snubbr.com

Even match for Nikon D80
Can you girls and guys give models from other manufactures that would compare to Nikon D80 to get some picture of the competition in the same league?..

Comments (12)

Competition is good. Not just competition, but cameras are great..

Pentax K20D, Sony A300 and Sony A350, Olympus E-520, Canon 40D.

Http://www.stan-pustylnik.smugmug.com..

Comment #1

Make sure whatever you compare has a real glass pentaprism. That's what gives that beautiful bright view on a D80. I dont' know about the rest, but the Canon 40D does have a glass pentaprism. Don't settle for a penta-mirror if you've looked through a D80's viewfinder.Cheers, Craig..

Comment #2

Yes to a glass Pentaprism on the Pentax K20d. There are tradeoff's between features and performance on the cameras listed above but I don't doubt they will all do very well within their operational parameters..

May I ask, what is it you don't like about the D80? Or are you thinking about the D80 and want to shop wisely and compare with competition?.

Beware there are some brand fans that will try to convince you to buy what they bought. Think critically about the logical arguments you get in response, and think about your needs vs others...

Comment #3

Guidenet wrote:.

Make sure whatever you compare has a real glass pentaprism. That'swhat gives that beautiful bright view on a D80. I dont' know aboutthe rest, but the Canon 40D does have a glass pentaprism. Don'tsettle for a penta-mirror if you've looked through a D80's viewfinder.Cheers, Craig.

The Sony uses a penta mirror and the viewfinders in the A300 and A350 are dim in my opinion. Those two cameras have live view which the Nikon does not. The Sony A200 does not have live view and the viewfinder is much brighter...

Comment #4

I am partial to the Pentax K20D, but that's because Pentax was my film camera..

What I think you should consider more than the body is the glass....what lens or lenses are going to meetyour needa and what are you going to have to pay for them..

Lenses that use image stabilizataion (IS) are going to be more expensive than those that don't....a camera body that incorperates IS will allow you to have IS with any lens. Noise can be a factor for low light situations...there is software that will help0 with noise (Noise Ninja for example) but that's another 70 bucks and some post processing time. Post Processing time is more expensive than the program.Shoosing another camera body isn'tjust a straight up comparison of bodies..

Comment #5

RBroomall wrote:.

I am partial to the Pentax K20D, but that's because Pentax was myfilm camera.What I think you should consider more than the body is theglass....what lens or lenses are going to meetyour needa and what areyou going to have to pay for them.Lenses that use image stabilizataion (IS) are going to be moreexpensive than those that don't.

Not necessarily true e.g.

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR 1,219..

Http://www.digitaldepot.co.uk/...F-S_VR_70-200_f/2.8G_IF-ED/product_info.html.

Sony 70-200 f/2.8 (no VR) 1,548.

Http://www.digitaldepot.co.uk/.../Sony_70-200mm_F2.8_G_Lens/product_info.html.

....a camera body that incorporates ISwill allow you to have IS with any lens..

True but at long telephoto settings your image through the viewfinder will not be stabilised and it may be quite difficult to see what you are photographing. I struggle to see detail hand held at 200mm without a monopod. Nikon or Canon stabilised lenses would improve that situation..

Chris Elliott.

*Nikon* D Eighty + Fifty - Other equipment in Profile.

Http://PlacidoD.Zenfolio.com/..

Comment #6

Totally agree with Chris. The body IS guys are always saying how they only have to pay once for IS, but when I look at average costs, the non-IS lenses are often the same or higher than Nikon's VR or Canon's IS, given the same quality.Cheers, Craig..

Comment #7

Mrxdimension wrote:.

May I ask, what is it you don't like about the D80? Or are youthinking about the D80 and want to shop wisely and compare withcompetition?.

Yes you may and the answer is the latter. It's always good to compare. My friend bought a d40 and recommended Nikon for me..

Tried Pentax and Canon 450D today and I wondered why 450D was a little fuzzy on the viewfinder. Now I know. Both were good in the hand and weights were also acceptable. Was very positively suprised on the speed of Pentax's AF. Have also tried D80 of course and it had a very good AF and very vivid viewfinder view...

Comment #8

Chris Elliott wrote:.

RBroomall wrote:.

I am partial to the Pentax K20D, but that's because Pentax was myfilm camera.What I think you should consider more than the body is theglass....what lens or lenses are going to meetyour needa and what areyou going to have to pay for them.Lenses that use image stabilizataion (IS) are going to be moreexpensive than those that don't.

Not necessarily true e.g.

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR 1,219..

Sony 70-200 f/2.8 (no VR) 1,548.

And what's your point here...is the Nikon equivalent without VR more or less expensive? Apples to apples please..

....a camera body that incorporates ISwill allow you to have IS with any lens..

True but at long telephoto settings your image through the viewfinderwill not be stabilised and it may be quite difficult to see what youare photographing. I struggle to see detail hand held at 200mmwithout a monopod. Nikon or Canon stabilised lenses would improvethat situation..

Pentax has IS in the body so I don't see your point about the telephoto...if the camera body has image stabilization then any lens will be stabilized....and if you are using a telephoto lens on a Nikon or Canon that lens will have to have stabilization incorperated into the lens or use a physical support ie. monopod...not so with the Pentax...

Comment #9

The D80 is US$725 at B&H, the 40D $970 and the K20D $1299 (all body only), while the Oly E510 is $486. The 40D and K20D have some advantages over the D80, and the D80 has some advantages over the E510, but whether the differences are worth the dollars you need to work out for yourself. The 450D, on the other hand, is $729, and the D80 has a clearly superior feature set at that price..

'Some of the money I spent on booze, women and fast cars, but the rest I squandered' - George Best..

Comment #10

RBroomall wrote:.

Chris Elliott wrote:.

....Not necessarily true e.g.

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR 1,219..

Sony 70-200 f/2.8 (no VR) 1,548.

And what's your point here...is the Nikon equivalent without VR moreor less expensive? Apples to apples please..

Why? We are comparing systems. Sony DSLR with built in IS plus 70-200 costs more than an equlivalent Nikon body without IS plus 70-200 VR. A saving in the UK in the order of 200. That will buy you another lens or a decent strobe or a tripod or whatever. Buy Sony and you have no choice but to pay through the nose once away from kit lens territory..

You cannot use a Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 on a Sony DSLR. And if you do not need IS/VR (which I do not) I can save a further 500-600 buying the above lens new. I have no such choice with the Sony system. Put shortly I would have to pay 1,100 more to shoot the same things with Sony as I do with my D80 and used 80-200 (Used Sony 70-200s are as rare as hens's teeth)..

....a camera body that incorporates ISwill allow you to have IS with any lens..

True but at long telephoto settings your image through the viewfinderwill not be stabilised and it may be quite difficult to see what youare photographing. I struggle to see detail hand held at 200mmwithout a monopod. Nikon or Canon stabilised lenses would improvethat situation..

Pentax has IS in the body so I don't see your point about thetelephoto...if the camera body has image stabilization then any lenswill be stabilized....and if you are using a telephoto lens on aNikon or Canon that lens will have to have stabilization incorperatedinto the lens or use a physical support ie. monopod...not so withthe Pentax..

I cannot make it much simpler to undertand. Please re-read what I said:.

"your image through the viewfinder will not be stabilised and it may be quite difficult to see what you are photographing.".

I will spell it out for you using simple words: the picture you see in the VF will wobble a lot hand held when using a long telephoto lens which does not have IS in the lens. That can make it very difficult to see detail for example when shooting birds in flight but can affect even on a a landscape shot. You are really shooting blind as to the detail that will appear in your photo and will remain so until you view the photo on screen later when the bird (or whatever) will be long gone. With an IS lens the image does not wobble at all and you can see clearly the detail that may be critical to your choice of when to press the shutter..

Do you use your Bigma hand held at 500mm? I bet you only ever use it on a tripod. Just try hand holding at say 400mm and see how much detail you can really see throught the VF. Choosing the right moment to press the shutter is a real guess..

So an in body system has a convenience advantage up to say 150mm. After that it gets progressively more difficult to really see what you are doing and a tripod or monopod becomes progressively more essential. At 150mm and beyond in lens IS has a real advantage in that you can leave the monpod or tripod at home AND still see the image clearly whereas with in body you have to take one or other with you or shoot blind (or use LiveView which is still primitive in it's implementation being, clunky and slow to AF and difficult to view in bright sunlight or at the resolution provided by most LCD screens.).

Chris Elliott.

*Nikon* D Eighty + Fifty - Other equipment in Profile.

Http://PlacidoD.Zenfolio.com/..

Comment #11

RBroomall wrote:.

Chris Elliott wrote:.

RBroomall wrote:.

I am partial to the Pentax K20D, but that's because Pentax was myfilm camera.What I think you should consider more than the body is theglass....what lens or lenses are going to meetyour needa and what areyou going to have to pay for them.Lenses that use image stabilizataion (IS) are going to be moreexpensive than those that don't.

Not necessarily true e.g.

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR 1,219..

Sony 70-200 f/2.8 (no VR) 1,548.

And what's your point here...is the Nikon equivalent without VR moreor less expensive? Apples to apples please..

You darn well know what the point is. If the OP was considering a brand with in-camera IS would he be able to save because equivalent lenses from that manufacturer didn't need IS built into the lens?.

Chris pointed out a case where this was not true. In fact, it generally is not true. For some reason, Sony, Pentax and Olympus tend to charge the same or more for nearly equivalent lenses to Nikon and Canon lenses with built in stabalization..

....a camera body that incorporates ISwill allow you to have IS with any lens..

True but at long telephoto settings your image through the viewfinderwill not be stabilised and it may be quite difficult to see what youare photographing. I struggle to see detail hand held at 200mmwithout a monopod. Nikon or Canon stabilised lenses would improvethat situation..

Pentax has IS in the body so I don't see your point about thetelephoto...if the camera body has image stabilization then any lenswill be stabilized....and if you are using a telephoto lens on aNikon or Canon that lens will have to have stabilization incorperatedinto the lens or use a physical support ie. monopod...not so withthe Pentax..

Again, the point is fairly obvious. With in-lens stabalization one can see the effects of that stabalization through the viewfinder. In the case Chris pointed out, one might find it hard to check focus or to even see detail with a long telephoto unless it uses in-lens stabalization. All but one super telephoto within the Nikon lineup is stabalized..

For that matter, Pentax only offers one prime that might be considered a super telephoto and that's the 300 f4, so it would if one wanted top quality glass for birding they wouldn't be able to use a Pentax with or without stabalization. Sony makes a 300 f2.8 for $6000 that is $1500 more than Nikon's in-lens stabalized 300 f2.8. Sony makes nothing longer and neither does Olympus. At least with Oly you get a little additional crop factor but that 300 goes for $6500..

So with regards to birding, action sports and some other types of photography, the in-body stabalized crowd either doesn't make anything at all or they are a lot more expensive than the Nikon or Canon in-lens stabalized offerings. Sigma makes a 300 f2.8 and a 500 f4.5 that are great lenses, but not equivalent optically or with respect to build..

I have a soft spot for Pentax, and now that Hoya has merged, maybe we'll see some good glass that expands the line and doesn't rely on 3rd party makers..

Cheers, Craig..

Comment #12

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.