[rodi]

.
nikon would not put a moving LCD monitor on its flagship. and I think more than 11fps would not be a mirror reflex shutter mechanism, so that won't happen unless it's done in live view and the shutter remains open.

with the durability, strength and mass that is the D3's mirror reflex components, I'm surprised it moves as fast as it does now.

guess we have two more months to find out.

[Chewy734]

It's probably is 30 fps under Liveview and APS-C. You're essentially cutting the resolution from 18 to 8 MP, so going from 20 to 30fps is definitely doable. I guess we'll see soon enough.

[rodi]

the crop mode functions as normal. the mirror flips.

[Chewy734]

Oh, ok. Then going from 11 to 30 fps seems like a stretch, but who knows.

[rodi]

11fps crop mode.

not sure if they can go much faster while keeping the 300,000 shutter-life guarantee with those components. but you're right, who knows. just seems crazy. if they leave the shutter open like in live-view, then it could go much much higher. live-view on the current series closes and operates the mirror normally for each shutter click, so it doesn't stay open either.



.

[rodi]

who does that embedding forbidding bullshit anyway. christ.
fail.

[Chewy734]

[rodi]

ooh it's working now?

[Chewy734]

nope, still fail rodi. But, it's not hard to click the image and watch it on youtube.

[The1]

yeah, I've watched it, and as a result of clicking the youtube link, watched about 6 other video reviews on cameras now

[Chewy734]

gonna be batting for the other team Reed?

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

gonna be batting for the other team Reed?

haha, i mixed up the 2 threads....

[The1]

I'm going to stick it out with Canon, i have too many Canon lenses to make that jump. And i'm pretty happy with them and the progress I'm making.

I'm curious to see what the next version of the 1D brings to the table however for a future investment if i get really into things and my photography falls into place (and start making money on it..... that always helps)

[Chewy734]

I meant batting for Nikon instead of Canon.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

I meant batting for Nikon instead of Canon.

corrected above

blonde moment....

[Chewy734]

carefully buddy... I hear Badger's all about blondes.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

carefully buddy... I hear Badger's all about blondes.

damn, i'm not safe doing anything!!! good thing my blonde is so dark people think it's brown!

[M_Six]

Amazon.com now playing tricks with the 24-105 F4. They have it listed at $999, but when you go to buy it they suddenly have none in stock for that price. But the same vendor (Abe's of Maine) does have it for $1099.

Deja vu all over again, eh?

[Chewy734]

I'm curious... what made some photogs here choose to go with Canon while others with Nikon? What were your reasons?

I don't mean to instigate something like the never-ending Mac/Windows war

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

I'm curious... what made some photogs here choose to go with Canon while others with Nikon? What were your reasons?

I started with Yashica and Pentax back in the 1960s. After my Pentax Spotmatic got stolen in the 1980s I was kind of cool on photography because I didn't have facilities to process film like I really wanted to do. Still, I "needed" a camera for travel and kid photography, so I bought film P&S cameras that had zoom lenses and a bit of control for the user and good prices, which led me to Canon. (It could have just as well been Nikon, but I felt like Pentax, Minolta and the others had fallen behind at that point).

When it came time to buy a DSLR I was using a Canon G9 and the Canon DSLR (5D MkII) seemed like the natural progression. Now that I'm into nature photography and using a supertele lens a lot, Canon has more selection at this end of the lens range and tends to give a little better value because of Canon's emphasis on its long-lens selection. In the woods and on the sidelines of football games and sporting events, the big, white lenses seem to dominate.

My brother just went with Nikon and I didn't protest too much, other than point out that he couldn't borrow my 500mm/f4. He's a noob and I don't think that he realized what he was passing up.

I think they're both fine systems. Sony also has some great bodies and lenses and Pentax seems to be making a comeback of sorts. I have a friend with a Sony and the long lens selection is pretty dismal.

Dave

[Chewy734]

Interesting Dave. Needless to say, I wasn't around way back when. But, I came to Canon because my dad owned an AE-1 when I was a little kid (I still have it), and it always fascinated me. I never really knew the technical differences between Canon, Nikon, etc at the time, so I stuck with the brand I knew when I bought my first P&S and later a dSLR.

[rodi]

when I bought my first dslr, I was using a Sony R1 fixed lens camera. a friend of mine at school who was shooting and printing some really good stuff let me try out his D100 and I really liked the feel of it versus all the canon rebels that were around. I just felt it was a better ergonomic design. and the fact that nikons will accept any lens made since the 1950s, whereas canon was limited to the recent EF mount. seemed like a good idea if all I needed was a cheap dslr and a cheap old 50mm. cheap d40 plus a $40 lens made in the 70s. think I sold the 18-55 kit lens for $20.

wouldn't it be cool if you could use your dad's FD mount lenses from his AE-1?