Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 24, 2006, 2:49 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Hi,

This is a general topic up for discussion. I have a Nikon D50 and the usual lenses (18-55 Nikkor / 50mm Nikkor / 70-300 Sigma) and am very happy with what I shoot.

Recently D80 is out and I was happy to see this at CNET -http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11396_7...tag=cnetfd.ld4

I of course dont have the money, but I was wondering is D80 worth two times the price of D50?

The visible difference I can see from my naive eyes are -

Higher ISO on either end of the spectrum in D80 + More Mega-pixels + New CCD Filter Type(RGBG) + New Auto Focus Type + More flash modes and so on...

Why should an amateur enthusiast spend more money on D80, when he could invest it in lenses with a more economical D50?

Thanks.
ZchewereZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 24, 2006, 2:51 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Ooops just realized that this is a lens forum.. :idea:

but still this can be viewed as Camera Vs Lens debate.
ZchewereZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2006, 5:20 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

It comes down to control. User selectable iso in 1/3 stops, full control over the creative lighting system, grid lines, better viewfinder, etc, etc, all give the advanced user more control over the final output. It also throws in a few more bells and whistles (d-lighting, b&w and sepia shooting and other in camera editing tools) and packs a nice large LCD with a cover. Will it produce apprecicably better images?? That's debatable, but for the most part yes, if only slightly so. If you don't need the extra control and fluff, the D50 is a great bargain.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2006, 6:15 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 228
Default

I decided the cheaper camera and investing more in lenses was the way for me to go, as they should last me many years, whilst I know it'll probably not be more than two or three before I succumb to new camera lust and go out and buy the 15 megapixel D90 (or whatever)
As I'm new to the DSLR scene the D50 was still a huge jump over what I had previously, whereas the D80 didn't seem to offer all that much more over it for all the extra cash. Next time round however, I'm thinking the D80's replacement will offer a much more noticeable improvement on the D50 (like my made up '15MP D90' example above), maybe at three times the resolution and quite possibly with noticeable improvements in stuff like battery and screen technology.
MrPogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2006, 11:31 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 143
Default

Get the D50 In my opinion for 2 reasons.

1 Flash sync
D50 = 1/500
D80 = 1/200
Thats a huge difference and for outdoor flash use is EXTREMELY important

2 Lenses
The D50 is soo similar to the D80 that I think its worth the extra money you save to spend on lenses, Especially since lenses last almost forever and DSLR's last only like 2 years.
Lexiticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2006, 7:57 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
ReneB3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 193
Default

The sync speed is only an issue with the built in flash, and then only a small one.

I just bought a D80 and kept my D70s. The 10mp sensor and larger view finder were the big draw. The 2.5 inch screen and other tweaks were just icing on the cake. I also bought a 4 meg card on eBay for $31 so the CF/SD problem was no deal breaker. I do wish it was the same size as the D70s. Probably my biggest complaint.

As I get used to the smaller size and different ways it does the same things, I think I will be better off in the long run. I also think these things will start lasting longer than two years, even with all it's new bells and whistles it still does not take twice the picture of the D70/50, so the next big thing will make less and less of an impact. The photographer still makes more of a difference than the camera.

As for spending less on a camera so you can buy more glass... it just never seems to work out that way. Using that theory, how many D50 owners took the cash they saved and bought a $750 lens? Most seem to buy less expensive glass and pay the mortgage with the cash we save.

I've already started saving my quarters for the 18-200 VR, it should be in the bargain bin when I am ready to buy it.

I guess buying cameras is like buying shoes, get what fits today and maybe the next size up for growth.
ReneB3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2006, 11:32 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 143
Default

I bought the Sigma 10-20mm, And the Sigma 18-200mm
One of those would have gone unpurchased had i bought the D80.

Also I disagree I think the flash sync is ridiculously important, Especially for outdoor portraits and sports.


And the FP mode to get faster shutter speeds (than 1/200) on the D80 isn't a true flash sync speed. I couldn't live without the 1/500 of the D50 for what I take pictures of.
Lexiticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2006, 12:34 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The Flash Sync speed differences is not as big of a deal as most people think.

Keep in mind that the lowest ISO speed with the D50 is ISO 200.

However, the D80 has the advantage of starting out at ISO 100.

So, if you were shooting in light with an aperture requiring 1/400 second at ISO 200 for proper exposure with the D50, you could shoot at ISO 100 and 1/200 second at the same aperture with the D80, staying within it's sync speed limitations.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 11:44 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 143
Default

Other than indoor portraits I think the most important part of the flash is its ability to stop motion, EITHER just with the flash or as a combination fill. And I would lose a lot of creative controll not being able to use 1/500.

example at the track. Lighting conditions are about 20 minutes apart, so relatively similar.

Attached Images
 
Lexiticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 4:48 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
StevenC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 218
Default

Not being silly here, but I don't see your point with the example you give.

1) No 1 and most importantly, You shouldnt be using a flash with motorbike or indeed any other motorsports where you are so close - you WILL cause an accident. I'm not saying this because I "don't know what I'm talking about" - I've done plenty of MX shots and been to local and national MX on a number of occasions and have seen accidents caused by people with flashes.

2) The panned shot looks much more creative, brighter and imo - better than the "stopped" one.

3) You are at f9. Bring it down to f4 (assuming you go that wide... or even wider if poss), put the iso level up by one and you can probably stop action fine with a 1/320 without the need for any flash.

4) Using 1/200 on a lens no longer than say 70mm would be fine to stop action and using the in-built on a lens any longer than that would be pointless as it probably won't expose correctly due to it's guide number etc.
StevenC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:27 AM.