Professional Web Applications Themes

Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22 - Photography

Finally I am going to switch from film totally. I am to either go Canon or Nikon and totally based on this WA question. I will do 85% of my work with the WA lens. My work is crime scenes. Mostly alleys and interiors ... some at night. I prefer not using flash and rather use a tripod when necessary. Which lens is better with regards to sharpness and lack of distortion? Not having a big budget, it is going to be D70 or Rebel XT based solely on this lens choice. Thank you all for any input. Marty...

  1. #1

    Default Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    Finally I am going to switch from film totally. I am to either go
    Canon or Nikon and totally based on this WA question. I will do 85% of
    my work with the WA lens. My work is crime scenes. Mostly alleys and
    interiors ... some at night. I prefer not using flash and rather use a
    tripod when necessary.

    Which lens is better with regards to sharpness and lack of distortion?
    Not having a big budget, it is going to be D70 or Rebel XT based
    solely on this lens choice.

    Thank you all for any input.

    Marty
    Marty Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22



    Marty wrote: 

    I don't now whether you do this 'officially' for police or legal
    reasons, but if you will be in a position to rely on your shots as
    evidence in a court, you may be called on to prove the authenticity of
    your pictures. A negative is generally regarded as incontrovertible
    proof of authenticity, but the ease with which digital images can be
    tampered with generally means it is harder to prove the image as
    genuine.

    Canon is working on (may have it on the market now, as I haven't been
    following the progress) a system that will be proof of authenticity for
    a digital image, for the reasons outlined above. I am unaware of any
    move in that direction by Nikon, or any other maker of digital cameras.

    This may well dictate your choice of camera, and hence lens.

    Colin
    Colin Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 23:49:26 +1300, Colin D
    <127.0.0.1> wrote:
     
    >
    >I don't now whether you do this 'officially' for police or legal
    >reasons, but if you will be in a position to rely on your shots as
    >evidence in a court, you may be called on to prove the authenticity of
    >your pictures. A negative is generally regarded as incontrovertible
    >proof of authenticity, but the ease with which digital images can be
    >tampered with generally means it is harder to prove the image as
    >genuine.
    >
    >Canon is working on (may have it on the market now, as I haven't been
    >following the progress) a system that will be proof of authenticity for
    >a digital image, for the reasons outlined above. I am unaware of any
    >move in that direction by Nikon, or any other maker of digital cameras.
    >
    >This may well dictate your choice of camera, and hence lens.
    >
    >Colin[/ref]

    Thank you. I do use the stuff in homicide defense cases ... mostly
    death penalty. I have been doing this for about forty years as a cop
    first and defense after that. (I am pretty old.) The standard here in
    Maryland is that the picture fairly and accurately represents the
    scene as it was observed by the photographer. I have never been asked
    for a negative ... yet. Nor have I been asked if the photos were made
    using film or digital. I have, during the past two years, used some
    digital p&s without question so far.

    Thanks again for your input.
    Marty Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 23:49:26 +1300, Colin D <127.0.0.1> wrote: 

    It's out there; in its second version, even. The part is the DVK-E2.
    The press release says it works with the 1Ds and the 1D MkII. I'd
    guess it works with the 1Ds MkII as well. Somewhere on dpreview, it
    says that this thing works with the 20D, but I have a 20D and I
    don't believe that that's correct.

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04012903canondvke2.asp

    I was awfully chagrined when the DVK-E2's release was covered on
    Slashdot about a year ago, as I had been working for several months
    on a nearly identical invention. Canon and I even identified the
    same target markets: news, law enforcement, insurance, and spies --
    though they didn't mention spies in their press release. :-)

    The patent, it turns out, dates from 1999 or thereabouts. So I
    wasn't even close.

    --
    Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
    Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
    questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
    --Josh Micah Marshall
    Ben Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    Op Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:43:20 +0000 (UTC) schreef Ben Rosengart
    <br+com>:
     

    From the website of B&H:

    The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II and EOS 20D digital cameras can prove it's
    images are unaltered, original files. The Data Verification Kit
    DVK-E2, consisting of a dedicated memory card, a Secure Mobile (SM)
    card reader, and special software for Windows 2000/XP is able to
    verify that EOS-1Ds Mark II and EOS 20D image files are absolutely
    unaltered. The system is so precise, that even the slightest
    discrepancy is detected. This may well be a landmark for digital
    imaging in law enforcement and other doentary uses.

    When the EOS-1Ds Mark II and EOS 20D user shoots with the verification
    system activated (P.Fn-31), a code is automatically generated based on
    the image contents and attached to the image. When the image is
    viewed, the data verification software determines the code for the
    image and compares it with the attached code. If the photo has been
    retouched in any way, the codes will not match, thus verifying that
    the image is not the original.
    you can send email to me using
    mendelson-at-mendelson-dot-nl
    www.mendelson.nl
    bart Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 16:54:11 +0100, bart j mendelson <nl> wrote: 

    The 20D doesn't have "personal functions", it has "custom functions",
    and they only go up to 18. I've looked at all of them and none is
    for data verification.

    --
    Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
    Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
    questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
    --Josh Micah Marshall
    Ben Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    Op Tue, 8 Mar 2005 16:01:43 +0000 (UTC) schreef Ben Rosengart
    <br+com>:
     
    >
    >The 20D doesn't have "personal functions", it has "custom functions",
    >and they only go up to 18. I've looked at all of them and none is
    >for data verification.[/ref]

    Then the B&H website must be wrong. And so is amazon:
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0002XQJFA/002-6192499-9763241?v=glance.
     
    In addition to Canon's EF series of lenses and Speedlites, several
    other accessories are designed to work specifically with the EOS 20D.
    The Battery Grip BG-E2 adds a vertical shutter release, and is
    compatible with up to two of Canon's BP-511/511A/512/514 lithium-ion
    battery packs, or alternatively a set of six AA batteries, for greater
    convenience when traveling. Canon's Semi Hard Case EH/7-L can
    accommodate the EOS 20D with a small zoom lens (EF-S17-85mm f4-5.6 IS
    USM included), and the EOS 20D is compatible with Canon's DVK-E2 image
    data verification kit to check original image data authenticity,
    whenever verification is essential.

    and http://www.dpreview.com/news/0408/04081909canon_eos20d.asp

    and http://www.canon.ru/products/about.asp?id=1298

    ?????? EOS 20D ?????????? ? ????????????? ????????????? ?????????? ???
    ???????? ?????? DVK-E2, ??????? ??????????? ? ?????? ?????????
    ????????, ? ??????? ? ? ??????????? ?????? ??? ???????? ???????????
    ?????? ???? ??????? ???????????.

    and: http://www.canon.lt/products/about.asp?id=1298

    and
    http://www.canon.co.uk/about_us/news/consumer_releases/eos20d.asp

    and: http://www.canon.com.ph/inpage.asp?mainContent=327

    and:
    http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=SNAModelSuppliesAct&fcategoryid=816 &modelid=10464

    and finally from canon USA:
    Data Verification Kit DVK-E2
    9314A001AA

    In Stock
    Price: $1,100.00
    Like its predecessor, this kit can verify whether or not a photo is an
    untouched original. But its use of a Secure Mobile (SM) card reader,
    instead of an IC card reader, makes it more compact than the previous
    version. Moreover, the versatile DVK-E2 is able to verify images
    photographed by the EOS-1Ds as long as they are appended with a data
    verification image.
    Includes card reader, IC card, Software CD.

    Models:
    EOS 1D Mark II, EOS 20D, EOS 1DS

    end of list and quotes.

    But how it works? I don't know, i don't own a 20D yet.

    Bart


    you can send email to me using
    mendelson-at-mendelson-dot-nl
    www.mendelson.nl
    bart Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 17:37:04 +0100, bart j mendelson <nl> wrote: 
    >
    > Then the B&H website must be wrong. And so is amazon:
    > [...][/ref]

    Five bazillion vendors plus Canon themselves can't be wrong, eh?
    I just checked the manual. The hitherto-mysterious Custom Function
    18, "Add original decision data," is indeed for use with the DVK-E2.
    Sorry for spreading misinformation, and thanks for setting me straight!

    --
    Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
    Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
    questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
    --Josh Micah Marshall
    Ben Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    Op Tue, 8 Mar 2005 16:47:08 +0000 (UTC) schreef Ben Rosengart
    <br+com>:
     
    >>
    >> Then the B&H website must be wrong. And so is amazon:
    >> [...][/ref]
    >
    >Five bazillion vendors plus Canon themselves can't be wrong, eh?[/ref]

    Not only vendors but also the always correct Canon Lituania :-) !
    you can send email to me using
    mendelson-at-mendelson-dot-nl
    www.mendelson.nl
    bart Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    In article <com>,
    bart j mendelson <nl> wrote: 

    In the crypto world this is usually called a digital signature.

    The easiest way to do this is give each camera a small piece of
    temperistant storage (for the key), and a certificate for the key.
    (And updated firmware to compute signatures).

    No need for a dedicated memory card, or a secure card reader.

    The tricky part is of course to make sure that the key is well protected.

    (Given the decicated memory card and the secure card reader, it is possible
    that the actual digital signature is computed in the secure card reader,
    and that before that a less secure scheme is used. A MAC between the
    camera and the secure card reader is also possible, but that does not
    require a dedicated card. The deciated card suggests that the card
    recognizes the camera, that camera does not do anything special,
    and that the secure card reader recognizes the card and computes the
    signature.)


    --
    That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
    could believe what it liked, including the idea that it bad been done by.
    It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses where so cheap to make.
    -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
    Philip Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    Seems the topic wandered to something you did not ask for. For me I would
    go with the Nikon. I have a 12-24 and find it quite good. Have never
    compared the results with a Canon 10-22. I owned a Canon Video that used
    interchangeable lens. I spend a great deal on my Canon Lens system only to
    junk them all within two years. They grew fungus internally and were
    useless. My 35 year old Nikon lenses which I packed all over the Pacific
    Islands in some very adverse weather conditions are still perfect. It's
    Nikon for me when compared to Canon based on my personal experience.


    "Marty" <netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:com... 


    IMKen Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22


    "Colin D" <127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:127.0.0.1... 
    >
    > I don't now whether you do this 'officially' for police or legal
    > reasons, but if you will be in a position to rely on your shots as
    > evidence in a court, you may be called on to prove the authenticity of
    > your pictures. A negative is generally regarded as incontrovertible
    > proof of authenticity, but the ease with which digital images can be
    > tampered with generally means it is harder to prove the image as
    > genuine.
    >
    > Canon is working on (may have it on the market now, as I haven't been
    > following the progress) a system that will be proof of authenticity for
    > a digital image, for the reasons outlined above. I am unaware of any
    > move in that direction by Nikon, or any other maker of digital cameras.
    >
    > This may well dictate your choice of camera, and hence lens.
    >
    > Colin[/ref]

    Since one can always use a digital camera and a film recorder the legal
    system has me bewildered!

    George


    George Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 23:49:26 +1300, Colin D
    <127.0.0.1> wrote:
     

    I have been hearing this stuff for years now. Most of the major
    police forces here in Canada have already switched to digital, in fact
    there was an article in Photo District News last year about the
    Winnipeg Police and RCMP using digital only, and I know that the
    Ontario Provincial Police uses digital imagery interchangeably with
    film. All the forensic technician or photographer is required to do,
    if asked, is testify that the image represents the scene as he saw
    it. The same thing they were asked to do with film. In my entire
    career I have never heard of a photographer having to produce a
    negative in court.
    McLeod Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    FWIW:
    Canon's "data verification kit" has been available for quite a while. I've
    seen a web page on it, and a magazine (web) article on it, but I just went
    to the Canon USA web site ... and their search capabilities are soo anemic
    that you will have a hard time finding it. The "official" name is "Canon
    Data Verification Kit DVK-E2."

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04012903canondvke2.asp

    http://www.adorama.com/ICADVKE1.html

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/product/266214/CADVKE1/REG/4969

    http://www.canoncompanystore.com/epages/annex.storefront







    "Marty" <netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:com... 
    > >
    > >I don't now whether you do this 'officially' for police or legal
    > >reasons, but if you will be in a position to rely on your shots as
    > >evidence in a court, you may be called on to prove the authenticity of
    > >your pictures. A negative is generally regarded as incontrovertible
    > >proof of authenticity, but the ease with which digital images can be
    > >tampered with generally means it is harder to prove the image as
    > >genuine.
    > >
    > >Canon is working on (may have it on the market now, as I haven't been
    > >following the progress) a system that will be proof of authenticity for
    > >a digital image, for the reasons outlined above. I am unaware of any
    > >move in that direction by Nikon, or any other maker of digital cameras.
    > >
    > >This may well dictate your choice of camera, and hence lens.
    > >
    > >Colin[/ref]
    >
    > Thank you. I do use the stuff in homicide defense cases ... mostly
    > death penalty. I have been doing this for about forty years as a cop
    > first and defense after that. (I am pretty old.) The standard here in
    > Maryland is that the picture fairly and accurately represents the
    > scene as it was observed by the photographer. I have never been asked
    > for a negative ... yet. Nor have I been asked if the photos were made
    > using film or digital. I have, during the past two years, used some
    > digital p&s without question so far.
    >
    > Thanks again for your input.[/ref]


    RSD99 Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 15:46:08 -0500, McLeod <com>
    wrote:
     
    >
    >I have been hearing this stuff for years now. Most of the major
    >police forces here in Canada have already switched to digital, in fact
    >there was an article in Photo District News last year about the
    >Winnipeg Police and RCMP using digital only, and I know that the
    >Ontario Provincial Police uses digital imagery interchangeably with
    >film. All the forensic technician or photographer is required to do,
    >if asked, is testify that the image represents the scene as he saw
    >it. The same thing they were asked to do with film. In my entire
    >career I have never heard of a photographer having to produce a
    >negative in court.[/ref]

    Thank you McLeod. I have been in court for 40 years myself and also
    have not had to produce any negatives. In the old days I used a 4x5
    Speed Graphic and recorded f-stops, shutter speeds, film, developer,
    etc. No one ever asked me about that stuff either. My photos usually
    have to do with a view someone says they had. That is, an impossible
    view. Thus, if someone doubts my pictures and testimony they only need
    to go out to the scene for themselves. Usually it has something to do
    with police or government witnesses having amazing x-ray vision ... or
    the ability to see around corners. :)

    As I said way above, in Maryland we are asked if the photograph
    "fairly and accurately represents the scene" ... very similar to
    Canada I now know.

    Marty
    Marty Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 19:00:24 GMT, "IMKen" <rr.com> wrote:
     
    >[/ref]

    Right you are IMKen. I think I like the D70 better than the Canon XT
    or 20d. My experience with Canon is from 1966 and I had to problem. I
    had Nikons in quantity after that and also had no problem. However I
    then switched to all Leica rangefinders for a decade. They were my
    loves. Today I couldn't afford even one of them. Thanks again.
    Marty Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    Marty wrote:

    <snip>
     
    distortion?

    <snip>

    Both of these lense are about the same level. The advantage of the EF-s
    10-22 is that it's available for about $300 less. I paid around $625
    for it, while the Nikon 12-24 is about $930.

    Since you may be shooting at higher ISO settings, due to the lack of a
    flash, you probably should go Canon, rather than Nikon, since the Canon
    has lower noise at the higher ISO settings.

    Really either one would be fine. The D70 body will be cheaper, since
    there are rebates on it now as it is about to be replaced by a newer
    model, but the Rebel xt will be cheaper for the body plus wide-angle
    lens.

    Steve
    http://digitalslrinfo.com

    Scharf-DCA Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22


    "Scharf-DCA" <com> wrote in message
    news:googlegroups.com... 

    I believe the OP indicated a preference for tripod-mounted long exposures,
    not high ISO settings. Marty, is a little more digital noise going to
    impact your work as a crime scene photographer?

    Walt



    Walt Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: Nikkor 12-24 vs. Canon 10-22

    "RSD99" <net> wrote in message
    news:nDqXd.29492$.. 

    Based on what Marty and McLeod (the working pros in this area) have both
    indicated, this would appear to be another solution for a problem that
    doesn't exist.

    Walt


    Walt Guest

  20. #20

    Default DVK-E2

    On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 20:00:43 -0500, Walt Hanks <net> wrote: 

    Legal systems move slowly (as they should). Society is still
    figuring out how seriously to take cryptographic evidence. Perhaps
    it will take an unusual case to establish the admissibility of this
    kind of cryptographic evidence. Like one where the facts are hotly
    contested and the photographer is dead or otherwise unavailable.
    I'm not holding my breath. But it's a cool idea and I do think it
    deserves and will some day see its day in the sun.

    --
    Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
    Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
    questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
    --Josh Micah Marshall
    Ben Guest

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Nikkor vs Sigma (70-300 f4-5.6)
    By Ken in forum Photography
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 7th, 09:52 AM
  2. Nikkor lenses
    By Avery in forum Photography
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: July 29th, 11:20 AM
  3. A new Nikkor 200-400 F4 VR
    By ThomasH in forum Photography
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: July 26th, 03:15 AM
  4. Nikkor 28-105 D
    By Nobody in forum Photography
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 17th, 12:25 PM
  5. Nikkor 24/2.8 AF (non-D) - is good?
    By Cthulhu in forum Photography
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 11th, 09:26 PM

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