the d80 is more than 200 bucks more than the d40x
are you comparing a d40x kit with a d80 body only?
the d80 is more than 200 bucks more than the d40x
are you comparing a d40x kit with a d80 body only?
www.dpreview.com
www.luminous-landscape.com
www.fredmiranda.com
www.imaging-resource.com
www.theonlinephotographer.com
strobist.blogspot.com
I subscribe to Outdoor Photographer, which has good articles for (amazingly enough) outdoor photography, ie. landscapes. Good gear reviews and some nice technique articles.
Since I havent purchase a camera in 20 years, I'm behind the curve here - so can only go on what read but here are the links for pricing that I've found. Please tell me if the D80 package is a great deal or am I'm missing something
D80 w/ Nikon 18-55 lensfor $479: http://www.bestpricecameras.co...ils.aspx?prodid=706431
D40x w/ 18-55 lens for $429: http://www.bestpricecameras.co...ils.aspx?prodid=901972
D40 w/ nikon 18-70 lens for $509: http://www.bestpricecameras.co...ils.aspx?prodid=810419
Its for my wifes birthday who has been talking about taking up photography for years - I'm looking for something we can both use now to take snapshots and something she can grow into (auto and fully manual controls). The anti-shake feature that is referenced would seem to be nice (if it really works). Not sure if weight if a differetator in this class, but lighter would be better. I'm guessing they all have the eyehole (neither of us like using the lcd - guess we've been mashing the camera up to our faces for too long
Also, I have old gear (20-30 year old lens) from Minolta and Mayma - any chance that they would be reuseable (or are old lens like old PC).
thanks for any comments or suggestions between the three
PS - was also looking at the Canon Rebel XTI $449 or Pentax K100d $399. Also have been eyeing the Sony A100K (it is $539 broke my limit so would have to have a good reason to select with all the other good alternatives available)
Obvious, my price ceiling is around $500 w/ a general purpose lens - looking for best camera for the buck (not bias towards any manufacture).
yeah, I don't think you want to order from there.
http://www.resellerratings.com...e/Best_Price_Cameras_6
Lifetime rating of .27?!??!? You'd be better off ordering from B&H or some other reputable site. THe D80 costs a LOT more than $479. You know the old saying, "if it's too good to be true, it usually is."
http://www.resellerratings.com...e/Best_Price_Cameras_6
Lifetime rating of .27?!??!? You'd be better off ordering from B&H or some other reputable site. THe D80 costs a LOT more than $479. You know the old saying, "if it's too good to be true, it usually is."
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,405
- 8,582
- 126
not too many SLRs that can be had new for that.
pentax k100D you can get with standard (18-55) lens and telephoto (55-200) for about $500 after rebate, fatcash, coupons
digital rebel xt (not xti, so missing 2 megapixels, somewhat ineffective dustbuster, and the much improved autofocus) is about $570 with 18-55.
D40 is about $530 with 18-55.
olympus E-500 is about $570 with 14-45 and 40-150 (olympus uses a smaller sensor with a 2x crop so it's like getting a 28-90 and 80-300 lens, using 35 mm equivalents).
the k100d can use any pentax lens ever made. the rebel xt can use any EF lens. the D40 can use only nikon AF-I and AF-S lenses (basically modern nikon lenses). the E-500 can use 4/3 mount lenses (which doesn't have a lot of history but olympus makes a decently full range of high quality lenses, it does have a dearth of primes, however).
Originally posted by: dxpaap
Originally posted by: troytime
Originally posted by: dxpaap
Its for my wifes birthday who has been talking about taking up photography for years - I'm looking for something we can both use now to take snapshots and something she can grow into (auto and fully manual controls). The anti-shake feature that is referenced would seem to be nice (if it really works). Not sure if weight if a differetator in this class, but lighter would be better. I'm guessing they all have the eyehole (neither of us like using the lcd - guess we've been mashing the camera up to our faces for too long
Also, I have old gear (20-30 year old lens) from Minolta and Mayma - any chance that they would be reuseable (or are old lens like old PC).
thanks for any comments or suggestions between the three
PS - was also looking at the Canon Rebel XTI $449 or Pentax K100d $399. Also have been eyeing the Sony A100K (it is $539 broke my limit so would have to have a good reason to select with all the other good alternatives available)
Obvious, my price ceiling is around $500 w/ a general purpose lens - looking for best camera for the buck (not bias towards any manufacture).
Couple quick things before I run to work.
The Minolta lenses will work if they are Maxxum AF lenses (post-'85). The older MD/MC lenses can work with an adapter, I understand, but are MF only and not particularly useful. If you have '80s vintage Maxxum lenses though, they are fantastic and easily match the optical quality of today's lenses (with some minor issues because of optical coatings). Most of my lenses are from that era because they are inexpensive and give great images.
While the Sony is a bit more expensive, consider that in comparison to the Canon it has the image stabilization built-in. Canon makes you pay every time you buy a lens (along with Nikon). Compared to the Pentax, the Sony has higher resolution, and I think, not positive, that the image stabilization of Sony is better than Pentax by a tad. I'm not familiar enough with Pentax to make a detailed comparison between the two.
Bottomline: If you have Maxxum lenses, buy the Sony because you have a huge head start on lenses (50mm f/1.7 is about $75-100 on Ebay, likely lens you would have from that time). You could omit the kit lens if you wanted to save money and get the body only (you lose wide angle, but you can get a nicer lens later when there's more money).
If you have older Minolta lenses, then Pentax seems to fit your budget more. Sony might start reducing the A100 price a bit in a month or so because they are about to introduce a higher end model, which could drive prices down a tad. The A100 is going to be replaced in Mar '08.
thanks everyone for the great responses - looks like my upper limit will need to get bumped a $100-200 (I wonder how come that always seems to happen )
Have to dig out those lens and go over to Ritz (to see what fits what)
)Have to dig out those lens and go over to Ritz (to see what fits what)
Well, I'm to the point of actually touching real product and liked the feel of the nikons which seemed less bulky & lighter then the SonY A100. Was also disipointed that none of my old Minolta and Mayma lens would work on the sony). He said they were to old (to bad they are in great condition).
Still have not touched the pentex K100 - hopefully I'll get some lens reuse there.
The sales person said the only real diff between the D40x and D40 was 2megpix (10 vs 8) - Since there was $200 diff, I asked if the 2 extr mpix really made much of a diff. He said only if your doing a lot of photoshop editing?
Any thoughts on the practical value of the 2 extr mpix? does it matter?
Also (the salesperson said), for the Sony w/ the stablizing feature in the body, does not impact using standard lens (e.g. 18-55), its really for the larger lens). Thats why the others (Nikon, Canon, Pentax) only have it in their larger telephoto lens -not the smaller ones. So unless your using alot of big lens - you don't really need the stablizingt feature in the body (besides - that is what makes the Sony a bit heavyer and bulky).
Any thoughts on that line of logic?
thanks
Still have not touched the pentex K100 - hopefully I'll get some lens reuse there.
The sales person said the only real diff between the D40x and D40 was 2megpix (10 vs 8) - Since there was $200 diff, I asked if the 2 extr mpix really made much of a diff. He said only if your doing a lot of photoshop editing?
Any thoughts on the practical value of the 2 extr mpix? does it matter?
Also (the salesperson said), for the Sony w/ the stablizing feature in the body, does not impact using standard lens (e.g. 18-55), its really for the larger lens). Thats why the others (Nikon, Canon, Pentax) only have it in their larger telephoto lens -not the smaller ones. So unless your using alot of big lens - you don't really need the stablizingt feature in the body (besides - that is what makes the Sony a bit heavyer and bulky).
Any thoughts on that line of logic?
thanks
- Jan 2, 2006
- 10,455
- 35
- 91
Uhhhh... I'm guessing that this is at Ritz and not some real camera store?
Would your older lenses work on the Sony with an adapter?
I personally don't think the 2 extra MP makes a difference. His use of the general term "photoshop editing" makes no sense. It will make a small difference when you're cropping. That's really about it. $200 would be better spent IMO on better glass.
IS can definitely be used in shorter lenses like the 18-55mm, like for indoor shots where the lighting's not that great. There have been plenty of times where I've wished I had IS with a short lens. Heck, I've sometimes wished I had IS on my 10-20mm... anything to be able to use a lower ISO or a smaller aperture for better sharpness (most lenses are not at their sharpest when wide open).
Just for clarification the D40 is 6mp and the D40x is 10mp.. so a total of 4mp difference
... I don't think the person you were talking to knew what they were talking about.
YAY D80+18-135 and the 55-200 vr lens came over the weekend
I went to the San Diego Zoo to try it out.
Heres the Flickr -> http://flickr.com/photos/10493126@N00/
P.S. anything before the zoo is done with a Sony T9 (point and shoot)
I went to the San Diego Zoo to try it out.
Heres the Flickr -> http://flickr.com/photos/10493126@N00/
P.S. anything before the zoo is done with a Sony T9 (point and shoot)
Originally posted by: teatime0315
YAY D80+18-135 and the 55-200 vr lens came over the weekend
I went to the San Diego Zoo to try it out.
Heres the Flickr -> http://flickr.com/photos/10493126@N00/
P.S. anything before the zoo is done with a Sony T9 (point and shoot)
Nice. Hope you enjoy the camera, some of your shots were pretty good.
Hey folks - more confusion created by talking to store sales people. I called two Penn photo stores and asked about old lens compatibility - got a different story then advice on this board.
Ask about compatibility of my old lens (Minolta and Mayma), and both flat out said there is no chance of compatibility, period! for any older lens on the new DSLR. I had mentioned that I'd heard in some cases the Minolta maybe for Sony and Pentex with or with a converter - still they said no way.
I did get one to admit that there was a potential of physically mating up, but the picture would not come out or be very poor quality. He noted that none of the auto focus, metering, zooming would work - which I understand, but the plan to use this in manual mode (as a hobby camera - to see how creative we can be).
Anyway, any suggestions on stores (online or BM) who might be willing to entertain the idea of using older lens (both Penn and Ritz won't even discuss the topic).
Thanks
Ask about compatibility of my old lens (Minolta and Mayma), and both flat out said there is no chance of compatibility, period! for any older lens on the new DSLR. I had mentioned that I'd heard in some cases the Minolta maybe for Sony and Pentex with or with a converter - still they said no way.
I did get one to admit that there was a potential of physically mating up, but the picture would not come out or be very poor quality. He noted that none of the auto focus, metering, zooming would work - which I understand, but the plan to use this in manual mode (as a hobby camera - to see how creative we can be).
Anyway, any suggestions on stores (online or BM) who might be willing to entertain the idea of using older lens (both Penn and Ritz won't even discuss the topic).
Thanks
If you want to ask some questions of Minolta experts, try dyxum.com or the KM or Sony forums at dpreview.com (dyxum is probably the better first choice). You may also be able to find your answer at dyxum, or try photoclubalpha.com -- David Kilpatrick is exceptionally knowledgeable about the A mount and might have the answer there (he also monitors the dpreview forums so you can address a question to him there).
I've always heard that you could use the older pre-Maxxum lenses with the 5D/7D/A100, but they would be manual focus only with no other modern functions. Some of them may not work because of the distance from the sensor with a converter -- I've heard of that problem before (I may have the actual situation inaccurately explained).
As for the salesman's comment from earlier, he's an idiot. The in-body image stabilization of the Sony (and the Pentax and Olympus) works for every lens attached to the camera (with one exception, I believe -- obscure one though). Stabilization can tend to be more beneficial when using longer focal lengths because telephoto generally uses larger f-stops and therefore slower shutter speeds; however, smaller f-stops (greater apertures) and slower shutter speeds are used all the time in dim light, making the stabilization necessary for low light non-flash photography.
To my knowledge, neither Canon nor Nikon make stabilized normal or wide angle prime lenses (50mm or less), and since prime lenses are generally sharper and faster than zooms, that's a significant gap in their lineup that is insurmountable. It's also considerably cheaper (theoretically but not with Sony's current pricing) to pay for stabilization once, in the body, rather than having to pay for it each and every time you buy a lens, and those lenses command a noticeable premium over their non-stabilized siblings.
Speaking of premium lenses, (I think!) the only AF stabilized Carl Zeiss lenses you can use currently are for the Sony mount. Pentax has Zeiss that are stabilized (in-body), but they are MF only. I heard awhile back that Zeiss has some issue with in-lens stabilization -- that they were concerned about image quality or something like that. No idea, just something I remember reading.
Lastly, also consider that in-body stabilization improves with each new body while the lens technology stays static in the lens. Since lenses have a much longer lifespan than bodies, especially with digital bodies these days, the differences will start showing soon. My stabilization has already improved when moving from the Maxxum 7D to the Sony A100 by at least 1 f-stop, with the very same lenses. Had I been relying on in-lens stabilization, my body change would not have resulted in any stabilization improvement.
Use a tripod all the time, and image stabilization won't matter at all.
Hey amigaMan & AndrewR,
Awesome sites - just what I needed.
I continue to be stunned by the knowledge and power of the internet - less then a week ago I know about zero on DSLRs, know able to make an extremely informed decision, including factoring in reuse of old lens by locating obscure adaptors - simply amazing !
Thanks to all for sharing your expertise.
There's hope for mankind afterall
Awesome sites - just what I needed.
I continue to be stunned by the knowledge and power of the internet - less then a week ago I know about zero on DSLRs, know able to make an extremely informed decision, including factoring in reuse of old lens by locating obscure adaptors - simply amazing !
Thanks to all for sharing your expertise.
There's hope for mankind afterall
Concern about the adapters that I've located
I found the Haoda Fu site and the $124 adapter (on sale), but I've also found general MD/MC adaptors for a 1/3 the cost. Not sure which way to go.
But, looking at my old lens, there is a "stem"? sticking out of the mount lip - which I don't see a way for the adaptors to accomidate. I'm a little concerned that these adapters may not be the correct ones.
adapter link
I have photo (jpg) of my lens but can't figure out how to attach to this post
thanks for any insight
I found the Haoda Fu site and the $124 adapter (on sale), but I've also found general MD/MC adaptors for a 1/3 the cost. Not sure which way to go.
But, looking at my old lens, there is a "stem"? sticking out of the mount lip - which I don't see a way for the adaptors to accomidate. I'm a little concerned that these adapters may not be the correct ones.
adapter link
I have photo (jpg) of my lens but can't figure out how to attach to this post
thanks for any insight
- Jan 2, 2006
- 10,455
- 35
- 91
The stem is a spring-loaded switch that determines whether the aperture stops down or not when you turn the aperture ring. When you hold the lens in your hand, the stem's position prevents the aperture from stopping down when you turn the aperture ring. When you push the stem clockwise and hold it there, you'll find that turning the aperture ring now will stop down the aperture.
The adapter will fit. When you attach the adapter to the lens, the adapter will push and hold the stem in the position bolded above so that turning the aperture ring will stop down the aperture.
There are pros and cons to using adapters on these lenses.
The obvious pro is that you can use your old manual focus lenses on your new digital bodies.
The con is setting the aperture. If you want to shoot at f/8, you need to focus at wide open, lock that focus, turn the ring to stop the lens down to f/8, meter, and take the shot. This is kind of involved, but definitely still doable. Or you could stop down the lens, focus (which will be tough because the viewfinder image will now be pretty dark), meter, and take the shot.
Another small con is since you're putting extra glass between the lens and the body (the adapter has glass elements in it), you may experience a small drop in optical quality depending on the quality of the adapter.
thanks fuzzybabybunny,
So it seems that the quality of the adapter (glass used in it) DOES make a difference. So the following claim by an expensive ($125) adapter reseller maybe valid?:
"Most of the Minolta MD AF adapters on the market are about 1:2 adapters but my adapter is 1:1.
This is a big advantage. It is not only a crop factor but also brighter and sharper.
The lens are coated ultra low dispersion glasses. The image quality is second to none!"
2nd consideration, The main lens of concern is a Kamero 90 - 210mm tele-zoom, would it be worth it to try and save this one or just throw the cost of the adaptor at a new tele lens?
I can't find much on the Kamero to know if it is worth influencing my purchasing decision (except I was satified w/ its performance with my minolta SLR).
I was using the lens reuse to help choose between the Sony Alpha and the nikon D40X - Sony having the stabiliation in the body but being heavyer and bulker or the D40x being lighter better feel, decisions decisons
So it seems that the quality of the adapter (glass used in it) DOES make a difference. So the following claim by an expensive ($125) adapter reseller maybe valid?:
"Most of the Minolta MD AF adapters on the market are about 1:2 adapters but my adapter is 1:1.
This is a big advantage. It is not only a crop factor but also brighter and sharper.
The lens are coated ultra low dispersion glasses. The image quality is second to none!"
2nd consideration, The main lens of concern is a Kamero 90 - 210mm tele-zoom, would it be worth it to try and save this one or just throw the cost of the adaptor at a new tele lens?
I can't find much on the Kamero to know if it is worth influencing my purchasing decision (except I was satified w/ its performance with my minolta SLR).
I was using the lens reuse to help choose between the Sony Alpha and the nikon D40X - Sony having the stabiliation in the body but being heavyer and bulker or the D40x being lighter better feel, decisions decisons
To be honest, if you're trying to get a 90-210mm lens to work by spending $125 on an adapter, you are better off buying the camera and then picking up a used "beercan" off of Ebay -- a Minolta 70-210 f/4. It's a fantastic lens and was actually designed by Leica back in the '80s. They've increased in price a little bit lately, but if you time it right, you can find them for $100-140. Upper limit is about $190-200 if you get into a bidding war.
It's easily the best lens for the money that you can buy, practically on any mount. Build quality is unsurpassed, and image quality is terrific. I have three right now and getting ready to do a showdown to figure out which two I want to sell.
Pick up a beercan ($140) and a 50mm f/1.7 ($60-70). With the kit lens (18-70mm), you have a really good starting set for not all that much money. If you are really strapped, just get the beercan, and you have 18-210mm with two lenses.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter