Nikon D50 SLR w/18-55mm lens kit plus free 256mb SD $656 shipped @ Buydig.com

[BMdoobieW]

I bought the Nikon D50 from Buydig a few weeks ago, I bought the body only (for about $560) since my wife tami already has tons of great lenses (she has the Nikon D70). I upgraded from a Canon G5 and a Canon S2 IS (I figured it was better to carry around a superior camera and multiple superior lenses than to carry around two great cameras with great lenses).

I love my D50!

Edit: Oh yeah, I use my 50 f/1.8 90% of the time as well. I carry my camera with me to work every day, and I leave that lens on it. I only bring/use others lenses when I am specifically planning in advance to go photograph something. The 50 f/1.8 works especially well for me because I take a lot of low-light photos (underground in the subway) and I can jack the ISO up to 1600, set a shutter speed of 1/200, and get a decent photo of a moving subway train (or I can use a lower ISO and a slower shutter speed an get a great, non-blurry photo of a still subway train).

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: dclive
Aaagh! A Canon owner!

DPReview puts the D50 and Rebel XT in the same market and mindshare.... the D70 is quite a bit more and competes more with the 20D, IMHO.

The 300D is the old Digital Rebel, non XT I believe. And that was seemingly what they had seen at press time for the DPReview article. The D50 is certainly better than that one. I'd take an XT over a D50 without much hesitation, though. The non-pricewatchy places I look have the body-only 50D at $550, the body-only XT at $750, the D70 at $900, and the 20D at $1200.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: dclive

Originally posted by: Dealster

G is the cheapest lens; D is a higher grade of lens.

Not always true... G means it does not have an aperture ring on the lens and thus requires a somewhat modern body so the aperture can be controlled by the camera. A lot of recent Nikkor consumer lenses are indeed G lenses but so are the newer pro lenses like the 17-55 2.8.

Explanation of lens letter codes

In practice, however, typically that also means G lenses are the lower end of the line.

Amazon shows this; the G series has no ED and is DX; the D series has ED and isn't DX.... look up both for, say, 70-300mm.

It's a marketing differentiation in that there's nothing inherent in just being "G" that means it's bad, but typically, that's how it works out.

So what's your opinion on the 12-24, 17-55, 70-200 2.8, 10.5, 200-400, 200 f/2, and 300 2.8? There are just as many, if not more, pro "G" lenses than "consumer" lenses. "G" does not mean lesser quality.

 

[mioxre]

This deal just came up from samys.com last night with the kit for $599.95, if anyone's interested.

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: iroast
http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=NK70200AFSVR $1500

wow

Nikon's got lenses that cost ten times that (and some, probably, for 100 times that). Professional lenses.

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: dclive
Aaagh! A Canon owner!

DPReview puts the D50 and Rebel XT in the same market and mindshare.... the D70 is quite a bit more and competes more with the 20D, IMHO.

The 300D is the old Digital Rebel, non XT I believe. And that was seemingly what they had seen at press time for the DPReview article. The D50 is certainly better than that one. I'd take an XT over a D50 without much hesitation, though. The non-pricewatchy places I look have the body-only 50D at $550, the body-only XT at $750, the D70 at $900, and the 20D at $1200.

Yes, the 300D is the old DR, non-XT.

RE: Seemingly what they had....
Yes, I noticed that too. But if you look, DPreview had already done a review of the 350D, so obviously they knew about it. I took that as a slip of the tongue/keyboard, and assumed they meant 350D.

Agreed on the prices. I'd still stick with the D50. The XT feels like a toy, is too small for my hands, and just feels chintzy. The 20D, otoh, is nicer (but about the same picture quality), but it's also a lot more expensive, and if I wanted to spend that kind of money, I'd get the D200, *NO* question about it. Even adding another $500, the D200 is just that much better.

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: dclive

Originally posted by: Dealster

G is the cheapest lens; D is a higher grade of lens.

Not always true... G means it does not have an aperture ring on the lens and thus requires a somewhat modern body so the aperture can be controlled by the camera. A lot of recent Nikkor consumer lenses are indeed G lenses but so are the newer pro lenses like the 17-55 2.8.

Explanation of lens letter codes

In practice, however, typically that also means G lenses are the lower end of the line.

Amazon shows this; the G series has no ED and is DX; the D series has ED and isn't DX.... look up both for, say, 70-300mm.

It's a marketing differentiation in that there's nothing inherent in just being "G" that means it's bad, but typically, that's how it works out.

So what's your opinion on the 12-24, 17-55, 70-200 2.8, 10.5, 200-400, 200 f/2, and 300 2.8? There are just as many, if not more, pro "G" lenses than "consumer" lenses. "G" does not mean lesser quality.

Fair comment. I'll agree there's nothing inherent that makes the G worse.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: dclive
[Yes, the 300D is the old DR, non-XT.

RE: Seemingly what they had....
Yes, I noticed that too. But if you look, DPreview had already done a review of the 350D, so obviously they knew about it. I took that as a slip of the tongue/keyboard, and assumed they meant 350D.

Agreed on the prices. I'd still stick with the D50. The XT feels like a toy, is too small for my hands, and just feels chintzy. The 20D, otoh, is nicer (but about the same picture quality), but it's also a lot more expensive, and if I wanted to spend that kind of money, I'd get the D200, *NO* question about it. Even adding another $500, the D200 is just that much better.

They couldn't have meant 350D, because the review refers to instant on lacking in the 300D. The 350D has instant on.

But anyway the D50 is definitely the best "value" if you are going to just buy the body.

 

[dclive]

Good points.

Dell had the D50 with cheaper lens (not the 18-55) for $535 or so once all the discounts were bundled in there.

Amazing!

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: dclive

Originally posted by: iroast
http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=NK70200AFSVR $1500

wow

Nikon's got lenses that cost ten times that (and some, probably, for 100 times that). Professional lenses.

I don't doubt $15,000 for a lens, but $150,000? Give me a break.

 

[dclive]

No problem. Google it a bit and there's surely some out there, albeit perhaps in the medical fields. Nikon makes more than just SLR lenses.

Here's a point and shoot camera for $35,000 to get you started:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/expensive-ps.shtml

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: dclive

Originally posted by: iroast
http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=NK70200AFSVR $1500

wow

Nikon's got lenses that cost ten times that (and some, probably, for 100 times that). Professional lenses.

I don't doubt $15,000 for a lens, but $150,000? Give me a break.

150K is a stretch, but not completely outlandish. Canon made a 1200mm lens that originally sold about 75K from the factory.