HOT! - Nikon D50 SLR Digital Camera /w Lens for $534.15 Shipped

[jmagg]

Now, does anyone know where to *get* (much less 'get a good deal on') the Nikon 18-200 VR lens? This is the new $700 - $800 lens nobody can keep in stock (or, if they can, they want $800 - $900 for it.)

Seems not.

Im about to bite on a used Nikkor 75-300 (about the size of a yule log), and the 50mm 1.8.

Actually the kit lens is pretty good also imo, I've gotten some super sharp shots out of it at 50mm 5.6



A sidenote, IEXIF is a good small app to show all Exif information (shudder speed , aperture, flash and about 60 other pieces of embedded info. Good for examining the great shots and how they got there.

IEIFX

 

[dclive]

I use iPhoto for the EXIF information.... it gives the basics that I need - pretty slick. I've never found a good photo cataloging and organization program on the Windows side.... yet.

Has anyone found a good way to host a local webserver and put pictures on that local webserver? I'm looking for an automated process - select, say, 50 photos, and have them nicely cataloged and displayed on the webserver? Something like Wipha 2.0 for the Mac? A key benefit is that it uses iPhoto's already-existing organizations and smart folders arrangements, so there's no recategorizing required.

http://globs.org/articles.php?lng=en&pg=265

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: dclive
Now, does anyone know where to *get* (much less 'get a good deal on') the Nikon 18-200 VR lens? This is the new $700 - $800 lens nobody can keep in stock (or, if they can, they want $800 - $900 for it.)

Look for some Nikon rebates starting tomorrow (or so I hear) if you're looking for deals. As far as finding the 18-200vr, it requires either patience or luck. For me, I purchased my via luck. The first thing to do is get to a local camera shop and get on their waiting list. Some require a desposit, some do not. Next, go to a couple of sites that offer email notification upon stock and sign up (B&H is one).

As far as prices for this lens, MSRP is around $699. A few lucky people were able to nab this lens at $649 when it was first released last November. Local camera shops are more likely to carry the lens for the $699, and popular online sites sell for $749-$799. You can find these at Best Buy and Circuit City, but expect to pay $899 (eBay prices basically).

Good luck!

 

[dclive]

Do you have any specifics for places offering it for $699? I've had difficulty finding a legitimate, "big" store offering it for less than $799 and $749. Wolf Camera / Ritz wants $749, and have no stock, for example, same with B&H and Adorama.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: dclive
Do you have any specifics for places offering it for $699? I've had difficulty finding a legitimate, "big" store offering it for less than $799 and $749. Wolf Camera / Ritz wants $749, and have no stock, for example, same with B&H and Adorama.

You are most likely to find it for $699 at a local camera shop, even though they might also be jacking up the price to make a little buck. You're best bet at getting the lens at MSRP is to wait till the lens is widely available, which could very well be a few more months. Nobody really knows at this point.

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: dclive
Do you have any specifics for places offering it for $699? I've had difficulty finding a legitimate, "big" store offering it for less than $799 and $749. Wolf Camera / Ritz wants $749, and have no stock, for example, same with B&H and Adorama.

You are most likely to find it for $699 at a local camera shop, even though they might also be jacking up the price to make a little buck. You're best bet at getting the lens at MSRP is to wait till the lens is widely available, which could very well be a few more months. Nobody really knows at this point.

Exactly, and that's the issue - the lens has been 'out' for about 5 months now, and it's still impossible to find. Ah, well.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: dclive

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: dclive
Do you have any specifics for places offering it for $699? I've had difficulty finding a legitimate, "big" store offering it for less than $799 and $749. Wolf Camera / Ritz wants $749, and have no stock, for example, same with B&H and Adorama.

You are most likely to find it for $699 at a local camera shop, even though they might also be jacking up the price to make a little buck. You're best bet at getting the lens at MSRP is to wait till the lens is widely available, which could very well be a few more months. Nobody really knows at this point.

Exactly, and that's the issue - the lens has been 'out' for about 5 months now, and it's still impossible to find. Ah, well.

It's always a chance to find the lens in stock at a Best Buy or CC, then price match to a local camera shop (maybe you have a Ritz or something similar nearby). If you're lucky, they won't call the shop to see if they are in stock. Worth a shot me thinks.

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: jmagg

Now, does anyone know where to *get* (much less 'get a good deal on') the Nikon 18-200 VR lens? This is the new $700 - $800 lens nobody can keep in stock (or, if they can, they want $800 - $900 for it.)

Seems not.

Im about to bite on a used Nikkor 75-300 (about the size of a yule log), and the 50mm 1.8.

Actually the kit lens is pretty good also imo, I've gotten some super sharp shots out of it at 50mm 5.6



A sidenote, IEXIF is a good small app to show all Exif information (shudder speed , aperture, flash and about 60 other pieces of embedded info. Good for examining the great shots and how they got there.

IEIFX

The 50/1.8 is a good buy. I had one before I upgraded to the 50/1.4. I'd pass on the 75-300. Look for a used 70-210/4 or f/4-5.6 instead, better contrast and tones.

 

[jmagg]

I went for the 75-300. I need the range and the price was right. I'll post samples when it arrives. Thanks for the advice nontheless.

 

[themusgrat]

This looks good, and as far as the picture quality goes, what is the difference between this D50 and the D70? Because my brother has a D70, and I love it. If I had a place to upload a massive shot to, I'd show you guys the picture I took in the Canadian Rockies. It is on my desktop, and is the awesomest non-edited picture ever. I just want to be sure that I could get great results with the D50 too.

EDIT: Here.

 

[dclive]

Most say there's little or no difference in PQ between the two - main diff is the D70 has a few more features that some pro photographers might use. The next jump in PQ is really the D200, and that's a LOT more $.

jmagg: Got a tripod? Holding it steady without VR at full focal length is difficult. Even at just 200, I find it very, very difficult - at 300, no way without VR for me....or a really good tripod setup.

 

[jmagg]

Yes i have a tripod, although i probably wont be using it for the shots im intending to take. The shots will be mainly of my son, playing school lacrosse, outside, with strong natural light. Im hoping fast shudder speeds and open aperture settings will compensate for my old bones.

I may consider a monopod if all else fails.

 

[QueHuong]

I got a PM asking for book recommendations.

Learning to use the D50:
link
Magic Lantern Guide (I don't have a D50 myself, so I haven't read this book, but I hear praises for this book).

Learning the technical aspect of making a picture:
Understanding Exposure: link - this book is highly rated by many


The New Manual of Photography: link
Good overview of most photography topics; good for newbies, probably mildly interesting for the experienced. I have a good used hardcover edition that I'd like to sell - PM me if interested.


The above books should help most people who are new to photography get started, but know that their aim is mostly to teach you the basic technical side of photography. You'll learn the various functions of yoru camera, learn about how shutter speed relates to aperture, how to stop action, how to control depth of field, etc. After you know the basics, the next step would be to develop your artistic skills; your compositional skill. I don't have any specific recommendations for books, as I haven't read through a specific one; I mostly go to bookstores and pick up tips from various books and magazines. But here are some that might be worth checking out:


link
link
link
link

In addition, here are some books that will likely be relevant to you:
link
link
link

 

[astrocase]

I've been sitting on the dslr fence for a while now. I'm just so sick and tired of going on these amazing vacations and coming home with crappy pictures from my point and shoot. Where is a good place to start reading up on what I should get and what I should expect? Maybe all I want is something without the delay when I take a picture and something that can handle better/more lighting conditions. I can only get good pictures of portraits with my current camera.

 

[QueHuong]

Originally posted by: astrocase
I've been sitting on the dslr fence for a while now. I'm just so sick and tired of going on these amazing vacations and coming home with crappy pictures from my point and shoot. Where is a good place to start reading up on what I should get and what I should expect? Maybe all I want is something without the delay when I take a picture and something that can handle better/more lighting conditions. I can only get good pictures of portraits with my current camera.

Specifically in regards to this statement: "I'm just so sick and tired of going on these amazing vacations and coming home with crappy pictures from my point and shoot. "

Nothing personal, but you're the very person I was cautioning to about buying a DSLR. Read my earlier replies toward ncage.

In short, a DSLR won't automatically give you better pictures. In fact, a good P&S will probably give you prettier pictures than those from a DSLR. Again, see my earlier replies for my reasoning.

But you did say you want to learn; if you want good pictures, you absolutely have to learn. If you develop your skills, you'll see that your P&S can give you good pictures. But just don't expect instantly better pictures by picking up a DSLR.

 

[TekDemon]

Originally posted by: QueHuong

Originally posted by: astrocase
I've been sitting on the dslr fence for a while now. I'm just so sick and tired of going on these amazing vacations and coming home with crappy pictures from my point and shoot. Where is a good place to start reading up on what I should get and what I should expect? Maybe all I want is something without the delay when I take a picture and something that can handle better/more lighting conditions. I can only get good pictures of portraits with my current camera.

Specifically in regards to this statement: "I'm just so sick and tired of going on these amazing vacations and coming home with crappy pictures from my point and shoot. "

Nothing personal, but you're the very person I was cautioning to about buying a DSLR. Read my earlier replies toward ncage.

In short, a DSLR won't automatically give you better pictures. In fact, a good P&S will probably give you prettier pictures than those from a DSLR. Again, see my earlier replies for my reasoning.

But you did say you want to learn; if you want good pictures, you absolutely have to learn. If you develop your skills, you'll see that your P&S can give you good pictures. But just don't expect instantly better pictures by picking up a DSLR.

I second this...as long as your P&S isn't a complete piece of crap it should be able to pull off very nice vacation photos-even some artsier stuff.

The SLR is just going to allow you more control over the picture-but if you don't know what you're doing it's not going to magically make your pictures look better.

 

[astrocase]

Ok, let me rephrase. I like to take pictures but feel limited by my point and shoot. I'd like to do some more astrophotography with a nice 50mm. I don't want to be so limited by my camera. Example: I was in the jungle and there was a huge spider that I couldn't take a picture of but they guy next to me with a DSLR could. His picture was unbelievable. Mine wouldn't focus and when I got far enough away I was lacking detail and color. Another example: I was at Angkor Wat and my camera would not take pictures well within the compounds of the temples. It simply couldn't handle the shadows and the dark environments. In the mornings it failed miserably to handle the sunrise. Everything is washed out, grainy, or out of focus and there's not much I can do about that with a point and shoot. I would hardly consider myself a photographer but with my limited experience doing astrophotograhy with a film camera (50mm and 200mm) I do understand the basics (at least I did, I'll need to refresh).

 

[mb]

astrocse: perhaps if you don't want to spend the big bucks on a dslr, not to mention all the time it would take to learn all the aspects about it and all the lenses for it, but still want a lot of it's features have you considered getting a slr-like digital camera? The Kodak Z612 seems like it has a lot of great features with lots of zoom power. I wouldn't be surprised to see it at least 15% off MSRP somewhere once it is released.

 

[SeminoleMarine]

I started with this (SLR style) then moved up to the Cannon digital Rebel XT.

Text

For starters this is a great camera with great speed. A point and shoot that doesn't make you stand still for three seconds before taking the pic. I have thousands of outstanding pics with this Fuji. The Cannon on the other hand is phenominal. I suggest learning with the Fuji or the Kodak supafly was talking about before moving into a full DSLR.

 

[ncage]

Just for those that are curious. Here is a Macro shot i took with my camera. Almost immediatly after i got the camera i ordered a Sigma 70-300mm APO DG lens. I got the lens in tuesday It has macro functionality on it. While not a true high end macro lens it doesn't do to bad for what it is. Realize that you will get a lot better results with a 400-500 1:1 macro lens but i thought this was pretty cool:
http://brentw.no-ip.org/spidermacro.jpg

 

[dclive]

Thumbs up on that ncage!

 

[astrocase]

What do you gain by going with a DSLR (as an amateur) instead of one of those Point and shoots like you've linked to above?

 

[mb]

Off the top of my head I would say the choice of lenses. Other than that I am not qualified to say because I do not own a DSLR or DSLR-like digital camera (although I am weighing my options).

 

[SeminoleMarine]

Originally posted by: astrocase
What do you gain by going with a DSLR (as an amateur) instead of one of those Point and shoots like you've linked to above?

Not sure who you were asking. I found that by going with the Fuji first, it gave me a "learning" curve. I was able to utilize certain SLR type functions on a point and shoot. A very reliable, fast, point and shoot. I was able to carry that knowledge (however limited) over to a full DSLR. I am enjoying my new Cannon and am taking some fantastic pics. I am taking some forgettable pics as well, but I am getting better. It is only my opinion and suggestion that you start with a SLR type point and shoot before moving up. You certainly can go straight to DSLR and learn that way. There is no right or wrong way in my book. I like to take pics, but I wanted to learn slowly before making the big purchase.

 

[dclive]

IMHO:
Speed and better lenses. It's debatable if some people would even care, though, given that SLRs tend to be bigger (unwieldy, especially with smaller hands), and can be difficult to learn.

I have a D50, and I love it, and I'm happy I bought it rather than a current-gen P&S. However, P&Ss are rapidly advancing, and the problems that were true in my old Canon S200 P&S (a 2-megapixel tiny model), including increeedibly slow processing and delays between shots - have now ... well, they haven't gone away, but they're not the big deal they once were. Especially with the Sony R10, a nice P&S, the technology has improved a lot.

That said, a P&S locks you into one lens (although it may be a very zoomy lens, the quality typically can't even approach a dSLR). Typically you'll have speed issues compared to a dSLR (but it isn't NEARLY as bad as it once was). Typically the flexibility in what you can do with the settings of the camera are quite a bit less (vastly less, usually), but most people won't care.

For that great picture of a water dropping and waves splashing (we've all seen this picture a million times - it's very common) you'd typically want a dSLR, and you'd play with exposures and all kinds of other settings. For a great picture of your kids running around the back yard, a P&S is typically fine. It's when you get into the in-between areas that it becomes debatable which is better.

Nikon doesn't help matters when they price their D50 (a REALLY nice camera!) at just $500-$600. For the vast majority, this is a great way to get into SLR photography, and it takes the same lenses that the higher priced (and their next-generation cousins) will take, so there's very little risk in investing in lenses. When you sell, sure, you might get 1/2 of what you spend for the D50, but the lenses shouldn't drop in value _nearly_ as much (lens technology is far more constant and consistent than camera technology.)