The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)

[fureshi]

the camera definitely isn't the limiting factor so that D80 should do you well. extra money spent on lenses is the way to go but that being said, it's hard not being sucked into the wow factor of the D300. i was in the same boat as you. i've had a D50 for two years now and spent some money on a few lenses but in the end, the draw of the D300 was hard to turn away from. somehow i got lucky on amazon and they had a open box D300 with the 18-200vr for $1560. it was too good of a price to turn down. the D50 was never the limiting factor for me though and i intend to keep it as a back up.

by the way, i think if you shoot only with the 50/1.8, it'll teach you a lot about composition. you no longer have the zoom so it forces you to think more about how to compose the shot better. i've learned a lot from a borrowed 5D from work which only had a 50/1.8 on it.

[M0T0XGUY]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

Thanks for the suggestions. My photography piggy-bank will be totally empty for a very long time to come (maybe at least half a year or so) so it really boils down to whether I can live with just a 50/1.8 for that period of time. Maybe it will make me a better photographer, relying less on zoom to compose my shots. On the contrary, the type of shots I can take will be rather limited too... High ISO performance would be very nice though. I'll report back when I have my 'precious'

EDIT: I was wondering whether the D80 has the AF-ON button? I'm planning on getting used to separating focus from the shutter if the facility is present.

It doesn't.

[GTRacer]

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY

It doesn't.

You can assign the AE-L/AF-L button to AF on in the custom functions.

[Towert7]

I've got over 18,000 pictures shot on my D50, and the real limiting factor for me was the lens I was using. Having used lenses like the 85mm F/1.8 and the 60mm F/2.8 Micro, I can fully appreciate the ability to which the D50 can take a picture.

My parents have the D80, and I have had a lot of fun using it. Certainly a wonderful camera.

If it were me, the D80 would be the perfect entry point DSLR for me, especially if you are strapped for money. Spend the rest on some good lenses, and the only thing holding you back is your own creativity.

Oh, and by the way, I don't apply to the: stickin with 50mm will make you a better photographer. It may, and it may not, but the simply fact that you are so limited is the real bummer. I've had a lot of shots at wide angels that would not have been possible with the 50mm.

Knowing what I know now, I would probably start off with the 50mm F/1.8 and the 35mm F/2. Also, since the 70-300G is so darn cheap (100$), I would throw that in JUST so I would have that focal range covered and so you could learn how to shoot telephoto. Those three lenses would be a great starting set, and each is quite light. Or, you could just get the 18-200VR if you are willing to sacrifice a little image quality for convenience and greater focal range. I started off with the kit lens and then upgraded to the 18-200VR, and that upgrade was very nice.

Keep us posted on what you do.

In the end, this speculating of which would be better for you is a little moot. Don't spend too much time trying to decide. Better to just get something, and start shooting (and learning!).

[M0T0XGUY]

Originally Posted by GTRacer

You can assign the AE-L/AF-L button to AF on in the custom functions.

Oh nice then.

[milkpowder]

Originally Posted by Towert7

~snip~

I tried the new 60mm and it's quite some lens. Minimum focusing distance is a mere few centimeters away! I also put a 17-55 on D80 just to see what the weight balance would be like it it is certainly acceptable. The 17-55 wasn't quite as heavy or large as I thought it would be but it's beyond what I can spend anyway so I didn't spend much time with it. The zoom ring is very stiff though so no lens creep for sure!

Just how "bad" is the build quality of the 50/1.8? I like holding the camera by the lens instead of it have it hang around my neck

I realise the 50mm on its own will be rather limiting, but like you said, the 70-300G amongst some other basic zooms are quite affordable (18-70, 18-55VR) so I could get those maybe two or three months down the line. Having read reviews and used the 18-200, I think I would rather walk around with a 18-70 and 70-300(VR?). If I were to get the D80/18-70 kit, it would be cheaper to have both lens than if I were to buy the 18-200 separately.

[bigshot]

It would be cheaper because it's not as convenient to have two lenses that do the job of one. But what you say is true. The 18-200 VR is a pretty heavy lens. If that bothers you, a lighter, shorter zoom would be better.

Everyone always thinks about the long end, but I find that wide angles are much more useful than telephotos for most of my shooting. The 18-70 would be a great all around lens, but I'd add a superwide to that before I got the 70-300.

See ya
Steve

[M0T0XGUY]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

I tried the new 60mm and it's quite some lens. Minimum focusing distance is a mere few centimeters away! I also put a 17-55 on D80 just to see what the weight balance would be like it it is certainly acceptable. The 17-55 wasn't quite as heavy or large as I thought it would be but it's beyond what I can spend anyway so I didn't spend much time with it. The zoom ring is very stiff though so no lens creep for sure!

Just how "bad" is the build quality of the 50/1.8? I like holding the camera by the lens instead of it have it hang around my neck

I realise the 50mm on its own will be rather limiting, but like you said, the 70-300G amongst some other basic zooms are quite affordable (18-70, 18-55VR) so I could get those maybe two or three months down the line. Having read reviews and used the 18-200, I think I would rather walk around with a 18-70 and 70-300(VR?). If I were to get the D80/18-70 kit, it would be cheaper to have both lens than if I were to buy the 18-200 separately.

The build quality of the 50 isn't bad by any means, but there's certainly little chance of it supporting the camera's weight alone - a necessary side effect of its small size. Still, I think it would be quite wise of you to purchase a used D80 and 17-55 (or perhaps the 70-300) rather than a D300; as I think the overall image quality of the former combo will best that of a D300 and a 50 f/1.8. Think about it: unless you plan on shooting mostly nighttime or poorly lit indoor subjects, the D80 is every bit as good as the D300 from an image quality perspective, and veryclose from a build quality perspective.

EDIT: Wow, I somehow managed to skip over the part where you mentioned the 17-55 being too expensive. Still, many large aperture standard zooms and tele-zooms are available for less than the combined cost of a D300, and will still likely yield better "field" quality.

[skyline889]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

I tried the new 60mm and it's quite some lens. Minimum focusing distance is a mere few centimeters away! I also put a 17-55 on D80 just to see what the weight balance would be like it it is certainly acceptable. The 17-55 wasn't quite as heavy or large as I thought it would be but it's beyond what I can spend anyway so I didn't spend much time with it. The zoom ring is very stiff though so no lens creep for sure!

Just how "bad" is the build quality of the 50/1.8? I like holding the camera by the lens instead of it have it hang around my neck

I realise the 50mm on its own will be rather limiting, but like you said, the 70-300G amongst some other basic zooms are quite affordable (18-70, 18-55VR) so I could get those maybe two or three months down the line. Having read reviews and used the 18-200, I think I would rather walk around with a 18-70 and 70-300(VR?). If I were to get the D80/18-70 kit, it would be cheaper to have both lens than if I were to buy the 18-200 separately.

For me, I'd go with the D300 and 50 1.8. Having learned on primes (35/50/135) and an F2, it helped me ease into photography and teach me a little about composition instead of just relying on the zoom of my lens. Not everyone needs this but it helped me a lot especially since I was coming from a monster 12x Panny zoom P&S. This is just me, but if it was between older gen tech, I would rather have the D200 over the D80. I had the chance to test out a D80 for a while and would rather just pay the extra $200 for the D200. The D200 feels much better in my hand, the build quality is better, and I like the AF and metering accuracy on the D200 better even though the ISO performance may not be quite as good as the D80. Also, since the D200/300 meters with old AI glass, you can pick up some older Nikon primes for really cheap; you'll just have to mf them.

If I wanted to invest in glass though and save for a body later, I'd still pick up a D50 used for $300 and buy a Tokina 12-24mm, and a Sigma 50-150 2.8. Maybe add a 18-55 in there just to cover the mid-range gap. I'd skip over the 18-55 VR since VR is more of a marketing ploy in that zoom range anyway and you lose the ED element. The 18-70mm is also a good budget mid-range but the zoom at least on the two copies I've had has been extremely stiff and I'm not set on the duo-cam zoom action. The 70-300VR is a nice lens but the range is a bit specialized so unless you know you'll be shooting in that range, I'd skip over it until you have superfluous funds.

[milkpowder]

I can realistically stretch about $2.2k on a rig and intend to purchase it in the UK even though everything is little more expensive. It's rather unfortunate, but I'd prefer not to go "grey market" for warranty reasons. I guess I could claim 17.5% VAT off when I next leave the UK.

The D300 is just under $2k on its own and $2,320 w/18-70. That leaves $200 for lens, maybe a lil' more if I can get a good bargain from the camera store. It'll just about get me a 50/1.4...

The D80 is just under $1k on its own and $1,150 w/ 18-70. That leaves ~$1k for additional lens, and likewise, a bit more if I can get a bargain. The D80 + 17-55 @ $2.7k is over budget and would require a bit more saving up...


Like most of you, the D80 option seems like a no-brainer to me... if only there weren't so many rumours circulating around regarding the imminent release of the D90 (and of course the highly anticipated D3x). To get a D80 now would be like buying a first generation iPhone knowing that the second generation is just around the corner. While I do understand that a good camera always remains a good camera, I would hate to miss out on whatever additional D300-like functions the D90 would have (eg higher-res CMOS, sensor dust removal, better ISO performance, live view, etc...)


It's easy to just say "quit thinking and just get it", but to actually put word into action is a whole different story... Don't you hate it when money dictates what you can and cannot buy



Hi Skyline889, thanks for the advice. It took me a very long time to write my reply so I missed your post. Funnily enough, I didn't really miss the handling quality of the D300 when I held the D80. I didn't play around with the D80 long enough to notice any performance differences, but it certainly didn't feel cheap unlike the Canons which I handled. I'll give it some more thought.