[hdesbois]

Hi Hervé,
I've been using a (film) Nikon SLR for some years now (F100 model). I'd say that under most conditions, autofocus is doing great job. If you can borrow a Micro-Nikkor 60 mm (fixed focal lenght), or the older (non AF 55 mm), you can test your camera since these lenses are as sharp as any lens can be. A simple 50 mm 1.8 is cheap and ultra sharp. Always use a sturdy tripod with a good head for sharpness tests (Manfrotto gear is good value for money), and overide autofocus. Most lenses have an optimum quality at about 5.6 to 8 fstop, so, use aperture priority mode with good lighting so as to use at least 1/60 shutter speed. I don't know about digital Nikons, but the old film cameras were excellent quality, with enough nice lenses for every occasion. I'd be surprised if you could not get top quality pictures with your D200.
H.

[John Layne]

Hey Hervé

I bought my Nikon D200 last year and have been very happy with it.

After reading a few articles on sharpness, I ended up switching off the in camera sharpness setting and now do all sharpening in Photoshop.

Unless I'm off on a long trip and will shoot more than a 100 photos I shoot in RAW mode (Nikon .NEF) and convert to Photoshop and or Jpg with Photoshop's Camera Raw.

Lenses I own and I'm happy with the sharpness with all of them, in most situations.

Nikon 18-200 DX VR
Nikon 12--24 DX
Nikon 80-200 D f2.8 (One I used with my Nikon film Camera)

Ken Rockwell has a review of the 18-200, where he discusses sharpness in general, worth a read http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200/ ... rpness.htm

[tokiop]

Hervé,

I don't know if it can help, but I had sharpness problems with my 350D that were only coming from a bad hmm "eye correction" setting (correction for myopes etc so they can shoot without their glasses..)... So the picture were sharp for my eye but not for the camera. Don't know if it is clear, but for me this was the source for the same frustrating problem !

[Hervé]

wow so many advice... thanks !! I do think it was an auto-focus problem..

Mihai, I'll do the focus test, thanks for the link..

Ludenhud, these are really great pictures... what I expect from that cam in fact !..

Henri, I found an article about the fstops... they indeed say don't go above f11... thanks

Thanks for the link also Ricardo.. very useful !

anyway, I will post some results...

Thanks Maxwellians..

[Leonardo]

hmm... It seems that somebody was looking at this old thread today

I know, because that person went straight to my website to look at some pictures

[ivox3]

....aren't you crafty ?

[simmsimaging]

Canon is the de facto standard for professionals, at least in the advertising end of things, and most of the guys I know using Canon are converts from Nikon in the film and early digital days.

b

[Jeff Tamagini]

Canon is the de facto standard for professionals, at least in the advertising end of things, and most of the guys I know using Canon are converts from Nikon in the film and early digital days.

b

From what I have witnessed over the last few years and starting to become a semi-pro, Portrait/Wedding guys, and nature/landscape tend to be nikon, while Sports, cars and wildlife photographers tend to be Canon....

im personally a Canon user, I have a 30d, A 28-135 IS USM Lens and a 100-400 L series lens

[j_man]

Hervé, the camera bodies these days aren't that important, they all have about the same qualities, and some features you need to decide for your self which would be more useful for the things you want to do. The important thing is the lens, and I think Canon has a larger variety of lenses and perhaps also better quality than Nikons offer. From Canon you have the "L" series lenses which are expensive but are usually great quality. You can look at some user lens reviews starting at fredmiranda.com and then search for more indepth reviews on the web.

Mihai... I beg to differ... a significant component of the camera body is the sensor that records the image... Canon has produced a superb image sensor in the 5D (full frame) and the smaller one found in cameras such as the 20D, 30D, and Rebel models is also very good.

I agree with the comments re. the quality of Canon glass...

Hi Herve,

I got my canon 20D over two years ago and I think it's a fair thing to say that it is the best thing I ever bought. I would recommend canon over Nikon as Mihai has said, because of the range of lenses they have. I think MrCharles has missed the point. Of course the camera body and CMOS is very important, but camera bodies are for Christmas and lenses are for life.
I love canon but I do hear fantastic things about nikon as well!
The 20D is superb, but soon (hopefully!) I will upgrade to a 5D. The 350D and 400D are excellent cameras but they don't have the solid feel and sturdiness of the mid range canons. I suggest you go to the store and get them in yours hands and take a few photo's to see how you feel.

Cheers,

Josh.



Josh.

[Ringas]

IMHO both Canon and Nikon are very good choices.

I personally own a Nikon D200 because I already had an F100 with a 24-120 AF lense which I like very much so I didn't want to change system. I only bought a new 12-24 DX f4 lense which I tend to use all the time.

The only reason why someone might want to favour Canon over Nikon is the format multiplier which increases the focal length of the lenses; my 12-24 is actually a 18-36 (Nikons have a lense multiplier of 1.5). Canon has some models with a multiplier of 1.0.

So if you want to use wide lenses like 14s or fisheyes and don't already use a certain system, it might be better to go for Canon. Remember though that wide lenses are much more expensive and bulky.

[mrcharles]

I think MrCharles has missed the point. Of course the camera body and CMOS is very important, but camera bodies are for Christmas and lenses are for life.
...
Cheers,

Josh.

I don't think so... we are selling a lot of top-of-the-line canon lenses right now because the new digital cameras can't use them... lenses are for life if you shoot Leica (selling mine right now) or view cameras.

I saw a significant improvement in image quality between Nikon and Canon sensors at the same asa/iso and especially when iso settings are high.

If you are finding Nikon glass to meet your needs, great. We, however, saw a marked difference in sensor recording as well as lens quality and have no regrets with Canon digital.

In the best of all situations, go to a pro camera store and rent both cameras and lenses for a weekend and start testing. Reviews and personal inputs are useful, but nothing compares with doing your own tests.

[Mattia Sullini]

And what do you pros think about the exploit of Sony with alpha 100? I know it's not really a professional camera, but does the job quite well!
I am experimenting with macro, and haven't perfectly focused the part i needed, but the overall quality of tones looks to me quite pleasant

[j_man]

And what do you pros think about the exploit of Sony with alpha 100? I know it's not really a professional camera, but does the job quite well!
I am experimenting with macro, and haven't perfectly focused the part i needed, but the overall quality of tones looks to me quite pleasant

actually considering it is designed on what sony bought from konica it is definately bred on professional quality and excellence.

my 'other' walk around camera is going to be a panasonic:

http://www.panasonic.co.uk/digital-slr/ ... /index.htm

J.

[mrcharles]

Mattia...

That is some beautiful light in that photo of yours... hey, is that a Maxwell sky?........ just kidding.....

On the technical side, I would never use a photo like that of the flower for a primary standard to judge image quality... either of the lens or the sensor... (it might be useful for other kinds of judgements.... another good subject is of bare branched trees against an even, overcast sky...
)

35mm lenses are almost always severely compromised... in so many ways... I just sold my Leica lenses and they have been the best I've used for 35mm.

When I do lens tests one kind of photograph I make is a mid-distanced, sharp edged building and compare edge to edge sharpness at several different f stops.

Some interesting general observations...
the best image sharpness for a lens often occurs at around f5.6 or f8 (both absolute and edge-to-edge)...

Significant diffraction induced blurring of abs. sharpness occurs at settings of f11,16 and higher (but if you need the depth of field you pay the price)...

Zoom lenses are almost always a compromise compared to a fixed focal length lens...

Virtually no camera manufacturer supplies a correctly made lens hood (this is a big deal if you are concerned about flare and coma... and you ought to be if you ever have a light source in front of the camera plane...)

[Mattia Sullini]

here's what you asked for, but i am not sure i am doing a good job for promoting the alpha 100!
I used an old Minolta zoom lense 35-70mm and maybe this could be the cause for light to eat the branches...
f/10 1/25 ISO 400 45x1.5=67mm

Shot with DSLR-A100 at 2007-08-09