have to say about anything actually. I was mildly interested in your
    claims regarding the Nikon 70-200 VR but you have been unable to provide
    anything tangible to support your position. You are quickly proving to be
    nothing more than a Nikon rube. And for the record, that is OK by me. Now
    that I know that I can properly weigh your statements and opinions.

    You need to chill dude, these are only cameras.
     
    Bo Stevens, Jan 30, 2004
    #90
  11. Hugo Drax

    Bo Stevens Guest

    So, are you saying that you can write better English because of your
    keyboard? You statement only served to succinctly support his analogy,
    unfortunately you did not even realize it. LOL
     
    Bo Stevens, Jan 30, 2004
    #91
  12. The problem, though, is that by 1980, everybody and their brother were doing
    that sort of thing: it wasn't just Xerox Parc. Bitmap displays and the
    desktop metaphor were invented independently at nearly every research lab in
    the US and Europe. (A slight exaggeration<g>, but a friend did her undergrad
    thesis at Edinburgh around 1979 on using the desktop metaphor, and the MIT
    and Stanford AI labs were doing bitmap displays in 1974, etc. etc.)

    This is one of the reasons I sympathize with the argument that software
    (algorithms and tricks) shouldn't be patented: much of it is invented and
    reinvented many times before someone with patent experience and a lawyer
    decides to make a killing.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 30, 2004
    #92
  13. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Starting to call me names, aren't you?
    Out of arguments?
    I have made a list of non-Nikon products that I deem superior
    to their Nikon counterparts. You have been unable to do the
    same with Canon. So, your allegation is totally baseless.
    A Bible thumper, I should have figured it out before...
    That explains a lot.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 30, 2004
    #93
  14. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    But you are still unable to acknowledge that some non-Canon
    products are actually BETTER than their Canon counterparts.
    I've done that with Nikon, so, it's pretty obvious now who's
    the real zealot.
    Wrong example. Leonardo da Vinci designed a flying machine
    and never actually built it. That's what Nikon did with IS.
    Not everybody in history was a genius like Leonardo...
    Yeah, fine with me. By the same token, Nikon should receive credit
    for brining pro DSLR's to the market. Oh yeah, sorry I forgot your
    usual double standards. Nikon should not get ANY credit except for
    providing competition to Canon, right?

    And of course it's a philosophical impossibility that a non-Canon
    product could be better than its Canon counterpart, right?

    Who's the zealot here?
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 30, 2004
    #94
  15. Hugo Drax

    Mark M Guest

    Here in So. Cal, "bub" is hardly name-calling.
    It's sort of like saying "hey pal..." ("Hey bub").
    Does it mean something bad where you're from?
    Hahaha! :)
    No, not me.
     
    Mark M, Jan 30, 2004
    #95
  16. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Are you really THAT wide Preddy? ;-)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 30, 2004
    #96
  17. Hugo Drax

    Mark M Guest

    If you wish to persuade, though, you might want to take the plank
    It's just the ancient version of:
    "The pot calling the kettle black"
    ....and it happens to come from the Bible.
    :)
     
    Mark M, Jan 30, 2004
    #97
  18. Hugo Drax

    Mark M Guest

    If all those words you keep trying to put in my mouth...actually came from
    me...then I'd agree with you.
    Ah...but they never have. :)
    You are very creative, though. Points for that.
     
    Mark M, Jan 30, 2004
    #98
  19. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    The newer system in the Nikon lens IS a fact.
    When was the Canon lens released? Do the math.
    You see Bo, the PROBLEM is that you Canon zealots start with
    the wrong assumption that NOTHING can possibly be better
    than Canon, so when someone tells you that a non-Canon product
    is actually better, you call it an "audacious claim."
    If you had an open mind, you would actually TEST both lenses,
    like Gavin and I have done, and see it yourself why the Nikon is
    better. Of course you assume that I am a religious fanatic like you,
    but I'm not. I'm ready to make a list of non-Nikon products that
    are better than Nikon (actually, I've already done that), and I
    challenge you to do the same with Canon. If you don't, it means
    two things: Canon makes perfect, blemish-free products which
    have absolutely NOTHING wrong OR you are a zealot and too
    biased to face reality.
    Yeah, when you release AFTER your competition, you can actually
    have time to improve on it. By the same token, Canon marketed a
    pro DSLR *after* Nikon, but somehow that doesn't count, right?
    It's called a double standard.
    The Nikon 70-200 *IS* a third-generation VR. Only a third-generation
    VR is the LATEST one.
    We had already figured that out...
    That's because you would NEVER concede that a non-Canon
    product COULD be better than Canon. You see WHERE the
    problem is?
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 30, 2004
    #99
  20. Hugo Drax

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    I told you, go out and try both lenses.
    Naaaah, too "exotic" for you, and that of course involves
    TAKING PICTURES, which is an even stranger activity
    for you...

    It's much safer to believe the Canon websites that will tell you
    the chance of a non-Canon product being better than Canon
    is a philosophical impossibility.
    Baseless accusation. I made a list of Nikon products I believe
    inferior to non-Nikon counterparts. Will you be able to do the
    same with Canon? Then we'll see who's the real "rube"...
    Yeah, and some people actually USE them. Go figure...
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 30, 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.