new d3 and d300

[chickenhawk212]

The new nikon cameras look really interesting.  iso 25600, 14 bit, burly build quality and many other features that would appear to best the newly released 1d3 and 40d in their respective segments.  Seems like most everybody here shoots canon...what do you guys think of nikons new hardware?

Also, it seems that nikons standard zooms and primes dont have any kind of optical stabilization where many equivalent canons in this range do; however, nikons long lenses do have the vr.

Is nikon just being stingy with the stabilization or does canon still hold some kind of patent on the technology in the standard focal lengths?

Chris

[BernardLanguillier]

Is nikon just being stingy with the stabilization or does canon still hold some kind of patent on the technology in the standard focal lengths?

Chris
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135207\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are actually lenses like the 18-200 with VR so I don't think that there is any patent issue involved.

My guess, but it is just a guess, is that the new Nikkor zooms are PJ oriented.

The basic assumption on nikon side appears to be that reliability is the #1 priority for PJ gear and that VR lenses still cannot be compared in terms of mechanical robustness and reliability. That's what I guy close to Nikon explained to me a few months back here in Tokyo.

Another possibility might be that Nikon intends to sell a 24-70 first, and then a VR version a few months later. :-)

Regards,
Bernard

[jani]

Sorry for barging in several months afterwards ...

There are actually lenses like the 18-200 with VR so I don't think that there is any patent issue involved.

Actually, there is.

Canon's IS and Nikon's VR behave differently.

The VR system uses two sensors to detect pitch and yaw separately, while the IS system uses a gyro sensor.

I had a deeper look into the differences some time ago, and my personal conclusion is that the world would've been a better place, had Canon and Nikon not been sitting on their respective patents, but rather allowed eachother to make use of the advantages found in both technologies.

As it is, I don't see Canon or Nikon "winning" because of a superior stabilization technology, it's just us consumers who lose because they don't cooperate.

Earlier this year, Canon announced new developments in their more expensive TV broadcast gear, and perhaps experience gained from this will sift down into our "cheap" SLR lenses in a few years. I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon have similar developments in store.

[BJL]

Also, it seems that nikons standard zooms and primes dont have any kind of optical stabilization where many equivalent canons in this range do; however, nikons long lenses do have the vr.

Is nikon just being stingy with the stabilization or does canon still hold some kind of patent on the technology in the standard focal lengths?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nikon has recently announced a VR standard lens, an entry level kit lens for DX format:
[a href=\"http://press.nikonusa.com/2007/11/new_nikon_afs_dx_nikkor_1855mm.php]http://press.nikonusa.com/2007/11/new_niko...kkor_1855mm.php[/url]
as well as having had a 24-120 VR for some years, and more recently an 18-200 DX.


So I guess it is just priorities: longer lenses first, with Canon having got further along the path to stabilizing standard zooms.

The arrival of in-body IS in all three main competing DSLR systems is probably pushing Nikon and Canon to add stabilization to more of their standard zooms: it was just a few months earlier that Canon added an IS version of its 18-55 EF-S entry level kit lens.

[oldcsar]

Speaking of the new IS version of the kit lens... photozone's analysis concludes that its optics are massively improved (even border and corner sharpness), although the build quality is only marginally improved.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/ca...556is/index.htm

If Canon had fixed the inner tube wobbling, I would have seriously considered buying this lens.