I was ogling the D3 a bit more, the full-frame digital SLR that has remarkably high ISOs… (Aside: having seen sample shots, ISO3200 and ISO6400 do have some noise/grain. Very usable, but not the same as shooting at ISO200.)
It also turns out that the D3 technology has been put into a smaller digital SLR, the Nikon D700. It’s $2,000 cheaper, but apparently retains the high-ISO, full-frame sensor. It gains on-board flash. It features Live View (so you can use it like a point-and-shoot, instead of looking through the viewfinder like a real photographer), a 920k-pixel LCD (which is apparently quite superior to those on Canon cameras), and seemingly features the Adaptive Dynamic Range feature on the D300 and D3, which is pretty neat.
Nikon also has a 14-24mm zoom lens. This doesn’t sound too impressive in the age of 10mm zooms, until you realize that this is 14mm for full-frame cameras: the 10mm and 12mm lenses are designed just for cropped-sensor digital cameras. A 10mm lens on my XTi would be the equivalent of a 16mm lens on a full-frame camera, on account of the 1.6 crop factor. And if I mounted the 10mm lens on a full-frame sensor, it would look horrible, with the image being inside of a black circle. But the 14mm is the real deal. It’s also an f/2.8 lens, which is quite fast, and it’s also apparently ridiculously sharp. The word “insane” comes up a lot in describing this lens.
It’s worth noting that the D700, although $2k cheaper than the D3, is still $3,000. Canon’s 5D is around $2,000, and can hold its own at high ISOs, just not 6400+.
I’m almost getting the feeling that Canon is resting on their laurels at this point. Sure, the 5D was/is great, but Nikon’s definitely upping the ante here.
Also, Sigma has a 12-24mm zoom (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3236&navigator=1) which works on full frame cameras, and for about half the price. Although I’m not sure it matches the Nikon in optical performance — which, as you mentioned, is apparently phenomenal, although it got a fair review at PopPhoto.com. Canon has a 14mm prime, but that’s about it.
Er, slightly confusing. That should be:
Although I’m not sure it matches the Nikon in optical performance — which, as you mentioned, is apparently phenomenal — it got a fair review at PopPhoto.com
(Funny how a trivial change in punctuation changes the meaning.)
I’d really like to see Canon come out with a response to the D3, because I’m not liking all of this looking at Nikon SLRs and their silly circular viewfinders. (Then again, if my biggest complaint is the shape of the viewfinder, they’re clearly doing something right!)
I hadn’t realized the 12-24mm was full-frame… It’s pretty darn wide.
C’mon, Canon!