Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 16, 2006, 12:23 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 69
Default

If IS is a priority for you and you can wait, then you should consider the new Pentax K10 with in-body IS which should be released in the next few weeks (not sure of exact date). The advantage of the new pentax dslrs is backwards lens compatability and inbody IS.

- Bpp
Ballpointpenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 8:00 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Personally, I really disliked Phil Askey's review of the Nikon D80, and how he compared itto the Canon EOS 400D and the Sony Alpha dSLR-A100. Dpreview have disappointed me.

The following is the impression that I've gotten from the review.


Quote:

The last issue is price, or value for money. In my opinion, its customization, performance, build quality, comfort and design are worth the price difference between it and the competition. Having said that Nikon may struggle 'in stores' to fight Canon's (aggressively priced) EOS 400D ($200 is quite a big difference). If you're a more discerning photographer who can see the advantages offered by the 'all round' D80 you may well consider the extra money well spent.



He was like trying to say that the Nikon D80 is a much better dSLR to consider over the Canon EOS 400D. I can see that he was bias!! It seems to me like he has brought himself the D80 and is using itfor thereview.

What do you mean by "If you're a more discerning photographer who can see the advantages offered by the 'all round' D80 you may well consider the extra money well spent."??? Oh, just because it hasthe extra nifty custom features, the PENTA-PRISM viewfinder, the extra top mounted status LCD panel, the dual command dials, and just because the D80 is very NIKON like which you like, you can consider them WORTH the extra $$$$??? Give me a break, the Canon EOS 400D is not such a bad camera either, and you are trying to say that it's cheaper price is not as justifiable???

"In my opinion, its customization, performance, build quality, comfort and design are worth the price difference between it and the competition."

I find this a very bias statement to make. The Nikon D80 is also very much more expensive. Seriously, he is trying to make the D80 sound so good and the EOS 400D sound so bad. I don't disagree that he can give his opinion, but this is areview, and it isa very popular one too, he will be giving people the wrong impression of the cameras! He should have at least give the Canon EOS 400D some credits as well.

"Having said that Nikon may struggle 'in stores' to fight Canon's (aggressively priced) EOS 400D ($200 is quite a big difference)."

See??? He is trying to take the Nikon D80's side. He is worried andconcerned for the Nikon D80. He is trying to put is as if the Canon EOS 400D is a threat to the Nikon D80!

Quote:

Onto noise, Nikon's approach, as it always has been, is to use more chroma noise reduction and leave as much luminance (detail) information intact as possible. This does lead to more visible 'grain' in images at higher sensitivities than some other cameras but because this is monochromatic in appearance it is less digital-like, more reminiscent of film grain. Thankfully also if you prefer you can control the amount of noise reduction applied (although this appears to control luminance NR).


You see, when it comes to the strong point of the EOS 400D>>> "Better high ISO performance", he will try to reason around the fact until he has formed a satisfying statement for the Nikon D80's worse high ISO performance>>> Bla bla bla.....in the end, they are all very good, and the differences will ultimately be negligible...

Then he will say that the Nikon D80 is not bad, at least has this and that, and has a very good something etc...all in all, there can allbe considered equal...

:roll:

Quote:

Nikon appear to have shaken off the soft-image demons of the past and are also using a slightly stronger (more consumer friendly) default sharpening level than the D200.
He is trying to make the Nikon D80 sound so good..... Why make soft images seems a bad thing??? I thought that more advance (dSLR) cameras produces soft images, which is a great thing for P.P. and detail retention without sharpening?? I thought that the purist approach was always what you have liked??? Again, trying to make the D80 sound better...like so good only. (Just note the statement again)

"Nikon appear to have shaken off the soft-image demons of the past and are also using a slightly stronger (more consumer friendly) default sharpening level than the D200."

Quote:

Just as significant is the viewfinder. A digital SLR relies on its viewfinder for scene composition, focusing and depth of field, you do sometimes wonder how seriously this is taken. Nikon clearly did with the D80, instead of a light-sapping (but cheaper) Pentamirror solution they selected a quality Pentaprism setup which is, we are told, similar to that in the D200. That glass Pentaprism viewfinder with its 0.94x magnification equates to a big, bright view which has no distortion and really does bring you up close-and-personal with the entire scene. Optional grid lines can help greatly when taking landscape or architectural type photography.
Just look at this! He is trying to make the viewfinder of the Nikon D80 sound like a very significant thing indeed. He is also trying to make the pentamirror viewfinder of the competition sound so bad indeed, when actually they are not bad at all!

Then he will go on and say how significant it is...

In my opinion, he is like trying to make it a situation of life and death...he is just making it sound so gooooood. :roll:

Quote:

In-use performance also feels as though it's a step above its price class, instant power on time and on to shot time, very fast auto focus, short shutter lag and 'just-about a blink' viewfinder blackout (160 ms), fast record review and playback as well as fast SD card write performance. There's also ergonomic performance, the camera is smaller than the D70/D70s but not at the expense of usability, the hand grip is a good size and shape (and considerably more comfortable than the EOS 400D) and all controls are within reach. Other small details such as button size and placement are simply just right.
All are actually just minute details only, and he is trying to make it all sound like a really BIG thing! :roll:It is also not to say that the EOS 400D doesn't have some of the aspects above.

"step above its price class"???Give me another break....you have already praised the D80 much enough and you still want to state that it is like a "step above its price class". How far can you go man...

You didn't give any credicts to the cheaper EOS 400D and you still want to say that the already more expensive D80 is better than it's price class??? Go and get a life...:?

Quote:

Spend some time with the camera manual and looking through the menus and you'll begin to realize the amount of customization available, with no less than 32 custom functions there's very little you can't configure to your way of working. Stack on top of this control over settings which are just 'defaulted' on other cameras (such as high sensitivity noise reduction) and it's pretty obvious that the D80 is in a class of its own in this respect.
Come on, those are just functions only, they are just the icing on the cake. The EOS 400D also offers plenty of image perimeters and functions. "But ultimately, it is the image quality thatwill bethe most important" You yourself said it before in other reviews!! And the EOS 400D have better image qualities.

Quote:

The number of cons, and the fact that there are no serious ones, is a testament to the thought and work that has gone into the D80's design. It's one of those cameras which just feels 'right and sorted' from the moment you pick it up. Things just get better the more you use the camera, you will begin to discover the usefulness of major features like the customizable automatic ISO and the subtle touches like being able to tap the DELETE button twice to delete an image (sounds insignificant, but in use things like this make the D80 far more usable than other cameras).
Bias, bias, pure bias...I have enough of your opinions in this review! :?

Quote:




[*]Good large LCD monitor with wide viewing angles and removable protective cover
Why you include this into your pros of the D80when in the A100's pros, you didn't include it's equally great LCD with anti-reflective coating??? A lot ofthings in that D80's pros menuare mostly subjective!!

You never mentioned the A100's better resolution in your test??? (You tried to pose it as insignificant when you are placing EVERY TINIEST BIT ofdetail of the D80 asvery significant)

"As expected the D80 delivered the same 2200/1800 LPH performance we saw from the DSLR-A100"

If you wouldhave liked the A100 as you did with the D80 now, I bet things would be very very differentfor the features& abilitythat the A100 have.

Quote:

Is it a big step from eight megapixels? No, but then Nikon didn't do eight megapixels.
As you can see, he is very scared to say anything pro Nikon.

Quote:

where as the DSLR-A100 appears to continue it, along with some moire.
Yeah, you are very attentive to something so slight about the A100! Clearly, it says something about you! >>>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/niko...lra100-002.jpg

Which entry level dSLR continues all the way pass "24" ??? :roll:

Nikon D80>>>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Niko...on_d80-002.jpg

Nothing to say. Very good huh?? What if you had favoured the A100??? (WOW, big story...) :roll:

In the end, you had still pontificated a lot about the superb resolution of the D80 in the following pages. (Ofcouse, you won't mention the A100...)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond80/page18.asp

The ISO performance of the D80 is looking worse to me here than the rest. Images are getting soft from ISO 800 onwards. Something you would usually make a hype about.

Quote:

From ISO 100 to 400 there is very little difference between these three cameras, noise levels are similar, as is the reproduction of detail (the D80 perhaps being slightly softer than the EOS 400D and DSLR-A100). At ISO 800 the DSLR-A100 looks noisier with noticeable luminance and chroma (color) noise, the D80 maintaining a clean appearance although at the expense of some detail. At ISO 1600 the D80's gray patch looks the cleanest, followed by the EOS 400D and DSLR-A100.

Closer inspection show that this is due to Nikon's superior chroma noise reduction which keeps the mottled color pattern (chroma noise) to a minimum, producing a more 'film like' monochromatic grain. Of the three cameras the EOS 400D still maintains the best detail. The ISO 3200 option (HI 1.0) is unique to the D80 (compared to its peers) and while there's a very clear loss of detail it can still be useful in very low light situations where the choice would be this or not getting the shot at all.
You would have probably put it much more worse it it wasn't because of the D80.

And since when you started favouring ISO 3200? You didn't said anything about the Pentax ist* DS's ISO 3200 advantage. Instead, you were busy slaying it's "not bad at all" ISO performance.

Come on, be realistic Phil.

Quote:

Nikon's approach to noise reduction works well in the D80; firstly use mostly color noise reduction which maintains as much luminance information (detail) as possible, the remaining noise having a more film like, monochromatic grain appearance. The second part to the noise equation is giving the user control over the amount of luminance noise reduction, if you prefer you can turn it off completely (this level of control is sadly missing on many cameras).
Come on, you know very well that it's ISO performance is notas superior as the EOS 400D'sright?

Quote:

Of course the ideal would be to have a clean signal in the first place, unfortunately Nikon are at the whim of their sensor manufacturer on this point.
Once again, trying to slay Sony for the issue. How controversal!

Seems like anything you don't like about the Nikon D80, you'll try to spit it somewhere else.Like tryingto conceal it with long statements or put the blame on some other companies etc...

"Very short 'viewfinder blackout time' at shutter release " of the D80 is in your D80's advantages list??? :roll:Give me a break once again, are you actually never satisfied of already saying that how good the D80 is?? Can people even notice it? Is the other dSLR shutter blackout time reallythat long? Finally, I have shot with the D70s and I couldn't even notice a shutter black out time in dim lightings. :?Tell me we are super humans that willnoticed the D80's tiniest bit detail...Sorry we are not. The feature is not a big deal, and it is definitely not a big deal enough to be considered to the D80's advantage. (Unless you have nothing else better to say)

All in all very "Subjective" D80's advantages list.

Quote:

Both cameras deliver excellent detail, the only slight difference being the EOS 400D image having a crisper appearance with some more detail in texture (it's really unlikely you would be able to see this difference, even in a large print). This slight advantage is probably a combination of Canon's better in-camera image processing and slightly stronger sharpening.
Hey! that's the very first time that you are saying "it's really unlikely you would be able to see this difference, even in a large print" tell me that you've changed. :?

Normally you would just say that camera image A have better per-pixel sharpness, detail,and crispness and then that's it. Seemslike you are frutile to admit that the EOS 400D is better. So you would try to say it rather conservatively, unlike last time on certain cameras...

Quote:

Canon's superior image processing and perhaps milder noise reduction maintains more detail at ISO 800 (although not by a large margin), at ISO 1600 things are more balanced with certainly more noticeable chroma noise than from the Nikon D80.
Ah ya...just say that the EOS 400D was better man. No need to mention things like "(although not by a large margin)" things that you would usually not say. Just to note the extra "bias" in anything to do with the D80, when you would just blow a non D80 camera of similar performance away, without trying to reason or anything.

I just "hate" the rather bias altittude towards the D80. (Unless the other cameras such as the EOS 400D & A100 have been treated equally) But theywere not! In my opinion. I bet you won't state the "Unecessary" statement "with certainly more noticeable chroma noise than from the Nikon D80." if it was the D80. (I think that youare scared to knock the D80 too much,that is why you felt the need tostate that statement)

I can also say (in favour of the Canon EOS 400D); that the Nikon D80 have visible N.R. artifacts, obvious detail lost, slight watercolor like effects, slage hammer noise reduction, and bad image definition at ISO 1600.

A lot of things thatare true doesn't actually need to be stated at this point of time. The pointwas that the Canon EOS 400Dis better atthehigh ISO performance; that's it! [/*][*]
[/*][*]Hey Phil, I think that your forum members have more decerning eyesthan your bias pair of eyes!


[/*]
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 8:11 AM   #13
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Personally, I really disliked Phil Askey's review of the Nikon D80, and how he compared itto the Canon EOS 400D and the Sony Alpha dSLR-A100. Dpreview have disappointed me.
Not sure why you're so upse by this. It's a comparison review - of course there are going to be some biases. Give any person two cameras and they're are likely going to prefer one over the other. It's certainly more useful than reviews in any magazines out there. It's also the nature of photography - it's a very subjective thing.

But, I gotta ask - for someone that doesn't use the Canon DSLRs, why are you so offended by the perceived slight (although I disagree there - I don't think Phil knocked the 400d at all)? I'm serious here - why do you even care?


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 8:23 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:

why do you even care?

Are you being sarcastic?
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 8:40 AM   #15
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

no - I'm being totally serious. why would you care if a reviewer 'slighted' a camera you don't own and from your previous posts don't have a published interest in owning. If you're not interested in purchasing the 400d why does this review even affect you? It's an honest question with no sarcasm intended.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 9:20 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

JohnG, Ireally didn't like the way dpreview presented the Nikon D80 review, and how they had related it to it's rival dSLR cameras. The review give too little or no credits to the Sony A100 for it's resolution advantage, anti-dust/anti-shake, dynamic range optimizer, equally great quality LCD (which they gave full credits for,in the D80's review), for choosing a purer approach in it's high ISO images, and lower price rangeetc...Continue >>

They also didn't givesignificant credits to the Canon EOS 400D's better high ISO performance, slightly better image quality (per-pixel sharpness, crispness etc...), more extensive image perimeter settings, such a great anti-dust feature, equally great LCD screen, and affordability etc...

I meant, they have made everytiny detail of the D80 so greatly significant. (That is why)

In addition, they have also made theissues of the D80 seems very small, and the factors of it's competitors seems rather vast. (It's the way they had played around with the words...)

All in all, I can clearly sense the "bias" in the D80's review as I am reading through it.

(Normally their reviews are not like that)



BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 9:27 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I'm with John. I think the D80 review is on the money, and the details he highlighted are important details, especially concerning the control and customization, that isn't matched by some of the lower end DSLRs, even ones made by Nikon (the D70s and D50). I also don't think any cameras were slighted or put down in any way. He never says the Canon is a bad camera...he is just saying the extra cost of the Nikon is justified by the extra features it has. How is that bias??? He doesn't say the 400d's cheaper price isn't justified. I read it that the Canon and Nikon are priced fairly for what they offer, which is a fair statement. He even states the 400d will likely outsell the D80 based on its price point.

I don't get what the issue is. It seems like you're trying to discredit the D80 and the many features it has to promote cameras that are less feature rich because YOU like them. That to me is pretty biased, and its clear you've done many of the things in your past posts that you're accusing Phil Askey of doing, and you've done it alot more vocally (again I think Phil's Review is fair).
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 9:57 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Code:
I'm with John. I think the D80 review is on the money, and the details he highlighted are important details, especially concerning the control and customization, that isn't matched by some of the lower end DSLRs, even ones made by Nikon (the D70s and D50). I also don't think any cameras were slighted or put down in any way. He never says the Canon is a bad camera...he is just saying the extra cost of the Nikon is justified by the extra features it has. How is that bias??? He doesn't say the 400d's cheaper price isn't justified. I read it that the Canon and Nikon are priced fairly for what they offer, which is a fair statement. He even states the 400d will likely outsell the D80 based on its price point.
Read this>>>

Quote:

Ireally didn't like the way dpreview presented the Nikon D80 review, and how they had related it to it's rival dSLR cameras. The review give too little or no credits to the Sony A100 for it's resolution advantage, anti-dust/anti-shake, dynamic range optimizer, equally great quality LCD (which they gave full credits for,in the D80's review), for choosing a purer approach in it's high ISO images, and lower price rangeetc...Continue >>

They also didn't givesignificant credits to the Canon EOS 400D's better high ISO performance, slightly better image quality (per-pixel sharpness, crispness etc...), more extensive image perimeter settings, such a great anti-dust feature, equally great LCD screen, and affordability etc...

I meant, they have made everytiny detail of the D80 so greatly significant. (That is why)

In addition, they have also made theissues of the D80 seems very small, and the factors of it's competitors seems rather vast. (It's the way they had played around with the words...)

All in all, I can clearly sense the "bias" in the D80's review as I am reading through it.

(Normally their reviews are not like that)

Code:
I don't get what the issue is. It seems like you're trying to discredit the D80 and the many features it has to promote cameras that are less feature rich because YOU like them. That to me is pretty biased, and its clear you've done many of the things in your past posts that you're accusing Phil Askey of doing, and you've done it alot more vocally (again I think Phil's Review is fair).
rjseeney, I know that you owned a Nikon D80 okaaay...

I don't think thatthe Sony Alpha dSLR-A100 is less feature rich than the Nikon D80.





BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 10:04 AM   #19
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Wow - it's a good thing Phil didn't compare the D80 to the R1. I'd hate to see the fallout that review would have caused :blah:
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2006, 11:14 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
Wow - it's a good thing Phil didn't compare the D80 to the R1. I'd hate to see the fallout that review would have caused :blah:
That's for sure.


Ben,

Yes I own a D80 (in addition to several other cameras). Ben, you've even pointed out features that the D80 has that other camera don't...the viewfinder, two control dials, 32 custom features, in camera editing, etc. However, these to you are just "icing on the cake" (your term) and therefore not important. However, by the D80 having these features and other entry level cameras not having them , how can you claim those cameras are as feature rich. In terms of control, the d80 offers alot more. There is no disputing that. How is comparing control features bias? Or are the features that are important to you the only important features?? The D80 is not in the same class as the A100, or even the 400d. It is at least a half step above, and certainly not entry level. I'm sorry you dislike the camera that much.

At least when I speak about specific cameras (the D70s, d80, d50, the original digital rebel DSLR, and various sony and canon P&S cameras) I do so from experience, not from volumes of reviews, conjecture and assumptions, which is where you operate from. You need to slow down, and listen and learn, and more importantly use some of the cameras you recommend. Get some DSLR experience before you begin to preach on the subject.

I apologize for the tone of the post, and we should all focus on the original poster's questions.



rjseeney 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 2:15 AM.