http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4857/the-camera-of-the-year-2007.html
2007-12-12 11:36:23 · 7 answers · asked by Picture Taker 7 in Consumer Electronics ➔ Cameras
I'm not sure about their parameters, but if you look at the nominees, perhaps there is a budget limitation. They qualify their choice by saying that the Camera of the Year "both refines and redefines photography." Maybe it's the 51 focus zones that can track colors, although the D3 has that, too. Maybe they thought the D3 was just Nikon catching up to Canon's big guns. Or, maybe the D3 and Canon's EOS 1Ds Mark III are just too darned expesive to be considered.
2007-12-12 13:57:04 · update #1
Piano Man, that's a GREAT link!
2007-12-12 16:23:47 · update #2
I'm not sure it qualifies as the camera of the year but there is one little thing about it that really gets me going and that's the low noise at high ISO. It produces less noise in an ISO 6400 image than the D200 produces in an ISO 3200. To see what I mean, click the link below and select Nikon D300 in one window and Nikon D200 in the other and compare the ISO images.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
2007-12-12 15:16:02 · answer #1 · answered by Piano Man 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not that the D300 isn't a great camera, but ratings from magazines like Popular Photo (and Shutterbug, American Photo, etc.) can be on the questionable side, considering how beholden the magazines are to their advertisers. Sure, some of that has to do with the fact that camera and lens manufacturers are only going to send the absolute best gear for testing, but the objectivity of the process comes into question when flaws like the serious autofocus problems that the Canon 1D Mark III has suffered don't get mentioned quickly. And they're considering their audience, too, which accounts for the Nikon D3 and Canon 1D/1Ds Mark IIIs not making the final list. The average reader isn't going to go out and drop thousands on a body - so figure there's an unstated "For Our Readers" at the end of the Camera of the Year.
2016-04-08 23:37:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. It looks like a great camera, beating all of its competition. It seems well worth the $1,800 price tag. Something I really would have liked to see was a full frame CMOS sensor, something to rival the Canon EOS 5D. Oh well, there's always next year I suppose.
2007-12-12 11:45:06 · answer #3 · answered by electrosmack1 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm with Vienna, the D3 is far more in the right direction from Nikon - cropped sensors?????
a
2007-12-12 13:08:41 · answer #4 · answered by Antoni 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow! I knew it was going to be great, but I didn't realize how revolutionary this camera really was. I think I'm going to print out that review and keep it under my pillow to dream on....
Congratulations to Nikon for "doing it right", again.
2007-12-12 11:42:49 · answer #5 · answered by George Y 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
SURELY the D3 is a more important camera...
2007-12-12 12:55:49 · answer #6 · answered by V2K1 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Oh Sam, close your mouth and stop drooling...lol
2007-12-12 13:05:15 · answer #7 · answered by Petra_au 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋