• 02-01-2004, 02:28 PM
    Michael Fanelli
    Rob Galbraith & Canon 1D Mk II
    Rob has an excellent preview of this camera with lots of photos. This is a great site for those of you who are sports or PJs as Rob looks at cameras from that point of view.

    http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/mul...id=7-6451-6636
  • 02-01-2004, 09:15 PM
    Cowgirl
    Sooooo. I wonder how much the 1D MII will be? I'm sooo drooling!


    Kathy
  • 02-01-2004, 09:24 PM
    Liz
    Here's the price...........and
    $4,499.

    And......all the specs you need to make a decision! heheh.

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04...neos1dmkii.asp

    Liz :)

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cowgirl
    Sooooo. I wonder how much the 1D MII will be? I'm sooo drooling!


    Kathy

  • 02-02-2004, 09:13 PM
    Cowgirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Liz
    $4,499.

    And......all the specs you need to make a decision! heheh.

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04...neos1dmkii.asp

    Liz :)

    Thanks Liz! I thought that it would be more! OK, I'll keep drooling over it for a long time. I'm still getting use to my 10D.

    Kathy
  • 02-03-2004, 10:07 AM
    Trevor Ash
    I'm hoping it'll be less than $4,500. Wasn't that the suggested or estimated price or sometihng like that. $3,999 is looking a lot better for me :)
  • 02-03-2004, 12:08 PM
    Sebastian
    A Nikon user's thoughts...
    We just were granted the D2H by the Nikon Gods and Canon comes out with this. FIrst reaction is, of course, a sinking feeling in your stomach.

    "Are we really stuck with company that's THIS far behind the times?"

    I have been thinking about this since the announcement, and this has more than tempted me to make the switch than anything ever has before. But I have put a lot of thought into this, and here's what I think:

    The D2H is by many reviewer's accounts the best camera to USE, even according to the hardcore Canon shooters. This is very important to some, meaningless to others. I happen to be one of those who are willing to pay more for Nikon simply because their interface and layout suits my style of shooting almost to perfection.

    BUT, 8mp at 8 frames per second is simply insane. On the other hand, there's more to it than that. THey have added the ability to zoom in on an image, they have added the SD card slot, they have added the data verification kit, and a new flash system. It's all very impressive.

    How does that compare to Nikon's offering?

    The SD card slot confuses me. There is a supposed speed improvement in SD over CF, but the cost worries me, as well as the announcement of the recent 1gig SD cards that needed a special stacking technology to be able to even make them. CF is up in the 6gb range now, which one has a higher potential limit? I don't know, but I digress. I just find it interesting that their data verification kit is using SD cards as well, I can only assume it's because of the SD card's support for DRM, hence the "secure" in the name.

    The D2H on the other hand also introduce a couple new technologies. For one, this might be the most significant, is the flash system. From all accounts, this is the best thing for digital flash out there right now, very reliable from what I've read. Canon's system won't really be tested until the camera and compatible flash ship. The D2H has WiFi, which makes it easier for sports shooters and journalists to get their images out there, and most importantly, it lets them do it FASTER. The D2H incorporates the new 11-point focus system, which is reportedly faster and more accurate than the previous system used on the D1 and F5 series cameras. The D2H also has a new power system based on the lithium ion cells that seem similar to the ones used in the D100. THousands of shots per charge have been reported, but as always depends on how you use the camera. No matter what though, battery life is superior to the 1D in all it incarnations.

    So in the end, what is one to think? Personally, I see this as another example of my longstanding belief that Canon makes their cameras look better on paper, while Nikon does a better job at listening to shooters and giving them what they want when SHOOTING. 8mp at 8fps is very impressive, but in the end, a camera is useless to me if the battery is dead, or if I can't switch setting fast enough to respond to changing situations. And those two things are probably the biggest two reasons that even if the Canon was 16mp at 16fps, I would still most likely be saving for the D2H. Especially since it is 25% cheaper than what the Canon will most likely retail at.

    Just brainfarting around...
  • 02-03-2004, 01:08 PM
    Asylum Steve
    So, where so you have time...
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Sebastian
    Just brainfarting around...

    ... to be daydreamin' about camera equipment, huh??? ;)
  • 02-03-2004, 01:16 PM
    Sebastian
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Asylum Steve
    ... to be daydreamin' about camera equipment, huh??? ;)


    Well, the past two days were spent in bed or playing Knights of the Old republic. I had PLENTY of time to think.... :)
  • 02-05-2004, 09:56 AM
    JeffHall
    Well, on the converse and much lower price point side, I'm looking at the Nikon D70 versus my Canon Digital Rebel and marveling over how much better the specs on the D70 look. Color matrix metering, FEC, MLU, etc. *sigh*. I still have a slight tinge of regret that I didn't go for the 10D.