[R2D2]

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

Erm.. the 14-24 and the 24-70 are the only two that are, for now, better than their red counterparts! The new 24-70 (red) in all probabilities be better than the golden one (based on the recent launches of the upgraded versions. Red also has many more wonderful value for money choices (like the 70-200 f4/f4 IS) and always has been a choice of more pros when it comes to teles.



How reliable do you think the DXO results are!!? Just a glance through the DXO results (for the canon lenses, not sure if the same holds good for nikon) will make you laugh!

Both, D800 and 5D MK III are very very good cameras and the difference between them is not exactly night and day. Both have their pros and cons.

The NEX 7 sensor (which will also be seen in the D3200) can hardly embarrass the mkiii. The sensor might be the heart of the camera but there is so much more to camera than just it.

BTW, I am not a canon fanboy! Just sharing a few facts.

Not to worry mate. Shaju's comments were made purely in jest. While I may own Nikon system I have experienced other camera brands. For e.g. the very 1st SLR I used was my Dad's Canon AE-1 (as a school boy) and a Yashica as well.

But you are absolutely right about with lenses - the 14-24 is yet unrivalled and Canon owners use adapters to mount that lens. The Nikon 24-70 is superb as well. But the new Canon 24-70 IS II version due in July should be even better, as it has IS but it comes with a big jump in price. The Nikon version was introduced in 2007 along with the D3 and is due for an update - hopefully only in performance and features not price. The new Canon 70-200 IS II is a whisker ahead of it's Nikon VR2 counterpart.

While I agree that both the D800 and 5DMK3 are very good cameras, let me also share a few facts with you. DXO are imaging scientists and far more respected for their inputs than you would imagine. Read around on the net. As of now the only people bashing them now are Canon fanboys.

As for real life tests of the D800 and the 5DMk3 here's a link - Canon 5D Mark III - Nikon D800 Review

And this is from a very experienced photog who primarily uses Canon.

PS - what system do you use?

Cheers!

[shajufx]

Originally Posted by white-rabbit

Guys,any idea of a photography contest,for a beginer like me can try?

If you have the time, just google a bit, there are 100s of contests going on weekly & monthly on many online portals and annually by various publications.

Originally Posted by ntomer

....Tokina isn't available in India with bill and warranty......Nikon 16-85, but the more I read about it, the more doubts I have.......Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 ......

As far as I understand, smartshoppers and flipkart sell all products with valid bill & warranty. Nikon 16-85 is heavy and I would prefer a Sigma 18-50 2.8 or Tamron 17-50 2.8 anyday over the nikon. I had the sigma bought for 21k in 2010, its bang for the buck and delivers razor sharp images. I also had compared Tamron 17-50 in the shop itself, could not find any difference, pricing was almost the same too.

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

Erm.. the 14-24 and the 24-70 are the only two that are, for now, better than their red counterparts!.......

Does it really matter ? When it comes to real life situations, nobody cares if you carry a golden ring or red ring or no ring, images speak for itself and its very very rare people ask if you had a ring on the lens. Frankly I dont mind having golden & red on a single lens

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by shajufx

Does it really matter ? nobody cares if you carry a golden ring or red ring or no ring, images speak for itself

Amen to that! Only gearheads would bother about the colour of the ring or the presence of a ring.

Originally Posted by shajufx

Frankly I dont mind having golden & red on a single lens

I am going to put a red rubberband around my gold rimmed lenses! That should serve those nosey gear heads right.

Cheers!

[MindSpeeDs]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Not to worry mate. Shaju's comments were made purely in jest. While I may own Nikon system I have experienced other camera brands. For e.g. the very 1st SLR I used was my Dad's Canon AE-1 (as a school boy) and a Yashica as well.

But you are absolutely right about with lenses - the 14-24 is yet unrivalled and Canon owners use adapters to mount that lens. The Nikon 24-70 is superb as well. But the new Canon 24-70 IS II version due in July should be even better, as it has IS but it comes with a big jump in price. The Nikon version was introduced in 2007 along with the D3 and is due for an update - hopefully only in performance and features not price. The new Canon 70-200 IS II is a whisker ahead of it's Nikon VR2 counterpart.

While I agree that both the D800 and 5DMK3 are very good cameras, let me also share a few facts with you. DXO are imaging scientists and far more respected for their inputs than you would imagine. Read around on the net. As of now the only people bashing them now are Canon fanboys.

As for real life tests of the D800 and the 5DMk3 here's a link - Canon 5D Mark III - Nikon D800 Review

And this is from a very experienced photog who primarily uses Canon.

PS - what system do you use?

Cheers!

No worries!
The new canon 24-70 is non IS. I am still waiting for the reviews to creep in for this one and the tamron 24-70 VC. But looking at the way the new canon lenses are should be very good.

Coming to DXO and their credibility -
DXOMark with Canon Lens Resolution - Canon Digital Photography Forums

How reliable do you think this data is!!?

I have gone through Fred's review and almost every possible review out there on the internet (including all the ones on youtube) and still can't say that the D800 is so much a better camera. The sony sensor sure is doing a wonderful job in the D800, I do feel that canon has finally gone ahead in the AF department which was Nikon forte. Some people just want great jpeg images, mk iii has an edge, the auto white balance seems better on mkiii than on d800, the feel, build quality, ergonomics have been vastly improved and even the nikonians are preferring the mkiii in this regard, high iso video seems to be better in mk iii. From what I see, cleaner images from the raws of the mk iii at higher iso's over the d800 seems true. however, the resolution of the sony sensor in the d800 is absolutely ridiculous! even the high iso performance is not that behind the mk iii like what many have said. DR seems to be way ahead (some say it is not so) and pulling out detail from under exposed images is going to be so much better from the raws of the d800.

Canon .
Picked a 5n recently but wish that I should have picked the fuji x pro1 instead. Not as my main one though.
Did start on the canon TL, did try the Nikon and yashica too apart from Oly.

[MindSpeeDs]

Originally Posted by shajufx

Does it really matter ? When it comes to real life situations, nobody cares if you carry a golden ring or red ring or no ring, images speak for itself and its very very rare people ask if you had a ring on the lens. Frankly I dont mind having golden & red on a single lens

Not to me. Sure seemed like it did to you. At least that is what your earlier post indicates!

[white-rabbit]

Originally Posted by shajufx

If you have the time, just google a bit, there are 100s of contests going on weekly & monthly on many online portals and annually by various publications

I did a lot of google,but couldnt find any genuine one. Is there some thing that we can trust and start with?

[shajufx]

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

....that is what your earlier post indicates!

Probably you are very new to my style of posting, I dont miss a chance to pull anyone's leg who talk about brand wars or ring colors and put a bit fire into it whenever possible

Originally Posted by white-rabbit

I did a lot of google,but couldnt find any genuine one. Is there some thing that we can trust and start with?

There are half a dozen running on FB itself. Prizes are nothing big to boast about, but good enough for a beginner. A friend of mine won a home theatre system last month from smartshoppers and I had helped gathering more than 50% likes for her contest image. Hope that gives an idea !

[MindSpeeDs]

Originally Posted by shajufx

Probably you are very new to my style of posting, I dont miss a chance to pull anyone's leg who talk about brand wars or ring colors and put a bit fire into it whenever possible

Could say so because I don't really follow your posts And my response was only to your post that indicated one being better than the other (you got it wrong as to which was better though). Maybe you should try dousing the fire instead of adding fuel or starting anew !

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

The new canon 24-70 is non IS.

I am still waiting for the reviews to creep in for this one and the tamron 24-70 VC. But looking at the way the new canon lenses are should be very good.

You are right..it doesn't have IS. If I were you I'd get the Canon instead of the Tamron. I was put off 3rd party lenses due to previous experiences. The only one I would even consider is a Tokina.

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

Coming to DXO and their credibility -
DXOMark with Canon Lens Resolution - Canon Digital Photography Forums

How reliable do you think this data is!!?

Far more reliable than the rants on a photography forum. DXO are scientists with their rep at stake. It is like a Car & Driver or any auto mag test report. You take it for what it is but make your own choices eventually.

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

I have gone through Fred's review and almost every possible review out there on the internet (including all the ones on Youtube) and still can't say that the D800 is so much a better camera. The sony sensor sure is doing a wonderful job in the D800, I do feel that canon has finally gone ahead in the AF department which was Nikon forte. Some people just want great jpeg images, mk iii has an edge, the auto white balance seems better on mkiii than on d800, the feel, build quality, ergonomics have been vastly improved and even the nikonians are preferring the mkiii in this regard, high iso video seems to be better in mk iii. From what I see, cleaner images from the raws of the mk iii at higher iso's over the d800 seems true. however, the resolution of the sony sensor in the d800 is absolutely ridiculous! even the high iso performance is not that behind the mk iii like what many have said. DR seems to be way ahead (some say it is not so) and pulling out detail from under exposed images is going to be so much better from the raws of the d800..

The problem with Canon is that they haven't released a game changer in the Mk3 that the Nikon D800 is (compared to the D700) despite having the best part of 4 years to work on it. The Mk3 is ridiculously priced @ $3.5K for a camera that brings marginal improvements to the table. Nikon could have priced the D800 far higher but chose to keep it at the level of the D700 when it was introduced i.e. $3K Check the internet forums for reactions from current 5DMK2 owners on the new model's price. And yes, the 5DMk3 has better WB and FPS than the D800 but it is the Nikon's image quality at that sky high resolution that has people gasping in amazement. I honestly didnt believe, being a Nikon system owner myself, to see the D800 as a 36MP camera with IQ and DR that snaps at the heels of medium format. Check this review for a Hasselblad MF and Nikon D800 comparison by pro photogs.

D800 vs Medium Format with Roth and Ramberg - YouTube

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

Canon .
Picked a 5n recently but wish that I should have picked the fuji x pro1 instead. Not as my main one though.

Ah Canon..I should have known. BTW what's the 5N..u mean the 5D? I may be neck deep in the Nikon system but consider myself clear headed and impartial enough to call a spade a spade. In the mid 90s to mid 2000s Canon was wiping the floor with Nikon. This time around Nikon has got it right. Unfortunately Canon dropped the ball this year, especially when it comes to features and pricing of the 5DMk3.

I expect the long delayed and overdue 1DX (another controversy on the delays) to pull ahead of the D4 (which I have). Time will tell. I hope for Canon's sake the 1DX lives upto expectations. People expected more from the Mk3.

In the end purely from a user's perspective - whether it is Nikon or Canon you can't go wrong with either make.

[MindSpeeDs]

Originally Posted by R2D2

You are right..it doesn't have IS. If I were you I'd get the Canon instead of the Tamron. I was put off 3rd party lenses due to previous experiences. The only one I would even consider is a Tokina.

Far more reliable than the rants on a photography forum. DXO are scientists with their rep at stake. It is like a Car & Driver or any auto mag test report. You take it for what it is but make your own choices eventually.


The problem with Canon is that they haven't released a game changer in the Mk3 that the Nikon D800 is (compared to the D700) despite having the best part of 4 years to work on it. The Mk3 is ridiculously priced @ $3.5K for a camera that brings marginal improvements to the table. Nikon could have priced the D800 far higher but chose to keep it at the level of the D700 when it was introduced i.e. $3K Check the internet forums for reactions from current 5DMK2 owners on the new model's price. And yes, the 5DMk3 has better WB and FPS than the D800 but it is the Nikon's image quality at that sky high resolution that has people gasping in amazement. I honestly didnt believe, being a Nikon system owner myself, to see the D800 as a 36MP camera with IQ and DR that snaps at the heels of medium format. Check this review for a Hasselblad MF and Nikon D800 comparison by pro photogs. D800 vs Medium Format with Roth and Ramberg - YouTube

Both of them seem to have some or the other issues as of now and will take some time to iron them out.

Ah Canon..I should have known. BTW what's the 5N..u mean the 5D? I may be neck deep in the Nikon system but consider myself clear headed and impartial enough to call a spade a spade. In the mid 90s to mid 2000s Canon was wiping the floor with Nikon. This time around Nikon has got it right. Unfortunately Canon dropped the ball this year, especially when it comes to features and pricing of the 5DMk3.

I expect the long delayed and overdue 1DX (another controversy on the delays) to pull ahead of the D4 (which I have). Time will tell. I hope for Canon's sake the 1DX lives upto expectations. People expected more from the Mk3.

In the end purely from a user's perspective - whether it is Nikon or Canon you can't go wrong with either make.

I've used Tamron's and Sigma's earlier and definitely believe they can match canon/nikon optically/build (tamron - optically only). But there is a lot of consistency issues.

Nikon 18-135 better than 70-200, a basic zoom better than a really sharp prime. I wonder what data would prove so! It is unlike Cars etc., I'm yet to come such a stark contrast.. say someone says the swift lxi is better than kizashi. Maybe the turning radius/ mileage and drive ability in traffic. That would be more like the weight and portability of the lens and nothing beyond.

Agreed. But sure need to acknowledge the fact that they were listening to people ranting about terrible af or lower fps on 5d and similar such stuff. They have done quite a bit but the advancement in the sensor is not as much as it is in the d800. Maybe it is time that even canon went to Sony for their sensors!. One would get the same sensor tweaked a bit different across canon,nikon and sony!
Pricing is absolutely ridiculous, it is just a matter of a few months before they get down to 3k levels. Well.. unless they have too many takers at this price point.

Oh, heck! do I even sound like a fanboi!? I would have written so even if i were using nikon.

NEX 5N - wanted to have a small form factor camera that gave me slr like images/performance. BTW, the NEX 7 ISO performance is not as good as the 5N but resolution is higher (DXO ranking too).

1DX might be better than the D4 only in the hands of one that can leverage its potential. On paper too (not sure of DXO though)! Wonder what a kidney could go for these days!

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

NEX 5N - wanted to have a small form factor camera that gave me slr like images/performance. BTW, the NEX 7 ISO performance is not as good as the 5N but resolution is higher (DXO ranking too).

By looking at the raw images, NEX5N has got better iso performance than even A77!

[arvind71181]

Originally Posted by Durango Dude

How would you guys rate a brand new Canon EOS 550D with EF 18-55mm lens and 2years India warranty at Rs.32990 at Ebay? Is it a good enough deal?

I think its a very good deal as I when I bought the camera last year itself it was costing 34000. If you are comfortable with online purchases and the seller has a good reputation, then in my opinion you can go for it.

Btw, is the 18-55 lens an IS one?

[fuel_addict]

I am currently using a 1000D since 3.5 years and thinking of an upgrade. The 600D and 60D are two options I have been considering. The lack of HD video and limited metering modes in the 1000D are reasons for the upgrade.

Is spending the extra $$ on a Canon 60D over the 600D (T3i) well justified for a regular/amateur photographer? The features look quite similar with the 60D having following added features:

better build,
bigger battery,
9 cross type AF points,
in camera RAW editing,
max shutter speed of 1/8000s and
3 different sizes for RAW images.

The difference in 60D and 600D camera bodies is around $250 on Amazon. In India, the difference is around 12-13K with the kit lenses.

[Durango Dude]

Originally Posted by arvind71181

I think its a very good deal as I when I bought the camera last year itself it was costing 34000. If you are comfortable with online purchases and the seller has a good reputation, then in my opinion you can go for it.

Btw, is the 18-55 lens an IS one?

Thanks Arvind, yes it's an IS lens

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

I've used Tamron's and Sigma's earlier and definitely believe they can match canon/nikon optically/build (tamron - optically only). But there is a lot of consistency issues.!

That inconsistent quality is what puts most serious amateurs (me included) and pros off 3rd party. I had an experience with Tamron in the early 2000s. I hasten to add Zeiss lenses are an exception but their prices are, well, sky high

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

Oh, heck! do I even sound like a fanboi!? I would have written so even if i were using nikon.

You did come across as on in your first post but now that you've articulated your thoughts further, no you don't

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

NEX 5N - wanted to have a small form factor camera that gave me slr like images/performance. BTW, the NEX 7 ISO performance is not as good as the 5N but resolution is higher (DXO ranking too)..

The NEX5 and 7 are very good cameras but IQ wise the Nikon V1 is good too. If I had to buy an EVIL camera today, Nikon-1 (can use my FX lenses and other accessories) and the Sony NEX would be on the top of my list followed by Fuji

If there's a company that will give the Canon/Nikon duo a run for their money in imaging tech it is Sony. It's quite simple, when you make sensors the kind that Sony makes and with their expertise in electronics albeit consumer, it won't be long before it is snapping at the heels of the big two. Another reason why Canon needs to pull up its socks and get into the EVIL segment like Nikon did with the Nikon-1 system.

The reflex mirror has is its days numbered. They only need to sort out the immediacy/lag time and other issues with EVs. But as things stand today I prefer the optical viewfinder. I am not a fan of PNS style small cameras as the ergonomics are bad and camera shake is an ever present issue especially with telephoto lenses. The pro level cameras are superb in ergonomics but their size and weight are a big problem. If they can shrink the size of the say 1D and D3/D4 bodies to the D800/5D size by incorporating an EV it would be welcome.

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

1DX might be better than the D4 only in the hands of one that can leverage its potential. On paper too (not sure of DXO though)! Wonder what a kidney could go for these days!

1DX is better specced than the D4 and I am one of those believing it will turn out to be better. But specs tell only half the story and Nikon has had a lead in the full frame market ever since it introduced the D3 in 2007 and D3S in '09. Specs aside - coz as with automobile BHP and torque figures lets see what happens when the tyres hit the tarmac. I await the release of the 1DX into the hands of photogs and even DXO.

IIRC, Canon designs and produces its own sensors while Nikon mainly buys them from 3rd parties. The Nikon-Sony combine is working out well. If Canon bought sensors from Sony then it may help them get a leg up in the rush to introduce better models.