Professional Web Applications Themes

DigitalSLRInfo.com is online - Photography

"Steven M. Scharf" <net> wrote in message news:ZhFQd.4145$news.atl.earthlink.net...  more  control,  Hmmm, your info on the Canon 20Da is wrong. The 20Da doesn't have the IR filter removed, it uses a different filter to pass H<alpha> waves at 636nm. It's Japan "Special Order" only, and it should be noted it will take 3 months to deliver after the order. Probably will cost $10K (my guess)...

  1. #1

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online


    "Steven M. Scharf" <net> wrote in message
    news:ZhFQd.4145$news.atl.earthlink.net... 
    more 
    control, 
    Hmmm, your info on the Canon 20Da is wrong. The 20Da doesn't have the IR
    filter removed, it uses a different filter to pass H<alpha> waves at 636nm.
    It's Japan "Special Order" only, and it should be noted it will take 3
    months to deliver after the order. Probably will cost $10K (my guess)


    Darrell Guest

  2. #2

    Default DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    The response to the Digital SLR Information web site that I created has
    received numbersof hits been beyond my expectations. I have obtained a more
    logically named URL for the site, DigitalSLRInfo.com.

    Thank's for all the feedback. I've added several new columns to the
    comparison table as a result, including sensor manufacturer, remote control,
    mirror lock-up, communications, and memory.

    Steve
    http://digitalslrinfo.com/


    Steven Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online


    "Chris Brown" <no_uce_please.com> wrote in message
    news:dyndns.org... 
    >
    > That's correct - they're smaller.[/ref]

    The site's author is showing a bias, therefore it makes for a slanted
    website.



    Darrell Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    In article <ZhFQd.4145$news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    Steven M. Scharf says... 

    And again the statement that the Olympus DSLRs are "unacceptable", which
    is nonsense, because many people are using them with excellent results.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups./group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
    Alfred Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    > And again the statement that the Olympus DSLRs are "unacceptable", which 

    Alfred: I'm an Olympus nut. I've had a 220, 340L, 450Z, C3000, D40 and 5050.
    You don't know how much I want to get an Olympus DSLR! But, while the Evolt
    isn't "unacceptable" by itself, dang, Canon certainly has seemed to push the
    envelope with regards sensor technology. If I were shooting landscapes,
    probably no big deal. But for the work I do, a high ISO/low noise sensor is
    the thing that will really make the biggest improvement over my 5050. Oh
    sure, it's nice that you can choose your lens on a DSLR, but truthfully, if
    somebody made a camera that had the ISO/noise characteristics of the 20D in
    a fixed-lens (say, 35-140 equivalent) P&S, with image stabilization, I'd be
    there. But that seems too much to ask for.

    It's a choice, of course. For what *some* are looking for, the Olympus just
    isn't there, and thus "unacceptable." For others, it will do great. But,
    frankly, the price differential isn't what it ought to be. Yes, people
    complain about the cost of the 20D, but I'm not really sure where they're
    coming from. Seems like a lot of camera to me.

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


    "Alfred Molon" <com> wrote in message
    news:supernews.com... 
    >
    > And again the statement that the Olympus DSLRs are "unacceptable", which
    > is nonsense, because many people are using them with excellent results.
    > --
    >
    > Alfred Molon
    > ------------------------------
    > Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    > http://groups./group/MyOlympus/
    > Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/[/ref]


    Mike Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    In article <supernews.com>,
    Alfred Molon <com> wrote: 
    >
    >And again the statement that the Olympus DSLRs are "unacceptable", which
    >is nonsense, because many people are using them with excellent results.[/ref]

    Don't bother. It's a Canon hagiography site.

    John Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online


    "John Francis" <com> wrote in message
    news:cv061d$82k$panix.com... [/ref][/ref]
    more [/ref][/ref]
    control, 
    > >
    > >And again the statement that the Olympus DSLRs are "unacceptable", which
    > >is nonsense, because many people are using them with excellent results.[/ref]
    >
    > Don't bother. It's a Canon hagiography site.[/ref]


    Hagiography? I would have gone for Canon canonization instead. :-)


    Paul Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    In article <com>,
    Paul H. <yycom> wrote: 
    >
    >Hagiography? I would have gone for Canon canonization instead. :-)[/ref]


    Ouch. How could I have missed that one?

    It's a shame, because if he were a little less dismissive of
    "other brands", I doubt if he'd have too many objections.

    Most people would probably agree with his conclusions that
    Canon offer the best models in the $1500-and-up marketplace,
    and that their range of lenses is unsurpassed (although his
    steadfast refusal to acknowledge the D2 is unfortunate).

    But, as I've said in earlier postings, he really doesn't seem
    to know just what standards he's measuring against. some of
    the times he dismisses cameras because they are lacking features
    that are of little or no interest to anyone but the semi-pro or
    better market (battery type, availablity of ultrawide lenses).
    Then he turns around and dismisses other cameras based on some
    features that are of no significance in that market segment.

    And, of course, you don't see any mention of those features
    where the Canon offerings fall short of the mark (an example
    here would be viewfinder brightness, magnification, etc.)

    But what can you expect from someone who uses a quote from
    Ken "I don't need to use a camera to review it" Rockwell?
    (Alhough, in all fairness, if Ken Rockwell is prepared to
    say _anything_ good about a non-Nikon camera it must be an
    outstanding piece of equipment).


    John Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    "Mike Jacoubowsky" <netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:TsMQd.592$news.prodigy.com...

    <snip>
     
    Olympus just 
    But, 
    people 
    they're 

    I knew that this web site would upset some people, but I wanted to be
    objective about the issues with each camera. Personally, I am able to
    calmly discuss the pros and cons of any item I have purchased, without
    getting upset, and without worrying that something new and improved
    will come out the day after I buy whatever it is I'm buying. The
    engineer's way is to do a lot of research prior to making a purchase,
    to avoid making a poor choice.

    I don't want to imply that the all the cameras in the "unacceptable"
    category are simply too horrible to consider. What I do want to be
    clear is that there are much better choices to be made for comparable
    sums of money. A few hundred dollars difference in a product that you
    are going to use for many years is not a big deal in the scheme of
    things.

    IMVAIO, the noise issues with the Olympus E-300 make it a poor choice,
    _compared to what else is available_ (the lack of mirror lock-up, and
    the lens selection, are other important considerations). And it's not
    like someone is going to choose the E-300 simply because they have a
    load of 4/3 lenses.

    As you pointed out, The 20D is not excessively expensive, and you get a
    lot more by moving up from the consumer to the prosumer level. Also,
    the 20D goes on sale a lot.

    Steve
    "http://digitalslrinfo.com"

    Scharf-DCA Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    Scharf-DCA <com> wrote:
     

    The photographer's way is to understand that a few numbers don't tell the
    whole story.

    --
    Jeremy | com
    Jeremy Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    "John Francis" <com> wrote in message
    news:cv09nn$n3l$panix.com... 
    >>
    >>Hagiography? I would have gone for Canon canonization instead. :-)[/ref]
    >
    >
    > Ouch. How could I have missed that one?
    >
    > It's a shame, because if he were a little less dismissive of
    > "other brands", I doubt if he'd have too many objections.
    >
    > Most people would probably agree with his conclusions that
    > Canon offer the best models in the $1500-and-up marketplace,
    > and that their range of lenses is unsurpassed (although his
    > steadfast refusal to acknowledge the D2 is unfortunate).
    >
    > But, as I've said in earlier postings, he really doesn't seem
    > to know just what standards he's measuring against. some of
    > the times he dismisses cameras because they are lacking features
    > that are of little or no interest to anyone but the semi-pro or
    > better market (battery type, availablity of ultrawide lenses).
    > Then he turns around and dismisses other cameras based on some
    > features that are of no significance in that market segment.
    >
    > And, of course, you don't see any mention of those features
    > where the Canon offerings fall short of the mark (an example
    > here would be viewfinder brightness, magnification, etc.)
    >
    > But what can you expect from someone who uses a quote from
    > Ken "I don't need to use a camera to review it" Rockwell?
    > (Alhough, in all fairness, if Ken Rockwell is prepared to
    > say _anything_ good about a non-Nikon camera it must be an
    > outstanding piece of equipment).
    >
    >[/ref]
    Well, he does class the Nikon D2x and D2h with the Canon 1D mkII as less
    than professional bodies, so he's not biased, it's just by the standard he's
    set, they don't match the Canon 1Ds mkII and Kodak 14n/c because they lack a
    35mm film sized sensor. And the Kodak has sensor issues, like moiré and
    noise.
    And viewfinder brightness is not much of an issue, I've never felt its lack
    in any of the Canons I've owned, and the 20D has a viewfinder that is
    reputed to be brighter than the one in the D70. One thing to remember,
    everything on his site is relative, if it is better on one camera than
    another, then the former out ranks the latter. There are no absolutes, just
    as there is not "perfect" camera. Although the Canon 1Ds mkII comes close,
    as far as 35mm style bodies go.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


    Skip Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    "Skip M" <net> wrote in message
    news:RISQd.31854$..
     
    he's 


    This is true. It's all relative. Few would place the D2x in the same class
    as the 1Ds Mark II, and even though the D2x will certainly used by
    professionals who are patiently waiting for Nikon to have something at the
    same level as the 1Ds Mark II, the two cameras are not in the same class. At
    least that's how I call it. I don't claim to be the world authority on which
    camera is in which segment, the web site reflects my view of the market. I'm
    certain that Nikon has a different take on it all.


    Steven Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    In article <TsMQd.592$news.prodigy.com>, Mike
    Jacoubowsky says...
     

    But if you shoot at high ISO the dynamic range of the camera will be
    considerably reduced. Another thing, the pixels od the 20D are not that
    much larger than those of the 300D.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups./group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
    Alfred Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    In article <supernews.com>,
    Alfred Molon <com> wrote: 

    That's correct - they're smaller.
    Chris Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:40:51 GMT, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
    <netcom.com> wrote:
     
    >
    >Alfred: I'm an Olympus nut. I've had a 220, 340L, 450Z, C3000, D40 and 5050.
    >You don't know how much I want to get an Olympus DSLR! But, while the Evolt
    >isn't "unacceptable" by itself, dang, Canon certainly has seemed to push the
    >envelope with regards sensor technology. If I were shooting landscapes,
    >probably no big deal. But for the work I do, a high ISO/low noise sensor is
    >the thing that will really make the biggest improvement over my 5050.[/ref]

    CCDs are still preferred by people who use cameras for scientific
    and industrial photography. For various reasons. But Canon has
    done wonders with the cheaper CMOS.
    -Rich
    RichA Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:14:13 -0500, "Darrell" <dev/null> wrote:
     
    >more 
    >control, 
    >Hmmm, your info on the Canon 20Da is wrong. The 20Da doesn't have the IR
    >filter removed, it uses a different filter to pass H<alpha> waves at 636nm.
    >It's Japan "Special Order" only, and it should be noted it will take 3
    >months to deliver after the order. Probably will cost $10K (my guess)
    >[/ref]

    Unlikely. The idea behind it is to compete with overpriced
    astronomical CCD cameras from companies like SBIG.
    -Rich
    RichA Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 04:20:41 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
    <net> wrote:
     
    >he's 
    >a 
    >
    >This is true. It's all relative. Few would place the D2x in the same class
    >as the 1Ds Mark II, and even though the D2x will certainly used by
    >professionals who are patiently waiting for Nikon to have something at the
    >same level as the 1Ds Mark II, the two cameras are not in the same class. At
    >least that's how I call it. I don't claim to be the world authority on which
    >camera is in which segment, the web site reflects my view of the market. I'm
    >certain that Nikon has a different take on it all.
    >[/ref]

    How would you compare the Fuji S3 to the Canons?
    -Rich
    RichA Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    RichA wrote:
     

    Unless that scientific work is astronomy. The long exposures seem to be just
    right for CMOS as it does not heat up as a function of exp. time (which leads to
    noise). Canon have aparently released a 20D version with less IR filtering (or
    a notch at an IR wavelength of interest to astronomers).

    other: http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/20d/20dvs10d.htm

    CCD imagers on telescopes require cooling.

    What are the other adv. of CCD for industrial/scientific work?

    Cheers,
    Alan.

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    Steven M. Scharf <net> wrote:
     

    Without having actually seen any pictures from it yet, how could you possibly
    "call it" at all?

    --
    Jeremy | com
    Jeremy Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: DigitalSLRInfo.com is online

    Quite honestly your site does not, on first impression, give the appearance
    of being all that objective. In some ways it kind of looks like the "Steve
    Scharf's Reasons Why Canon is Better than Everybody Else" site. If you are
    going to bash Nikon's D70 for no mirror lock-up, why not the Canons as well?
    For that matter, why not criticize Canon for no spot meter?

    Characterizing the D2X as "semi-professional" is just plain ridiculous when
    many working pros are using the D100, the D1H or the 20D. You apparently
    have some definition of "professional" which means "uses a Canon camera."

    The actual reviews are better, though they contain some misinformation and
    unfounded speculation. Is it really impossible to buy CR2 batteries at
    Disneyland? Of course not; I have bought them there myself.

    Castigating the crummy Nikon Capture plug-in and ignoring the one that comes
    with Photoshop CS is, to put it bluntly, ignorant.


    C Guest

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139