Nikon D50

[Kelly Grannell]

what he said.

 

[Anewman]

when purchasing a PC I usually go for the best that I can afford - should I do the same with a DSLR Camera?

No the same rule does not apply.
Most persons will notice a difference between a entry level pc and top of the line PC.
Other than size most "newish" photographers(unless they catch our desease) will never notice a difference between a D50/Rebel 350d and a D70s/30d, etc...

A refurbished D50 WITH a kit lens from Beachcamera.com will cost you $549(free shipping and not tax), that is almost HALF of what the D70s costs at the same site. Spec wise some of the differences are like max shutter speed(d70S = 1/8000th, D50= 1/4000th) and burst speed(D70s= 3fps, D50= 2.5fps), would you notice that?

 

[handicap18]

The 350D and the D50 are more in the same category. The D70s is a step up from the D50. I have a D50 and love it. Compared to the 350D's I've seen it feels and looks more like a film SLR camera. The 350D is closer in size to a larger P&S.

You really can't go wrong with either. I've been a nikon user since the late 80's. For the average picture taker 8MG vs 6MG isn't going to make a difference unless you plan on enlarging pictures to poster size. But even then unless you have exceptional eyes for photographic images you might not notice.

The D50 is the least expensive of the 3, but don't underestimate its power. It takes outstanding pictures. It has the same sensor as the D70s. It doesn't have a few things that the D70s has such as a 2nd command dial and a few other things that if you haven't had a SLR in the past, you wont miss.

I would go with the D50 body only and the Sigma 18-125mm to start you off. Be warned however, that once you get the camera you'll find youself looking at other things and soon enough you'll be wanting more. They call it NAS, Nikon Accessory Syndrom. You will want them all!!

You can view some pictures taken with my D50 by clicking on the Misc Pictures in my signature. All the pictures there were taken with the D50 except the ones in the Favorites folder.

 

[Anewman]

All the pictures there were taken with the D50 except the ones in the Favorites folder.

Hmmmmm

Interesting that none of your favorite pictures were taken with the D50

 

[handicap18]

Hmmmmm

Interesting that none of your favorite pictures were taken with the D50

Ok I'll change the name of the folder then,,,,

However they were taken with either a Nikon 6006 or Nikon N70.

Wait a minute,,, I do have a folder called Favorite Disney that were taken with the D50

 

[Kelly Grannell]

As a Canon user, I would recommend either Canon Rebel XT or Nikon D50 but not D70. Especially for Disney uses, you'll need the high-ISO capability and the high ISO on the D50 is better than the D70. and the D50 vs XT high-ISO capabilities are about the same (different characteristics, but about as good)

 

[Anewman]

As a Canon user, I would recommend either Canon Rebel XT or Nikon D50 but not D70.

Exactly my thinking.

 

[tjl1388]

Kind of OT but does the Nikon D2X have a better high ISO...?

Bottom line is it worth the money. I have the 70, wife has the 50 and I can really see the deficiancies of the 70 at 1600 ISO.

OH........I recomend Nikon

 

[MistyGirl]

Hi again and thanks for your replies, I'm very confused as I don't know too much about the DSLRs, I was hoping to buy one then do some sort of course plus some messing about myself (trial and error). Maybe I should stick to the Nikon Coolpix that I have??

My use of any camera is for family snaps (parties, holidays and special occasions), some landscape (I live in the West of Ireland and I just love to take pictures of the sea and the hills, also we have the Burren nearby), taking photos of my kids participating in their various club games and athletics.

The bottom line is I can afford to spend around $1,600 but I don't want to get something that I will never be able to use or worse I get something that I'll be disappointed in if I get the bug for DSLR Photography.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Kind of OT but does the Nikon D2X have a better high ISO...?

Bottom line is it worth the money. I have the 70, wife has the 50 and I can really see the deficiancies of the 70 at 1600 ISO.

OH........I recomend Nikon

yeah, but the OP asked about D50, D70 and RebelXT. If there is no price constraint, I'll go with at least 30D which yield even (slightly) better high ISO than D2X).

 

[tjl1388]

Kelly, the whole reason I bough the DW the 50 was the fact that I already had $4-500 in lenses for my 70. I am sorry to say I probably should have went with the canons from the begining but to switch know would be quite expensive. Plus I still can't get past the fact that the XT feals like a cheap plastic toy in my hands due to both construction and my hand size.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Kelly, the whole reason I bough the DW the 50 was the fact that I already had $4-500 in lenses for my 70. I am sorry to say I probably should have went with the canons from the begining but to switch know would be quite expensive. Plus I still can't get past the fact that the XT feals like a cheap plastic toy in my hands due to both construction and my hand size.

That's why even as a Canon user I still recommend the D50. RebelXT built-quality is less than stellar and too small for my hands. Not that there is anything wrong with XT's durability. I just wish Canon didn't make it so small and feeling so flimsy.

If you already spent $4K-$5K on Nikon lenses, it would be foolish to change side. You've made the right decision. There is nothing wrong with the D50 (vs RebelXT) in terms of picture quality. Outside of picture quality, they are just minor subjective quibbles which may or may not apply to everybody else.

 

[captaincrash]

Hi again and thanks for your replies, I'm very confused as I don't know too much about the DSLRs, I was hoping to buy one then do some sort of course plus some messing about myself (trial and error). Maybe I should stick to the Nikon Coolpix that I have??

My use of any camera is for family snaps (parties, holidays and special occasions), some landscape (I live in the West of Ireland and I just love to take pictures of the sea and the hills, also we have the Burren nearby), taking photos of my kids participating in their various club games and athletics.

The bottom line is I can afford to spend around $1,600 but I don't want to get something that I will never be able to use or worse I get something that I'll be disappointed in if I get the bug for DSLR Photography.

Yeah...

The Nikon D50 has superior performance to the D70 in high ISO. And the Nikon feels built better then the Canon. But as TJL1388 said.....

.... I am sorry to say I probably should have went with the canons from the begining ....

Say... I just noticed you're from or located in Ireland! My neighbors of 2 years were from Ireland! They were expats here for an Irish company - the Dad was an exec here to "watch the money" coming an' goin' for the home office.

At any rate, I would recommend the 350XT.... because the D50 is a 6MP camera - and although if may FEEL BETTER ... the picture resolution size on the Canon is 33% larger at 8MP AND... read the reviews at DP review and you'll see their detailed comparison with side by side images between the D50 and 350 ... left the D50 behind. The price difference is just $100 or less after rebate (is the rebate good in Ireland?). AND wouldn't you prefer the camera with the superior resolution, AND better image purity?

IE.... between the 2 the high ISO may be similar but the 350XT is 33% higher resolution. Meaning you could cut away 25% of a 350 image ... and you would STILL have a marginally better image. That's before you consider the dominance Canon enjoies with professionals ... like for sports and such it's obvious with all those white barreled lenses. I'm going to a "fun and crazy" convention tomorrow (Anime Expo in Anaheim - largest in North America - 2 photos below) with my friend who shoots professional football exclusively out of Los Angeles and he amusingly speaks of how nearly every pro shoots with Canon equipment. He'd simply quip - canon makes better bodies and glass. Period. DO you really need a detailed explanation beyond that? Well - at the consumer and "pro-sumer" level - there are other considerations:

Now - as everyone has said... the size and feel are gonna be different. The 350 is smaller and the 2nd lightest DSLR on the market. Thats both positive and negative. Carrying a 350 will be obviously more comfortable (+). BUT advantage in the handling "feel", fit in you hands, and even the "look" might go to Nikon. Yeah, I don't like the mode dial on the 350 one bit either. And your hand size and may dictate one over the other. But the whole purpose is taking pictures, right? - and between the 350 and D50 there is a clear resolution difference. A 6MP DSLR is one step closer to the technological grave than an 8MP (in thoery). AND that statement is coming from ME - and I use a 6MP DSLR... the Canon 10D.

BUT I suspect you'd be happier handling the Nikon D50. AND the opposite is gonna be true with the images - that you will be happier with the 350 images versus the D50. So you want better pictures or a camera that feels a little better to handle?

So, as advice to you - if it were me and I were choosing between the Canon 350 versus a Nikon D50.... I'd go with the 350. And apply the left over budget towards a couple of nice accessories. I would get the 18-55 KIT lens because it is the cheapest near wide angle lense out there... and although it is derrided by some because it is inexpensive - it is also a tremendous "bang for the buck" value. And if you're considering a $1600 budget.... I would tack on a 1 gig flash card for about $50-75. AND the kicker... I would go for the 70-300 f4-5.6 IS zoom! It is an awesome lense. OR... I would go for the 70-200 f4 "L" lense. Both of these are about $550 or so brand new. The "L" is very slightly better for image quality - and is built like a tank as it is considered a true "professional" lense. But the 70-300 IS is image stabilized (IS - is 3rd generation with a 2 mode option!). Plus the 70-300 reaches 100mm further. Which on a DSLR is another 160mm due to the crop factor. I suspect you might have a little money left over for a half decent bag.

Now as an alternative... if you want an extrenal flash - then I would recommend a 28-135 IS ... ( I just bought it and am waiting for mine to arrive! ) or a 28-105 f3.5-4.5. These two should run $400 or $210. SO the 3 lenses I am talking about are either $550/ $400/ or $210. MAKE CERTAIN NOT to get the 75-300 IS... that is the older design and is lower rated for performance. Also - do NOT get the 28-105 f4-5.6... this is very low rated. Both of these lenses sell for $100 less than the models I am recommending. A dishonest sales-person might pull a quick switch on you if you are not careful. ANd... as for a flash - just get a 430EX is about $250.

So - if you got a 350 kit ... that might be $774 (price at B&H) or $674 after the $100 rebate (expires on July 15! and it may or may not be good in Ireland - get family or a friend in the US to get it for you!). ADD the 70-300IS f4-5.6 or 70-200 f4 L for $550 and your total is $1224. Add a bag, spare battery, good 2 protective UV filters (don't go with the green label hoya UV filters ... get black or grey labeled ones - see ebay ).... and you're probably at $1324~$1375. You can now add a fair tripod or monopod for $40-75... so lets just say $50. Now your total is at $1375-1425. Now spend the rest on a softare suite or apply it towards printing huge enlargements of a few of your first few prized images! For laughs = we have a place called Costco in the USA that will make a 12x18 for $2.99. Yeah, 3 bucks. It can have jacked up colors - but for $3 it makes a fun give away - or something to play with as a temporary mini-poster.

If you can fit it in - get non- canon batteries (save a ton on $), and get a nice bag... I like Lowepros. Oh yeah... add $40 for the Canon hood on the 70-300 IS too.

If you don't want the long Canon 70-300 or 70-200 L... then the 28-135 IS savings will give you a running total of 1226-1275. Now you have enough saved to get a 430EX flash for $250. Your total is back up to 1475-1525. But the 430EX has a powerful guide number of 141 (IE - it is rated to shoot 141' at ISO 100 with a 105mm lens setting). Thats far more powerful than the pop up camera flash. And he 430 can use E-TTL for the flash exposure! But - how often will you need a flash that powerful?

And if this costs more in Ireland - drop the flash - or get the 28-105 f3.5-4.5 with a flash. AND... finally.... as kelly said - a 30D would be an awesome DSLR to have. But it costs a whole lot more. You would not have any budget for a 2nd lens or flash. But you owuld have a very very durable camera that would (in thoery) be tough to outgrow. The shutter life on a 350XT is rated at supposedly 40-50,000 actuations, while the 30D is rated by Canon at 100,000 (mean time between failure). Either way - that is the equivulant of 1400 - 2900 or more rolls of 36 exposure 35mm film.

So - my silly excessive detail is a demonstartion that I do in fact "give a damn". LOL! Right or wrong.

​

 

[Shanan]

I bought a D50 January '06 and love it. I am very much not up to speed with apertures, ISO etc. I know that I don't use the capability that my camera has. However, I love my D50. I had looked at Canon & Nikon for several months before buying the D50. Short and sweet - would I buy it again? YES!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Hi again and thanks for your replies, I'm very confused as I don't know too much about the DSLRs, I was hoping to buy one then do some sort of course plus some messing about myself (trial and error). Maybe I should stick to the Nikon Coolpix that I have??

My use of any camera is for family snaps (parties, holidays and special occasions), some landscape (I live in the West of Ireland and I just love to take pictures of the sea and the hills, also we have the Burren nearby), taking photos of my kids participating in their various club games and athletics.

The bottom line is I can afford to spend around $1,600 but I don't want to get something that I will never be able to use or worse I get something that I'll be disappointed in if I get the bug for DSLR Photography.

If you can afford that price, I would suggest the following:

Canon 30D body only
Sigma 18-125 lens
Hoya Super HMC UV0 for lens protection
extra battery for the 30D from Sterlingtek
four 512 Mb Sandisk Ultra II CF cards

remember, you can use a dSLR as a high-end point and shoot (at least there is no delay when you turn on the unit -- 0.25 sec startup time, much-much faster and accurate Auto Focus than any point and shoot, and hardly any delay when you click the shutter button -- 0.02 second lag). Oh, and the ISO 1600 is better than the same ISO on Nikon D2X or Canon RebelXT. PLUS the availability of ISO 3200 in boost-mode)

 

[Ratpack]

Well, I am about a week and a half from our first trip with the new D50. I have one more question (right now). In the parks, should I carry the 18-55 & 55-200 or 18-55 & 70-300? I wish I had the funds to make a better lens choice, but that is what I have right now and I only want to carry two lenses, not 3. Which should I go with and maybe why?

Thanks!!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

what combo? Nikkor 18-200 VR, that's all you need

 

[Charade]

I would go with the 55-200 combo. I have an 18-200 (the VR model) and it's great but I could have used a little more reach for some shots on my last trip to WDW.

In fact, now that I have the 18-200, I'm going to sell my 18-70 kit lens and the 70-300 Sigma I have. I won't need the 18-70 lens at all and don't really want to lug around the 70-300 while on vacation. It would be nice if someone made a 70-300 with image stablization.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I would go with the 55-200 combo. I have an 18-200 (the VR model) and it's great but I could have used a little more reach for some shots on my last trip to WDW.

In fact, now that I have the 18-200, I'm going to sell my 18-70 kit lens and the 70-300 Sigma I have. I won't need the 18-70 lens at all and don't really want to lug around the 70-300 while on vacation. It would be nice if someone made a 70-300 with image stablization.

I don't get it. If Ratpack is using 18-55 and 55-200 combo. How is this giving him more reach than 18-200 lens?

PS: Canon makes 70-300 with IS

oh, and one from Nikon is coming up, actually. October release, I think.

 

[tinksdad]

I don't get it. If Ratpack is using 18-55 and 55-200 combo. How is this giving him more reach than 18-200 lens?

PS: Canon makes 70-300 with IS

oh, and one from Nikon is coming up, actually. October release, I think.

Really???

I've got the 18-200mm, great lens, but I've had my eye on the that Nikon 70-200mm AF-S, VR, f2.8 is one sweet lens, albit big!! Really great with a 1.4 teleconverter it gets out there!!

Any info the upcoming release?