Nikon D7000

tkbslc wrote in post #10913612
On paper the 39 AF points looks cool, but remember only 9 of them are cross, just like Canon.

And all of the cross-type sensors are in the middle. This is the one problem I have with Nikon's cameras--they don't spread out the cross-type points on any of their cameras.

This is a brilliant move on Nikon's part. It essentially demolishes the 60D before it's even out, and gives the impression that Nikon offers more value for the money. If this is what they do to the D90, I can't imagine the D300/D700 successors.

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #10913900
And all of the cross-type sensors are in the middle. This is the one problem I have with Nikon's cameras--they don't spread out the cross-type points on any of their cameras.

I believe the 50d also has all cross points and they are located in the middle as well.

elitejp wrote in post #10913964
I believe the 50d also has all cross points and they are located in the middle as well.

50D points are not all in in the centre they are spread out in a diamond shape.

Whoa then nikons are REALLY inn the middle

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #10913801
Not sure where you're getting that figure. DPR says £1699.99, which will probably mean about $1700 in the States. Still a bundle more than the 35L, but you can be sure the 35L Mark II will come in at about the same price.

Ummm...at the current exchange...£1699.99 = $2656.35...Now I realize its not a DIRECT conversion, as the brits pay different import taxes and such, but it isn't likely to be almost $1,000 less than the conversion either.

And the 24/1.4, which should be priced pretty similarly is $2640 MSRP, discounted to $2200 on Amazon. I'll be freaking shocked and amazed if that lens launches UNDER the $2k mark in the states.

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #10913872
The only thing I think it needs at this point to be a real pro body is dual card slots, so it's most of the way there to the APS-C pro body that Canon had needed in their lineup for a long time. Just goes to show: different strokes.

Be careful what you wish for...having two slots is great...IF they are allowed to behave the way that makes the most sense for your individual liking. I know my old 1D2 didn't behave as I would have liked...I prefer the RAW on one card, JPG on the other method...the 1D2 wouldn't play that particular game...I think they have fixed this since the 1D2N, but still...simply having two slots doesn't gaurantee added functionality.

AngryCorgi wrote in post #10914098
Ummm...at the current exchange...£1699.99 = $2656.35...Now I realize its not a DIRECT conversion, as the brits pay different import taxes and such, but it isn't likely to be almost $1,000 less than the conversion either.

And the 24/1.4, which should be priced pretty similarly is $2640 MSRP, discounted to $2200 on Amazon. I'll be freaking shocked and amazed if that lens launches UNDER the $2k mark in the states.

At Amazon, 35mm is $1800 USD, which is about $850 less than the conversion.
http://www.amazon.com …7&creativeASIN=​B0042X9LB0

I can't find the 24mm on Amazon. I assume they aren't taking pre-orders yet?

The conversion doesn't work in camera pricing structure. I think others have already established that it doesn't....

AngryCorgi wrote in post #10914145
Be careful what you wish for...having two slots is great...IF they are allowed to behave the way that makes the most sense for your individual liking. I know my old 1D2 didn't behave as I would have liked...I prefer the RAW on one card, JPG on the other method...the 1D2 wouldn't play that particular game...I think they have fixed this since the 1D2N, but still...simply having two slots doesn't gaurantee added functionality.

The D7000 does allow you to put raw on one card and jpg on the other: http://www.nikonusa.co​m …tail.ProductTab​s.Overview

CameraAddict wrote in post #10914388
At Amazon, 35mm is $1800 USD, which is about $850 less than the conversion.
http://www.amazon.com …7&creativeASIN=​B0042X9LB0

I can't find the 24mm on Amazon. I assume they aren't taking pre-orders yet?

The conversion doesn't work in camera pricing structure. I think others have already established that it doesn't....

Yes, as I said it isn't a direct conversion...$1800 is still WAY too much for that lens. Go look at some sample images at nikon's int'l site. Not lookin' real sharp wide-open for a nearly $2k lens.

CameraAddict wrote in post #10914411
The D7000 does allow you to put raw on one card and jpg on the other: http://www.nikonusa.co​m …tail.ProductTab​s.Overview

Yes, I was making a point (since he wished it were on the CANON, not the NIKON) that thinking a general feature gauranteed usefulness isn't always solid logic.

I guess it just makes sense if lenses are more expensive than bodies. Camera bodies comes and goes, after few years this will be ancient, and worth almost nothing second hand comparing to price now. While lens holds it value quite well.

CameraAddict wrote in post #10914388
I can't find the 24mm on Amazon. I assume they aren't taking pre-orders yet?

24/1.4

AngryCorgi wrote in post #10914779
24/1.4

i want an upated one from canon. or better yet, a non-L FF version dang it.. a 24/2 with USM. I don't use it often enough to justify the L, but it sure would be nice to have.

AngryCorgi wrote in post #10914098
Ummm...at the current exchange...£1699.99 = $2656.35...Now I realize its not a DIRECT conversion, as the brits pay different import taxes and such, but it isn't likely to be almost $1,000 less than the conversion either.

And the 24/1.4, which should be priced pretty similarly is $2640 MSRP, discounted to $2200 on Amazon. I'll be freaking shocked and amazed if that lens launches UNDER the $2k mark in the states.

Then you'll be freaking shocked and amazed.
http://www.nikonusa.co​m …KKOR-35mm-f%252F1.4G.html

$1799.95.

If you're not used to comparing Euro/British prices with U.S. prices, here's a general rule of thumb: U.S. price will be close to 1-to-1 in terms of number, not currency value. So if a lens is £1000, believe it or not it's usually around $1000 in the States. Weird, I know, but that's how it is.