Nikon D80

[Gdad]

Having had and sold a D70 and now using a D80 I would have to say noise performance is similar. Of course I think the D70 kind of got a bum rap on the noise issue anyway- I found by pushing the exposure by 1/3 - 2/3 on the 70 improved the noise substantially. The D80 does have some features I love and upgraded for (Larger viewfinder, larger LCD, Nikon verticle grip available) noise was not one of them.

Here is a shot taken with my noisy old D70

 

[fitzperry]

Jeff, I can't see your exif data. What is the ISO on that shot?

Here is one taken at ISO 800. Shot in RAW and converted using Lightroom presets (i.e. before I pushed the exposure to brighten it up thereby creating more noise).

And cropped

Maybe the D80 wouldn't do much better--I don't have enough experience to know for sure (which is why I'm harassing you ), but I've not been impressed with anything I've shot above 400.

Here's another one--this time at 640, again shot in RAW and converted using Lightroom presets. It's ok sized for the web, but the noise would definitely show printed at 8x12, and from what I've seen it seems like I'd get better results with the D80. Do you really disagree? Believe me I'd love the larger viewfinder and lcd, but probably not enough to spend $600 or $700 for it. I'd rather spend my $$ on lenses if upgrading the body isn't going to have much impact on image quality. We've had some big expenses around our house this year. I need as much bang for my buck as possible!

Crop:

 

[Gdad]

I don't know why Smugmug hides the exif data- it was taken at ISO 1600 f2.8 for 1/80 sec. Any camera will create noise if underexposed. Shooting in Raw helps somewhat but the D70 tends to take a very conservative picture- and tries to avoid blown out hilights. Not necessarily a bad thing but for night and/or high iso shots try pushing the exposure by +.3 to +.6 EV.

You an see the data in the gallery - Here

Here is an experiment I did with the D70 at 1600 a while back-

-2 EV

-1 EV

0

+1 EV

+2 EV

Noise is much better if you over expose slightly and then bring it back down in Raw- rather than pushing in the other direction. Just my $.02

 

[handicap18]

The D80 also does some in camera noise reduction that seems pretty cool.

Kyle, do you (or anyone else) have any guess as to when Nikon will replace the D80? It seems to be sort of a gamble in terms of getting the most for your money. When the next model comes out the value of the D70 will presumably drop, so it will cost me more to upgrade. Hmmmm. . . .

The D80 hasn't been available for a year yet. It was released in Sept '06 so you may not see a replacement for it for at least 6 months. There were 12 months between the D70 and D70s (though that is really a minor replacement as the D70 and D70s are VERY similar). 18 months between the D50 and D40. 18 months between the D70s and the D80. If the pattern holds true, then maybe some time in Feb '08 for the next upgrade from the D80, though things can change.

Right now the rumor is a replacement for the D200. That was released Dec '05. Though there were 3 years between the D100 and D200. Right now Nikon seems to be on an 18 month revision schedule (as I've seen it stated a few places online) which I take is similar to Canon's. Nikon's higher end camera's (D200, D2x, D2xs D2h and such) are more along the lines of a 2+ year revision depending on how high up they are.

Even with all that, the next body along the lines of the D40 to D80 ends could be something just below the D80, not necessarily and upgrade from the D80.

 

[fitzperry]

Noise is much better if you over expose slightly and then bring it back down in Raw- rather than pushing in the other direction. Just my $.02

That's interesting. With the images I posted, I underexposed in order to get a manageable shutter speed since I didn't have a tripod with me and didn't want to bump the ISO any more. And I thought I was being so smart.

Thanks for the info!

 

[fitzperry]

Even with all that, the next body along the lines of the D40 to D80 ends could be something just below the D80, not necessarily and upgrade from the D80.

Good point. That's certainly where they went with the D50 and D40. Guess it depends on whether they want to compete more with the XTi or the 30/40D.

 

[Steve's Girl]

I don't know why Smugmug hides the exif data- it was taken at ISO 1600 f2.8 for 1/80 sec. Any camera will create noise if underexposed. Shooting in Raw helps somewhat but the D70 tends to take a very conservative picture- and tries to avoid blown out hilights. Not necessarily a bad thing but for night and/or high iso shots try pushing the exposure by +.3 to +.6 EV.

You an see the data in the gallery - Here

Here is an experiment I did with the D70 at 1600 a while back-

-2 EV

-1 EV

0

+1 EV

+2 EV

Noise is much better if you over expose slightly and then bring it back down in Raw- rather than pushing in the other direction. Just my $.02

This is great info! Very helpful. Thanks for posting! Just when I think I'm getting the knack of this, I realize again that I have sooooo much to learn.

 

[Gdad]

Here is some discussion on this topic from DPReview 6 months ago...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&thread=22244432

 

[Steve's Girl]

Here is some discussion on this topic from DPReview 6 months ago...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&thread=22244432

I'm going to have to experiment with this a little. The D80 tends to overexpose and I would often set the EV at -.3 or -.7. I have recently started leaving it at 0 and have been happier with the images. I'll need to play around with this a little bit more.

 

[Gdad]

I'm going to have to experiment with this a little. The D80 tends to overexpose and I would often set the EV at -.3 or -.7. I have recently started leaving it at 0 and have been happier with the images. I'll need to play around with this a little bit more.

I am in the same boat- I have a D50 and a D80 now and unfortunately have not figured either of them out quite as well as I understood my D70. The CW I have read on the D50 has always said it overexposes a bit but I'm not sure if that is true unless shooting jpg.

 

[handicap18]

I am in the same boat- I have a D50 and a D80 now and unfortunately have not figured either of them out quite as well as I understood my D70. The CW I have read on the D50 has always said it overexposes a bit but I'm not sure if that is true unless shooting jpg.

I had read a lot that the D50 overexposes as well, though I've never had a problem with that if it does. Whether it was when I was shooting JPEG's or now shooting RAW.

It might have something to do with what type of film you may have used back in your film days. I know Ed (YEKCIM) found he preferred to have his D50's set at -.3 I think, because it is more like the film he used to use.

I almost always leave my D50 at 0 unless I need to push the exposure to get better shutter speeds, then I'll go to -.7 or -1. Occassionally I've gone up to -2, but that is rare.

 

[mill4023]

I've wanted to move to SLR for a long time, but now I'm actually going to do it and I want to get something before we leave for our trip on the 21st (9 days !!!).

I've done quite a bit of research and for various reasons, I've narrowed my choices down to the Canon Rebel XTi or the Nikon D80. Almost everything I've read says the image quality is practically the same, but the D80 is more comfortable to hold, better built, has a much nicer viewfinder, and has more features like spot metering. I've actually held and played around with both and while I do prefer the D80's ergonomics and viewfinder, I'm not sure it's worth the extra money. Right now, the XTi is running about $600 for the body, while the D80 is about $870.

Anyone think the D80 is worth the extra money?

My other question, which also has some relevance to the above question, is which lens(es) would you recommend for either the Canon or Nikon for decent(for an amateur taking family and vacation photos) quality at an affordable price? With either one, I plan on getting the 50mm F/1.8 for low light shooting. But aside from that, I'd like to have coverage from 18 to 200. Are there any decent affordable lenses that will provide that or would it be more economical and give me better quality to split that range up between 2 lenses? On the Nikon side, I've heard good things about their 18-200, but that's a lot of money.

This question is related to the question of which camera to buy because if it turns out that I can get that 18-200 coverage cheaper by going with Nikon vs Canon or vice versa, then the price difference between the bodies may not be an issue.

I know 18-200 is my ideal, but I could also go shorter. I just know that after playing around with the XTi, 18-55 is not enough reach for me. The 18-135 kit lens on the D80 was much closer to what I'd like as far as range. So any suggestions for what kind of range is needed to get a wide variety of vacation pictures would be appreciated as well.

 

[fitzperry]

The 18-135 lens is pretty highly regarded as far as kit lenses go. I have the 18-70 that came as the kit lens with my D70 and have been very happy with it, although I'm considering switching to the faster Sigma 24-70 f/2.8. Others will no doubt disagree but IMO Nikon's kit lenses are superior to Canon's (part of the reason I went with the D70 over the Rebel). Buying the kit can help offset the cost difference because you usually save a little on the lens.

For a little more reach, I believe there is a new Nikon 55-200 with VR that sells for around $250 and has gotten pretty good reviews. I have the older non-VR version and it's a decent lens, but at that focal length I'd recommend the VR. That would get you the 18-200mm reach you're looking for at a lower price than the 18-200 super-zoom (and probably better optics). I've had my eye on the 70-300VR for awhile now but haven't been able to convince myself to spend the money (IIRC it's around $450) because I really use the wider angle lens much more.

The 50mm is of course a must have. I use mine quite a bit and it came in really handy at WDW.

As for whether the D80 is worth the extra $$, I believe it is a step above the Canon and probably worth it, but that's JM(completely unbiased )O.

 

[Steve's Girl]

Anyone think the D80 is worth the extra money?

IMHO - yes! Last fall, I was also looking at the D80, XTi as well as a few others. I chose the D80 and have been very happy with it. Nikon's lens choices is what really swayed me. I have 3 kids and knew that I didn't want to change lenses everytime I went from a wide angle shot to a zoom shot. So, a good "walk around" lens was really important to me. Nikon's 18-135 is an excellent lens. I now have the 18-200VR and really like it. It is expensive, but not so much so when you look at having to buy two lenses to cover the same range with other systems. It is not pro glass, but does provide good results with a lot of convenience. I think Sigma now makes a comparable lens to the Nikon 18-200VR. Not sure of price, however.

 

[Master Mason]

The problem is it is not an equal comparison.

Canon and Nikon camers don't really line up for even comparison.

The XTi is better than the d40
The D80 is better than the XTi
The 40D is better than the D80
The D300 is better than the 40D

When you get to the pro lines then the comparisons are different, but with the step ladder you can't really compare directly because its not apples to apples.

 

[YEKCIM]

As MM says, Big N and Big C don't have "paired" cameras, by design. I would suggest that you look beyond the camera body and compare lenses, based on your anticipated needs, both now and in the future. Work backwards from there. I have both the 18-135 and 70-300VR and find that that is a very good combo for me. Your mileage may vary, depending on your particular needs.

~Y

 

[mill4023]

The problem is it is not an equal comparison.

Canon and Nikon cameras don't really line up for even comparison.

The XTi is better than the d40
The D80 is better than the XTi
The 40D is better than the D80
The D300 is better than the 40D

When you get to the pro lines then the comparisons are different, but with the step ladder you can't really compare directly because its not apples to apples.

Yep. That's what is making this more difficult for me. If they were equivalent and equal prices, I'd just pick the one I liked more. In this case, I know that the D80 is overall, a slightly higher end camera and if they were the same price, I'd definitely pick it. The question is really whether the D80 has enough advantages to justify the extra money. And a lot of that comes down to deciding whether to buy into the Canon or Nikon family of lenses.

So that's why I'm wondering whether it's more affordable to get decent lenses to cover 18-200 with Nikon or Canon.

 

[NostalgicDad]

I love my D80. I like that it uses SD cards instead of Compact Flash although lots of folks definitely prefer the latter. I use an 8GB SDHC and it performs great in that regard. I've been very impressed with the battery life as well. Nikon recognized a previous problem with the older batteries and made a nice improvement. Spot metering is a big plus as well in this class of camera.

I currently use a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 and have been completely happy with it as my prime lens. For telephoto, I bought the Nikon 70-300VR and have no complaints at all. That is a super lens. I've heard lots of good things about the 18-135mm kit lens. It just wasn't the focal length that suited me when I bought the D80 body.

You'll get great results out of either camera. I just give the nod to the Nikon and so does the following c|net review......

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11396_7-6654246-1.html

 

[mill4023]

As MM says, Big N and Big C don't have "paired" cameras, by design. I would suggest that you look beyond the camera body and compare lenses, based on your anticipated needs, both now and in the future. Work backwards from there. I have both the 18-135 and 70-300VR and find that that is a very good combo for me. Your mileage may vary, depending on your particular needs.

~Y

Is that 18-135 the one that comes as a kit lens with the D80?
Is it a decent lens for an amateur who just wants to take vacation pictures?

 

[YEKCIM]

Is that 18-135 the one that comes as a kit lens with the D80?
Is it a decent lens for an amateur who just wants to take vacation pictures?

You bet it is! I have both the 18-135 and the 70-300VR and those two lenses cover about 95% of my needs. I purposely bought lenses with significant overlap, to reduce lens changes. The 18-135 is very sharp, but does suffer some from vignetting (wide open), distortion (wide end), and chromatic aberration. None of those faults has been a problem for me, but I mention them because they do exist.

Here are a few from WDW this past July:

Feel free to browse my 2007 galleries (see sig below) for other examples.

~Y