The Fall of Nikon

[DSLR noob]

you know what, screw it, you're getting an explination for everyhting now

good photoshop, but Canon and Nikon still pwns joo!
(5D, 40D, 1D MkIII, 1DS MkIII, D300, or D3) > A700
sorry

P.S. should of used a pic of the A700 with Ziess glass, not Sigma)

lets see I said this because because it was a good photoshop but followed it along with a "still pwns joo" in obvious-to-understand chatspeak to give away that it was a joke. Then I gave an opinion as to cameras that are greater than the A700. The ones in question being the 5D and 40D. The 5D is full frame with 12 megapixels despite being 2 years old so it gets my opinionated vote, and the 40D shoots faster, has more lens and accessory support and has live view so I still opinion it higher. I then explain how Ziess glass would really give Sony an edge on the Nikon poster

Yeah you're thinking of someone different. I did get a 20D and sold my D Rebel XT so that might be the stepup you're thinking about. I know the Sigma lens is awesome, but lenses matter more than the body, therefore the glass should be the main attraction in a photo trying to beat out Nikon, however using a lens that the average Nikonian shmoe can go out and buy for his camera too renders the picture/ad/motivational poster/thing useless.

...............Still pretty though.

Also sorry to sound like a Nikon/Canon fanboy but this thread asked for it, the A series is a great series of camera, but sony is just picking up where Minolta left off, and is quite a few generations from being in a class with the 2 big dogs.

I eaplain here that I did not, in fact use a Sony DSLR at one point then go on to say why Ziess glass would give the picture more effect. Then I appologize for entering off as too much of a fanboy then stated that I think Sony is behind currently. My reasoning for this being that they have no pro line and the specs of the A700 seem to line up with a 30D or D200 more than the current 40D and D300, hence why I used the word "generation".

ok next post

5D is also full frame but I guess you forgot that, and I can compare the 1D series and the D3 as the thread is called "The fall of Nikon" when you say the fall of an entire company, you can pull the biggest guns out of their arsenal if you want, as for the 40D, you can fill the card if you set it to medium file size and tone it down to 5 fps like the Sony. Last thing, is lens and accessory support, enough said.

I DO know my facts and still stand by my post. I looked at the A700 specs when it first was announced and quickly lost interest as it looks more like a 30D competitor than a 40D competitor. Sony's "new" generation, is still behind by about a year.

well this post is an explination of a post I already explained above but you seem to have ignored it to go pick your nose somewhere. aso by now you should have realized my actions were brougth about by a few misunderstandings I will post later.

You know what, nevermind, I didn't come here to start a fight with Sony fanboys, the thread just has a title that seems like it wanted to start a brand war where it doesn't belong yet so it had to be put in its place. I didn't say My camera was better than yours don't misquote me by saying " All Nikon and Canon owners claim they are better than everyone else" I'm just saying as an ENTIRE SLR COMPANY they are, as far as individual cameras, I've said my opinions.

Taken from photo.net
--"The Sony Alpha A700 is priced at $1400, landing between the Canon EOS 40D ($1299) and the Nikon D300 ($1799). It does lack the "live view" system, which is present on both the D300 and 40D. It has a slower maximum frame rate (5fps) than either the EOS 40D (6.5fps) or the D300 (6/8fps). Both the Canon and Nikon DSLRs use a 14-bit A/d conversion system. Sony hasn't yet published details on the A/D converter in the Alpha A700, but I suspect it's 12-bits or they would probably have commented on it."--

see, it is still behind.

here I try and bury the hatchet, and we still get barbaric responses from you up ahead. I post evidential research on a website that seems to favor the 40D to show I am not crazy in my opinions nor alone, so to bash me for what I've said above is stupid because this site agrees. I explain that I still feel nikon and Canon are better as overall companies, if you want reasoning there answers can chime in as better sales, more support, more options in cameras(as in choices) and other opinionated things, but hey you want me to back myself up.

no, Sony is God's gift to the photographic world, the end. I do not want to be in a brand fight they annoy the crap out of me.

LOOK! obvious display of want to avoid conflict! pretty simple there, yet your immaturity spikes to a whole new level resulting in a low blow photoshop pic up ahead

whatever helps you with your jealousy

this is the niceist thing I could say after you abused my "My photos are ok to edit"

I just don't see how you couldn't predict the massive amounts of debate this thread would bring

this is ONCE AGAIN referring to a misunderstanding, stating why I made it a brand to brand comparison in the first place and why I felt it neccisary, see above for explinations o f my opinions supporting favored brands

I dunno I was bored. I actually like the A100, I thought I might have been better off with one back when using the D Rebel XT because of the in camera stabilization, weather sealing, and 10 MP but now I am happy with my 20D -I just thuoght that by putting an image like this in the equipment section rather than an appropriate gallery, critique, or digital photo manipultation section saying "The fall of Nikon" AND comparing it to a D3 poster needed to be put in its place a tad*-. Besides, the D3 is better than what Canon has to offer, putting it down means Canon is even FARTHER back.

* between the - marks basically sums it all up, now do you see why this thread can be considered more like YOU starting the brand war?

here I actually say something positive about the Sony A100 then state why such confusion arose in the first place

okay so........... we're all good (besides that the photo editing seems like a low blow)

still being upset by that photoshop I try and settle everyhting

Actually the D3 and D300 have Nikon's first in house developed sensors..... the Sony sensors are still in the D40, D40x, and D80 though.

this thread was supposed to be a "hey, now that that's all behind us, I want to have a serious talk with you" post. I thought that, by the way you worded you post, (mentioning the D3 and D300 RIGHT before saing Sony does Nikon sensors) that you weren't aware of a fact that I was trying to give, as a fellow forum member. You take it like an attack, completely the wrong way, and get super defensive again.

Ok, new discovery, Sony DSLR users word things that imply stuff different than what they meant. Read the post I quoted again, you mention the D300 and D3, then talk about Sony sensors.......... how do you guys not see how you're confusing me?!?!?!?!!???

I make a joke about "ok, that too, was a misunderstanding" you guys are really confusing me.

This is where you REALLY flip going to name calling. Throwing out many insults after a pause in my constant reply posting. a lapse in time of about 30 minutes of negativity towards me without me even defending.

So if you look abck at all of this explination, everyhting I said, you overreacted to. I think just ebcause Sony guys get a lot of $hit and trash talk on the field, you took things I said as more of attacks that what they were. See, according to my explination, I had no foul intentions in ANYTHING I said, you started the immature responses and you're basically the whole flame war. Like I said, I know my way around forums, and I know how to carefully word my posts. Read it all and think along with explinations and you;ll see that none of it should've even offended you in the first place.

 

[shorty6049]

:hug:k, you're forgiven. now go to bed

 

[shorty6049]

1200 posts!

 

[DSLR noob]

1200 posts!

lol random yeah sorry to ruin your thread. I'm sure both of us are. We shouldn't let the small stuff bother us. We're both guilty. If there is a reply from him to what I posted above that isn't "you're right, I'm sorry, I took what you said as attacks, it was all just a big misunderstanding" I'll ignore it. If its nice I'll say thank you and move on. Either way, this should be my last post in this thread.

 

[shorty6049]

dont worry about it. I started a new thread in a better catergory that i'm hoping will get a better reception. by the way, heres the poster....

 

[eravedesigns]

Well if thats truely what you meant by all of that then sorry for being so harsh.

Honestly I was pushing this whole thread cause i find it funny when people argue over brands cause no one is ever going to win and I just pushed it to far

My "insults" to you at the end were more or less just poking fun at your name DSLR noob

Peace

 

[DSLR noob]

ok, all is good, no worries then. Have fun shooting, weather it's with a pin hole camera made of cardboard or a Hesselblad, we all love photography so let that be the end of it.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

rawr.

 

[usayit]

im lovin it....long live sony

Long live Sony-Konica-Minolta.... "Sonilta"?

 

[uberben]

wow...friday night...and your having a brand war. I think a few people here need some dates or something.

 

[Mike_E]

Let the Choir say Amen!

Now, Let's go eat!!!

 

[JerryPH]

oooo... ouch.
I'm getting an a700 in a couple months, if that makes it any better!

Thats ok, we won't hold it against you... much. :lmao:

 

[jstuedle]

Wow. no more, no less.

 

[zioneffect564]

Man tony where the heck was I during all of this oh wait you did have a brand war on friday night thats why i wasn't here lol..

 

[lkWinnipesaukee]

I hate photography, I just love Canon more than Nikon. And everything else.


AND....


CHEVY dominates FORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and....

Not that I'm trying to stir the pot, or anything... :lmao: