[PATB]

I use a Canon G6 primarily for taking pictures during family vacations and outings. I love the camera and have taken decent shots with it, but I always find myself not using the flash as I seem to get better results by disabling it. Problem is, as expected, some of my pictures get too dark.

I have an old Nikon 50mm f1.4 with my film SLR (since buried in the garage!). I remember taking great shots with that lens even without using flash when my first kid (now 13!) was just a baby. I am thinking that perhaps I can use the prime lens with a newfangled DSLR?

I am just a casual photographer and want something extremely light weight, easy to use, and can accept interchangeable lenses. With lots of automatic, noob features for taking family pictures. Is the Nikon D50 the ticket? Or perhaps the D40?

Thanks in advance for any information.

 

[Arainach]

How old, exactly, is your 50mm f/1.4? If it's Autofocus, the D50 will work absolutely perfect for you. The D40 will not because it lacks the screwdriver lens to autofocus plain AF glass (it only works with the AF-S lenses with internal screwdriver motors). If it's REALLY old (like pre-1969, from the pre-AI era), it won't work on any Nikon Body. If it's an AI or AI-S MF lens, it'll work perfectly on the D200 or D2x, and will shoot perfectly on the D40/D50/D80 except that it won't meter and will only be usable in Manual Mode. This is due to the old physical aperture coupling beinig rather expensive to implement in bodies, causing Nikon to drop it in their consumer models to save space and cost due to lack of demand.

Either way, no matter what your situation I'd get the D50 over the D40 any day. Many more controls, compatible with ALL AI-present Nikon Glass instead of the D40's madness, and a much better camerra all around.

 

[PATB]

My 50mm is about 13 years old. Is autofocus the only thing I would lose with the D40? Looks like the D50 would be the ticket, or I just have to get a new prime lens.

 

[Arainach]

If it's an AF lens, AF would be the only thing lost on the D40. Getting a new Prime isn't an option yet, because as of yet Nikon hasn't changed any of their primes shorter than 105mm to AF-S. They've been gradually redesigning the line, but the common 50mm and 85mm primes are probably near the bottom of their priority list since they focus so fast in the regular AF versions anyhow.

 

[Senn20]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PATB /img/forum/go_quote.gif I use a Canon G6 primarily for taking pictures during family vacations and outings. I love the camera and have taken decent shots with it, but I always find myself not using the flash as I seem to get better results by disabling it. Problem is, as expected, some of my pictures get too dark. I have an old Nikon 50mm f1.4 with my film SLR (since buried in the garage!). I remember taking great shots with that lens even without using flash when my first kid (now 13!) was just a baby. I am thinking that perhaps I can use the prime lens with a newfangled DSLR? I am just a casual photographer and want something extremely light weight, easy to use, and can accept interchangeable lenses. With lots of automatic, noob features for taking family pictures. Is the Nikon D50 the ticket? Or perhaps the D40? Thanks in advance for any information.

Grab the D50 before it's gone. The D40 has a more simplistic autofocus system and control layout. Also you won't be able to autofocus your 50mm prime with the D40.

 

[ghopper]

The D40 would be a downgrade for you, as the Canon G6 is a pretty high end point-and-shoot model. D40 has only 3 AF areas and can't do many things a true DSLR should. The D50 is pretty decent for a beginner photographer. I used to use one before I moved on to the D80. However, DSLRs are in no way light weight. If you want lightweight and interchangeable lenses, Leica is the only way to go but it costs 3-5x more than what you're looking at right now.
Is the 50 1.4 manual? I presume it is if you use it with your film cameras. D50 does not work with manual lenses. The meter does not work, so you will have to do guesswork with the shutter speed and aperture. Also, the D50 viewfinder is too dark to accurately manually focus something. This is particularly important when you have the lens wide open to 1.4.

 

[PATB]

Thank you very much for the replies. If I can't use a prime lens effectively with the D50 or at all with the D40, I am going to stay put and use my G6 for a while. Weight is an issue for me as it is tough to carry around a heavy camera all day while keeping an eye on the kids and carrying other stuff. In fact, I end up carrying a small point and shoot most of the time.

Instead of a DSLR, is there a small, decent point and shoot digital with fast lens? (budget is around $1K max).

 

[kugino]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PATB /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thank you very much for the replies. If I can't use a prime lens effectively with the D50 or at all with the D40, I am going to stay put and use my G6 for a while. Weight is an issue for me as it is tough to carry around a heavy camera all day while keeping an eye on the kids and carrying other stuff. In fact, I end up carrying a small point and shoot most of the time. Instead of a DSLR, is there a small, decent point and shoot digital with fast lens? (budget is around $1K max).

while point and shoots are getting faster with less and less shutter lag all the time, you still want a DSLR for fast shots, quick startup, etc. i think a D50 is the way to go!

 

[ghopper]

This Leica D-LUX 3 is a gem. Should be perfect for you.

 

[majid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PATB /img/forum/go_quote.gif Instead of a DSLR, is there a small, decent point and shoot digital with fast lens? (budget is around $1K max).

The only compact digicam even remotely competitive with a DSLR in terms of low-light performance is the Fuji F30. You can get it for about $225 after rebate. With DSLRs at the $600 mark (like the D40 with kit lens), it does not make sense any more to spend more than $300 on a small-sensor camera.

For your $1K budget, you could get a D50 or D40 with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens or a Nikon 35mm f/2 (both roughly equivalent to your 50mm lens because Nikon DSLRs have an APS-size sensor that acts as if you multiplied the focal length by 1.5). Either combination will effortlessly run rings around the G6. If you are getting a new lens altogether, you may even consider switching systems to Pentax, who have better viewfinders and a very nice series of all-metal pancake lenses in their "Limited" line.

In terms of size, I usually carry with me a Canon Rebel XT with the relatively bulky 35mm f/1.4L lens, the D50 or D40 are smaller, as are the two lenses I mentioned.

 

[Arainach]

I'll take your word on the lenses, but the D50 body is definitely larger than the Rebel XT body - that was the entire reason I bought it over the Rebel, as a matter of fact.

 

[PATB]

Thanks again for all the responses. I took a break from headphone listening at night and instead spent some time browsing various photo websites. In a nutshell, I am as confused as when I started but got the feel for what are currently available.

I do now have an appreciation of why finding a light weight digital camera with low light capabilities is going to be a pain. The Fuji 31fd comes close, but the noise levels due to the small sensor is reportedly more than even a mediocre dSLR. The panasonic LX-2/leica D-Lux3 reportedly does not have the high ISO capability of the Fuji 31/30. The Ricoh GR digital is intriguing but remains an enigma; mixed reviews and can't find one to test in the local camera shops. Also costs as much as the D40.

Right now, I am deciding between the Fuji 31fd and the heavier D40.

I looked at the Leicas and they are beautiful and expensive! I wish I knew more about photography to justify getting an M8. However, with my "skills," there is no difference between an M8 and a ps so nothing over $1K for me

 

[Arainach]

I've yet to see a Point-and-Shoot that can do low-light well. A DSLR lens with a wide aperture is incredibly helpful, as are the larger, higher-quality, lower-noise sensors on DSLRs. The D40/D50 are reportedly better than most DSLRs in their price point at ISO performance, the D80/D200's not bad, the D2h/D2X are arguably among the best out there, and Canons have always been known for their quality High ISO performance.

 

[jjcha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PATB /img/forum/go_quote.gif The panasonic LX-2/leica D-Lux3 reportedly does not have the high ISO capability of the Fuji 31/30. The Ricoh GR digital is intriguing but remains an enigma; mixed reviews and can't find one to test in the local camera shops. Also costs as much as the D40. Right now, I am deciding between the Fuji 31fd and the heavier D40. I looked at the Leicas and they are beautiful and expensive! I wish I knew more about photography to justify getting an M8. However, with my "skills," there is no difference between an M8 and a ps so nothing over $1K for me

Hey Pat, I think you're looking in the right direction. Talk with lan - he's got one of the Fuji's (I think it might be the F31fd?) which he got for its strong low-light performance. I got the Leica D-Lux 3, which is in fact beautiful and expensive, and noisy as all heck... But lan might be able to say something about how well the Fuji performs compared to a real DSLR. (My gut is it might be pretty good, but nothing beats sensor size...)

Have you held a D40? They're a touch smaller than the Canon EOS 400D's and those are so compact to begin with... The M8's a beauty. I picked it up and, man, just started shooting. So intuitive... meanwhile being a Canon guy, I can't make heads or tails of a Nikon...

Best,

-Jason

 

[PerformanceFirst]

PATB, I know you've been looking at Nikon's, but I found a great deal on a Canon Rebel XT body ($458) or XTi body ($611). You can get a 50mm F1.8 lens from Canon for about $60-70. Just another option to consider. The deal is on www.gotapex.com, just scroll down a lil.