Автор: Tateos
Дата: 03-12-04 23:43
Това по-долу е малко дългичко и на английски но е едно от най-добрите лаконични сравнения които съм чел в нета.
И все пак мисля че в случая се касае до пари - имаш в повече - Канон с добри обективи, по малко ли са Никон с китовия, а другите не се резличават толкова в цените сравнени с Канонските - цени - качество.
Ако ти се чете:
![[shtrak]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/shtrak.gif)
Canon 20D vs Nikon D70 - an objective comparison NEW
Most of this stuff is already known and has been discussed. If you get upset over posts like these, then just don't read this one. Otherwise, read on.
The organization I work for has both of these cameras and requires/allows me to take them both out at the same time, with a wide assortment of lenses, to take photographs for specific purposes. During the course of the last few months I have taken the opportunity to compare the two. For the sake of this comparison, I will include comments on the 20D's kit lens, the 17-85IS, and the D70 kit lens, the 18-70.
Also, in my personal shooting I own a Nikon film SLR, and a Canon film SLR, and have owned non-slr digicams of both brands, so I am not biased.
I'll try to keep this short. I will leave out some of the obvious differences in specs, like 5FPS vs 3FPS, etc.
Thoughts :
- 20D has better effective resolution (obviously)
- 20D has slightly larger, brighter viewfinder. It's not exactly a world of difference, nor is the D70's viewfinder "bad", but if you switch back and forth, the 20D's is a bit better. OTOH, the D70 has cool gridlines and center-weighted circle, which are not to be discounted.
- 20D has better Auto WB, but not a lot. Though arguably, the Canon colors are NOT as accurate as the D70. However, my finding was that even after post processing, the D70's color had trouble being as "pleasing" to the eye as the 20D's. I've used Photoshop since version 2; so I'm not sure why this is. It seems as though the 20D simply captures a wider gamut of colors and hues... Sorry I can't be more specific than that. Again, while the colors are not as accurate, they somehow come off as more natural and pleasing.
- Autofocus... I only ever use the center AF point anyway, so I could care less about having 9 or more points. AF speed depends on lens, but overall is similar between the two cameras. I would not really say one is more accurate than the other.
- Build: The 20D is very nice. Not as good as the 10D, or the D100, but better than the rebel by a large margin (duh) and better than the D70 by a small margin. D70's build is great too, especially considering the price.
- Ergonomics: These are generally personal preference, as well all know. I think for someone just picking up either camera for the first time, never having used either brand, the D70 wins pretty handily. The ergonomics are just better, which is probably why Nikon holds a patent on them. That said, I don't really have any issues with the 20D controls, once you use the camera for a short time, they are fine; just not as logical. Click wheel is cool. 20D's LCD response time seems faster. D70 shows more logical information on the LCD/viewfinder, including current ISO value. D70's menus are easier to read (larger fonts), 20D's menus are perhaps easier to navigate, with the wheel.
- Noise: No surprise here, the 20D wins of course. The D70 does well at high noise too though, with a more natural (monochromatic) grain pattern. The D70 can look just as good at 1600 as the 20D, imho, with some noise reduction. However, 20D will be cleaner out of camera, which means less processing time. The big difference is of course in shadow noise, where the D70 tends to be a bit grainier. Great performance from both, though, on noise. ISO100 is nice to have on the 20D, but not THAT important.
- Metering: Big win for the D70 here. One of the D70's strongpoints is that it has the same metering system as the bigger pro cameras in their line. The metering is just awesome. Flash metering is even better... it will blow you away. In contrast, and please don't be offended when I say this, but compared to the D70, the 20D's metering really sucks. The flash metering is even worse. In fact I would go so far as to say the flash metering on the 20D is just a joke compared to the D70. Sorry if that's offensive but during my work I found this to be perhaps the single biggest issue; the metering. The 20D does tend to blow highlights sooner, too, but that's old news; and to be fair, it handles blown highlights better than the D70, which is a plus in its own right. This applies to both matrix/center-weighted metering; and of course the 20D does not have spot meter, which may or may not be important to you; but ask many pro's, many will tell you then wouldn't live without it.
- Moire: To be honest I did not experience it on either camera. The D70 I used is a very new build though, so perhaps this was worked out or something. It is said to exist though.
- JPEG: Both cameras look better in RAW mode. Duh. The D70, however, did suffer more in JPEG mode than did the 20D.
- Lenses: Well, you can make lots of arguments as to who has the better lenses. I had at my disposal many of the best lenses of each brand. My personal opinion is that both manufacturers have various gaps in the lens lines, and neither is perfect. Some say Nikon may cater more towards "art" lenses, Canon towards sports lenses. I don't know. Whatever. One thing I will comment on though, are the two kit lenses, since at this point in time, they are the main two zooms that cover a sensible focal range with the 1.5/1.6X crop, and are (arguably) affordable.
The 17-85IS lens is, in my humble opinion, a very poor quality product. This will offend many people, particularly the more amateur types who have bought their first DSLR (or SLR), coming over from non-SLR digicams. But the fact remains, I did comprehensive shooting with both lenses, and this lens was very poor optically, again in my humble opinion. Primarily it suffers from softness, particuarly at the wide end of the lens. It is also somewhat slow, and while IS is "cool", it is not always helpful (though sometimes it is). There is also a fair amount of CA, though this isn't ever that big of a deal, imo. Some people say the lens is 95% as good as the 17-40L, which i found was very far from the truth. Why should you believe me vs them? Well, I don't own any of this stuff, I just get to use it; whereas they have just shelled out hard money on it, which usually leads to bias. Anyway, while the lens has a great focal length, the optical quality is not up to par for a $600 lens. If it were $300-$400, I think it would be more worthwhile. For some, the optical details won't matter due to the extremely practical focal range. For me, I find it disappointing that there is still no L-quality walkaround lens for the Canon DSLR's (other than perhaps the Sigma 18-50EX; but that really is not long enough at all).
The 18-70DX, on the other hand, is at the other end of the spectrum. It is in fact a very GOOD lens; easily worth more than the cost. It consistently took great sharp photos and even performs well wide open. Nothing bad to say about this one, really.
Anyway, that's all. I tried to be as objective as possible. Neither camera is perfect, but both are excellent and I don't think there is really enough difference between the two bodies alone to justify taking any major price hit, for anyone considering jumping to the opposite system just for fun. That said, it is a very difficult time for someone who is looking ahead to the future, and trying to decide which *system* to go with. Canon seems to be on a good track except for the poor quality of their EF-S lenses thus far. Nikon on the other hand is less certain. While the D70 is a big money maker for Nikon, and rightfully so, the fate of the future line is uncertain... initial reports on the D2X suggest it is NOT a great high ISO performer. While we can certainly expect the D80/200D will match and/or exceed the 20D, who knows how the high ISO performance will be? And while full-frame sensor isn't really that important for the masses, Nikon still has no flagship, FF camera.
So, verdict, both camera bodies rock. Not that you didn't already know, but for anyone who's looking to seriously get into DSLR photography, the only real question is that of systems and lenses, which is quite uncertain at this point, in my humble opinion, and surely a subject for a different post. I hope this was helpful or at least entertaining.
|
|
![[smilie11]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smilie11.gif)
![[smilie21]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smiley21.gif)
![[smilie5]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smilie5.gif)
![[smilie6]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smilie6.gif)
![[smilie3]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smilie3.gif)
![[smilie24]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smiley24.gif)
![[beer]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smiley20.gif)
![[smilie18]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smiley18.gif)
![[smilie23]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smiley23.gif)
![[smilie8]](https://photo-forum.net/forum/smileys/smilie8.gif)
Кой какво казал, а другия пък какво казал за него... Стига бе човек
Последвай Фото Форум във Facebook
Фото Форум в Instagram