The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)

[OverlordXenu]

I've been thinking of getting a digital body to make getting my lighting set up easier, anyone got any recomendations? All I really need is a way to chimp the pic and histogram.

[bigshot]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

Like most of you, the D80 option seems like a no-brainer to me... [i]if only there weren't so many rumours circulating around regarding the imminent release of the D90

There's always a "newer and better" model on the horizon. Buy what makes sense at the time you're buying and use the hell out of it to get your money's worth out of it.

See ya
Steve

[milkpowder]

Well I got a camera today. It's a Nikon!

[Towert7]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

Well I got a camera today. It's a Nikon!

Yes, but the bigger question:
Do you have any lenses?
must be asked.

[darkninja67]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

Well I got a camera today. It's a Nikon!

D300?? :drool:

[milkpowder]

Originally Posted by darkninja67

D300?? :drool:

You guessed correctly! How did you know I also got a 18-70 because I figured a 50mm wouldn't be sufficient. Before that I had another go with the Canon 40D but I just couldn't get past the slightly tacky feel of it. I'm sure the IQ would've been near indistinguishable from the D300 but various physical things didn't seem right about it, eg screen wasn't as nice, buttons weren't as tactile, body didn't feel as solid, etc... All in all it didn't seem as well-polished as the D300. I probably would've took a D80 over the 40D just on the basis of the build. Yes, the handling matters that much to me; I'm that shallow.

[darkninja67]

Originally Posted by milkpowder

You guessed correctly! How did you know I also got a 18-70 because I figured a 50mm wouldn't be sufficient. Before that I had another go with the Canon 40D but I just couldn't get past the slightly tacky feel of it. I'm sure the IQ would've been near indistinguishable from the D300 but various physical things didn't seem right about it, eg screen wasn't as nice, buttons weren't as tactile, body didn't feel as solid, etc... All in all it didn't seem as well-polished as the D300. I probably would've took a D80 over the 40D just on the basis of the build. Yes, the handling matters that much to me; I'm that shallow.

Congrats on the D300. Would be the body for me if I went Nikon. Just used to Canon and the $500 difference gets me the killer Tamron 17-50.

Good luck with the D300 though, it is a special body.

[lan]

Welcome to the D300 club.

Did you get the 18-70 used? If new, I just would've payed a bit more for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.

[darkninja67]

Originally Posted by lan

Welcome to the D300 club.

Did you get the 18-70 used? If new, I just would've payed a bit more for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.

I read somewhere that the "newer" copies of the 17-50mm were having issues on Nikon bodies.

[lan]

Ah yes. Forgot there were newer 17-50s with motors built in. What were the issues?


I got me a used Tokina 100-300f4 pretty cheap. I tried a used Tokina 80-200 2.8 but it just wasn't very good with too much chromatic aberration. I didn't feel like spending 1000+ for the Nikon 80-200 AF-S especially since I have 3 lenses that cover that range already. The 100-300 is pretty good I'd say. Granted the motor is slow but it's totally useable at f4.