Taking it One Step Further

[dmw16]

I appreciate all the help that people have offered in my first thread. Now I am looking for recommendations on which cameras to look at.

It seems like MP beyond a certain point isn't a big deal, so I won't make that a big deciding factor.

From what I've gathered, Nikon offers better ergonomics as well as having 50 years of compatible lenses which I like from a budget standpoint. So I am leaning towards Nikon. That isn't to say I am opposed to other brands.

The only concrete Nikon recommendation I've gotten so far is a D70 and I was told the D40, D50, and D60 have some drawbacks and to avoid.

I'd like to keep it under $400 for a body. I have no issue buying used. On the topic of used, are there good forums where people sell their used equipment (other than ebay and here)?

Thanks.

 

[996GT2]

For Nikon, D50, D70, D70s are best bets under $400 (you can in fact find all 3 bodies for under $300). You can get a new D40 or D40x in the <$400 price range, but keep in mind draw backs like the 3 area AF and lack of in-body AF motor. For Nikon, I recommend the 18-55 VR and 50mm f/1.8D as starter lenses, or the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR as a good, fast midrange zoom (~$400).

The D70 costs not much more than a D50 body these days, and I would get it over the D50 due to faster burst shooting (3 FPS), support for i-TTL flash, viewfinder grid lines on demand, DoF preview, and some other useful upgrades.

For Canon, Rebel XTi or used 20D are the best bets under $400 (20D might be closer to $450). These prices are for body only, so you will need to get a lens (the EF-S 18-55 IS is a good starter lens for Canon, as is the EF 50mm f/1.8)

I've personally owned a Rebel XTi; I sold the XTi because the photography class I wanted to take had been full for a few months, so I planned on taking it next semester and didn't want the XTi collecting dust in the meantime. Just a few days after I sold the XTi, though, a spot opened up and I got a D70.

Having used both brands, I honestly can say that I liked Nikon better due to the reasons I mentioned in the other thread. However, what works for me may or may not work for you, so try both.

 

[dmw16]

Can you suggest a good wide angle lens for the nikon?

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: dmw16
Can you suggest a good wide angle lens for the nikon?

Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8

Review here

Price range is from $550-650, so it's both better and less expensive than the Nikkor wide angle zoom lenses. Compared to the Nikkor 12-24mm f/4, the Tokina is 1mm wider at the wide end, has a faster f/2.8 constant aperture, and costs much less.

The Tokina lens has no AF motor, so it will not AF on a D40, D40x, or D60. All other Nikon models (D50, 70, 80, 90, 300, 700, etc) will AF with this lens since they have an AF drive motor inside the camera.

Are you sure you really need a lens much wider than 18-55mm? Lenses tend to go up dramatically in price as the wide end of the zoom range gets wider than 18mm.

Also, keep in mind that APS-C sensor cameras have a field of view crop that lengths the effective focal length of lenses.

For Nikon, the multiplier is 1.5. For Canon, it's 1.6. For Olympus, it's 2.0 (they use a 4/3 sensor which is smaller than APS-C). For point and shoot cameras, the multiplier can be as great as 8 or 10 because the sensors they use are VERY small.

So what this means is that the Tokina 11-16mm really has an effective focal range of 16.5-22.5mm on a Nikon DSLR. Much wider than the 27-82.5 range of the kit lens, but it does come at a 5x price premium. For really wide angle stuff, you need to shell out the big bucks for a full frame DSLR like the Nikon D700 or Canon 5D. These have no field of view crop, so the effective focal range of lenses is exactly what's printed on the lens body.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

I wouldn't base the body-buying decision on the price/availability of used lenses... I've seen the cost of used lenses go up dramatically over the past couple of years, I guess because so many people are buying DSLR's now.

@OP: I think you would get the best info by checking out real photo websites, such as DPReview.com, Photo.net, etc. That way, you can get get a multitude of opinions and anecdotal evidence regarding a camera's performance.

As far as used equipment goes, Photo.net and DGrin.com have small marketplaces, and KEH.com is a reputable seller/buyer of used equipment

Finally, regarding DSLR system choices, try to analyze your picture-taking style, if you can. ALL the DSLR's available are very good, there's not a loser in the bunch. Some different strengths/weaknesses apply; Nikon seems to have better/faster AF (at least in the entry-level market), Pentax offers more "bang for the buck", Olympus has the best kit lenses, etc.

 

[Munky]

Are you gonna use this camera for serious, all-day shooting or just a personal hobby and vacation shots? If money matters, and you're not a pro/semi-pro photographer, a Nikon D40 is plenty for your needs. The lack of an in-body focus motor will only be an issue to someone who's already invested in a bunch of non AF-S Nikon lenses. But the light weight and ease of use of the D40 make it a good choice for personal/vacation photography.

 

[dmw16]

It will be very much for hobby, vacation, etc. I'd like to get into "artistic" shooting, but still, nothing pro level.

I think I will start with just a basic few lenses that people have mentioned above. The wide angle was a down the road type thing.

So the lack of an AF motor isn't a big deal with modern lenses? I guess worst case is I have to focus manually with I prefer in a lot of situations anyhow.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: dmw16
It will be very much for hobby, vacation, etc. I'd like to get into "artistic" shooting, but still, nothing pro level.

I think I will start with just a basic few lenses that people have mentioned above. The wide angle was a down the road type thing.

So the lack of an AF motor isn't a big deal with modern lenses? I guess worst case is I have to focus manually with I prefer in a lot of situations anyhow.

The lack of an AF motor is not a huge deal unless you really want to use lenses like the 50mm f/1.8 or Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AND get autofocus.

If you're just using AF-S kit lenses like the 18-55 then it's definitely not a big deal. I got the impression that you really wanted to use the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, so that's the reason I steered you towards getting the D70.

If you don't care about using non AF-S lenses, then I would recommend the D40 as a good, basic DSLR to start off with. The 4 extra megapixels in the D40x and D60 are nice, but they won't really do much unless you plan to make 20x30 prints often or seriously crop your images. The money you save would be better spent on a better lens or an external flash anyway.

Try to buy just the D40 body and get the 18-55mm VR lens to go with it (the D40 kit comes with the 18-55mm non-VR).

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: dmw16
It will be very much for hobby, vacation, etc. I'd like to get into "artistic" shooting, but still, nothing pro level.

I think I will start with just a basic few lenses that people have mentioned above. The wide angle was a down the road type thing.

So the lack of an AF motor isn't a big deal with modern lenses? I guess worst case is I have to focus manually with I prefer in a lot of situations anyhow.

The lack of an AF motor is not a huge deal unless you really want to use lenses like the 50mm f/1.8 or Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AND get autofocus.

If you're just using AF-S kit lenses like the 18-55 then it's definitely not a big deal. I got the impression that you really wanted to use the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, so that's the reason I steered you towards getting the D70.

If you don't care about using non AF-S lenses, then I would recommend the D40 as a good, basic DSLR to start off with. The 4 extra megapixels in the D40x and D60 are nice, but they won't really do much unless you plan to make 20x30 prints often or seriously crop your images. Try to buy just the D40 body and get the 18-55mm VR lens to go with it (the D40 kit comes with the 18-55mm non-VR).

That's what I did - D40 body off fleabay, and the newer VR lens bought separately. It's got some neat features like auto-iso, customizable menu, and a 1/500 flash x-sync speed. The only feature I might miss is exposure bracketing, which makes getting those HDR shots easier, but I'm not into that sort of thing.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: dmw16
It will be very much for hobby, vacation, etc. I'd like to get into "artistic" shooting, but still, nothing pro level.

I think I will start with just a basic few lenses that people have mentioned above. The wide angle was a down the road type thing.

So the lack of an AF motor isn't a big deal with modern lenses? I guess worst case is I have to focus manually with I prefer in a lot of situations anyhow.

The lack of an AF motor is not a huge deal unless you really want to use lenses like the 50mm f/1.8 or Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AND get autofocus.

If you're just using AF-S kit lenses like the 18-55 then it's definitely not a big deal. I got the impression that you really wanted to use the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, so that's the reason I steered you towards getting the D70.

If you don't care about using non AF-S lenses, then I would recommend the D40 as a good, basic DSLR to start off with. The 4 extra megapixels in the D40x and D60 are nice, but they won't really do much unless you plan to make 20x30 prints often or seriously crop your images. Try to buy just the D40 body and get the 18-55mm VR lens to go with it (the D40 kit comes with the 18-55mm non-VR).

That's what I did - D40 body off fleabay, and the newer VR lens bought separately. It's got some neat features like auto-iso, customizable menu, and a 1/500 flash x-sync speed. The only feature I might miss is exposure bracketing, which makes getting those HDR shots easier, but I'm not into that sort of thing.

One thing to keep in mind for the OP: the D70 has all of the features mentioned above, plus some other niceties such as 3 FPS burst shooting (vs 2.5 in the D40) and better battery life (larger battery and top panel LCD so the main LCD is not on all the time). Plus it's got the AF motor built in in case you want to use Nikkor AF (not AF-S) and third party lenses down the road.

So if you don't have a need to get a new camera, definitely consider the D70 in addition to the D40 since you get get a nice D70 body for under $300 on eBay easily.

 

[dmw16]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

If you're just using AF-S kit lenses like the 18-55 then it's definitely not a big deal. I got the impression that you really wanted to use the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, so that's the reason I steered you towards getting the D70.

What gave you that impression? Not saying I do or don't, just wondering what I said

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: dmw16

Originally posted by: 996GT2

If you're just using AF-S kit lenses like the 18-55 then it's definitely not a big deal. I got the impression that you really wanted to use the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, so that's the reason I steered you towards getting the D70.

What gave you that impression? Not saying I do or don't, just wondering what I said

Actually I just skimmed the other thread again and I guess I was confused when I wrote that because you didn't suggest suggest specifically that you wanted the 50mm (I went to bed at like 2 AM the day before yesterday, sorry)

You did say you liked the idea of being able to use older lenses though, which is definitely an advantage of getting a Nikon camera with the built in AF motor.

You also said you wanted a good wide-angle lens down the road; well, the Tokina 11-16 costs 30% less than the Nikkor equivalent, is faster, goes wider, and performs extremely well. The ability to use third party lenses like this is definitely another advantage for getting a body with the AF motor.

Also, the 50mm f/1.8 is one of the best and cheapest lenses no matter which brand you consider (Canon OR Nikon), so if you shoot pictures of people or still life it's pretty much a no-brainer. The speed and sharpness of a prime like the 50mm is simply unmatched by any zoom at any price range.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: dmw16
It will be very much for hobby, vacation, etc. I'd like to get into "artistic" shooting, but still, nothing pro level.

I think I will start with just a basic few lenses that people have mentioned above. The wide angle was a down the road type thing.

So the lack of an AF motor isn't a big deal with modern lenses? I guess worst case is I have to focus manually with I prefer in a lot of situations anyhow.

You might want to consider the Pentax K200D. By all accounts, it is an excellent camera, weather-sealed, dust-removal, great build quality. The K200D with the well-regarded 18-55 AL II kit lens can be found new for under $600. The caveat: AF is not quite as fast or sophisticated as Canikon. However, Pentax does have a line of interesting and superb prime and pancake lenses, Best of all, with the built-in image stabilization, virtually every modern lens can benefit - no worry about buying the heavier, more expensive VR or IS lenses. Oh yeah, a 100 years worth of Pentax lenses will work with it, also. It's a great system if you don't mind not being part of the masses.

If you are looking for a "grab-n-go" DSLR, and are sold on Nikon, I think I'd probably go for the D40. It's smaller and lighter than the D70, more point-n-shoot friendly, too. Either way, you can't go wrong.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: dmw16
It will be very much for hobby, vacation, etc. I'd like to get into "artistic" shooting, but still, nothing pro level.

I think I will start with just a basic few lenses that people have mentioned above. The wide angle was a down the road type thing.

So the lack of an AF motor isn't a big deal with modern lenses? I guess worst case is I have to focus manually with I prefer in a lot of situations anyhow.

You might want to consider the Pentax K200D. By all accounts, it is an excellent camera, weather-sealed, dust-removal, great build quality. The K200D with the well-regarded 18-55 AL II kit lens can be found new for under $600. The caveat: AF is not quite as fast or sophisticated as Canikon. However, Pentax does have a line of interesting and superb prime and pancake lenses, Best of all, with the built-in image stabilization, virtually every modern lens can benefit - no worry about buying the heavier, more expensive VR or IS lenses. Oh yeah, a 100 years worth of Pentax lenses will work with it, also. It's a great system if you don't mind not being part of the masses.

If you are looking for a "grab-n-go" DSLR, and are sold on Nikon, I think I'd probably go for the D40. It's smaller and lighter than the D70, more point-n-shoot friendly, too. Either way, you can't go wrong.

Two issues with the K200D are the lackluster continuous shooting performance and issues with JPEG image quality. I don't know if the latter has been fixed via new firmware, but here is DPReview's conclusion of the K200D:

The K200D's image output is a bit of a double-edged sword. When we first looked at the JPEG images we weren't exactly thrilled.

In its default settings the Pentax produces oversharpened and a little oversaturated images with visible artifacts and jagged diagonals. To be fair, the JPEGS are not unusable (I've shot almost 1000 of them and most of them are pleasant enough to look at) but they are just not quite as good as some of the competitors' output.

Luckily there are two ways of working around this limitation though. You can either modify the default settings or, even better, shoot in RAW. If you do the latter you'll be very pleasantly surprised.

With the right processing the K200D is actually capable of producing clean, very detailed and pin-sharp images that should satisfy even the most dedicated pixel-peepers.

All in all, the excellent image quality you can get out of the camera's RAW files, the build quality and good overall feature-set are enough to let the K200D slip into our Highly Recommended category. Before you now go out and buy one though, make sure you can live without a live-view system and, if image quality is paramount, you'll be willing to shoot in RAW.

 

[996GT2]

.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Two issues with the K200D are the lackluster continuous shooting performance and issues with JPEG image quality. I don't know if the latter has been fixed via new firmware, but here is DPReview's conclusion of the K200D:

The K200D's image output is a bit of a double-edged sword. When we first looked at the JPEG images we weren't exactly thrilled.

In its default settings the Pentax produces oversharpened and a little oversaturated images with visible artifacts and jagged diagonals. To be fair, the JPEGS are not unusable (I've shot almost 1000 of them and most of them are pleasant enough to look at) but they are just not quite as good as some of the competitors' output.

Luckily there are two ways of working around this limitation though. You can either modify the default settings or, even better, shoot in RAW. If you do the latter you'll be very pleasantly surprised.

With the right processing the K200D is actually capable of producing clean, very detailed and pin-sharp images that should satisfy even the most dedicated pixel-peepers.

All in all, the excellent image quality you can get out of the camera's RAW files, the build quality and good overall feature-set are enough to let the K200D slip into our Highly Recommended category. Before you now go out and buy one though, make sure you can live without a live-view system and, if image quality is paramount, you'll be willing to shoot in RAW.

JPEG issues are non-existent, IMO - it's simply a reflection of what the Pentax people think consumers want. As the DPR reviewer pointed out, simply adjust the in-camera settings to reflect the desired output. Pretty easy.

Continuous shooting, I forgot to include that in my list of K200D bugaboos. IMO, that's not really much of a big deal @ this price point. Of course, opinions on that will vary.

 

[dmw16]

KEH has a D70 (body+battery+battery charger) for $280-$300 depending on condition and the D70S for $350. What does the S offer that the regular D70 doesn't?

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: dmw16
KEH has a D70 (body+battery+battery charger) for $280-$300 depending on condition and the D70S for $350. What does the S offer that the regular D70 doesn't?

According to DPReview:

Nikon has today announced an upgraded version of the D70, the new D70s. This camera has the same CCD sensor and imaging pipeline as the D70 so image quality should be identical. However several changes have been introduced including improved auto focus accuracy, slightly wider flash coverage, a higher capacity battery, a new larger 2.0" LCD monitor and re-designed menus.

 

[dmw16]

Thanks. Should have googled I guess

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: dmw16
Thanks. Should have googled I guess

Actually the changes may even be smaller than that. Some people have reported noticing no AF or other differences, so the only big change is the increase in screen size by 0.2 inches.

Resolution on the LCD is still the same. Basically, a D70 and D70s are identical in all the important areas.

I saw a D70 in great condition go on eBay for $275, so you should check.

Make sure you ask for the shutter count before you buy. If it's a relatively low number (<10,000 or around there), then you are good to go. If it's very high (50,000+), then the shutter will have a higher chance of failing. A new shutter costs $150-200, so make sure you ask for the count. It's in the EXIF data of all Nikon DSLRs.


Also, for lenses, check on eBay since brand new AF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR lenses go for $120 or so shipped. If you see one, snatch it up since it's just about the best lens you can get for under the $400 price mark of the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 XR. I got mine for $118 brand new on eBay and just received it today. Great lens...produces reasonably sharp shots even at 1/8 sec shutter speed, very quiet AF, lightweight and easy to carry around...definitely worth the price.

 

[ElFenix]

k200d jpeg performance is just dpreview's "DEFAULT SETTINGS FOR JPEG PROCESSING ONLY" mentality. just change the setting. i really have no idea why they make such a big deal out of something so easily changed.

 

[dblevitan]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
Nikon has today announced an upgraded version of the D70, the new D70s. This camera has the same CCD sensor and imaging pipeline as the D70 so image quality should be identical. However several changes have been introduced including improved auto focus accuracy, slightly wider flash coverage, a higher capacity battery, a new larger 2.0" LCD monitor and re-designed menus.

This is correct. However, Nikon released new firmware for the D70 which basically brought all the software improvements to the D70. As for the actual improvements, the list (from memory) is:

- theoretically wider flash coverage, but no one actually proved this
- larger LCD monitor
- socket for wire release

(of which only the last is truly important, but you can always just use the remote)

As for the battery, Nikon actually replaced many of the D70 batteries with EN-EL3a (or maybe e) batteries, which are the ones used in the D70s and other, newer Nikons.