D2X vs D-70 and more

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

Okay, here's my latest attempt at showing what the D2X can do,

trying to incorporate suggestions from those on this forum. Thanks.

To simplfy things all of the pics are in my portfolio rather than

loading up this thread. The folder D2X vs D-70 contains two sets of

photos. The balcony shots were in LA at ISO 200 f9 at 1/80 with D2X

and 1/100 with D-70 with Nikkor AF-D 135mm F2 DC. The SMU shots

were in Dallas at ISO 200 f11 with Nikkor AF-D 85mm f1.8, 1/90 with

D2X and 1/60 with D-70. All shots were on a tripod without lock-up

as this is not an option with D-70 and were finger triggered. I

res'd up the D-70 full sized shots to the same pixel dimensions as

the D2X (4288 by 2850) and then made similar crops. ALSO, in the

D2X folder are two pics of interest, one shot from an LA cab on Hi-1

ISO (1600) and one of Grauman's Chinese Theater on Hi-2 (3200). Now

I admit these pics were intentional dark, but I find the noise level

pretty acceptable given the ISO setting. And you'll have to take my

word for it that it's much better at full res than dumbed down for

PN. These were shot with Hi ISO noise reduction on, set to normal.

None of the images in either folder have been tweaked in anyway

except for the res changes and crop mentioned above. Enjoy guys and

gals and look forward to your thoughts. Paul

[bryan_lardizabal]

Paul & others "tests".....Why are so many people comparing the Mercedes to a

Volkswagen?

 

IMO...it doesn't take any effort to test & post as to which DSLR is the clear winner

here, although the D2X samples are in fact superb!

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

Only because people have asked to see the comparison. Believe me, I don't need convincing.

[arnabdas]

Haha, but can you see a US$ 4000 difference in image quality? I cannot!! However, I'd probably give up to $ 3000 more for the difference in build quality, features and handling. Methinks the D2x is still overpriced by 1000$ on a pure manufacturing cost basis (as is the 1D Mk II)

 

Paul, thanks a bunch for undertaking this!

[bill c.]

Brian-- It's not so much that we're comparing the two cameras as much as that we're using the D70 as a benchmark. Lots of people have the D70, and it's a known quantity. -BC-

[gary_woodard]

Pixel comparisons,100% crops, ducks, cats, seagulls, has anyone done

anything with the D2X that warrants a second look. Just wondering.

[arnabdas]

"Pixel comparisons,100% crops, ducks, cats, seagulls, has anyone done anything with the D2X that warrants a second look. Just wondering."

 

Self-portraits!! I bet the D2x will render much sharper features!

[kelvinphoto - arlington, t]

And for those that compare it to d2x vs 1dsMarkII, get real! how could a 1.5x sensor beat a 1x sensor with a 3k different? d2x should only compare to 20D or 1dMarkII, which are about the same sensor size and Nikon doesn't have anything to compete against it. Good bye Nikon, my x-cameras.

[umd]

Kelvin Phan, why don't you share any experince of yours about how 1x sensor is way better than a 1.5x, given there are quite convincing observations that tell otherwise. Subframe has caught up in image quality but full frame hasn't caught up in price advantage. Subframe has its own benefits like corner to corner sharpness and less lightfaloff issues. Subframe trend is observable even in Canon camp, they are releasing more EF-S lenses and I bet 1D replacement will be a 1.6x camera, also I don't expect any replacement to 1DS, subframe competitors will kill it. Indeed if you gonna switch why don't you just do it at once and stop posting "good bye Nikon", "I am switching bla bla" in every unrelated thread?

[chris_chow]

It would be interesting to see if the images from D2x can be up-res as well and if so, the extent to which they can get away with it.

 

So, may be there is still an advantage for D2x if we can talking about really big prints.

[lex_jenkins]

Well, that's a relief, Paul. It would be disappointing if the D2X wasn't better than the D70. ;>

 

$3,000-$4,000 worth of difference? Depends on your needs. For some photographers, yeh, absolute, it's worth the difference.

 

Kelvin: News Flash - Nikon vs. Canon Debate

 

Tens of thousands of photographers polled. Survey says: Yawn.

 

On the other hand I do believe that everyone should drive a GMC Sonoma because *I* do. And, as everyone knows, it's all about me. And my truck.

[loreneidahl]

Thanks for the work Paul.

 

 

Kelvin-

 

Are you still on this board.?? Your right Canon is better. Now GO buy your Canon.

 

You have to admit that Kelvin does give a rallying point here. Kinda fun!

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

Fact of the matter is that the review I've seen that compares the D2X to the 1Ds Mark II shows that the pictures from the DX sensor are in fact BETTER than the Canon's. Even the photographer I assist who shoots with the Canon, admitted the difference was clear. As far as anything worth looking at, I shot the same balcony at night (hand held) and I enjoy looking at it. Maybe you will too. It's in my D2X folder.

[bryan_lardizabal]

Paul, I believe the D2X is the "Nikon" Digital Champ for now.

 

As for the debate extraordinaire here: bigger, better, faster, 1.5x, 1x?! Geez!

 

In the end....all our efforts result in pictures, records of time, seconds in

technological evolution, and the passion of those behind cameras.

[vivek iyer]

1X is far better because it avoids the crap factor. A 28mm lens would still be a wide angle lens and not a "normal lens".

 

It is simply ridiculous to compare the D2X with the 1DsMkII. D70 comparison is fair.

 

I still wonder if D70 exhibits better D-range than D2X- any tests on that anyone?

 

I am happy to note that D2X, indeed, does better than D70 in terms of sharpness!

[dan_brown4]

Thanks Paul, great camera!

 

Perhaps a more interesting comparison would be D2x versus D2h, because these two

cameras as somewhat equal in build quality, handing and features. Then the question

would devlove to image quality versus a US$3000 price differential. Perhaps Lex and Paul

could work out a plan for such a test?

[ellis_vener_photography]

<I>1X is far better because it avoids the crap factor. A 28mm lens would still be a wide

angle lens and not a "normal lens".</I><P>

That really is a distinction that exists more in your (and other people's) head(s) than

anywhere else. a 24x36mm format is what you are used to. How many Hasselblad (6x6cm

format) or Mamiya RZ67 (6x7cm format) users whinge on and on about how a real normal

focal length lens is actually 80mm or 90mm (respectively) and that considering a 50mm

as a normal focal length lens on the 24x36mm format is still a wide angle except for what

you call the "crap' factor. How many 4x5 users think that way about what is considered a

wide, normal or long focal length for that format vs. what is considered a wide, normal or

long focal length lens for medium format? Now Consider that the standard "Academy"

format size in 35mm cinematography (16.00 x 21.95mm) is smaller than the DX sensor

while the Super 35mm cinematography format is just slightly larger ( 24.9 x 18.7 mm)

than the Nikon DX sensor. meaning that a 28mm to 35mm focal length, is for the DX size

format, is considered a normal focal length lens.<P>

<I>It is simply ridiculous to compare the D2X with the 1DsMkII. D70 comparison is fair.

</I><P>Actually it isn't ridiculous. I'll be testing a D2X against both of those Canon

bodies in

next week or two. I don't really have a favorite dog in this hunt. My older gear is

nearing the end of it's life cycle with the exception of one or two specialty I need a new

system and going with any new system

at this point is going to require me purchasing an entirely new system of lenses

and speedlights as well as camera bodies. That means that over the next year or two I'll be

forced to spend anywhere from $11 to $20,000. If anyone think I'm gonna make this size

decision lightly, you are definitely a few bananas shy of a full bunch -- and many of the

remaining fruits are badly bruised.<P>

 

 

<I>I still wonder if D70 exhibits better D-range than D2X- any tests on that anyone?

</I><P>I'll test for that too. Thank you for the suggestion.

[ShunCheung]

Well, there was photography before 24x36mm became so popular. When I was a kid in the 1960's, the first camera I used was my grandfather's 6x6 folder and Rolleiflex type twin-lens reflex was also very popular. The dominant film was 120. We didn't have internet and the web then, or people would have been talking about the "crop factor" of 24x36mm and 50mm lenses should only be wide angles.

 

Today, I also use a Contax 645 SLR where my 45mm/f2.8 lens is a fairly wide lens.

 

And before 120 film, Ansel Adams did most of his work with an 8x10" view camera.

 

Different formats have always been around, and the most popular format has changed a few times over the years. The general trend is that it gets smaller over time. 24x36mm was popular from the mid 1960's or so to the first couple of years in the 21st century. I suggest you should get used to changes in history. Some day in the future, something else that we probably can't even imagine today will replace 16x24mm CCDs and CMOS sensors.

[vivek iyer]

Ellis, Thanks!

 

I was referring to the 1 X vs 1.5X in the context of more choices of wide angle lenses for the 1X (well, if the canon lenses do not hold up well, because of the small camera registry, it is possible to use, Leitz, Nikon, Zeiss wide angles through an adaptor).

 

I really do not care about the size of the sensor as long as the corresponding lenses are available.

[tony_cabrera]

For me...

 

After using the D2X for only a couple of gigs, the extra $4000 is worth the:

- extra MP

- rugged pro build

- menu features

- extra mileage (long term use)

- large VF!

- AF (I can now use my lenses to its potential)

 

And slap it on a Stroboframe Pro RL and people get out of your way!

[tony_cabrera]

BTW... I drive a VW Touareg and it's the best vehicle I've ever owned, so stop saying Mercedez vs VW! Instead say Mercedez vs Daewoo or somthing...

[mark_chappell]

<I>Kelvin: News Flash - Nikon vs. Canon Debate<P>

 

Tens of thousands of photographers polled. Survey says: Yawn.</i><P>

 

Thank you, Lex. Let me add my yawn.

[bryan_lardizabal]

"so stop saying Mercedez vs VW! Instead say Mercedez vs Daewoo or somthing..."

 

I had a bad experience with a VW Jetta, so good for you. My D70 is much better than the Jetta, however its not a Mercedes

[tony_cabrera]

I was just messin around Bryan =)

 

So does that mean my D2X is better than my VW?

[bryan_lardizabal]

Tony

 

Absolutely!! I have resigned to the fact all cars are evil