A700 anyone?

[alfa147x]

for some reason that camera is just not a comfortable to hold

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: alfa147x
for some reason that camera is just not a comfortable to hold

Valid. Everyone's different there. I'm a firm believer in handling a camera first, and in the idea that the best camera in the world is whatever camera the photographer in question is most comfortable with.

Go with what works for you.

ZV

 

[alfa147x]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: alfa147x
for some reason that camera is just not a comfortable to hold

Valid. Everyone's different there. I'm a firm believer in handling a camera first, and in the idea that the best camera in the world is whatever camera the photographer in question is most comfortable with.

Go with what works for you.

ZV

I enjoy having every thing in thumbs reach for the left side of the camera

 

[alfa147x]

Originally posted by: alfa147x

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: alfa147x
for some reason that camera is just not a comfortable to hold

Valid. Everyone's different there. I'm a firm believer in handling a camera first, and in the idea that the best camera in the world is whatever camera the photographer in question is most comfortable with.

Go with what works for you.

ZV

I enjoy having every thing in thumbs reach for the left side of the camera

i think i didnt like the feel because its bigger vertically then other slrs

 

[alfa147x]

also if I were going to buy a camera in the a700 price range it most likely would be the 40d or the d300

looking at there iso 100 shots

the d300 wins next coming 40d and then the a700

for the iso 1600 shots

40d -> a700 -> d300

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: alfa147x
also if I were going to buy a camera in the a700 price range it most likely would be the 40d or the d300

looking at there iso 100 shots

the d300 wins next coming 40d and then the a700

for the iso 1600 shots

40d -> a700 -> d300

I don't know how anyone can tell the difference at ISO 100 in the RAW files. And if you're comparing default jpgs out of the camera, you need to realise that changing a setting or two can vastly alter the appearance (for example, the A700's default sharpening on jpgs is much less than that of the D300 or the 40D, but if you up the sharpening to +1 or +2 on the A700, the shots become essentially indistinguishable). Also, the shots used on DPreview to show A700 jpgs were not the highest-quality jpg produced by the A700. They should have been using the X.Fine setting instead of the Fine setting.

At any rate, I don't think that any of the three (A700, D300, 40D) are objectively better from ISO 100 through ISO 1600. There are some differences, but in that range "better" is subjective.

ZV

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: alfa147x
for some reason that camera is just not a comfortable to hold

contradicts my feelings (& hence me ponying up my cash for a dearer body) but then handling is always personal.
I find 400D/XTis horrible & yet it's probably the biggest selling DSLR in the world.

I enjoy having every thing in thumbs reach for the left side of the camera

you are going to struggle then as afaik no DSLR has all it's controls like that

also if I were going to buy a camera in the a700 price range it most likely would be the 40d or the d300

the D300 isn't really in the 40D/A700 price range though as it's 50% dearer.
Now, when the D90 comes out imo it most likely will be.

looking at there iso 100 shots

the d300 wins next coming 40d and then the a700

as already mentioned the 40D & D300 shots are best quality jpeg from the camera but the A700 are 2nd best.
the best ISO level for the A700 sensor (& indeed the KM 7Ds before it) is 200 so to a very minor extent you aren't seeing it at it's absolute best at 100.
& then of course they all used different lenses which instantly throws a spanner into the works of a true side by side comparison as you have introduced a major variable.

At the end of the day though imo the IQ between all of them is very, very close.

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Too bad Sony has sh!t glass by comparison...it is a nice body.

*cough* Troll *cough* Troll *cough*

You can call me a troll when you go to a major sporting event and see mostly Sony lenses instead of all those Canon white lenses.

I am sorry, but taken as a whole and considering their use amongst professional, Canon puts Sony to shame.

But don't get me wrong, I hope Sony follows through and adds pressure on Canon and Nikon. Should be good for prices/features.

by the metric of the sidelines, Nikon, Leica, and Zeiss are sh!t, and I would beg to differ. the only reason most pros today use Canon is because their AF was faster twenty years ago. Nikon was the first into digital, and currently has the best sports camera on the market. but they're all so good now, it makes more sense than anything else to just stay in whatever lens family you currently use.
the Canon ads showing sidelines full of white lenses (and Nikon makes white lenses, too, btw. white is so much better for the big lenses, the black ones get unbearably hot very fast) are nothing more than peer pressure advertising. "all the pros are doing it, so amateurs can too!" but hand an amateur a 1D(s), and they'll be utterly confused. hand them a D2/3, and they'll be confused for a bit, figure the basics out, then get to the Custom Functions menu.