A900 and D3X studio comparison
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
- KevinBarrett
- Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
- Posts: 2449
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:32 pm
- Location: Seattle, Washington, USA
- Contact:
-
David Kilpatrick
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
- Location: Kelso, Scotland
- Contact:
Re: A900 and D3X studio comparison
Well, I just bought into the Nikon system this afternoon. Tamron will only send out Nikon sample lenses now, and the 10-24mm was on its way to me. Actually we have a Fuji S5 Pro on review, and I will use that, but when digging around for a cheap Nikon body I contacted a pro friend who had some Kodak gear for sale. So for £270 I will shortly be the owner of a 2001 vintage duo, DCS760C and DCS720X (but no lenses, so I'm also digging around for a decent s/h cheap lens). This purchase falls into a 'must be mad' category, as both are based on the Nikon F5 and weigh roughly twice as much as an A900. The 760 is six megapixels on 1.3X factor with quite superb ISO 80 quality/colour, and the 720 is 1.6X factor only 2 megapixels but ISO up to 6400 and shooting at 4.8 frames per second. Plus, both have interchangeable F5 viewfinders and removable IR/AA filters - the 720X was given free with the 760, because the IR filter got broken and has been removed, leaving a bare sensor (capable of IR shooting with a 72 filter etc).
They won't really be all that much use for testing lenses, but I am very curious to compare the ledendary F5 focusing and metering - plus total weather sealing etc - with today's F100 based offerings. And I'll probably recover the outlay by doing some comparisons between a £7,500 camera from 2001 with the current state of the art.
David
They won't really be all that much use for testing lenses, but I am very curious to compare the ledendary F5 focusing and metering - plus total weather sealing etc - with today's F100 based offerings. And I'll probably recover the outlay by doing some comparisons between a £7,500 camera from 2001 with the current state of the art.
David
- Dusty
- Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
- Posts: 2215
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:04 pm
- Location: Ironton, Missouri, USA
Re: A900 and D3X studio comparison
Am I ever glad I wasn't an early adopter! What was that, 10 or 12 K U$D at the time? OUCH!David Kilpatrick wrote:And I'll probably recover the outlay by doing some comparisons between a £7,500 camera from 2001 with the current state of the art.
David
Dusty
An a700, an a550 and couple of a580s, plus even more lenses (Zeiss included!).
-
David Kilpatrick
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
- Location: Kelso, Scotland
- Contact:
Re: A900 and D3X studio comparison
I published the first full page magazine repro ever done in Britain from one of those early models, along with a cover (which was a derivative treatment, so not as pure). My collaborator was John Henshall, who went on to start EpiCentre:
http://www.epi-centre.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I worked with John on digital imaging from 1990 to 1994, as his editor - the 'Chip Shop' title for his series of artiles was one of my suggestions, which lasted long after I departed from that particular magazine. It ran until he finally encountered an editor who did not understand digital imaging the same way he did, or maybe was jealous of the popularity of the column and the success it had brought John - I suspect the latter.
http://www.epi-centre.com/reports/9810ccs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Canon version of the DCSx60 model which came two years before the Nikon, and was limited to 1fps - and cost according to this article $27,000!
John has sort kept his diary of models intact by doing this website. I have long ago forgotten most of the digital cameras I have used, but like John, we also had a Logitek Fotoman, and before that a Canon Ion (from which I removed the front mounted anti aliasing filter much improving the results).
David
http://www.epi-centre.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I worked with John on digital imaging from 1990 to 1994, as his editor - the 'Chip Shop' title for his series of artiles was one of my suggestions, which lasted long after I departed from that particular magazine. It ran until he finally encountered an editor who did not understand digital imaging the same way he did, or maybe was jealous of the popularity of the column and the success it had brought John - I suspect the latter.
http://www.epi-centre.com/reports/9810ccs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Canon version of the DCSx60 model which came two years before the Nikon, and was limited to 1fps - and cost according to this article $27,000!
John has sort kept his diary of models intact by doing this website. I have long ago forgotten most of the digital cameras I have used, but like John, we also had a Logitek Fotoman, and before that a Canon Ion (from which I removed the front mounted anti aliasing filter much improving the results).
David
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests