Is a Nikon D80 overkill?

[Irish Dave]

First of all, nikon doesn't because:
A) until this past year, Full Frame was insanely expensive- prior to the 5D, nothing under $5000 was full frame.
B) Full Frame without solving some of the problems that Canon has ignored in its past 3 cameras does not satisfy Nikon's stringent quality requirements.

Full Frame is ONLY an issue at this point if you feel the strong desire to upgrade to a $3000+ body. Even so, there are two previous Full Frame 14MP Nikon-mount DSLRs from Kodak. Nikon is also rumored to have at least two prototypes floating around for their Full Frame next generation camera.

Also, that AF system talk is patently false. Nikons are great in low light, and several have a reputation for being better in low light focusing than Canon.

Hi,
What problems have Canon been ignoring? I certainly haven't heard of any,

Which Nikon's are faster at focusing in low light?

Surely you must admit that having the focusing motor in the body is a bad idea. Canon has the focus motors in their lenses so each lens has the optimum torque for rapid focusing (in any light)

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Go to any major event and look around at what the pro's are using. I think you will find it difficult to play "spot the Nikon"

Nikon very well MAY have two prototypes floating around, but this doesn't do much for their sales.

Dave (retired pro photographer with 30 years experience)

 

[coldrain]

Canon only has 2 full frame cameras. The 1Ds and the 5D. No idea what the 3rd one would be!

Full frame is not a sign of being "professional". It has its advantages (wider view angle, bigger photo diodes so less noise/better dynamic range, no difficulty with trying to calculate crop factors in focal lengths when you are used to 35mm focal lengths).

It also has its disadvantages: less tele reach compared to 1.5x or 1.6x crop factor sensor DSLRs, vignetting (light fall off) towards the corners at wide angles (due to the angles of the light that falls on the micro lenses in front of the photo diodes).

This last problem is what probably above poster meant with "problems Canon ignores". A bit silly to make that into a big problem, the vignetting doesn't have to be a problem in most cases.

Nikon IS working on a full frame sensor/camera anyway. And they are trying to solve that micro lens/wide angle problem, probably in the same way Leica did with their 1.3x crop sensor M camera.

Now back to whether a D80 is overkill: while its sensor is not as nice as the 10mp one of the Canon 400D/XTi (more noisy... same sensor as the D200 and Sony A100, they just filter out noise and that translates into less detail), it is a good camera. It has some silly options (in camera image editting stuff), and its kitlens (18-150?) is a dog so avoid the kit.
6 to 10 mp is quite a jump though, so it is not really overkill. Avoid the D40 as you are very limitted in lens choice (both from Nikon and 3rd party).
IF you want to save money and go for a 6mp Nikon, choose the D50. With its internal motor it allows you to use all the current Nikon primes and other lenses that use the internal motor.

 

[Irish Dave]

Canon only has 2 full frame cameras. The 1Ds and the 5D. No idea what the 3rd one would be!

Full frame is not a sign of being "professional". It has its advantages (wider view angle, bigger photo diodes so less noise/better dynamic range, no difficulty with trying to calculate crop factors in focal lengths when you are used to 35mm focal lengths).

It also has its disadvantages: less tele reach compared to 1.5x or 1.6x crop factor sensor DSLRs, vignetting (light fall off) towards the corners at wide angles (due to the angles of the light that falls on the micro lenses in front of the photo diodes).

This last problem is what probably above poster meant with "problems Canon ignores". A bit silly to make that into a big problem, the vignetting doesn't have to be a problem in most cases.

Nikon IS working on a full frame sensor/camera anyway. And they are trying to solve that micro lens/wide angle problem, probably in the same way Leica did with their 1.3x crop sensor M camera.

Now back to whether a D80 is overkill: while its sensor is not as nice as the 10mp one of the Canon 400D/XTi (more noisy... same sensor as the D200 and Sony A100, they just filter out noise and that translates into less detail), it is a good camera. It has some silly options (in camera image editting stuff), and its kitlens (18-150?) is a dog so avoid the kit.
6 to 10 mp is quite a jump though, so it is not really overkill. Avoid the D40 as you are very limitted in lens choice (both from Nikon and 3rd party).
IF you want to save money and go for a 6mp Nikon, choose the D50. With its internal motor it allows you to use all the current Nikon primes and other lenses that use the internal motor.

Hi,
I said Canon have 3 full frame digital SLR's because the original EOS 1 Ds is still available. I know it has been officially replaced by the 1 Ds Mk 2 but it can still be bought new. The third one is obviously the 5D

I notice you don't make any comment on the focus motor in the Nikon body, their problem in focusing in low light or the fact that the vast majority of Professionals use Canon.

I never said that using a full frame Canon D-SLR shows you are a pro, just that it's a fact that most who are .......do.

Personally I have never experienced vignetting with any Canon cameras when using Canon lenses. (or Nikon either I must add)

I must also concede that Nikon make great lenses. I did use Nikon cameras and lenses for quite a few years, but changed to Canon because their digital camera system was superior.

Dave

 

[coldrain]

Hi,
I said Canon have 3 full frame digital SLR's because the original EOS 1 Ds is still available. I know it has been officially replaced by the 1 Ds Mk 2 but it can still be bought new.

I notice you don't make any comment on the focus motor in the Nikon body, their problem in focusing in low light or the fact that the vast majority of Professionals use Canon.

I never said that using a full frame Canon D-SLR shows you are a pro, just that it's a fact that most who are .......do.

Personally I have never experienced vignetting with any Canon cameras when using Canon lenses. (or Nikon either I must add)

I must also concede that Nikon make great lenses. I did use Nikon cameras and lenses for quite a few years, but changed to Canon because their digital camera system was superior.

Dave

I decided on the Canon system myself too, but I do not want to make this Nikon thread into a Canon fanboy flame war
If you try a full frame Canon body and any wide angle, you WILL notice vignetting/light fall off towards the corners.

About the internal lens motor... some lenses seem to work FINE with it. And Nikon is now switching to AF-S motors in the lenses. But still there are nice lenses without AF-S, and that makes the choice for the D40 not so smart. Especially if you want some nice primes.
And about focus accuracy... I have a 350D, and so I can not really fault Nikon in that area .

And about Nikon lenses, Nikon has some great lenses. They also have some so-so lenses, and even some crap lenses. Canon has great lenses and so-so lenses too, you really have to know your lenses if you want to make a brand decision on lens quality.

Happy xmas to you too, Dave

 

[Irish Dave]

I decided on the Canon system myself too, but I do not want to make this Nikon thread into a Canon fanboy flame war
If you try a full frame Canon body and any wide angle, you WILL notice vignetting/light fall off towards the corners.

About the internal lens motor... some lenses seem to work FINE with it. And Nikon is now switching to AF-S motors in the lenses. But still there are nice lenses without AF-S, and that makes the choice for the D40 not so smart. Especially if you want some nice primes.
And about focus accuracy... I have a 350D, and so I can not really fault Nikon in that area .

And about Nikon lenses, Nikon has some great lenses. They also have some so-so lenses, and even some crap lenses. Canon has great lenses and so-so lenses too, you really have to know your lenses if you want to make a brand decision on lens quality.

Happy xmas to you too, Dave

You too my friend, have a good one.

Greets from Ireland

Dave

 

[GoCubsGo]

I know that Nikon don't have a camera with a "full frame" sensor which would put me off buying Nikon. This is serious if you decide to update your camera body later.

I've heard rumors that the autofocus system in Nikon SLR's have trouble focusing in low light. If this is true ...... go for Canon.

Dave

I assure you that both canon and nikon have the rumors about the low light auto focus issue and to date I have yet to experience that issue with any nikon owned providing I am using a decent lens. The same goes for canon. I speak from using both canon and nikon and not based on something I read. Take it or leave it. I received poor auto focus in low light conditions results using the same sigma 4.5 70-300mm lens. The lens was about $200 and the low light issues were indeed an issue. You get what you pay for.

I also believe that the full frame sensor thing that you're worried about is silly unless you're a professional or semi professional photographer. I think that while it is a huge selling point of canon, most consumers do not care about that. I'm sure in many people's eyes it is just standard practice to say that they choose canon for the full frame sensor...most of those people I run into don't understand what the sensor is. But seriously do not get me wrong, full frame sensors are seriously great and nikon should adopt that in their models, but hey...it's not a reason to shy away from nikon or gravitate to canon.

To the OP:
I would not do the d50 but I would do the d40 because the images are amazing. I would personally not buy either because they do not fit my needs, but the d40 sounds right up your alley. I'm not sure about the battery deal, but I guess that could be researched.

 

[Irish Dave]

I assure you that both canon and nikon have the rumors about the low light auto focus issue and to date I have yet to experience that issue with any nikon owned providing I am using a decent lens. The same goes for canon. I speak from using both canon and nikon and not based on something I read. Take it or leave it. I received poor auto focus in low light conditions results using the same sigma 4.5 70-300mm lens. The lens was about $200 and the low light issues were indeed an issue. You get what you pay for.

I also believe that the full frame sensor thing that you're worried about is silly unless you're a professional or semi professional photographer. I think that while it is a huge selling point of canon, most consumers do not care about that. I'm sure in many people's eyes it is just standard practice to say that they choose canon for the full frame sensor...most of those people I run into don't understand what the sensor is. But seriously do not get me wrong, full frame sensors are seriously great and nikon should adopt that in their models, but hey...it's not a reason to shy away from nikon or gravitate to canon.

To the OP:
I would not do the d50 but I would do the d40 because the images are amazing. I would personally not buy either because they do not fit my needs, but the d40 sounds right up your alley. I'm not sure about the battery deal, but I guess that could be researched.

Yes professional and semi-pro's would prefer a camera with a full frame sensor, but then so would most serious landscape photographers (if they can afford it)

Happy Christmas

Dave

 

[wwooden]

Sorry if I am stealing this thread a bit but I have been looking pretty seriously into getting a decent camera. I've always enjoyed photography and took several courses in high school, but haven't done anything serious in years. I've used point and shoot cameras since then with ok results but never over satifying.

I found this add in my news paper this week, they have a Nikon D50 plus 2 lenses and a $50 gift card for $700. It's in the middle of the picture to the left. Seems like a pretty good deal to me, what does everyone else think? Would those two lenses be a good balance for each other? I figure I can use the $50 card to get a case to hold it all, I have plenty of memory cards already.

 

[coldrain]

Sorry if I am stealing this thread a bit but I have been looking pretty seriously into getting a decent camera. I've always enjoyed photography and took several courses in high school, but haven't done anything serious in years. I've used point and shoot cameras since then with ok results but never over satifying.

I found this add in my news paper this week, they have a Nikon D50 plus 2 lenses and a $50 gift card for $700. It's in the middle of the picture to the left. Seems like a pretty good deal to me, what does everyone else think? Would those two lenses be a good balance for each other? I figure I can use the $50 card to get a case to hold it all, I have plenty of memory cards already.

Well, I would disregard that "offer". The 70-300 G nikkor offered is quite crap... and the 28-80 isnt very amazing, being an old standard kit lens of film 35mm slr days.

Get the D50 with its 18-55 kit lens, that one will give you the wide angle you lose with the old 28-80mm (with the 1.5x crop factor, the 18-55 is an exact equivalent to that lens on a film SLR). The 18-55 is superior optically.

Then consider getting a Sigma 70-300 APO DG lens. It will put you a bit over the $700 probably, but it gives a LOT better results than that Nikkor 70-300 offered... and it gives you a 1:2 macro ability for free!

And about the above poster, the D40 images are nothing amazing, in fact very similar to the D50's images and Pentax K100D for instance.
The D40's drawback (a LOT of lenses are not compatible with it) is a big minus, making the D50 a lot nicer proposition.

 

[EastCoastFlyer]

I can confirm coldrain's assessment of the 70-300. In fact, I bought this exact kit 6 months ago, and almost never use that lens. I have spent my lens money on primes and wide-angle. A good telephoto zoom is next on my list. If I had it to do over I would have bought the body alone, then invested in good (at least better) glass.

 

[ChrisA]

I found this add in my news paper this week, they have a Nikon D50 plus 2 lenses and a $50 gift card for $700. It's in the middle of the picture to the left. Seems like a pretty good deal to me, what does everyone else think? Would those two lenses be a good balance for each other?

Looks to me like they are trying to unload some otherwise un-sellable lenses. Not many people would buy those two.

What I always tell people just getting into SLRs is to shop for the lens(es) FIRST. Don't worry to much about the SLR body they are all basically the same. Lenses mater and ar NOT basically all the same. You want first a lens that goes as wide as 18mm. The best deals or the kit lenses that come with the D50, D70 and D80. The 18-55 is good as are the 18-70 and 18-135. then the next one to buy depend on what kind of shots your first lens is causing you to miss. Beginners always think they will want a long telephoto like the 300mm They are mostly wrong. You will likey want to go wider or faster. the 135 may be as much "reach" as you will ever need unless you get into specialized photography like wildlife or sports and then expect to spend four digit prices.

Buy one of the three kit lenses (yes you can buy the D70s or D80 kits lens with a d50) and after you shoot 1,000 frames look over your work and see what you missed. Buy the lens that gets you those missed shots Don't go out and buy a cheap 300mm zoom just because it is cheap.

 

[coldrain]

Buy one of the three kit lenses (yes you can buy the D70s or D80 kits lens with a d50) and after you shoot 1,000 frames look over your work and see what you missed. Buy the lens that gets you those missed shots Don't go out and buy a cheap 300mm zoom just because it is cheap.

I would almost agree with ChrisA, but not totally... the 18-135 kitlens from teh D80 is actually quite a dog! Not sharp, CA problems, disappointing contrast... not a nice lens to have. If you do want more reach than 55 or 70mm, consider the Sigma 18-125mm. A much better lens optically.

Both the 18-55 and 18-70 kitlenses are better propositions (I prefer the 18-55), and the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 Macro, Tamron 17-50 f2.8 (try if it focusses correctly on your Nikon!) and the upcoming Tokina 16-50 f2.8 are all very good "standard" lenses to start with. Do keep in mind that lenses without internal motor (like that Tamron, not sure about the Sigma and Tokina) do not work on the D40 (I would not recommend that D40 to anyone, for that reason alone).

 

[Curren~Sea]

Thanks for getting back on track with this post. While I enjoy the occasional spirited debate, the Canon vs Nikon topic is irrelevant to me. The Nikon simply feels better in my hands.

Speaking of feel, the kit lens that I got with my D50 is the 18-55. It’s the all plastic model and is very light. The whole package of camera and lens is extremely comfortable, which means that it’s just a joy to reach for every time I think of it.

As for going into minutiae about obscure features and effects, that too is mildly enjoyable to hear. But the bottom line is that compared to any point and shoot digital that I’ve had in the past, this camera blows them all away in quality of image, speed of startup and focusing, and even ease of use (while you’re picking up, turning on, focusing and snapping a shot with your credit card sized digital, I’ve taken 10 gorgeous perfectly exposed shots with my D50 )

Now… the journey for me is learning how to become a better photographer. I think my equipment is just fine and I appreciate everyone’s input on the subject.

Would those two lenses be a good balance for each other?

For what it’s worth, the camera shop guy I talked to said the 28-80 is not an ideal lens for a digital camera. It’s a throwback from the film days. I think you’d be much better off with the 18-55.

Also, I don’t have any personal experience with it but the 70-300 Nikkor lens (the plastic lightweight one) might actually be a good fit for you. Factor in how much of an enthusiast you are with the price you’d have to pay for a similar but “higher quality” lens along with the additional weight and worry of a much more expensive lens. My guess is that if you’re a casual photographer who just wants to take some great shots, then you would be very happy with the Nikkor 18-55 and the 70-300, which would be all the lenses you would ever need until at some point in the future you decide to dedicate yourself to taking some classes or studying photography and working on your technique until your skill warrants better, more expensive equipment.

At least, those are my thoughts for what they’re worth.

 

[840quadra]

Congratulations!

I hope you really enjoy your new DSLR camera! I have been overjoyed with mine, and too love the solid feel of my new DSLR! (from the other camp).

The learning experience has been quite enjoyable so far, and I find myself attempting more challenging shots than I ever did with my Point and shoot, or my Prosumer.

Have fun learning the camera, just in time for some great holiday shots!

For what it’s worth, the camera shop guy I talked to said the 28-80 is not an ideal lens for a digital camera. It’s a throwback from the film days. I think you’d be much better off with the 18-55.

Also, I don’t have any personal experience with it but the 70-300 Nikkor lens (the plastic lightweight one) might actually be a good fit for you. Factor in how much of an enthusiast you are with the price you’d have to pay for a similar but “higher quality” lens along with the additional weight and worry of a much more expensive lens. My guess is that if you’re a casual photographer who just wants to take some great shots, then you would be very happy with the Nikkor 18-55 and the 70-300, which would be all the lenses you would ever need until at some point in the future you decide to dedicate yourself to taking some classes or studying photography and working on your technique until your skill warrants better, more expensive equipment.

At least, those are my thoughts for what they’re worth.

I am not sure about the Nikon camp, however classic throwbacks from the 35mm era on canon bodies, can be absolute gems.

There are quite a few amazing reviews of some old canon glass, on new DSLR cameras. I would assume that the same would be true with a few select Nikon lenses.

Be weary of a salesman in some cases. Many cannot make money by making suggestions that are out of production, as they cannot sell them to you and make money. The salesman I work with, and does my extended family, is open and honest with good classic lens choices that really do work.

 

[Curren~Sea]

throwbacks from the 35mm era on canon bodies, can be absolute gems.

Totally agree with you and I’m looking forward to possibly exploring the many options, which is one of the reasons why I chose the D50 over the D40. However, my understanding is that between the two, the 18-55 is a better lens than the 28-80 for a DSLR.

Also, my camera shop guy is the same person who talked me out of a much more expensive D80 that I was ready to pay for, because he listened to what I was saying and knew what would match my expectations the best. Right now, with the D40 and D80 out, it’s a very good time to buy the D50 at close-out prices. Just be realistic about what you need (as opposed to what you think you want).

I bought a D50 with a Nikkor 18-55 lens and a SB400 Speedlight. I’m sure that I’ll take a few hundred pictures over the next week or so. I’ll come back and post a very unprofessional highly subjective review after Christmas.

 

[Irish Dave]

Totally agree with you and I’m looking forward to possibly exploring the many options, which is one of the reasons why I chose the D50 over the D40. However, my understanding is that between the two, the 18-55 is a better lens than the 28-80 for a DSLR.

Also, my camera shop guy is the same person who talked me out of a much more expensive D80 that I was ready to pay for, because he listened to what I was saying and knew what would match my expectations the best. Right now, with the D40 and D80 out, it’s a very good time to buy the D50 at close-out prices. Just be realistic about what you need (as opposed to what you think you want).

I bought a D50 with a Nikkor 18-55 lens and a SB400 Speedlight. I’m sure that I’ll take a few hundred pictures over the next week or so. I’ll come back and post a very unprofessional highly subjective review after Christmas.

Congrats on the new camera .... enjoy.

The 18mm - 55mm lens is by far the best choice as it's equivalent to 28mm - 80mm (approx) on a 35mm camera. This is the most useful range of focal lengths and is ideal for most subjects
i.e. Landscape, architecture, head and shoulders portraits and general photography.

The 28 - 80 on your digital SLR would be the same as 42mm - 120mm (approx) meaning better telephoto but NO wide angle !!

Dave

 

[Curren~Sea]

Big smiley happy faces all around. Love my new camera!

 

[Abstract]

C
Now back to whether a D80 is overkill: while its sensor is not as nice as the 10mp one of the Canon 400D/XTi (more noisy... same sensor as the D200 and Sony A100, they just filter out noise and that translates into less detail), it is a good camera. It has some silly options (in camera image editting stuff), and its kitlens (18-150?) is a dog so avoid the kit.

If you compare the performance of RAW images rather than JPEG, the differences aren't in the sensor. It's just in the way Canon handles noise as opposed to Canon.

I know I'm going to sound like a Nikon fanboy when I say this, but I like how Nikon handles noise in the D80 more than in Canon's 400D (when shooting JPEGs). Why? This is because of the type of noise. I don't like chromatic noise, and Nikon gives me less of it, while the overall noise isn't much different. Nikon JPEGs at high ISO lose some detail though, so I can see why you don't like the D80 as much as the 400D in this respect.

Oh, and I don't really buy into the thinking that FF sensors produce less noisy images. I understand that they SHOULD, as I do understand the concept entirely (and I deal with radiation sensors all the time,.....MOS sensors at that), but the difference hasn't proven to be staggering, or even noticeable, although this could be due to the extra pixels Canon crams onto the 1Ds on the larger sensor.

And of course pros would want a FF sensor, but I'd think only the ones who do landscape photography. I like landscape photography, so surely I'd appreciate one. However, it's not good for anybody who wants reach, and telephoto lenses are MUCH more expensive than wideangle lenses. If you need reach for any reason, I don't see why you shouldn't stick to APS sized sensors. I don't see much benefit in terms of photo quality by going FF.

And Nikon is now switching to AF-S motors in the lenses. But still there are nice lenses without AF-S, and that makes the choice for the D40 not so smart. Especially if you want some nice primes.

I agree with this entirely. I don't know how many times people are going to have to hear that same argument, but I guess you (and people like me) will just regurgitate this for a long long time. The only time I'd recommend the D40 is if the person buying it is clearly not going to spend money on lenses, as they're only looking for better image quality, not to be pros or even hobbyists. However, this means NOT buying lenses from companies like Sigma, Tamron, or Tokina, since the large large majority of their lenses would never AF on the D40, and I don't think many D40 customers are willing to MF.

 

[Passante]

Hi,
SNIP
Two of our local newspapers, who had been Nikon users for years have recently changed to Canon for this very reason.


Greetings from Ireland
Dave

Hugh?????

 

[sjl]

I decided on the Canon system myself too, but I do not want to make this Nikon thread into a Canon fanboy flame war
If you try a full frame Canon body and any wide angle, you WILL notice vignetting/light fall off towards the corners.

You'll get that on any wide angle lens, especially at full aperture, regardless of the body or sensor size (remember: when I say wide angle, I'm talking wider than around 24mm, 35mm equivalent FOV - eg, 10mm on a 1.6 crop body). It's the nature of the beast. I've no doubt you'll get vignetting on the Canon 10-22mm, the Nikon 12-24mm, etc., etc. - simply because getting all the light even on such a wide spread is hard. If you manage it, you've probably compromised some other nice-to-have quality in the process.

The only way you can reduce the vignetting problem is to stop the lens down, with all that that entails.

 

[Abstract]

Well I think he's saying that vignetting on APS sensors is relatively low, while it would be very high on FF sensors.

 

[Irish Dave]

You'll get that on any wide angle lens, especially at full aperture, regardless of the body or sensor size (remember: when I say wide angle, I'm talking wider than around 24mm, 35mm equivalent FOV - eg, 10mm on a 1.6 crop body). It's the nature of the beast. I've no doubt you'll get vignetting on the Canon 10-22mm, the Nikon 12-24mm, etc., etc. - simply because getting all the light even on such a wide spread is hard. If you manage it, you've probably compromised some other nice-to-have quality in the process.

The only way you can reduce the vignetting problem is to stop the lens down, with all that that entails.

I remember my old (now very very old or more probably dead!!) photography tutor saying:

"No lens gives it's best performance fully open or fully closed ..... best performance is found somewhere in the middle"

You have a chance of vignetting at the Maximum aperture and diffraction at the minimum aperture. This I believe is still true.

Personally, I will generally set the aperture about f8.
Most lens MTF graphs show f8 to be a good choice.

Depth of field with ultra wide angle lenses is never a problem at f8 when using the hyperfocal distance.

Dave