OT: Digital cameras

[YZalltheway]

Recently I've been looking at getting a more serious digital SLR camera than my 4 megapixel point and shoot one. I've narrowed it down to Nikon because I've seen the pictures that my friends nikon has took and they are amazing quality. I really like the Nikon d40x and the nikon D80. Have any of you used these cameras, are they any good compared to others in their price range?

[char393]

I don't shoot Nikon, so I can't answer that question specifically.

I would opt for a less expensive body and try to get the best quality lens I could afford. Good glass makes all the difference in the world, IMHO.

[YZalltheway]

Well what body are you using? Youre pictures always seem to turn out really nice. Also What size lens are you using. And how much did you spend on your whole setup. I would really like to get into photography and I love taking pictures but I hate it when they turn out really crappy.

[char393]

I'm shooting with a 20d now. My first DSLR was a Canon Digital Rebel, the 6 megapixel one. Just to give you an idea of what you can accomplish with a body like that and a good lens... this was shot with a Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 L series lens..




This was shot with the 20d body and the same lens..


And this was the 20d body and a Canon 70-200 F/4 L series lens.


The L series glass will run you a bit more, I paid right around $500 for the F/4, but it works well for what I need it to do. I think you'd want the F/2.8 for anything low-light shots, but the price jumps considerably. As for the price of the body, I got mine used from a friend...and I got a great deal. I also sold Keeto my old digi rebel body and lens, so that helped offset the cost.

BTW...sorry for the shameless self-promotion.

[2kHondaCR500R]

You need to think about what type of subjects you will be shooting. If it's motor sports, portrait, landscape, low light action, etc. I say this because some DSLR backs have faster and better focusing along with other things such as lower noise at higher ISO settings that you may or may not need to achieve the type of quality photos you want.

Also, investing in the right lenses is as important as the camrea itself.

You can't go wrong with the Nikon or Canon system. But you just need to give us more info on budget and what subjects, etc., you'll be shooting.

You'll also need to do some research and a lot of reading to make the best possible choice for your needs. Let me toss you a couple Nikon related links and maybe Char can add some Canon to help you decide on which system to buy.

Nikon Cafe is a Nikon Camera specific forum. Search and ask all the question you want there. There are very helpful people on that board, but use the search first.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

You can research Ken Rockwell's site for his tests and opinions on Nikon gear. Use the link or search to find what you want to know.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Nikon D80 review at Ken Rockwell
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Nikon D40x review at KR's
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

DSLR 10mp shootout article
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

This may help...

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

This may help, but I never read this guys stuff. lol
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

I shoot witha Nikon D80 myself.

Samples... and I'm no pro so don't expect much to compare by. They're only edited for size, nothing else. lol













Full size of the boat: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

My junk shot with D80.



Hope this helps.

[char393]

I have to say that I think Nikon offers better in-camera adjustability...as in NR. Geez, I hope the Canon gods don't strike me down for that.

That being said, I am completely happy with my Canon. I really think it boils down to personal preference.

[YZalltheway]

Wow thanks for all that info the links are really helping out with alot. BTW those are some very nice shots from both of you.

[ossagp]

I got into photography with Nikon SLR's. I still have two. Since Digital I don't touch them much. George is a dyed in the wool Nikon user. He may have his 80 by now. He would be a good reference.

For what I want to do now, and that is carry really light and small and have a really long range lens I use a Kodak with a 10x optical zoom. My son has an identical one. He carries his on snowmachine rides. It has a very long range, capable of about what you would get with a 380mm lense on the Nikons you mentioned. A similar one for under 300 from them now has a 12x. It just depends on what you do.

I watched George at the MXDN. He enjoys it. I recall carrying two SLR's at once, and almost laughed. maybe someday I will be as much into the quality of the photo as I once was. I can probably send you some of what my son took last winter off his snowmachine if you want to know what you can do with a grocery store variety camera. If carrying it while you ride or hike has any part of your plans, I for one wont be using one of the ones you mentioned.

[YZalltheway]

well I would like to get into motorsport photography. My budget is around 500 for the body and around 200 for a lens. No I wont be carrying it while hiking skiing riding or anything that could break it.

[DRGSin393]

Alot of good info here. Ossa is right...If I could choose to do anything in the world for a living, dentistry would be first and photography a close 2nd. Its my passion. In your price range I would look for either the Canon Rebel xti or the Nikon D40Xs. Both are more than capable of doing what you need with plenty of room for future growth. As Char mentioned, the glass is THE most important piece of the puzzle. I would rather buy a good used body and spend what Id save towards good glass. In otherwords, invest in the glass, not the body. Yes, it makes that much difference. The bodies will be updated every few years whereas the lenses will be good much longer. As far as Nikon vs Canon, I prefer to shoot Nikon because of the Nikon glass and the controls/menus are a bit more intuitive. I started in landscape photography, which Nikon has a heads up in. Now I mostly shoot sports which up to this month, Canaon was the clear choice. Having said that, Nikon glass is generally more expensive, not as fast in certain ranges, which is important for shooting action in low light and Canon used glass is more readily found. In the end its all about the photographer's vision. Any good photographer considers his gear as just a tool. They'll pick whichever tool allows them to do the job more easily. Char can pick up my camera and shoot off plenty of awesome pics and vice versa. Here are a couple of more links for you: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] and [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

[2kHondaCR500R]

Originally Posted by DRGSin393

As Char mentioned, the glass is THE most important piece of the puzzle. I would rather buy a good used body and spend what Id save towards good glass. In otherwords, invest in the glass, not the body. Yes, it makes that much difference. The bodies will be updated every few years whereas the lenses will be good much longer.

Agree. Seems we're all on the same page here.

Originally Posted by DRGSin393

As far as Nikon vs Canon, I prefer to shoot Nikon because of the glass and the controls/menus are a bit more intuitive.

I chose Nikon because at the time their pro-sumer (like the D80) was the best camera for the money in its class. The D80 was almost a D200 for less; some things were even better than the D200. And you can't beat Nikon for the choices and quality in their lenses. The in camera software is better IMHO. And lastly, the D80 versus the XTi, the XTi is a great camera and performs, but it felt too small for my hands and was more plasticy and cheap feeling.

Originally Posted by DRGSin393

I started in landscape photography, which Nikon has a heads up in. Now I mostly shoot sports which up to this month, Canaon was the clear choice.

Canon certainly had the Pro-cameras lock stock and barrel for a while. But with the addition of the D3 series and D300, plus the new glass, I think things are about even now.

Originally Posted by DRGSin393

Having said that, Nikon glass is generally more expensive, not as fast in certain ranges, which is important for shooting action in low light and Canon used glass is more readily found.

Agree.

Originally Posted by DRGSin393

In the end its all about the photographer's vision. Any good photographer considers his gear as just a tool. They'll pick whichever tool allows them to do the job more easily. Char can pick up my camera and shoot off plenty of awesome pics and vice versa. Here are a couple of more links for you: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] and [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

I've seen some amazing photos from Canon cameras. Nothing I said is to knock Canon gear because they're equal to Nikon in my opinion. It's just some things Nikon does better and there are some things Canon does better. You'll make your camera purchase based on that, what type of shooting you'll be doing, and your budget.

FWIW, look for used gear for good deals. Nikon Cafe has a great trading post and a past sellers feedback thread so you know who is legit and trustworthy.

Good Luck!
John

[ossagp]

So George, are you seriously considering that dentistry thing? If so have you told anyone else?

[DRGSin393]

Originally Posted by ossagp

So George, are you seriously considering that dentistry thing? If so have you told anyone else?

..naww, I think I'll still wing it for a while. At least until the Licensing Board and the Prosecutor's office get an inkling. Its just that now that the weather has dipped into the 20s, its getting dayum cold doing work out of that cargo van.

[ossagp]

maradyne makes a really good heater for the back of those vans. i have one in the small tanker.

[ossagp]

I was out to buy a Cannon when I went to get my first SLR. A friend of mine was the manager of a large store which sold just about everything. Paul is a very good photographer as well, so I went to him to buy the Cannon (an AE). He said it was a good camera for sure, but it would be harder for him to sell me one at less than suggested on it, since no one would believe he was buying it for himself. So I ended up with a Nikon and Lenses he would have bought. All really good stuff, I added another body later on.

Nikon still has all beat in "snob appeal". My friend Doug owns a Hasselblad. He is probably about 6 times the photograper I am. If we were in the same place at the same time, more people seemed more interested in watching me than him. His camera body alone was worth what everything I was carrying and had in my truck was worth, but people know the name. Those people undoubtedly learned a lot of bad things from me.

[2kHondaCR500R]

Hasselblad = up to 39mp and $$$!

The H3DII’s unprecedented interaction between the various system components combine with increased lens performance and an unprecedented level of image sharpness to outperform any professional digital camera system on the market today, delivering outstanding pixel resolution, better colors, and improved detail rendering. The large format light channel provided by the H3DII and the H System lenses enables the use of the largest image sensors currently available – 48x36 mm - more than twice the size of even the largest 35mm camera sensors. These sensors hold more and larger pixels, ensuring ultra sharp images without gradation break-ups in even the finest lit surfaces.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

[jrsturn]

This is a timely thread. I'm looking at the Nikon D40 and the D40x. I can get the D40 with a package inc memory card, carrying case and a 55-200mm lens for $649. For the about same amount I can get the D40x. Will the added megapixels make up for the lens included in the aforementioned scenario or is a higher mp rate just fluff? I just moved up to the water-resistant disposable cameras this summer, so go easy with the responses! Thanks, Larry

[ossagp]

JR, you mean you are not going for the hasselblad either?

[DRGSin393]

Originally Posted by jrsturn

This is a timely thread. I'm looking at the Nikon D40 and the D40x. I can get the D40 with a package inc memory card, carrying case and a 55-200mm lens for $649. For the about same amount I can get the D40x. Will the added megapixels make up for the lens included in the aforementioned scenario or is a higher mp rate just fluff? I just moved up to the water-resistant disposable cameras this summer, so go easy with the responses! Thanks, Larry

This is a tricky one. Even though 10MP vs 6MP is relatively a large enough difference, it wont be realized until you enlarge and print the images beyond 16"x20". And even then, it takes a discerning eye. Ive been shooting a Nikon D1x, a 6MP "pro body" camera. Up until last week the 6MPs have never come into play. A client ordered a life sized poster of a pic I shot of his son. Ideally, I would like to have at least 12 MPs, preferably 16. So advantage D40x, if youre printing larger than 16x20. Conversely, by increasing the resolution to 10MP over 6MP, youre introducing more noise also known as "grain" during the film era. This noise would be evident when shooting in low light situations at ISO's greater than 800. So for instance...youre indoors shooting a basketball game and not using the flash, then the pics would tend to have more noise in a 10MP camera vs a 6MP camera, assuming that the sensors are the same size, which in this case they are. Advantage D40 for low light situations without flash. The next biggest difference is called Dynamic Range(DR), which loosely translates as the range of color your camera will distinguish-ie... 8 count crayon box vs 16 count crayon box. Advantage D40x, even though this is also difficult for the untrained eye to pick up and software can post process some of the differences. Read this thread on the topic and make up your own mind. Alot will be determined as to how the camera will be used. Both of them will take great MX pics.[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] Depending on your shooting situation, you may want to save the extra $$ by going with a D40 and spending the difference on better glass.

[yzernie]

You mean to tell me there is some out now better than this??? I better get with the times!!