Nikon D50

[Charade]

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.

It doesn't. It gives him the same reach as my 18-200. I was trying to say that *I* wished (at times) had more reach than 200.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

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?

I have a Canon equivalent (in terms of range and aperture) of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS (one of their white lens). It's a sweet-sweet lens. I sometimes use it with 1.4 TC too.

Other upcoming release? I don't have any more info. My friend's stores don't really sell Nikon (they are available, but for some reasons Nikon dSLRs don't really sell. OTOH, Canon P&S other than S1/S2/S3, A80/A95/A620/A700 don't really sell, the Nikon P&S seems to sell more at her stores)

 

[Kelly Grannell]

It doesn't. It gives him the same reach as my 18-200. I was trying to say that *I* wished (at times) had more reach than 200.

OIC. But that'll be the case with ANY lens you buy. At least that's the case with me. When I use 17-55, I wish I have a bit more. Then I use 17-70, I wish I have a bit more. Even when I use the 70-300 IS... I wish I have a bit more range

 

[Ratpack]

Thanks for the replys folks. After this info and a little toying around, I have decided to go with the 18-55 & 55-200. It is a little better lens and two other benefits, they accept the same size filters and it will fit back into my camera case without changing the lens back each time. I am sure there will be times when I want the extra zoom, so I will just have to take a few photo trips back to the parks!

 

[handicap18]

PS: Canon makes 70-300 with IS

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

SWEEEEEET! This might make my new telephoto zoom lens choice next year easier. Though I really really really like that 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens with a 1.4 TC. But thats $2000 right there.

I'll keep my eyes pealed!

 

[handicap18]

For the OP. I think I would go with the 70-300 over the 55-200. Biggest reason. Animal Kingdom. You'll get much better reach at 300 (though be VERY careful of camera shake on the Safari ride,,, keep it at a high ISO so you can have the fastest possible shutter).

I used the 18-70 and a 70-300. I found myself mostly in the wide angle range 18-50 or so and then also at the longer telephoto 200-300. not so much in between. Though to be honest I wish I had the Sigma 18-125 or the Nikon 18-200 for the majority of my picture taking at Disney. Compliment one of those lenses with a long reach telephoto and your set to go.

There's my 2 cents.

 

[Ratpack]

For the OP. I think I would go with the 70-300 over the 55-200. Biggest reason. Animal Kingdom. You'll get much better reach at 300 (though be VERY careful of camera shake on the Safari ride,,, keep it at a high ISO so you can have the fastest possible shutter).

I used the 18-70 and a 70-300. I found myself mostly in the wide angle range 18-50 or so and then also at the longer telephoto 200-300. not so much in between. Though to be honest I wish I had the Sigma 18-125 or the Nikon 18-200 for the majority of my picture taking at Disney. Compliment one of those lenses with a long reach telephoto and your set to go.

There's my 2 cents.

Thanks, I may just carry the 70-300 for AK. That may be the only park I need that one for as most other parks I can move closer. Of course I guess I really know what is going to happen, I will end up carrying all three lenses and wearing two belt packs. So if any of you folks are down there week after next and see a guy that looks like a pack mule, that is probably me!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

SWEEEEEET! This might make my new telephoto zoom lens choice next year easier. Though I really really really like that 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens with a 1.4 TC. But thats $2000 right there.

I'll keep my eyes pealed!

I think you'll be happier with the 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4 TC. I use a similar set up for my Canon and can't be happier.

Well, yes I can, but that involves me living next to WDW and winning the $100 million lottery ticket.

 

[handicap18]

I think you'll be happier with the 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4 TC. I use a similar set up for my Canon and can't be happier.

Well, yes I can, but that involves me living next to WDW and winning the $100 million lottery ticket.

Your right I probably would be happier, but if the cost difference between the 70-300 w/VR and the 70-200 f/2.8 w/VR & TC is $1200, then my wallet will be a lot happier. We'll see what the reviews are when it comes out. I know Canon has 2 70-300 w/IS at 2 different price points (@650 and 1200 respectively). It will depend on what Nikon comes out with. If its in the $650 price range then that might be able to satisfy me till DW goes back to work in a few years and the kids get older.

I'm also keeping watch for when I win the Mega Millions too. But I have a better chance of getting the $2000 lens w/TC on my own first.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

believe me, you'll be happier with 70-200 f/2.8 VR with TC. It max your aperture to f/4, still much faster than f/5.6 and when you need faster lens, take off the 1.4 TC and you'll use f/2.8.

 

[Ratpack]

I know it doesn't have a setting for it like other cameras but wondering if anyone has used this camera and perhaps converted the shots to IR. Also, has anyone used a 88A filter and does that give the effect or is there editing to still be done? I really like this effect.

 

[0bli0]

you can use a Hoya R72 filter and find a lens that doesn't give a hotspot. in the canon world there are a few lenses - i'm not familiar with the Nikons. Alternatively, you can have a camera modified to remove the hot mirror. Life Pixel does quite a few conversions and they list the D50 - http://www.lifepixel.com/ir-tutorials/nikon-d50-digital-infrared-conversion-instructions.htm
it is then a permanent IR camera...


edit: btw when you take a photo with a R72 filter, it is going to be a long exposure, even in daylight. so if it's windy, plants don't loook so good. after you need to process in PS, etc. to swap red and green channels and set white balance.

 

[Digital]

I've used my D50 with the hoya filter. I did use photoshop to adjust the levels a bit and on this one just converted it to black and white.

http://flickr.com/photos/digitalburn/187799787/

There is a few tutorials around for this method. I wasn't about to rip open my camera to play with the innards. I'll see if I can post some links when I get home.

 

[2kidsnutsfordisney]

Ok, I need some advice on a good basic entry level digital slr. I was all set to the get the D50 and then talked to someone and saw the E-500. We currrently have an Olympus point and shoot but I am needing something where I can get close-ups of my kids playing sports (soccer, baseball, etc.) which you cannot get with a point and shoot. When I priced out the D50 here is what I came up with - D50 w/28-90 lens $599, 1 gig card $60, 70-300 lens $160 which comes to $819 without taxes, bag, etc. I looked at the E-500 and can get the body and two lenses a 14-45 and 40-150 for $869 which also a $100 rebate making it $769. We would not need a memory chip right away since our xd card from our point and shoot would work in the e-500. Considering the e-500 is an 8 megapixal vs. the d50 with a 6 and some other features that the d50 doesn't have it seems that the e-500 is the better buy? Any advice or opinions??

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Nikon D50 hands down.

FAR better high ISO performance
standard 3:2 aspect ratio (as opposed to 4:3 on the Oly)
better lens selections
availability of 18-200 with VR one-size-fits-all lens

 

[Kelly Grannell]

6 MP vs 8 MP is not that big of a deal. I've printed 20"x30" with very minimal grain from a 6 MP camera. No problem at all at 12" x 18".

 

[Anewman]

Without sounding harsh, Olympus is last on my shopping list when it comes to DSLRs. But if I was forced to buy an Olympus DSLR it would be the E500 even over the more expensive E330.

I would easily prefer the Pentax line vs the Olympus line of DSLRs.

Buydig prices as of July 15th.
Pentax DL after rebate = $349
Tamron(for pentax) 28-300 XR = $139

 

[barrie]

I don't know anything about the Olympus but I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE my D50! Buy it - you won't be sorry. Barrie

ps - if you want to see what it can do for someone that only knows how to point and shoot, check out the photos from my last trip. There are links to them on this trip report.

 

[handicap18]

From what I've read, the high ISO's (800 & 1600) on the E-500 are not very good (it does have noise reduction, but that will run down the battery more and will double the time it takes to take a picture). It also has an almost 2 second startup time. It does have a 2.5" LCD monitor, but no LCD panel (which just shows basic stuff) so it will run through a battery faster. Its crop factor is 2x, compared to Nikon's 1.5x (thats why they have the 14mm wide angle compared to Nikon and Canon's that are 18mm for kit lenses). I don't know anything about the four thirds lens mount. I see it occassionally when looking at lenses, but not very often (that could mean nothing though).

I would think that the noise issue at high ISO's would be enough not to get one. Crop factor isn't as big of an issue so long as you pay attention to the lenses you get.

Amazon has the D50 with the 2 kit lenses (18-55 & 55-200) for just under $900. 1GIG SD Cards can be found for about $30. I'd rather go with the 2 kit lenses instead of the 2 lenses you mentioned. 200mm on a Nikon will give you what 300mm would give you on a film SLR. The 28-90mm you mention would not be wide enough (equilivent to 42-135mm) (remember the 1.5x crop factor because a digital sensor is a differenct size compared to film)

 

[Kelly Grannell]

here's a quote of pros and cons between E500 vs XT. The D50 is about the same quality is Rebel XT.

okay, just got back with Evolt 500 and RebelXT (I borrowed both so nobody can accuse me for writing a biased opinion based on a different camera models asked by OP). So am I allowed to chime in about the objective deficiencies (and also the strengths) now? I won't put ANY subjective review.

PROs:
1. better built quality than XT

2. better sized than XT (XT is way too small for my hand)

3. $100 cheaper than XT

4. Quiet mirror slap (XT is louder, tested in dead-silent room, my husband's sound-booth)

5. White Balance can be adjusted by Kelvin (so if you use light temp. reader, the white balance can be dead on, XT doesn't give this option)

6. Ginormous LCD (2.5", vs XT measly 1.8", this is important to me)

7. Can use both XD and CF (XT can only use CF... although at the same token, XD cards tend to be far more expensive than CF, at least 100% more in Canada)


CONs:
1. startup time is close to 2 sec with sensor-shake OFF, close to 3 sec with sensor-shake ON (XT is virtually instant, I flicked the power switch, and as fast as possible I moved my finger to the shutter button. Even before my finger reached the shutter button, the camera is already on).

2. slower AF by far (using Olympus 50mm f/2) XT is much faster (using Canon 50mm f/1.8, non-USM); using respective kit lens, AF on Olympus is slightly slower than Canon

3. ISO 200 on Olympus is grainier than ISO 200 on XT

4. ISO 400 on Olympus is on par with ISO 1600 on XT

5. Beyond ISO 400 is 'boost mode' only (meaning: the camera takes the picture with exposure lowered, then post-processed by boosting the exposure back to 'normal' within the camera. This is done for ISO 800 and ISO 1600). 'Boost mode' on XT starts (and stops) at ISO 3200. Natively the sensor sensitiviy goes up to ISO 1600 without resorting to lowering the exposure and post processing within camera body)

6. 3-point AF only (XT has 7 points, not that it matters, I only use the centre point and reframe, but for some people, the more AF points the better)

7. USB 1.1 connectivity (XT uses USB 2.0... also it doesn't matter, I use card reader anyway, but then again, some people download their pics straight from their camera)

8. Viewfinder is very small for my taste. To me, I can only use it to frame my pic but not to do manual focusing (XT is also too small for my taste, but it's large enough for me to do manual focusing).


That's all, that's as objective as I can comparing both cameras