Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
D80 vs. D100
- Thread starter cube
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Forget about the D100, the D80 is a lot, lot better.
Just curious: are you asking just because or are you contemplating to buy a D100?
Just curious: are you asking just because or are you contemplating to buy a D100?
Absolutely nothing. The d100 is a real dog. The d80 is leaps and bounds better.
The d100 was Nikon's first consumer digital SLR, 6 years ago. It was a demonstration of technology and a lousy camera then. Its horrible by today's standards. The d70 is a better camera than the d100. The d40 is a better camera than the d100.
Removed the jokes because some can't take it
The d100 was Nikon's first consumer digital SLR, 6 years ago. It was a demonstration of technology and a lousy camera then. Its horrible by today's standards. The d70 is a better camera than the d100. The d40 is a better camera than the d100.
Removed the jokes because some can't take it
Absolutely nothing. The d100 is a real dog. The d80 is leaps and bounds better.
The d100 was Nikon's first consumer digital SLR, 6 years ago. It was a demonstration of technology and a lousy camera then. Its horrible by today's standards. The d70 is a better camera than the d100. The d40 is a better camera than the d100.
Your cell phone is probably a better camera than the d100
I had the misfortune of using one for a bit and its one of the worst cameras I've ever used. A decent point and shoot will take much better images under most circumstances.
I really think your last paragraphs go a bit far. Used with caution the D100 seems to be able to produce pretty good shots [granted, I haven't used one but I do have a D70 and that's great, plus, rather a lot of d100 images out there speak for themselves]. You would be mad to buy one now though.
Useless advise from people that really can't offer any. Noted the D100 is outdated compared to the D80 hence newer technology available. To say the D100 is one of the worst cameras definitely shows your inability advise anyone on cameras. Along with the D2X, I own a D100 and I can tell you without a doubt the D100 is a better camera than the D70. The only way you can get away with a statement concerning the D40 and the D80 is because they are newer.
I personally would go with the D80 if you are deciding between the 2 cameras. Do not take "taylorwilsdon" advice and buy a point and shoot. A D100 is still better than a lot of other cameras (Canon's for one) out there, even though outdated. Just keep in mind how much you are willing to spend and don't pay attention as much to pixels, 6.1 megapixels would be just fine.
I personally would go with the D80 if you are deciding between the 2 cameras. Do not take "taylorwilsdon" advice and buy a point and shoot. A D100 is still better than a lot of other cameras (Canon's for one) out there, even though outdated. Just keep in mind how much you are willing to spend and don't pay attention as much to pixels, 6.1 megapixels would be just fine.
Unfortunately your advice is the very kind that you're warning the OP against.
You can't give a blanket statement that the D100 is better than Canon. I'm a Nikon guy, but I'll be the first to admit that Canon make some damn good cameras.
Be mindful of how you respond... nobody's trying to insult anyone here. people who get angry are trying to find something to get angry about.
Guys, I was joking with my post... some need to lighten up a bit
I have owned a d80 and used d100 a lot, along with most of Nikon's other cameras and I stand by my serious statements. The d80 is a much better camera.
Any camera can produce nice pictures in the right hands, but strictly speaking, the D100 is ancient technology and far surpassed by everything since then.
I have owned a d80 and used d100 a lot, along with most of Nikon's other cameras and I stand by my serious statements. The d80 is a much better camera.
Any camera can produce nice pictures in the right hands, but strictly speaking, the D100 is ancient technology and far surpassed by everything since then.
I agree but there are a few things the D100 can do the D80 can't. The D100 works with all Nikon Lenses and will meter even of manual focus lenses. So maybe you have and old F2 or F100 and some good manual focus glass but can't afford a D200. You can get the D100 for a LOT less.
And yes the sensor on the D100 is not as good as the D40, D70 or others if you are just going to publish on the web the D100 is good. But in general the D80 is much much better
One other reason to buy a D100. They mak a real nice underwater housing for it. People are moving up and you can buy the d100 set up for diving at steep discount. But a 105mm macro lens on it and it will still do very nice work
I believe that's a misconception. The non-cpu / ai lens metering was introduced with the D200 and D2x.
Can't argue with the underwater stuff, but you could probably find that for the D80 too.
HAHAHA, oh man...I was respecting your post until you said that. You were trying to be all logical and then you pulled out the irrational fanboi hat. That's probably the most ridiculous thing I've seen someone say on here in awhile. And I'm a Nikon shooter.
Wait...this was all about figuring out Nikon's naming conventions? Pfff...give up....most of us did a long time ago
They have no logic. Well, very little logic. The single-digit line lately is their top-end pro (D2h, D3, etc), the three-digit line is the prosumer (D200, D300, D700), and the two-digit line is consumer (D80, D40). That alone makes little sense, jumping from 1 to 3 to 2 digits as you go down the line. However, while the D300 replaced the D200 (which makes sense -- model number increases), the D40 replaced the D50 (makes no sense). I could go on, but don't think about it too much, your head will start spinning.I think Nikon has a hat filled with numbers that they randomly select. Or a dartboard.
D40 makes sense because it's a DOWNGRADE from D50.
D40x does not make sense only if you believe more megapixels means better.
D60 is the one that does not make sense because it is also a downgrade from D50. It's just a tweaked D40x.
I would put D80 below D100 because of the eyepoint, but then everything else should go below too.
D40x does not make sense only if you believe more megapixels means better.
D60 is the one that does not make sense because it is also a downgrade from D50. It's just a tweaked D40x.
I would put D80 below D100 because of the eyepoint, but then everything else should go below too.
I would disagree that the D40 was a downgrade from the D50. The D40 does lack a focus motor, but that allowed the body to be lighter and more compact -- a tradeoff. In every other way, the D40 is better. I've shot with a D50, and I own a D40. The D40 has better high ISO performance , a worlds-better LCD, and lots of little niceties like being able to limit the maximum auto-ISO.
Nikon clearly considered it (and marketed it as) an upgrade to the D50 and still moved the model number down.
Nikon clearly considered it (and marketed it as) an upgrade to the D50 and still moved the model number down.
No, it's not clearly a downgrade. Aside from the other things I mentioned, the D40 also has a brighter viewfinder than the D50. It has far better in-camera image processing. It is more battery-efficient.
How is the D40 "clearly a downgrade"? You have anything to support that? Have you actually used both extensively? You're just sounding petulant now.
That may be the case for you, but again, that doesn't make it "clearly a downgrade."
Be careful with blanket opinion statements. I never am
I have a D300 and some very nice lenses and I still like to shoot the D40... it feels small, almost toy like but still takes very nice pictures.
If it were not a downgrade, one would see a lot of D50's in the used market from people moving to the D40, D40x, or D60. And I'm not talking about a few units on ebay.
A lot of people with D70's moved to the D80. The people with D80's are keeping them until the "D90 with motor".
The D50 owners are not moving to the older D70, and a new D80 is too expensive.
A lot of people with D70's moved to the D80. The people with D80's are keeping them until the "D90 with motor".
The D50 owners are not moving to the older D70, and a new D80 is too expensive.
I have shot with a D50, and own a D40x. The D40/x (and presumably the D60) is lighter, has better ergonomics, better quality images, easier control over manual settings by using the back LCD (vs the honestly rather useless non-lighted top LCD on the D50).
I don't have old Nikon lenses, and frankly, aside from the nifty-fifty I have little interest in the non AF-S lenses. Every lens I want is available in AF-S, so the focus motor become a moot point.
Your blanket statements are ignorant. Maybe you should do some research or, better yet, get some actual experience before you start pontificating about camera specs.
Yes, I'm in the same boat (although I wouldn't want a D40 for other reasons), however there's a large subsection of people who'd rather go for the (usually cheaper) non-AF-S lenses but still have slow autofocus.
Versus yours (reference: D100 > anything Canon)? Please, be reasonable.