Canon EOS 30D vs. Nikon S70S?

[Silentwave]

I'm new here, Hi everyone!

To the original poster: it doesn't seem like you need a whole lot. A D200 or 30D would be overkill. If you're going to compare cameras, those are the two to compare- they are the ones targeted to similar markets IMHO.

The D50 vs. the Rebel XT and D70S vs. the XT or maybe the 20D ould be more appropriate.

My suggestion to you is check out the controls and ergonomics- specs are just numbers, and in real world applications they're remarkably close. I personally prefer nikon control layouts, dials and ergonomics. Your opinon may vary.

Then check out glass- Glass is the most important thing apart from you being comfortable with your system. An all around lens seems to be a good starting point, possibly with a 50mm f/1.8 prime to use in low light. The 18-200 VR is a great lens to start with, and it is the king of versatility.

And the resolution jump from 8.3mp to 10.2mp isn't that impressive. Now the jump to 12.7mp is much more impressive. (from 8 obviously not from 10). Also I think Nikon took a step back in using a CCD, they used a CMOS in the D50 and D2X but then decided to use CCD with the D200?? Why Nikon, why?

I wonder, why do you seem to think CMOS is the end-all of imaging chips? CCDs are tried and true- straight up CMOS was only used in the D2X. The D50 uses an updated version of the D70/70s/D100 etc. etc. 6mp chip with better image processing- a CCD. There is no difference in image quality IMO- it is all down to the processing done in camera and on the computer.

I've got the D2HS which is LBCAST (a variant of CMOS I am told) and the D200 and D70 which are CCD. I can get excellent output out of all of them.

Nikon simply made the choice that worked best for the camera- whatever gave the best output and minimized the cost passed down to the consumer won.

I love my D200- it is very well built, and provides me with superb image quality. Build is such an important thing as specs start to even out- for me I like weather sealing (i've gone outside in the early stages of hurricanes with my D70, but would have preferred a sealed body) and the D200's build and ergonomics are excellent. I've held and used most of the canons out there- 5D, 1DMkII, Rebel, Rebel XT, 10D, 20D and 30D... the build of the 20D/30D seems more like my D70 than anything else. The 5D is closer to the D200 in how solid it feels, but I still prefer the grip of the D200, the sealing, and especially the controls.

 

[dogbone]

Should I get a D70s and a good lens and learn with it, or should I get something awesome like the D200, where I will never have to replace (or at least for a few years).

Really, you can faff around with specs and forums till the cows come home but the simple answer to your question is, if you can afford the tiny bit more for the D200 it's a no brainer. Get it.

 

[law guy]

I'm new here, Hi everyone!

Welcome!

I wonder, why do you seem to think CMOS is the end-all of imaging chips? CCDs are tried and true- straight up CMOS was only used in the D2X. The D50 uses an updated version of the D70/70s/D100 etc. etc. 6mp chip with better image processing- a CCD. There is no difference in image quality IMO- it is all down to the processing done in camera and on the computer.

The CCDs in the D200 do have a bit higher noise at higher ISO (of course all of the chips out there are so much clearer than high speed film). I saw a difference between a D50 I tried for a few days and my Canon. (I shot Nikon film and explored that route first and then moved over to Canon in the end, despite originally finding it hard to give up the Nikon layout I'd grown so used to - a few weeks and the Canon layout is very intuitive and comfortable for me now). Early with my 30D I shot a whole day at 1600 by mistake (having set it there the evening before and just forgetting to change it) and didn't notice it until I looked at the photo information after I downloaded the shots. DPreview captures the issue with the higher noise and treats it overall in context of a very positive review.

"Issues, well yes, unfortunately the D200 has one or two. Firstly noise, it's easy to argue that a camera isn't designed to have a particular high sensitivity performance but unfortunately there's a benchmark out there and people now have an expectation of performance with a digital SLR at this level. That's not to say the D200 is particularly bad, but that the competition is particularly good. Certainly if you do a lot of shooting at ISO 1600 or higher you should spend a some time studying our noise tests and high ISO gallery samples."

Of course there are pleanty of individual reviews and comparsion reviews out there. A fun read is the D200 vs. 5D review http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/co...d-Review-/Overall-Impressions--Conclusion.htm
and pros to each.

 

[jared_kipe]

I don't think Nikon used a CMOS sensor in any of thieir DSLR camera. I just cut and pated this from the nikon web site's D50 page "RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6mm; total pixels: 6.24 million" It is a CCD. In theory CCDs can have lower noise but CMOS can have faster readout and lower cost but in the real world we care only about the "total system" and the sensor is only part of that.

I thought the D50 did, but I guess I read wrong. HOWEVER the D2X DOES use a CMOS. I belive you have it backwards too, CMOSes typically have less noise and use less power, from what I remember but I could be wrong.

 

[jared_kipe]

[semi-unrelated]

I just picked up a new 30D on Craigslist for $1000!

[semi-unrelated]

I once bought a 10D and several lenses and tripods off craigslist and turned around and sold them all for ~$600 profit. Thats how I got my Sigma 10-20mm EX

Also, moving from the 300D to the 30D other than the obvious control differences the biggest difference is how much cleaner the high iso shots are. And even middle ISO like 400 is leaps and bounds clearer. On my 300D after shooting a day at iso 400 I swore to myself never again to go over iso 200 unless I really really had to. With the 30D I'd probably say the same thing for about iso 400 or so, but it is really better at things like 1600 too.

 

[Silentwave]

I thought the D50 did, but I guess I read wrong. HOWEVER the D2X DOES use a CMOS. I belive you have it backwards too, CMOSes typically have less noise and use less power, from what I remember but I could be wrong.

Theoretically CMOS has HIGHER noise than CCD- but they can have on-chip noise reduction hard wired.

I like the nikon system because you have selectable levels of noise reduction.

 

[Silentwave]

The CCDs in the D200 do have a bit higher noise at higher ISO (of course all of the chips out there are so much clearer than high speed film). I saw a difference between a D50 I tried for a few days and my Canon. (I shot Nikon film and explored that route first and then moved over to Canon in the end, despite originally finding it hard to give up the Nikon layout I'd grown so used to - a few weeks and the Canon layout is very intuitive and comfortable for me now). Early with my 30D I shot a whole day at 1600 by mistake (having set it there the evening before and just forgetting to change it) and didn't notice it until I looked at the photo information after I downloaded the shots. DPreview captures the issue with the higher noise and treats it overall in context of a very positive review.

With an increase in pixel density comes an increase in noise. There is a noticeable difference inthe way that canon and nikon images are rendered especially at high ISO. I think canons are excellent cameras with great image quality- I just prefer the character of Nikon images even at high ISO. Different feel.

I too have shot days entirely at high ISO once or twice by mistake. that doesn't happen too much as both my cameras show ISO in the viewfinder all the time. I can do it though and have no worries at all. The other day I took my D2HS out and shot in broad daylight at ISO 6400 just to say that I had done it. Yesterday was rainy, as was the day before. Took both cameras out and pushed ISO without a second thought- it cleans up that well. With my D200 I leave noise reduction set for On-Low (as opposed to normal/high) for JPEGS and NEF files, and when processing in Nikon Capture I turn down the level of noise reduction that it automatically applies for the low setting, which is something like 8% at the higher end of the ISO range. On the D2HS I just leave it off since there is no low setting, only normal/high (...yet, a firmware update would be nice) and get perfect results in JPEGs and NEF files.

I have found, however, that adobe Photoshop gave extremely poor results with high ISO even compared to an image opened in Nikon capture with noise reduction turned all the way off- this is with the D200. I understand from fellow users that it also happens somewhat with the D2HS and D2X. I didn't bother to get CS2 for my mac for that reason.

Results may vary, naturally, and accurate exposure to begin with is important to getting good shots at high ISO no matter what cameras you use.

Happy Shooting, my friend

 

[law guy]

With an increase in pixel density comes an increase in noise.

***

Happy Shooting, my friend

I understand that the 5D benefits from a larger full frame sensor and thus the lower pixel density, however, the D50 and D70 utilize slightly larger Sony sensors with lower pixel density (6MP on 1.5x size sensors) than the Canon sensors for the XT, 20D, 30D (8MP on 1.6x) which have less noise at higher sensativities.

Your last note gets it of course, these are all MUCH better than loading in a roll of 800 speed film (though I do miss the grainy blair witch effect sometimes) - happy shooting.

For those of you who never shot film - an 800 speed film (a cheap Kodak print film if I remember correctly) image from twilight shot with a Nikon N80 is attached.

 

[jared_kipe]

Theoretically CMOS has HIGHER noise than CCD- but they can have on-chip noise reduction hard wired.

I like the nikon system because you have selectable levels of noise reduction.

What theory says this?