New Gear. Drool!!!!

[Zeb@adobeforums.com]

Did you notice the price drop on the Nikon D1X? Hopefully a D2X soon? The Canon 1Ds is still the only one worth having though.

[Buko@adobeforums.com]

Well even with the S2, Bringing it into PSCS camera RAW, the upsample in the render is mindbogling. I'm thrilled at the detail and sharpness that is held. So thanks Chris and the rest of the crew. photoshop combined with the new generation of digital cameras is truly awsome.

[Allen_Wicks@adobeforums.com]

The statement "Canon always seems to be about 2 years ahead of the other makers with R & D" is IMO not exactly true. Yes Canon owns the high end at the moment with the 1Ds, but cameras like the D1, D100, D2h, D70 have all been basically state-of-the-art at their price points when introduced; not 2 years behind. Canon and Nikon are playing leapfrog at the high end of DSLR photography, with awesome products from both firms.

Some of the "forward R&D" items Canon has introduced are things I personally prefer not to complicate a camera system with. But that is just my 0.02 based on negligible Canon experience.

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

hmm it took Nikon 2 years to produce a camera that could compare to the Canon 1D. The D2h was introduced a couple of months back with basically comparable performance to the old 1D, however, Canon have immediately replied with the 1D mark II which is faster, has the option to shoot twice as many megapixels and none of the noise issues associated with Nikon's LBCAST sensor. The fact that the 1D mark II is now an 8MP camera opens up numerous other markets to Canon that Nikon just cannot touch with the D2h or D1X.

Nikon still has nothing to compare to the 1Ds that has already been available for about 15 months and there was no mention of an update at the PMA either, so we can be fairly sure that there will be another 6 months at least to wait and there is already much talk about a new update to the 1Ds later this year.

What I think we are seeing in terms of market change is that Canon has the technological edge but at a higher price. When Nikon does introduce a competing camera it costs less as witnessed by the D2h and D70, however, its also true that until Nikon introduces competing products Canon has little motive to lower it prices in a market place where demand is exploding. The Canon 10D also must have made Nikon's task a real headache when it was introduced 1 year ago because it cost a lot less than the Nikon D100 initially.

I have some experience with Nikon cameras having owned 3 in the past, but that was all pre-digital era. The real problem for the Nikon user as I see it is that while the cameras may be great to handle, ultimate image quality is definitely a long way behind Canon at the high end although they are now competing hard at the low end with the D70 that looks like a great camera. In a time when countless pros are making the switch to digital I hear of many Nikon owners making the move to Canon but rarely the other way around.

In 3 to 4 years I think quality differences will be purely academic, however, Canon has created an impression of momentum that is hard for Nikon or any other manufacturer to match, so while the quality of digital capture is still rising Canon look like the clear winners to me. Just for the record, I am not a Canon zealot and would be happy to shoot with anything that does the job. I would really like to see far more competition between the manufacturers at the high end because it would force all of them to produce better products at lower prices and with fewer defects.

[LRK@adobeforums.com]

This is a great thread. I appreciate you all so much!

Linda

[Buko@adobeforums.com]

So with all this talk of the Nikons and Cannons does does Fuji S2 and S3 compare?

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

The advantage that both Nikon and Canon have over Fuji at present is their prestigious legacy if you like as makers of 35mm SLR cameras.

Fuji's problem as it moves from film to digital is its need to tap into a market of lens owners who will be willing to use their cameras and I suspect that if they were given a chance, the S3 would be marketed with either the Canon or Nikon mount, but Canon won't play ball nowadays as its aim is total market domination. Nikon are happy to sell camera bodies to 3rd party manufacturers because this increases their revenue while giving consumers more reason to stay with the Nikon lens range, however, they won't supply top quality bodies like the D1X to Fuji or Kodak because at that point it would seriously undermine their own brand sales especially as Fuji are clearly very good as far as sensor technology is concerned.

What will the situation be in 5 years time? your guess is as good as mine but I can foresee a sort of merger between Nikon and Fuji as a lifeline for both. For Fuji to start marketing its own bodies and lenses with a quality comparable to Nikon and then build up a loyal client base would take many years, while Nikon would clearly benefit from having the expertise and not to mention money from one of the worlds leading image makers.

Judging by everything I have read, the real battle here is not actually about selling digital cameras at all but in creating a base of future lens buyers because that is where the real money lies. Once you have a few lenses with any given system it becomes almost impossible to justify selling everything and switching to a competing product. Digital capture demands very good lenses to deliver the best results and future state of the art lenses capable of doing justice to future generations of sensors will be very expensive indeed.

As for Fuji in the short term, I think a great deal will depend on their price position within the market. They don't have access to tough professional bodies like the new Canon 1D II with fast auto focus, so no matter how good their sensor technology is they will have difficulty in pricing their products too high if they want to remain attractive to consumers. Assuming that Fuji can enter the market at the right price point with the S3 and I am guessing that this may even be lower than the Canon 10D, I believe they can continue to carve out a useful cut of the market as a discerning choice for owners of Nikon lenses or new DSLR buyers that don't need a tank like construction or super fast performance, but want all the advantages of excellent image quality at a reasonable price and this could include many advanced amateurs as well as pros.

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

Buko to ask how the Fuji S2 and S3 compare to Nikon and Canon will depend very much on your needs. My main reason for choosing Canon was that I already owned 5 lenses or I would have seriously considered going down the Fuji route.

We don't yet really know enough about the Fuji S3 either from a price or quality standpoint. My bet is that it will produce very good colours and generally pleasing images that are more than usable for many applications. Perhaps not a complete revolution compared to the S2, but nevertheless a useful upgrade. With that said, it's unlikely that it will be comparable to the 1Ds for resolution which will be a limitation for some and its obvious weak point is the body construction and slow operation compared to cameras from other makers offering comparable image quality, so it will have to remain reasonably priced.

If you really require tank like construction and a durable shutter etc the Fuji is probably not a great idea but I think the whole concept of only using camera bodies built like the old Nikon F for use in the tropics is overstated, so if you don't intend on going to war they are simply unnecessary for may users including pros. Taking two amateur camera bodies on a shoot is probably a lot safer than one pro body.

[Buko@adobeforums.com]

I have the S2. I liked what I saw image wise over the Nikon D100 at the time. I also have Nikon lenses, an old F2 F3 F4 user. Other than the S2 being a bit slow, after 7 shots because it has to write to disk, I really like the S2 and it has served me well so far. I was hoping that the S3 would be some awsome upgrade from the S2.

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

Many users of the S2 have been disappointed by the announced changes in the S3 but I think it is premature to be so pessimistic before some sample images and a price have been released.

The main complaints were about maintaining the old body and not seeing an increase in megapixels, however, megapixels are far from being the only component in making a good image and the S3 may yet surprise us. I agree that the S2 produces better images than the D100, so with the S3 promising greater dynamic range with more detail in both the shadows and highlights it could set a standard in overall image quality for others to aspire to or at least high quality images at a price point other manufacturers cannot match. Let's wait and see.

[Buko@adobeforums.com]

Well if the S3 images are the same quality as the S2 images with greater highlight detail, that's pertty darn cool. I've be playing with enlarging the RAW files with camera RAW in CS. even at the largest setting the interpolation is impressive.

maybe the S2 price will drop and I can get one for cheap.

[Wade_Zimmerman@adobeforums.com]

This digital thing will never catch on! You're all fooling yourselves!

But what did I say! So sensitive!

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

I've been doing a little research Buko and although its nothing official, the common consensus is that the S3 will cost just under $3000 in the US when released. Fuji obviously thinks that the new sensor technology is something pretty special if they intend to demand that sort of money and most people felt it should cost around half that price to remain attractive to potential buyers.

[Buko@adobeforums.com]

THanks, I'm going to talk to my camera store maybe I can get a good deal on a S2. For 3 grand I'd rather get a G5 right now.

[LRK@adobeforums.com]

John V: Are you looking to buy a new camera? If you are, which one would you be inclined to go with?

[Jelle_Mellema@adobeforums.com]

Besides photo-journalists do you really need a digital camera that's build like a tank. In the old days you bought a camera that would last you for the rest of your live and would provide you with the same image quality as long as you owned the camera.

Now camera's that are designed like the Canon D1 are "absolute" for most pro's after one or two years, just because a better one comes out with a better quality sensor. So what's the point of buying and paying a premium price for a camera that most likely is going to be replaced as soon as a better one comes out?! The only reasons I can come up with is tax deduction, a good show for the client and it feels better in your hands.

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

In the case of a camera like the new 1D, it has incredible auto focus and fast handling that most cheaper bodied cameras cannot match. The 10D offers a really nice compromise on build quality without having to spend too much and while the auto focus is acceptably fast for most people it isn't nearly as precise as the 1D. In practice it means you are more likely to get a fast moving subject in critical focus at F2.8 and exactly where you want with a 1D, while with a 10D you may need to go to F4 and just hope the main subject is in focus.

As far as the question of body construction alone goes however I agree with you totally.

[Jelle_Mellema@adobeforums.com]

That's a valid point, I guess for $3000 or more you can expect more then only a stronger body. I think the buffer and how fast you can shoot again are one of the most important things you have to look at when buying a pro digital camera.

[ashley_karyl@adobeforums.com]

Just as a matter of interest, how many of us really care about the 101 features in all these digital cameras? For years I did nearly 100% of my work with a Hasselblad 500CM and later a 501CM which were both totally mechanical with no inbuilt light-meter and manual focus, but the irony is that I was able to work remarkably quickly and precisely shooting models as they ran on a beach or moved around in the studio. On the few times I picked up the Eos 1, I found it so simple, it felt like I was flying.

From my perspective, all I am looking for from a digital camera is a reliable body with good ergonomics and reasonable speed coupled to an outstanding sensor. All the rest is just smoke getting in the way of taking good pictures and I am concerned at the tendency of manufacturers to put too many useless buttons on the modern digital cameras although Nikon are much better in this respect than Canon. It seems that with every update we are offered more features and options when all we really need in a professional or semi-professional camera is ease of use to avoid making mistakes or missing the shot while shuffling through menus.

[Jelle_Mellema@adobeforums.com]

It's just like cell phones; I asked a sales clerk at Best Buy if It was possible to make phone calls with a particular cell phone I was looking at, they where advertising only the gadgets. He didn't understand my joke......

And most menus are not really written with the creative mind in mind.