Yet another which to buy thread!

[Allstermac]

I've had a Nikon D40 for about 4 months and actually like it, but always thought I would want more! Today someone at work bought my D40 for $100 less than I paid! Anyway time to shop and get something better
I like Nikon, but any Canon folks wanna convert me? Give me opinions on why? Thanks!
If I stay with Nikon, I was thinking D80 or maybe the D200
The D80 has a 18-135mm lens kit and the 200 has the 18-200 kit (the 4-8 month backorder lens!) unless you buy the camera and the kit. I like the versatile lenses for travel. I would also like to do indoor low light portraits of buildings and people, as well as night shots outdoors... any lens suggestions?
2 nikon ?'s
- Does MAC aperature support D80/200 raw format? It did not for the D40
- I know you get what you pay for.... besides 1K more... what does the D200 give me over the D80
Just looking for opinions from folks that have been there/done that!
Thanks!

 

[Westside guy]

You don't say anything about your experience level etc. If this is/was your first SLR, I'd say the D80 is a slam dunk. Actually I think the D80 is probably what you want regardless - if you look at reviews, most folks seem to think it compares quite well with the D200 (which makes sense given the relative ages, and the way Nikon tends to operate).

For all things Nikon, Thom Hogan is a great resource. He is very good about telling you the pluses AND minuses of the various cameras and lenses.

Funny thing though - He said he prefers the Pentax K10D over the D80 , and both over the Canon 400D. But read his review yourself.

 

[ChrisA]

I've had a Nikon D40 for about 4 months and actually like it, but always thought I would want more! Today someone at work bought my D40 for $100 less than I paid! Anyway time to shop and get something better
I like Nikon, but any Canon folks wanna convert me? Give me opinions on why? Thanks!
If I stay with Nikon, I was thinking D80 or maybe the D200
The D80 has a 18-135mm lens kit and the 200 has the 18-200 kit (the 4-8 month backorder lens!) unless you buy the camera and the kit. I like the versatile lenses for travel. I would also like to do indoor low light portraits of buildings and people, as well as night shots outdoors... any lens suggestions?
2 nikon ?'s
- Does MAC aperature support D80/200 raw format? It did not for the D40
- I know you get what you pay for.... besides 1K more... what does the D200 give me over the D80
Just looking for opinions from folks that have been there/done that!
Thanks!

Just some comments. And no I won't say if Canon is better

1) You can mix and match the kit lenses and you don't loose any money. If yu want a D200 with an 18-55 you can get it that way. I bought my D50 with the D70s kit lens (18-70)

2) the way you decide Cann/Nikon is look at the lenses. Canon makes some really nice L-series glass but if you are never going to spend the $$ for one it does not matter to you that Canon makes them. Just look at the full system you might own down the road

3) Yes Aperture handles all the Nikon RAW formats now. They just added support for the D40

4) D80 vs. D200. The D200's meter will work with manual focus lenses and there is some better dust seals. But the bottom line is that DSLR bodies don't make images, lenses make images bodies just record them If the difference in price is $1K I'd put the extra money into a lens

5) Lenses. Get the low cost kit lens. The 18-70 is OK. Then buy some primes and or some f/2.8 zooms. I like the smaller DOF of the faster llenses. The VR might be nice but it will not give you the look of a f/2.8 or f/1.4

 

[Imbalance]

Excuse me if I'm missing something... but what are you gaining from upgrading apart from the fact that you can say you've now got a D80/D200 etc?

You can still take amazing photos with the D40. The D80 and D200 are hardly going to improve that at all - how many A1 prints have you made from your D40?

Next - any of those lenses are available for the D40 (assuming they have AF-S, which all the kit ones do), so just buy those and get the new range / options for your D40.

Lastly I think you have to ask the question: Are you interested in Photography or buying electronics equipment?

Cheerio

 

[Allstermac]

Excuse me if I'm missing something... but what are you gaining from upgrading apart from the fact that you can say you've now got a D80/D200 etc?

You can still take amazing photos with the D40. The D80 and D200 are hardly going to improve that at all - how many A1 prints have you made from your D40?

Next - any of those lenses are available for the D40 (assuming they have AF-S, which all the kit ones do), so just buy those and get the new range / options for your D40.

Lastly I think you have to ask the question: Are you interested in Photography or buying electronics equipment?

Cheerio

The D40 is a good camera for the $$ the biggest issue I have is lack of lens support, the AF-S and AF-I lenses are only ones that work (with auto focus)
I was glad to sell it as I have not invested in any other lens' at this time and can now focus on buying what will work best for me. I was going to order the 18-200 lens but was told thru ritz, unless I pay a few hundred more, I would be on a list with 6000 people ahead of me... they only get a few in each month and unless Nikon steps up production - maybe next year I'll get one.
Why would I want something better ? because I can I know you can get great photos from the D40 but you also get what you pay for! If it was that simple everyone would ditch there $$$ cameras and jump on the D40.
And yes, I'm fairly new to photography but have been interested for many yrs! Just last year I dumped my wife so now I can afford things I've always wanted

 

[Westside guy]

I know you can get great photos from the D40 but you also get what you pay for! If it was that simple everyone would ditch there $$$ cameras and jump on the D40.

Bottom line is - if you can afford what you want, that's really all that matters. But a lot of people are buying into the "megapixel myth" - 8 is better than 6, 12 is better than 10, etc. For the vast majority of people, there will not be any effective difference in the quality of their photos caused by buying a camera with a denser sensor. First it's a question of skill; and second it's a question of lens quality.

 

[carbonmotion]

Excuse me if I'm missing something... but what are you gaining from upgrading apart from the fact that you can say you've now got a D80/D200 etc?

You can still take amazing photos with the D40. The D80 and D200 are hardly going to improve that at all - how many A1 prints have you made from your D40?

Next - any of those lenses are available for the D40 (assuming they have AF-S, which all the kit ones do), so just buy those and get the new range / options for your D40.

Lastly I think you have to ask the question: Are you interested in Photography or buying electronics equipment?

Cheerio

Agreed. D80 is a great camera, but really there's not a huge difference in photo output quality when I shoot between it and the D40. Plus the 18-200 works on everything.

 

[Abstract]

Getting a better camera won't make your photos any better. Not at all.


In my opinion, the only thing you did by selling your D40 for $100 less than you paid for it is lose $100.

You're interested in lenses that are AF-S anyway, so they would have worked as good on a D40 as on a D80 and D200, although the D40 arguably has better image quality than the D80 and D200, albeit with less pixels.

I know you can get great photos from the D40 but you also get what you pay for!

That is retarded.

 

[Allstermac]

edit... not worth my breath...
to those with good advice... thanks! Much appreciated!
to those who just like to bash others _____

 

[beavo451]

hmmm. So paying more for anything gets you no more quality? I think you should think alittle more before you make an inteligent statement. Why buy a lexus when you can have a toyota? Pointless! Why buy an acura when you can have a honda.... whatever...when you grow up and can afford better toys, I won't insult you...

In regards to the camera body, paying more doesn't get you "better" image quality anymore. It gets you better construction, durability, autofocus systems, etc.

I can use your car analogy. By a Honda Accord and you can get from point A to B quickly and with a reasonable amount of comfort. By a Mercedes, BMW, or Ferrari and you still get from point A to B with an increase in price, cost of driving, maintenance, and comfort. Assuming that you do not break any traffic laws, you get from point A to B in the same amount of time (ie you really don't gain any "performance"). You are paying for the other nice things in the car. Unless you are a skilled driver in a closed course, the extra performance increases don't really matter.

A more expensive camera will get you "better" pictures, but if you don't know how to use it, then you aren't getting any better performance. If I gave you a D2X and a D40 with the same lens, and you took the same picture of a scene, I'll bet that both pictures will look pretty much the same. The D2X picture might even be a little bit worse because it has minimal in-camera processing. It is all in the technique, skills, and creativity of the photographer.

 

[carbonmotion]

I think what everyone is trying to say is, if you have the money to blow on the D80, go for it. I can see where you're coming from in a way. A friend of mine never understood why all my polos are Lacoste and Burberry which are which are probably made in the same factory as Ralph Lauren and IZOD, but sell for three times as much. If you're willing to spend more on prestige, then go for it... since D80 gets you more street creds than a D40. I think the posters just don't want you to be in the mindset of getting a D80 and expecting a noticable improvement in IQ, as IQ will remain similar.

 

[Allstermac]

Well my Jury is back! Picked up the D80 and one of 2 things has happened
1. My D40 was defective or....
2. The D80 works much better than the D40!
Does anyone have both to compare??
I say the 80 is hands down BETTER! Today took about 50 random shots(just to check it out (all in auto mode) and it's fantastic! Walked into a near pitch dark room in the house and the shots focused clearly and with and without flash.. both came out crystal clear! the same room and conditions , my 40 was always grainy!
The rest of the shots all turned out great... a shot of the car with the sun behind it... came out fine... same shot with the 40 was all blur!
I do not have these old pics to compare as I didn't keep them... they sucked
So Unless my old D40 had a defect... The D80 by far is worth the $$

 

[eddx]

D80 is supported on the mac and in Aperture

D200 is NOT worth the extra money for the majority of photographers.

D80 with an 18-200mm lens would be fantastic.

the 18-135mm lens is good but I feel with the 18-200 you only really need one lens for most photography

 

[carbonmotion]

Well my Jury is back! Picked up the D80 and one of 2 things has happened
1. My D40 was defective or....
2. The D80 works much better than the D40!
Does anyone have both to compare??
I say the 80 is hands down BETTER! Today took about 50 random shots(just to check it out (all in auto mode) and it's fantastic! Walked into a near pitch dark room in the house and the shots focused clearly and with and without flash.. both came out crystal clear! the same room and conditions , my 40 was always grainy!
The rest of the shots all turned out great... a shot of the car with the sun behind it... came out fine... same shot with the 40 was all blur!
I do not have these old pics to compare as I didn't keep them... they sucked
So Unless my old D40 had a defect... The D80 by far is worth the $$

This is not something that I have noticed, because at work I use the D200, D80, 70, and 40 interchangeably. I shoot alot of actions shots of guest speakers and semi lit auditoriums. However, you're probably more ...whats the word im looking for, discriminating ... when it comes to iq. Good job, I recommend a 18-200 VR, its a really great lens.