I hate Nikon!!! :)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030602nikond40x.asp#press

Seems like my D70s is now obsolete.

 

I'd not consider your D70 obsolete. It still takes pic's as good as when it did last year no?

Seems like a good MOve by Nikon. The D40 looked like an excellent camera for the MOney, but it's megapixels that sell to the masses, so upping to a 10.2MP version seems a good MOve.

The thing is tiny, which may or may not be appealing.

 

looks like they've also brought out a VR version of the 55-200
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030601nikon55200vr.asp

There's rumoured to be several new lenses set to be announced at PMA as well as the possible D3

 

I hate canon too: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0702/07022208canoneos1dmarkiii.asp

 

but this happens with just about everything..? - if it didn't we'd still all be driving morris minors and using XT pcs...

 

Or listening to vinyl?

 

Time to switch Isaac

 

Yes, it is the digital way. Remember real cameras? (or even vinyl) which stayed in production for years if not decades.

My D70s is a fine camera of course but it's just annoying that it no longer features in Nikon's product line.

 

Sure... where's Nikon's 300 F4 VR? Or 70-200 F4 VR?

 

Issac, beat me to the vinyl. Drat, must do less work and more typing.

 

The mind boggles.

 

How about a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR instead? For just £1300 or so, you might at well buy me one too while you're at it

 

well.....if you feel the need to upgrade and have a cheap dslr to sell...I maybe interested!

 

Does anyone here read any photography mag's?

I picked up a copy of Digital Photo the other MOnth to help pass some time on a train journey. Some interesting features, but I hadn't realised it's largely a photoshop magazine. Can anyone suggest an alternative?

 

erm...I bought a mag a few times last year (it came with free booklets about techniques etc) and that name escapes me now... but it was called digital photography or something...well, this was a useful reply..?

 

Canon have both F2.8 and F4. My shoulder says I want the F4. IS/VR means I don't need F2.8.

 

I'd been looking at lenses when purchasing my camera. I'd considered a VR lens and was trying to decide what I *needed* MOst, max' apperture, or VR. IS/VR sounds great but only helps with static objects no? Wont help with freezing MOving objects in low light or give the extra DOF control.

I can neither currently afford or justify it at the MO' and am still trying to get my head around my DSLR and kit lens anyhoo

 

At long lens lengths F4 gives pretty narrow DOF. Canon's IS has a panning mode which works for moving subjects. Ultimately, you can't get away from the benefits of a stop of additional light, but then again, IS helps in a lot of situations (eg very low light, hand-holding). A few examples:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=505740

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=505154

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1288449

In the case of both my 70-200 F4 (which isn't IS, but I'd like the IS version) and my 300 F4L IS, I'd rather have a lens that there's a vague chance I'll take with me than one I'll leave at home because it's too heavy. Even as it is my camera/laptop bag busts the cabin baggage allowance...

 

I have the 80-200mm F2.8 nikkor, however could not stretch to the VR one. However the whole line up is built like a brick shithouse.

My wife knocked over my camera the other day whcih was attached to a tripod so it had a nice arc to go round on the way down with an almighty bang. Lens is fine, my nerves were not.

 

my brother's nikon 8700 received the same treatment during xmas... ...beleive its still ok

I read soem where that a gentleman droppd his (5700) 6 foot onto concrete.....still worked