 Tarso S. Soares |
Nikon D70 or D80? Hi, I'm in the marked for a new camera. I have some (limited) previous experience with photography with a Nikon N80, so I thought I'd stay with Nikon. With that said, any advantages in buying the D70 over the D80? Moreover, should I purchase it with a 18-55 or 18-70 + 70-300 lens bundle? Thanks in advance! P.S - Can I find a guide to lenses somewhere on the internet? I.E. which kind of lens for each said situation.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sarah G |
Don't know if this would help, but here's a couple of things ... http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d80/vs-d70.htm http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jessica A. Eiss |
Hi Tarso, realize that as good as the D70 was and still is, it is over 3 yrs old, and a lot of improvments have been made through the yrs. Esp in the dept of noise reduction. I'm looking to upgrade to the D300 this summer, and will keep my D70 for backup, but if you shoot in anything over ISO400, you need to use noise reduction software to make it useable. i'd go with the D80 or D200 if not a brand new camera. If you get the D40 or D50, you are going down the ladder. also you can go to nikonusa.com for all of the nikon lens info you need.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sandy Hawkins |
I agree with Jessica...go for the D80. I am upgrading from it to the D300, but I plan to keep my D80 as well. It's a great camera. Sandy :-)
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Bah! Humbug! It ain't the camera, it's the photographer. If you believe all the hype, upgrade. If you're like most of us, you've never come near to exhausting the capabilities of the camera you have!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jessica A. Eiss |
c'mon John, how old is the computer you are using? I bet it's not more than 5 yrs old, is it? Couldn't be...the advancements are too great. Esp for storage, unless you don't keep any pics on your hardrive. Of course it's the photographer, but you still need good equipment, and the digital age is progressing as fast as the computer age. I love my camera, but there are better upgrades that make it that much better. What National Geographic photog is shooting with 3-4 yr old equipment? Why not?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Tarso, It really comes down to personal budget. The D-80 has more features than the D-70, but the image quality and noise level will NOT be noticeably better. The D-70 and the D-70s are no longer made, so buying one may involve some risk..number of shots already run thru etc... I still have my D-70 and keep it with me hooked up to a 50mm prime, although it is no longer my primary shooter; it is still a very capable camera in certain situations. Although John's comment is short and he states the obvious, there is a major element of truth in it. The camera itself also plays a major role in your creative abilities. If you dislike what you shoot with, you probably are not inspired to go out and shoot. Can't print 'em if you don't shoot 'em. Finally; the latest crop of DSLR's have come a long way in sensor design, approaching that of film and in some aspects, superior to film. The bells and whistles are fun, but not necessary to capturing a great image.
Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Jessica - As a matter of fact, my desktop is pushing three years in age. I had in built to replace the computer I had built in 1997. I wanted a larger hard drive and did demand the fastest AMD chip available at the time. Today, my old computer serves my Camera Club very well, enabling our members to make 13X19 prints. And, we still use Photoshop Elements 1.0. The Pentium II chip and Windows 98 make it a little slow. But for simply printing, who cares? My Dell laptop is vintage 2001. As to a camera, I bought my first and only DSLR [Canon 30D] about two years ago. Frankly, my Canon EOS 620 [1987]and EOS 3 [1999] are functioning perfectly. The bells and whistles Pete mentions certainly may make it easier to take a lot of images. They don't necessarily make it easier to take better pictures. The process of shooting in a creative mode [Av or Tv] is identical whether you use an SLR or DSLR. As to new cameras or upgrades, let's see . . . Jason Schneider writes a monthly article in Pop Photo or Shutterbug extolling older cameras [film] and there's an amazing market for them. Wish you could get similar trade-in prices for the "ole DSLR.] Years and years of prize-winning images have been produced B.D. [before digital.] And, as to National Geographic, it took years before it would accept digital images and, when they finally did, the cameras used actually may have had a 3 MP chip. If you've read some reviews on the new cameras, most include some comment like: "The Canon 30D is an upgrade of the 20D. There's not enough to justify upgrading, but if you're buying your first DSLR, get the 30D." These are my words, but similar thoughts appear very often. Of course, everything I've read suggests that the Nikon D300 is a very significant upgrade to the D200. The fact is, and I stated it earlier, most of us will never use all the features on the cameras we now own. In the interest of maintaining profits, camera manufactures upgrade and hope we'll buy. The first member of my Camera Club to "go digital" in 1998 has changed his equipment seven times in nine [9] years. He sold all his Nikon equipment [Nikon D80 and lenses] to purchase a Canon 40D in September or October, 2007. Then, Nikon introduced the D300 - guess what, he just sold the Canon stuff for the D300. Without question, he "needs" the latest equipment available. But, does this equipment help him take pictures? His record in our intramural competitions [two wins in nine years] suggests not. Interesting images have taken with pinhole cameras. Great images were taken with the Canon AT-1, even when the A-1 was available; the Nikon FTb, when the F-2 was around. Great images will be taken with the D70 and D80 even though there's a D-3. But, one of the reasons the D70 was replaced by the D70s [and then the D80] was that it was just too difficult to use. So, going back to Tarso's question, I'd go for D80. There are new/in-the-box units still out there, so you should be able to get a good price.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Debby A. Tabb |
all New In Box from the online dealer I trust: D70 Kit $599.95
http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-D80-Digital-SLR-Camera-18-55mm-Lens-Kit-D-80-USA_W0QQitemZ140211314380QQihZ004QQcategoryZ147174QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem D300 body only $1819.95: D200 Kit $1019.95 Good Luck, I own and use the D70's and D200's
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tarso S. Soares |
Thank you all very much for the replies! In the end, I think I'll go with the D40 due to budget limitations. I can use it for now and then upgrade next year. I don't think the body will represent much of a difference between the D40 and D80 using the same lenses, right? Should I get the 18-55 + 55-200 bundle or get a body and a 18-200? Thanks once again :)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sarah G |
The D40, to the best of my knowledge, comes only as a kit. I also just looked at several online stores and not a one sells the D40 body only. Therefore I am assuming that my knowledge is up to date and it is still sold only as a kit.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tarso S. Soares |
I think it all comes down to: In case I don't want to spend much money right (seems like the best idea atm), will I be ok with just a D40 + 18-55 and possibly a 18-200? Will I lose much by not going with the D80? Any suggestions? Thanks AGAIN! :)
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Ok, I think everyone realizes you don't want to spend money. Buying the kit lens [18-55mm zoom] and an 18-200 mm zoom makes absolutely no sens as you'd cover the same range. Buy the 18-200 mm and be done with it. As to the D40, if you have any Nikon lenses they'll not be compatible with the D40. A better purchase, the D40x. In either event, it could be too much of an entry level camera. Better to buy more camera body than less - that way, you'll have more than you anticipate needing and will avoid heartache when yoy realize that KEY feature you could have had, had you known more] isn't available on that entry level beast.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||