So, I’ve been dropping in at Calumet a lot lately, I’ve been talking to the guys in there. Believe it or not, I’ve actually found a group of camera store employees who are really cool people! They don’t push gear on you, they talk sensibly, they’re very un-biased as far as Canon VS Nikon VS others, and if you drop by at a time of day when it’s not busy, they’ll let you hold and shoot with various cameras as much as you want… Sure, it’s an un-written law that you ought to pay your “dues” and spend a couple hundred bucks on accessories and things so that they start to know you as a “regular”, but that was fine with me because I needed an Expo Disc and three D200 batteries anyway! (and rental gear on a regular basis too…)

So, I got to shoot for a minute or two with the new Canon 40D and the 50mm f/1.2 L. SWEET!!! I can highly recommend the 40D and maybe a 50mm f/1.4 to any and all my Canon shooting friends… You already know my advice on purchasing, based on which camera you currently have, what your budget is, and what you like to shoot. Long story short, all three cameras, the 20D, 30D, and 40D get my “seal of approval” as far as their VALUE is concerned…

I don’t care what the complainers say, the 3″ LCD is beautiful and big, and in fact I’m almost not happy that Nikon’s D300 screen is “HD”, because that’ll just waste battery power if you ask me…

The buttons being along the bottom instead of the side is no problem. The delete button is smartly indented a little bit more than the other buttons, just to name one small little feature that makes me realize how well thought out this camera is. Speaking of buttins, there is also a dedicated AF-ON button finally! Although EVERYONE really wishes they’d take that silly “direct print” button and make it a “func button” ala Nikon, but I dunno if Canon’s marketing department will ever let that happen…

Oh and auto-ISO, yayy!! I use this on a regular basis with my Nikons, it is quite useful… (However the 40D is limited to only 400-800 ISO, which is just ONE stop of adjustment lol… It can drop down to ISO 100 to avoid over-exposure in extreme circumstances however. But considering how amazing the ISO 1600 is, I really wish they had included it in all the auto-ISO fun. With the D200 it’s very straightforward- you start at ISO 100, you pick the max ISO from 200 to 1600, and you pick the minimum shutter speed, at which ISO starts automatically going up. Very handy, because sometimes you’re shooting wide angle and you can get away with 1/60 sec, but sometimes you’re shooting tele and you need 1/250 sec.)

You no longer lose images if you accidentally open the CF door while taking pictures, that’s handy!

Bokeh with an f/1.8 or faster lens is simply gorgeous… With the 50mm f/1.2, I was able to step WAY back from a subject and still throw the background incredibly out of focus. I can’t exactly recommend the f/1.2 lens when the f/1.4 non-L is just $300 or so and pretty much just as good.

However, there’s one thing that maybe some 40D users can help me with:
For as long as I’ve been using Canon SLR’s, I’ve noticed that the command dials control the exposure in a counter-intuitive direction with relation to the exposure scale that is displayed inside the viewfinder. What I mean is, turn the dail to the left, and the reading on the exposure scale moves to the right. Why? I understand that Canon has “-” on the left and “+” on the right, which is opposite of Nikon, but why aren’t the controls set so that you can turn the dial in the intuitive direction based on looking at the exposure scale?

My question really is, do the newer cameras have a way of REVERSING the control direction? That would be awesome, and it would DEFINITELY help shooters who “make the switch” from Nikon to Canon. That way long-time Canon users can keep on shooting the way they’ve gotten so used to over the years, while any new shooters who might be coming from Nikon can keep on shooting the way THEY used to shoot with their Nikon cameras.

No, I am not considering switching. (Although I often consider ADDING a Canon to my arsenal, big difference) However if any Canon shooters want to switch to Nikon hehe, just know that the command dials on all the pro and semi-pro cameras can be set to work both “forward” and “reversed”… Oh and you can designate which command dial controls which setting, but I think you can do that with Canon DSLR’s as well. (I like my apeture to be on the rear dial and my shutter speed to be on the front dial, whereas MOST people set the apeture to be controlled by the front dial… This was something I even set on my D70!)

If not now then hopefully soon Canon DSLR’s will come with reversible command dials…

Other than that, I can highly recommend the 40D, especially at it’s price point.

In other news, previous jokes aside I’ve decided that some day I want to have the impact on the world of DSLR’s that the likes of Thom Hogan and Ken Rockwell have. In fact, I’d love to be a Nikon rep or something; it sounds like one of the greatest jobs a geek like me could possibly have. And unlike the fanboy type geeks who bash the competition and try to shove THEIR system down your throat, I try to be as well-rounded, level-headed as possible, while still firmly supporting Nikon as the brand that I think is the best for many photographers.

Input / feedback is greatly appreciated!
=Matt=

Ooh, the Olympus E-3 just announced today has indeed turned out to be a tempting camera for my greatest pasttime, adventure photography. I’m seriously considering one, especially since it will cost “only” about $2K…

10 megapixels, enormous (magnified) viewfinder, 5 FPS, the world’s fasted autofocus when used with the new SWD lenses, and a 12-60mm f/2.8-4 lens that is pro-grade, weather sealed; equal to 24-120mm for those of us who still speak 35mm…

Not to mention the “insanely professional” series f/2.0 zooms that equal about 28-70mm and 70-200mm in 35mm terms. Yes, I said f/2.0 zoom. As big as and possibly more pricey than comparable 28-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 zooms, but still, an f/2.0 zoom!!! The geek factor on that is just almost too much to resist…

I’d almost swithch for weddings too, if they could come out with a couple more f/1.4 primes and an ISO 6400 ~6 megapixel sensor sidekick camera!

=Matt=

Alright, here are my 2008 Nikon DSLR body predictions:

Nikon D3X:
Same body as the D3, but with a 22 megapixel “FX” sensor. The extra 10 megapixels will probably mean that they have to slow down a little, maybe only 3-5 FPS, and possibly 5-8 FPS in a DX crop mode, somewhere around 10-12 megapixels… Oh and the extra megapixels will also probably hurt the high ISO performance by a stop or two, but this is not a high ISO camera, this is a fashion / commercial / landscape camera, duh! This bad boy will probably cost upwards of $7-8K

Nikon D3H:
Same body as the D3, but with a DX LBCAST 12 megapixel sensor that does 8 FPS standard and 12-14 FPS in high-speed crop mode. Its high ISO performance will be head and shoulders above any other 1.5x or 1.6x DSLR ever, busting out better than the D300 and *maybe* as good as the D3. Hopefully it will cost $3-4K.

Note:
The D3X in high speed crop mode will obviously NOT trump a D3H; the D3H will not only be thousands cheaper, it will also perform WAY better at high ISO’s. The D3H will be the ultimate sports and birding camera, the D3X will be the ultimate fashion, commercial and landscape camera. The D3 will simply go down in history as Nikon’s first full-frame 35mm DSLR, and might end up at least a thousand bucks cheaper by the time we see a D3H and X… However it will STILL be a freaking sweet all-around camera, performing especially beautifully at weddings and portrait sessions, thanks to it’s shallower DOF than the D3H and better high ISO performance than the D3X.

Last but not least, here’s the camera everyone will talk the most about, Nikon’s final triumph, if they can pull it off:

The D300X, I’ll call it.

What the heck is a D300X, you ask? Well, it will be a D300 with a D3 sensor in it. That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, a 5D killer, an ULTIMATE wedding photographer camera, and something to truly drool over. No high speed crop mode, just “FX”. Oh and just as the 6 megapixel in the D100, D70, D50 and D40 got progressively better and better, I expect a D300X sensor to be a bit tweaked, and maybe as good as one stop better than the D3 at high ISO.

Of course don’t expect it to blaze, it’ll probably do 3-5 FPS max.

*Disclaimer: By the time we see the D300X, Canon will have a 5D replacement out, and it will probably perform as good as or BETTER than the D300X’s sensor. However I expect Canon to continue in it’s “advanced amateur” body design with a 5D replacement, basically a 40D with a full frame sensor in it. And the D300X will, like the D300, be a burly semi-pro body. But that’s another topic for another blog entry! /Disclaimer

BTW, with the coolness of the D40 + D40X lineup, don’t expect Nikon to worry about debuting any new entry-level cameras…

However, speaking of the D40/X and it’s lack of an AF screw drive, I ALSO expect Nikon to get busy in 2008 with their lens lineup, updating as many lenses as possible to AFS (SWM) instead of the old screw drive. But that’s another topic for another blog entry!

Take care all you DSLR geeks out there!
=Matt=

Well, after all the hooting and hollering from people un-fairly comparing the 40D and D300 (usually bashing the Canon, especially for having a hower resolution LCD screen, which is almost one the dumbest things you could possibly bash)

…”Canon” (the fan base, I mean) has struck back with one lesser known point, a point that will probably be another hit to the D300′s potential as a D2 / 1D MK3 killer:

On paper, both new cameras have this newfangled 14 bit RAW engine which is supposed to noticeably increase dynamic range and tonal transitions. (smoothness) However if you look closely, the Canon can do this 14 bit RAW converting at full speed, 6.5 FPS, while if the Nikon wants to do it’s max 6 FPS, you’ve gotta go back to 12 bit RAW. Otherwise, you’re stuck shooting 14 bit RAW files at 2.5 FPS, which is about as fast as a Rebel XT. (Wait, I mean the D40. My bad, XT users!)

Is this going to be a deal-breaker for a lot of buyers? Yep, it sure will be, for the obsessive camera geeks who have nothing better to do than go online and compare cameras for hours on end, and argue about which one is better.

For real world shooting however, and definitely for myself as someone who shoots almsot everything from weddings to landscape photography, I can’t imagine that needing 14 bit RAW files instead of 12 bit RAW’s. Heck, when I need 5 FPS, I’m probably shoting JPG anyway. I can imagine the extra tonal power in 14 bit RAW files woul be great for shoting landscapes, but for that you don’t really need ANY kind of insanely fast FPS anyway…

That’s all for now folks…

=Matt=