I thought this was worth a read:
I know a lot of controversy and trolling has come into forums worldwide with the emergence of the Canon 350xt. Particularly because it seems to be aimed at the Nikon D70. Many comparisons have been made but none have addressed the real world issues about making a choice between these two fine cameras.
In order to settle a few doubts in my own mind, I obtained one of each model camera (through journalistic review opportunities) and put them through their paces. There are no computer simulations or analyses here. Just things you too can do if you set your mind to it. So without further ado, I submit to the world my testing report incorporating several criteria. Please be advised that as a control in some circumstances I have tested against an example of older technology so as to ascertain how far things have progressed. Both cameras were tested with the kit lenses offered in the target market area. In this case, Australia.
Accuracy
Accuracy is a premium requirement in a camera. I've been able to acertain subtle performance differences in the D70 / 350xt comparison testing. A lot of it will depend on your own personal style. If you tend to pitch with a pronounced spin, you'll notice quite a bit of difference between the two cameras. For a subject, in this case I've had the cooperation of the neighbors cat.
The neighbors cat occupies a clear space on my rear fence, some 11 metres (about 35 feet) from my rear door. Testing was undertaken over a period of nights.
The D70 has a nice heft and feel to it. The case has a reasonably rough texture and is fairly solid. Importantly, the kit lens has a slightly further forward weight, which shifts the centre of gravity. This causes it to spin with a pronounced gyration. This must be taken into account as it affects trajectory.
The 350xt is slightly more compact. It has a smoother surface and felt a bit lighter. This gives it an increased velocity for the same amount of energy. If you have problems judging distance, here is an advantage. A faster camera will drop less over the same distance. If you normally end up dropping your shots, go for the Canon. It also spins more centrally due to the lighter lens. Hence it is more linear on the way to the target.
So what does this all mean? The testing tells the story. The first few launches with the D70 missed the cat completely. I take this to be caused by the curved flight inherent in this model. Eventually I was rewarded with a direct hit and the cat disappeared faster than a 500th of a second flash sync. The cat reappeared approximately 45 minutes later and commenced it's second act. (As a sidenote, cats in Australia are made of sturdy stuff. This test in Northern India took three weeks to complete. Their native house cats would not return for the rest of the night )
Having some hard data with the Nikon, I turned to the Canon. Twice it sailed over the caterwauling moggy before I scored a solid hit. I attribute this to the lighter weight. This hit was more central and produced a satisfying thump. As this was closer to the center of body mass, the intrepid feline was removed from the fence more in line with the camera direction. Pussy returned approximately 38 minutes later and recommenced.
This gave the opportunity for some control testing with a film camera. Here's where the old technology really shines. With a slightly more weighty body and a lens of lesser range and weight, the film camera feels solid in the hand. Although I preferred the slightly textured feel of the polycarbonate bodies, the cool matte finish of metal gives a very nice purchase. It all adds up to a quite different experience.
It may be my familiarity with the film camera, but the first launch was rewarded with a solid hit. That sound is something quite different. I mean polycarbonate is very sturdy and impact resistant material, but the force transmitting power of metal just can't be readily beaten. Despite holding on with all claws deployed into the softer wood part of the fence, the carousing cat disappeared faster than a hippy at a soap making convention.
Also consider that a film camera of reasonable vintage has far less rounded edges and lots more pointy things. I'm sure everything else being equal, it would be a lot more uncomfortable. Our hardy test subject decided to move to a different venue at this point, so no further testing was possible.
So, who has the advantage here? Film comes out on top. 350 slightly ahead because of better flight characteristics.
Further testing of the cameras ensued.
I tested their performance as a jack stand, bullet proof vest, coffee cup, pizza cutter, hay bailer, solar hot water heater and sundial.
More details of these tests will be forthcoming in further installments..
The post can be seen here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&thread=13265373
I know a lot of controversy and trolling has come into forums worldwide with the emergence of the Canon 350xt. Particularly because it seems to be aimed at the Nikon D70. Many comparisons have been made but none have addressed the real world issues about making a choice between these two fine cameras.
In order to settle a few doubts in my own mind, I obtained one of each model camera (through journalistic review opportunities) and put them through their paces. There are no computer simulations or analyses here. Just things you too can do if you set your mind to it. So without further ado, I submit to the world my testing report incorporating several criteria. Please be advised that as a control in some circumstances I have tested against an example of older technology so as to ascertain how far things have progressed. Both cameras were tested with the kit lenses offered in the target market area. In this case, Australia.
Accuracy
Accuracy is a premium requirement in a camera. I've been able to acertain subtle performance differences in the D70 / 350xt comparison testing. A lot of it will depend on your own personal style. If you tend to pitch with a pronounced spin, you'll notice quite a bit of difference between the two cameras. For a subject, in this case I've had the cooperation of the neighbors cat.
The neighbors cat occupies a clear space on my rear fence, some 11 metres (about 35 feet) from my rear door. Testing was undertaken over a period of nights.
The D70 has a nice heft and feel to it. The case has a reasonably rough texture and is fairly solid. Importantly, the kit lens has a slightly further forward weight, which shifts the centre of gravity. This causes it to spin with a pronounced gyration. This must be taken into account as it affects trajectory.
The 350xt is slightly more compact. It has a smoother surface and felt a bit lighter. This gives it an increased velocity for the same amount of energy. If you have problems judging distance, here is an advantage. A faster camera will drop less over the same distance. If you normally end up dropping your shots, go for the Canon. It also spins more centrally due to the lighter lens. Hence it is more linear on the way to the target.
So what does this all mean? The testing tells the story. The first few launches with the D70 missed the cat completely. I take this to be caused by the curved flight inherent in this model. Eventually I was rewarded with a direct hit and the cat disappeared faster than a 500th of a second flash sync. The cat reappeared approximately 45 minutes later and commenced it's second act. (As a sidenote, cats in Australia are made of sturdy stuff. This test in Northern India took three weeks to complete. Their native house cats would not return for the rest of the night )
Having some hard data with the Nikon, I turned to the Canon. Twice it sailed over the caterwauling moggy before I scored a solid hit. I attribute this to the lighter weight. This hit was more central and produced a satisfying thump. As this was closer to the center of body mass, the intrepid feline was removed from the fence more in line with the camera direction. Pussy returned approximately 38 minutes later and recommenced.
This gave the opportunity for some control testing with a film camera. Here's where the old technology really shines. With a slightly more weighty body and a lens of lesser range and weight, the film camera feels solid in the hand. Although I preferred the slightly textured feel of the polycarbonate bodies, the cool matte finish of metal gives a very nice purchase. It all adds up to a quite different experience.
It may be my familiarity with the film camera, but the first launch was rewarded with a solid hit. That sound is something quite different. I mean polycarbonate is very sturdy and impact resistant material, but the force transmitting power of metal just can't be readily beaten. Despite holding on with all claws deployed into the softer wood part of the fence, the carousing cat disappeared faster than a hippy at a soap making convention.
Also consider that a film camera of reasonable vintage has far less rounded edges and lots more pointy things. I'm sure everything else being equal, it would be a lot more uncomfortable. Our hardy test subject decided to move to a different venue at this point, so no further testing was possible.
So, who has the advantage here? Film comes out on top. 350 slightly ahead because of better flight characteristics.
Further testing of the cameras ensued.
I tested their performance as a jack stand, bullet proof vest, coffee cup, pizza cutter, hay bailer, solar hot water heater and sundial.
More details of these tests will be forthcoming in further installments..
The post can be seen here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&thread=13265373
Last edited by a moderator:
