>Not necessarily, I think the D70 is not a dumbed down D100 - it is >actually better in many respects.
In many respects, yes. It HAD to be a better camera than the 300D since the 300D had about a 6-month head start. However it has a couple of 300D-isms that make it hard to use for me, probably deliberately. 1) AF mode is controlled in the menu system, not by switch. If you actually USE AF, this is a show-stopper. At least you CAN set it, as opposed to the 300D which chooses mode itself. Granted, for the intended user group this is a non-issue, but I also suggest that it was done to keep pros from buying it. 2) No battery grip, gives no vertical control array. This is superable, but annoying. Every Nikon I've used has had a vertical shutter release option with motor drive attached. 3) No mechanical aperture connection. Nothing at the $1000-1500 price point has such, but the pro DSLRs do and it makes older lenses more useable. Kudos to Pentax for the firmware fix allowing almost-normal use of older lenses, but I don't see Nikon and doing it because they'd love to sell you a more expensive camera if you really need a mechanical connection. Pentax doesn't have a D1/D2 series camera to "protect". Hopefully this will keep Pentax from "dumbing down" a cheaper DSLR to get serious users to buy a more expensive model. > With any luck we should be getting >more for less - or so that is how the digital upgrade path normally >runs. I think you can probably bank on all the major manufacturers >bringing out at least one new model a year for the next few years. Actually, at most levels we've been getting "more for the same price", not "more for less", at least in film cameras. Prices have been coming down because they are figuring out how to make less camera. Nikon's D2H is taking a beating in the market from the Canon EOS1Dmk2, and I think it is because Nikon tried to move the price point down (D1-$5000, D2H-$3250) whereas Canon put out as much camera as they could at the old $5000 price point. DJE
