Nikon D80 pics revealed
By Paul Miller 
posted Jul 26th 2006 7:26PM
posted Jul 26th 2006 7:26PM
[Thanks, Brando]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
Assuming that the features (other than the megapixel upgrade) aren't that much different, this makes me feel a little bit better about my recent d70 purchase. At least the body is basically the same...
Hope this is just as inexpensive as the a100.
Upgrading my EOS 350D anytime soon :)
A few changes. Same plastic body (stamped neckstrap loops), though it looks like it now takes SD cards only, just like the D50. Playback zoom looks to be controlled by the lower-left display buttons.
Also, there's now a soft-button above the DOF-preview. Very nice, hopefully it's programmable, and hopefully we get a few shooting and user banks to select from.
Biggest UI change seems to be the addition of an AF button, which will hopefully let you change M/AF-S/AF-C without digging through the menu.
Hopefully, the ISO cycle will include "Auto" as well.
Although a good lens will make more of a difference than upgrading from a D70 to a D80, that screen does look pretty impressive. I'd rather hang onto my money and the D70s's legendary battery life than upgrade.
This camera joining the D50 and D200 kinda gives Nikon a clear lead in this range of the market.
"Upgrading my EOS 350D anytime soon :)"
So you're changing an entire camera system because the competition has a slightly larger sensor at this moment in time?
Yeah, that makes sense.
I just got my A100...
Does anyone know if the sensor in the A100 is the same as the new D80 ?
Both Canon and Nikon have been pretty good at adding a few unnecessary changes to an existing camera and putting it on the market as a hot new commodity. Unfortunately, Nikon doesn't have this luxury much longer. If they want to prevent falling any further behind Canon, they need to resist the urge to "upgrade" existing cameras and put the money into heavy R&D.
Placing this camera on the market at this point is kind of like Dodge hoping to sell more of those station wagons just by putting in bigger engines.
i won't even touch this is if it only uses SD cards. dumb idea if you ask me. i will still be purchasing the D200...
Well, I'm a little insulted having Nikon compared to Dodge, but I'll let it slide.
I do like my D70, but I also get jealous of little digicams with huge lcds on the back compared to the D70's tiny display, looks like this might fix that. The two things I've noticed in comparing my D70 with the Canon 20D is that the D70 has too much noise at high ISO's and long exposures, and isn't quite as good at focusing in low light with comparable lenses. I hope these problems are addressed with the D80.
Other than those few little things, like Matty said, a lens is going to make way more difference than a few extra megapixels. I'd choose to spend a few hundred on a good wide angle before upgrading.
It looks great, but I can't seem to find the Canon logo. I couldn't possibly buy anything but a Canon. Maybe a Leica. Maybe.
Looks like the D80 will have the same sensor as the D200. This is good and bad, however, much better than anything Canon has produced lately. The 350XT is a real joke in terms of ergonomics and the 30D is a modest upgrade of the 20D, so not much to write home about there. Nikon looks to have the upper hand for now.
So...when are we going to see Canon up this ante with a new Digi Rebel? I'm waiting for the XT to get cheap...
I still think I am going to buy a D70.
AG: Sony has put out a press release stating that the sensors in the D200/D80 are *not* the same as the a100 :-)
This is a professional camera, I'm looking for having it for a long time.
"AG: Sony has put out a press release stating that the sensors in the D200/D80 are *not* the same as the a100 :-)"
Good! Cause the initial reviews have shown that high ISO noise is pretty bad on the a100 compared even to the D200! Is it too much to hope that high ISO performance is improved in the D80 and closer to what we've seen with the D50 (near-Canon like noise performance)?
The D200 sensor is 4 channel, the D80 will likely be 2 channel like the A100.
I definitely like that the size of the VF appears to be identical to the one on the D200.
The new lens also has me interested.
As for anyone trying to go and get themselves a new D70s or D50 had better go and get it quick; most authorized dealers are nearly out of stock.
send me some nice photos
You Nikonians make me laugh. Hilarious: "This camera joining the D50 and D200 kinda gives Nikon a clear lead in this range of the market" and "Nikon looks to have the upper hand for now". The grain in your high-ISO or long exposure pics must have clearly fogged your brains up too. LOL!
Image quality is all that matters, which means good lenses and good sensors. I grant Nikon has produced some exceptionally fine lenses, but it stops right there... They should kick Sony in the butt and try to produce some themselves. That is, if they even want to have a chance to beat Canon.
I don't want to fan the fanboy flames because I truly think both Canons and Nikons are great cameras, but personally i'd never buy a Nikon until they match (or beat) Canon's superior high-ISO performance.
In addition, I have also decided my next camera must be a full-frame DSLR, for even better low-light performance (therefore, the 5D is at the top of my wishlist!). In the meantime i'll continue to use my XT and 20D.
In the end, like people have mentioned before, it's the glass (canon OR nikon) that makes the most difference. I think you would be better off only upgrading camera bodies once every other (or even every 3rd) camera cycle, and spending the money earned on nicer lenses.
"In the end, like people have mentioned before, it's the glass (canon OR nikon) that makes the most difference. I think you would be better off only upgrading camera bodies once every other (or even every 3rd) camera cycle, and spending the money earned on nicer lenses."
DITTO
Greg,
Nikon designs their own sensors; Sony just does the fabrication for them.
Nikon has a lot of interconnected relationships with other manufacturers.
If a fabrication deal went sour between Nikon and Sony, they'd have at least several other alternatives to consider, like Fuji, Kodak, even themselves if need be.
It’s unclear if Canon can manage this same task quite as easily as Nikon, considering they've sort of isolated themselves from everyone else. It’s provided well for them now, but I’d be skeptical how well this approach works out for them in the future.
Hmm the constant cry for high iso is lazy photography in my opinion!
This looks like it will be a great little camera!
GOODONYA Nikon seems you have won the race for now.
How is shooting in low light situations lazy? The amount of light is what it is. Lazy is using a long telephoto instead of getting close to your subject with a 50mm.
Sounds like a fanboy statement to me.
There are a few extra buttons on the camera, such as a physical self timer, IR remote button, an autofocus button, and it looks like the D80 uses SD flash memory cards instead of the CompactFlash cards used on its predecessor.
I don't think these photos are real. If so, riddle me this -
Why have the ISO/Thumbnail and WB/Help/Protect buttons swapped position from where they are on the D50, D70, and D200? What is the OK button about?
In response to claims that Nikon sensors are "noisy," I would like to point out that it's either noise or loss of detail. Which one would you rather have in the trade off? In order to reduce noise, Canon has created a larger sensor. However, this larger sensor is a joke in terms of light fall-off at the edges of the sensor. Nikon's designed a much clearer sensor, and I have never really been bothered by the noise generated from my camera. Besides, I can easily get rid of the low amount of noise generated with PS.
SD card? aw...
A salesperson at a camera store told me that the reason you can rarely ever find non-pro cameras with CF instead of SD anymore is because people jumping on the digicam bandwagon would buy 8MP cameras, put 1x cheapo CF cards in them and then return the camera because it was "too slow".
Since no pro cameras were getting returned for this reason, they usually still run on CF.
Porkchop, thanks. I actually didn't know Nikon designs their own. Thought they just got 'm off the shelves. So I humbly revoke that part of my statement.
For the rest, I'm still laughing though. Have had some experience shooting a Nikon D70 in low light conditions at a wedding. Jasin, please make me laugh even harder by calling that lazy shooting - at your wedding I'll bring some lighting equipment to add to the atmosphere. Anyway, nice camera but the noise was totally unbearable. No way you could get rid of that even when stacking Photoshops noise reduction on Noise Ninja and Neat Image.
And so I gladly cling to my lazy shooting with a large fullframe 5D with apparantly laughable light fall-off at the edges which is another thing I learned today as it hadn't come to my attention the last few thousand shots... (if you listen very carefully you can hear another burst of laughing right NOW).
Happy shooting!
I'd just like to add that despite this D80 looking like it will replace the D70/D70s that it is kind of odd to assume that this camera will have a sensor just as noisy as the D70. If you think about it, the D70 is basically two or three generations old in terms of Nikon's product line. The D50, to my understanding, came out after the original D70 and the D50 is known for having much reduced high ISO noise. And then there is the D200 which, while noisier than a Canon 5D at high ISO, still tends to compare fairly well in the reviews that I've seen despite costing significantly less.
And the people saying this camera intro will be pointless unless it has an all new sensor are kind of missing the boat. Nikon isn't trying to upstage the D200, outshine the Canon 5D, or even entice D70 owners to upgrade by introducing this D80. I think their worry is more that the D70 no longer compares well against Canon products in a similar price range. So for the sake of being able to lure newer buyers, they pretty much *needed* a replacement/upgrade to the D70.
And as far as demanding a full frame sensor on your digital SLR, well, that's all kind of arbitrary, isn't it especially for newer buyers with no existing lens set? Why is it that a 35mm sized sensor has to be the best? Why not a larger sensor with an all new set of lenses to go with it? Hint: maybe image quality at any cost isn't realistic in order to sell cameras in the real world? Come on, people! The D50 is one of the best selling DSLRs out there, its fairly inexpensive, and it gets great quality photos in the right hands. So instead of the constant back and forth bitching of Nikon vs. Canon, maybe we all should just go take more photos and learn more about the equipment we already have and photography in general? Another way to say this: I can take shitty photos with $1000 worth of camera equipment and I can take just as shitty photos with $5000 worth of camera equipment.
Until Nikon at least gives the OPTION for a full frame camera they will never lead this market. I guess cropped cameras are fine for people who shoot birds or their cats, but for me shooting people I want to shoot WIDE.
Having said that, the D80 does not compete with Canon's full-frame cameras. I think in the low-end DSLR market Nikon and Canon both have their pros and cons. In this price range you could really go either way.
I was a Nikon 35mm user, with a Nikon F4. I decided to change systems to Canon because of their sensors. I fully understand why people love Nikons, the way they feel and the way they're built but I personally feel that they are letting their customers down by not at least OFFERING a full frame camera. Maybe not all their customers, but certainly me.
I just bought a D70s back in April and I love it. 6MP is perfectly fine with me for the time being especially because I can write to my 6GB Microdrive and never run out of space, SD cards just don't appeal to me. As for the Canon debate the price equivalent Canon's just don't feel like cameras and the buttons aren't positioned in a way I find comfortable.
Sold My D200 because the Noise was unacceptable at ISO over 320. This will be the same. What a waste. Nikon has great everything except there Noise at High ISO.
Until they get that under control, I will be living in the Canon Camp...
Still no original Nikon VG? High-noise ISO? (came with same D200/A100 CCD sensor).....
It will be make a notice, if it is came with anti-dust system :)
I had the same noise problem with my D200. I too will wait to buy a Nikon until they get this fixed.
I am actually looking to buy a camera!
Without starting a huge debate, I wanted to know which to buy, Nikon or Canon... so where should I get reviews? dpreview is down right now, but that is probably temporary. Is it the best? Is there anywhere else that does good reviews?
Please help...
P.S. I live in Montreal just incase you were going to suggest B&H in NYC.
I am also taking a two week intensive course in photography, and have already done similar ones. I am looking for any information on digital cameras, and photography in general. If you have any suggestions of where I should go, click on my name and follow the button on my site that says "e-mail me"
Whoops!
There we go...
I am a Canon 350D owner who has been considering switching to the new Sony A100 or, now, the Nikon D80. While I completely agree that the high ISO noise performance of the 350D is truly outstanding, it does not make up for my three major complaints with the camera: 1) frequent Auto White Balance errors in daylight and lackluster color performance as a result, 2) pics not as sharp as those of the D70, and 3) limited dynamic range in hight contrast light (e.g. blown highlights, etc.). I might be able to get sharper pics with an L series lens, but I'm not sure I want to put $2,000 worth of glass on a $800 camera that has the other two problems. I will be very interested to see the image quality coming out of both the A100 and the D80.
To the last posters: I find the information on www.fredmiranda.com more reliable than on dpreview, as it is provided by (mostly) professional users. It has forums for both Canon and Nikon users. Excellent review section as well.
James, it usually boils down to the choice of glass. The quality of the Nikon kit lens (18-75 I believe) is far superior to the Canon 18-55, which might explain the difference sharpness-wise. Not surprisingly so, as the Canon is only $100. In the end you get what you pay for.
For both brands, the best lenses with the most resolution power, contrast and the best colour rendition are usually the ones that will cost you dearly. That said, the EF 17-40L f/4 has all those qualities at an affordable price level ($600). It is however not a fast lens (f/2.8 or better). Extreme sharpness can be had with primes like the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, which are both less than $400. So it isn't necessary to buy the venerable 70-200L f/2.8 IS for $1800 to get extremely satisfying results. The better lenses have a great resale value as well, be it Canon or Nikon. You might want to check out the EFS 10-22 as well - it had me blown away with high sharpness and contrast on my 350D. I'm afraid I haven't got the comparable stack of Nikons but I'm sure you can find the info on the internet; www.photozone.de might be a good starting point.
In the end, if you buy quality lenses, it's the lenses you keep and the bodies you change. Happy hunting for a new set!
Greg - Thanks for the info and recommendations. I am a frequent reader of dpreview, but I did not know about fredmiranda.com. Some of my enthusiast friends have also recommended that I get a new lens or two rather than a new camera, so maybe that is the direction to go. JB
In the end it is a tough decision to make. Don't take the things I wrote way back up there too seriously as I was only hanging on the breaks to give another view. I hate it when people in a clearly biased way say that one brand or another is clearly superior.
The Nikon D50 clearly has its virtues when looking at the price level, the D200 seems to be an interesting camera, solidly built, and if the D80 gets rid of the D70's noise problem it should be a hit as well. Then again, I like Canons line-up as well. Have both the 5D and 30D and they produce some lovely images. I shoot a lot of low light and that's where especially the 5D shines. The amount of megapixels is far less important to me.
It's like Joe said: no matter the amount of money you spend on your gear, it is allways possible to produce shit with it! However, if you spend more, you know who to blame for it ;)
See:
Nikon D70 vs Canon 350D Shootout
http://www.pbase.com/wheatfield/d70vs350d
Password: santafe
Oh great, another consumer's entry level, plastic bodied, non weather/dust sealed DSLR. What a waste of research and development on Nikon's part. How about dumping the crappy Sony sensors and developing a new sensor in-house that will compete with the Canon sensors for low noise and high ISO performance, hello Nikon, there are digital Nikonians who'd like to do astrophotography without the noise. Maybe make a model without the darn IR filter over the sensor so Nikonians can better do some digital near-IR photography. Nikon needs to quit worrying about trying to fill minature or non-existant model gaps in their line and work on improving the very real performance gaps in their products.
For all those complaining about "terrible" high ISO noise performance in Nikons, have you even tried to shoot Neopan 1600 or push Tri-x two stops? Digital is a lot cleaner than most people give credit for - however, it certainly isn't as attractive as film grain, so that's really the issue as opposed to the actual digital noise appearance itself. If digital noise looked more like film grain, then there might be less debate over this. Canons certainly have less appearance of noise, but there's not enough to convince me that it is much greater than Nikon.
How do you Canon folk (ones complaining about Nikon's high ISO) shot the image? I hope you expose for shadows and then are using Nikon Capture to process, or else you definitely will get noise ridden images of terror (ACR isn't great dealing with high ISO).
To prove my point, just take a look at this D200 flickr discussion on high ISO: http://flickr.com/groups/d200/discuss/72057594086639228/?search=high+iso
IMO, the images don't look bad at all. Just take a look at the image pushed to 6400 - doesn't look bad at all considering how ridiculously high that is. Sure, there are colorsplotches and the like, but the noise doesn't get in the way of the photo.
My $0.02.
Jasin, another point about the high-iso and lazy photography: I find that stage photography requires a fairly high iso level, and this is NOT lazy photography. I used to have a D50 and it did well.
When the D80 is available in the shops, I will definitely go and check it out.
Andrew, I enjoyed your website. Whose Canon did you borrow? ;-)
The Nikon D50 has one of the lowest noise sensors available, and certainly does not give up anything, to any model Canon DSLR including the 5D. In fact the D50 may be the lowest noise DSLR ever produced, to date.
i never had a complain for noise.. in fact my images has the same noise as a leaf22 at iso50.
what i do is just HDR my 9 frames.
Looks like the D80 will be a nice addition to Nikon's lineup. Owning a D200, I would see this as a nice camera to introduce my wife to digital, assuming it's priced right. I look forward to seeing it.
I could care less about the Nikon/Canon wars myself as both make great gear, but after trying out some Canon gear (30D, 5D, & 1DMkII) and comparing the shots taken with my D200 at the same time, I was happy with my choice (the D200 shots looked better to me.) This was in bright sun light, so Canon's high ISO supremacy was negated, but that's where much of my work is done in the first place, including when I shoot film. While I certainly see no reason to knock their gear, I also didn't see anything that blew me away.
I'm a photojournalist and I'm still shooting with my old trusty and somewhat battered D100. I love it. Faults and all. I rarely shoot over 320 iso and I shoot a lot of low light stuff.
I never shoot raw and why should I? I nail my exposures and know how to use PS properly. I can stretch my images to make gorgeous 16"x20" prints and my images are published regularly. The trick for me is using old AI primes. They work just fine on the D100 but will not meter. However, experience has not failed me yet in guessing the exposures. I have a handheld meter but never use it. In fact, I don't even take it with me anymore. One can become so sensitive to light levels as to be able to immediately know what the exposure should be. It's instinctive now.
Mind you, I'm keen on this D80 I must say. Maybe it's time to retire my old pal though it continues to serve me well.
My old primes are the 24mm f2.8, 35mm f2 and 50mm f1.8. I keeps 'em small so as to be able to blend in and not offend. Nobody likes a frying pan stuck in their faces.
I do have one request of Nikon and that is that they design and build some gorgeous new fast small DX primes. Then they'd be kicking ass.
The D80 looks to be a great camera for the experienced amature to the professional. As an amature, I've been looking at the D50 with some quality lenses, as I like the feel, picture quality, ease of use, and use od SD cards. It appears that Nikon has me in a bind as the D80 is everything and way more.
To the person who said they'd never use SD cards: high speed cards can be purchased for either SD or CF cards, but the average read/write speed on a standard SD card is 1.67 times faster. But the big improvement is that SD cards use less power to read and write the same amount of information, which equates to a longer battery life. Hmmm, faster and more pictures per charge...sounds like a winning combo to me. No wonder Nikon went SD with the D80.
My Nikon is better than your Canon.
My Canon is better than your Nikon.
My car is faster than your car.
I am more childish than you.
No you're not.
Yes I am.
Not
Am.
Not.
The fact is Canon make great cameras and so do Nikon.
Use them to take photographs and not as pseudo penis comparisons
I note that Jasin has not been participating in this thread anymore. I guess he's too busy working real hard trying to shoot his pictures at low ISO-setting in extremely low-light conditions.
:)
I don't think these photo's are real,buttons moved and re named?,switching form cf to sd?, it's all hipe to get the world talking about it, i use my d70&18-125 as a point and shoot and would consider the d80 but i might wait for the d80s, if i am spending soon it will be on a nikon 18-200.
Andrew,
I saw the shot of the cat with high ISO....the first thing that caught my eye was the banding in the dark area at the foot of the photo. YUK
You can use high ISO`s with the D50 and get great images.Less noise and smooth tones, and if needed can be sharpened in PS giving first class results.
Uh, hello! The banding at the bottom of the cat photo is the grain of the CLOTH, not high ISO noise. Look at the black area in the bottom right corner. Duh.
First of all, I have to call out Paul Treacy as being full of s***. My ass you can guess every exposure without failing. Maybe you bracket and take 100 shots and one of them works. Give us all a break and spare the "I'm a photo/light God" routine.
Having gotten that off my chest, I have to say that high-end Nikon and Canon cameras are equally good.
I own two D2x which I love. I recently got a staff job where they supplied me two Canon Mk IIn. I like both the D2x and the MkII equally. The ergonomics of the D2x are better, in my opinion, and the colours are a bit better.
Also, I find Nikon optics to be just a tad sharper.
The canon, however, has slightly faster autofocus and the shutter speed of 8.5 fps is unrivalled.
Really, unless you are a super-picky photog, any camera is going to work. It's the person behind the lens, not the body it's attached to.
One can only assume that the d80 will have better quality than the d200, which is already extremely impressive.
ALso, just to stoke the fanboy fires and piss off all the condescending canon lovers, check out all the reviews of the d70 vs canon's counterpart - the rebel.
Now, check out d200 reviews vs the 30d.
Hhmmm...goes against what a lot of you have been claiming, huh.
P.S. How does using high-ISOs constitute lazy photography? Some people like the natural look of shooting ambient light rather than using flash or strobes -- especially a lot of photo editors I've dealt with throughout my career.
So who is Photo Dude? reveal yourself. You say I'm full of shit. How dare you. I said I can nail an exposure most of the time without taking a measurement and I mean it. Most pros who've been studying light as it rises and falls, day in day out absolutely can. I know what I'm talking about. Here are a couple of links for you to see...
http://www.paultreacy.com
http://www.yellowbellybooks.com
Venture a gander why don't you. You might learn something.
I have both a D70 and D200 and have been really pleased with both of them. I personally don't have any problem with the "noise" factor as I rarely shoot at high ISO and even if I did there are many things available to get rid of this. I'm not sure why Nikon have brought out this D80 apart from the different memory cards and larger lcd screen which the D200 has. All I wish is they would bring out a 100/400 F4 then my dream would come true!
Good site, good comments. I'm a Nikon shooter, D70 and D200
Looks like a PS blend of the D50 and the D70s... I seriously doubt Nikon would go SD instead of CF on this model.
I jumped off the Nikon bandwagon for the Canon 30D in hopes of finding the low noise nirvana. While I did indeed get slightly lower noise at 800+ ISO, my images were very soft and lacked the vibrant color tone and clarity w/o spending extra time in PS than I was having to with the Nikon. USM was needed to get the sharpness and guess what? There was the same amount of noise I got with the Nikon. There was no nirvana, just extra time spent in PS to get the quality I'd get at high ISO with Nikon and a little NR.
They are both great brands and take quality shots. I will say, however, the Nikon D200 is a tank compared to the 30D. It feels so much more substantial than the 30D which felt, for lack of a better word, cheap.
I'm going for a US trip in september, but I need a new camera before going. My plan was to buy Nikon D70s, but now the news of the D80? I have no clue of the waiting time for the D80, but it will probably take some months before it hits stores.
What do you recommend me to buy? Wait for D80 or buy D70s?
Please give your advice.
Get the D70s... it's a great DSLR and you can get nearly as much as you paid for it if you want to sell and get the new model.
SD card? What about all the CF cards I have been collecting over the years?
Canon make good camera's but shame about the lense's
Sorry, Nikon, I'm not buying any DSLR until you make a full-frame sensor.
I've spent the better part of 20 years building my lens collection, and each has been bought for a reason.
To have Nikon tell me to bump up everything by a factor of 1.5 because they don't feel like making a FF sensor?
Oh, and my SB80DX flash won't work either because the DSLRs use a new protocol?
You know, for a company that has in part built their fame on never obsoleting old equipment, it seems odd that my entire glass collection's focal length has to suddenly change and my flash just won't work.
If I have to buy a new (D)SLR body, flash, and low-end glass, why wouldn't I just go with Canon who, say what you will, seems to be much more in tune with what customers want?
Good site, good comments. I'm a Nikon shooter, D70 and D200(2)
I use an 350D ,i read almost all the reviews on internet about 350D/50D/70D. But in my opinion 350D is slighty better. But i must confess, i'm a nikonean... But i also know that is not the camera that takes the photos, is who is behind the camera. It doesn't matter if it's nikon, canon, sony, olympus, samsung etc... I've seen photografers with a lot beter pics that me taken with a tiny digital. I believe that dispite this madness with the high-noise, this cam is very capable, but it's your're imagination that does the diference.
What about dust on the censor. Will Nikon or Canon make a camera with vibration for dust removal? How much of a problem is it with the D200 Nikon compared to D 30 Canon?
Well Jacqui,
I'm not an expert photographer, but I can tell you the sand over here in Afghanistan is so fine I don't think it would make a difference. I would email you directly with my thoughts, but you apparently changed it while I was in Iraq. I look forward to reconnecting and reading your response.
Why would anyone with a Canon want to change for a Nikon. Canon are superior on picture quality, particularly on higher ISO settings, have faster focus and are the choice of most photographers who put photo quality ahead of snobbish brand image. The only downside I can see is that the EOS350D is not as robustly built as the 30D and Nikon models. Hopefully they will put this right when they replace the 350D. The future is clearly in full frame sensors (I pity those foolish masses who have spent their hard earned cash on lenses designed exclusively for APS sized sensors). Sony have made clear that they will go down this route whilst we understand that Nikon cannot follow without a total redesign of the lense mounts. Rumour had it that Nikon considered a sellout to Sony before Konica Minolta came along. No wonder, as Canon leave them further behind. Let's wait and see what they bring out for Photokina. There is a lot of downward pressure on prices. I hope for an EOS5D replacement around the £1000/1200 price bracket. That would really put Nikon on the spot.
I'm a working photographer, not a guy pointing a DSLR at aunt May then showing her the pic on the LCD display.
I don't use Canon, wanna know why? My buddy and I were working in the Canadian North doing some work for the National Research Council. They were paying for research, and we got a 6 week gig, a cold gig. He shoots Canon, I use Nikon.
To make a long story short, his Canon's didn't produce a bit of noise, because these things don't like cold climate. He shot 5,000 images during a 6 week assignment, for us that like changing the Boston Marathon to 5K. He was ticked off, and lost huge incentive bonus dollars due to lost results.
I shot 17,000 frames, and never missed a beat with my reliable, tried and true Nikons.
If you want the money shot, you have to be able to bring it home.
I use Nikon and Leica rangefinders, and I get paid.
I've used both Canon and Nikon. I've used Canon for extreme astrophotography. Now I've switched to try and use the Nikon with all the manual lenses I have. Nikon had a problem with HIGH ISO banding on the cameras, but have since found that one of the capacitors (sp?) was causing a problem with the image while being transfered from the chip to the processor. This has since be corrected by updating the capacitor to a newer one. Since then, the noise has been eliminated at HIGH ISO settings. One thing about CCD vs. CMOS.. well, 2 things actually. A CCD chip has a higher definition image than CMOS... why do you think they strictly use them for HIGH END Astro cameras? CCD also has a fixed noise pattern in the pixels which can be corrected with flat frame imaging and bias images taken at the same or near same temperature range as the original image. CMOS sensors have random noise patterns and require a greater deal of correction to remove the noise especially in longer images such as astronomy. CMOS usually requires multiple exposures stacked to get the same images as a single CCD camera. CCD also has a true ISO setting where CMOS does not. ISO 100 on a CCD chip is ISO 100. ISO 100 on a CMOS is the equivalent of ISO 150. ISO 1600 on a CCD is truely ISO 1600 while the CMOS is actually being shot at ISO 3200 or if using the gain to get 3200 you are actually shooting more closely to that of 6400 or higher. That is why a CMOS camera can get lower light levels faster than a CCD. However, a CCD will always have a higher definition image than CMOS and will also have a truer natural color to its images.
I like them both. But as a pro told me, its not what type of equipment you have, its how you use it.
I am making the plunge to a digital SLR (from film) and based on price range and astrophotography with general family pictures, etc I've narrowed my preference down to the Cannon EOS 20D (or Da if I can find one for the right price) and the Nikon D80. Do you have a preference as far as these 2 go, or do you have a better recommendation in the price range for someone just starting in astrophotography?
Thanks for any help you can offer.
Oh, waiter! One order of boat, please.
I’m sorry, Mousier, but you seemed to have missed it.
While all the thinly-veiled flak over whose dick is bigger (MY Nikon can beat up YOUR Canon) is, at best, entertaining—it misses entirely the point. Discussions about ANY entry-level DSLR retain value and relevance ONLY in the face of considering the product’s intended market. If D80 buyers wanted a full-on professional model camera, they’d sell their wives (or their husbands, or their Porsches, or whatever) and mortgage their entire futures so that they can buy the latest ga-billion D from PHOTOGOD.com. Hint: There is a REASON this new camera is under a thou.
The point? I suspect that most—if not every single—potential D80 buyer is, like myself, exactly what Nikon is targeting: the ENTRY-level DSLR consumer. We have never owned a DSLR—probably never owned a film SLR. We’ve likely owned a small but woefully underwhelming collection point-and-shoots and are looking to BREAK IN to something more pro oriented. Do we NEED the hottest do-das from the greatest of all camera deities? No, certainly not. But therein lies the saddest part of this whole experience. Were we to plunk down the 5 large for today’s biggest and best camera, we’d be vilified as poser yuppie tourists by the VERY SAME BULLIES on this board who wail about high ISO noise and blah-bu-blah-bu-blahblahblah.
Yes the D80, despite whatever new bells and whistles, is bound to fall short of the absolute topped-out luxury-line flagship models. That. Is. The. Point. This and respective cameras (the D70s, Rebels, 30Ds…even the D200) are inherently COMPROMISE cameras. The tenor of the arguments here seem to suggest that everyone wants every storied feature of every superlative camera jammed into a five dollar (and not five thousand dollar) package.
Wake up, insert real world. The bottom line is that entry-level camera buyers are principally (or at least mostly-partially) concerned with the bottom line. WE ARE NOT looking to BE professional photographers with these units; rather, we hope to find an economical path to BECOMING one. On that day that we exhaust the features and find the limitations of a thousand dollar price point DSLR, then we’ll be ready to trade up. I suspect that buy then BOTH Canon and Nikon will be making thousand dollar cameras that simply shame today’s flagship models.
So be it.
What guys like myself are looking for NOW, however, is clear, cogent, INSIGHTFUL discussion from real-world photographers in the field about the virtues vs. shortcomings of today’s entry-level DSLRs with the idea forever in mind that yes, we ALREADY understand that these are NOT the world’s finest photo machines. We get that, we accept that—not interested in paying for more. Yet.
So? So Romper Room was fun at five, but where (where else, that is) can a fellow find this Nirvana of e-information? I’ll admit there are a handful of helpful posters here, Greg, Joe, and (gasp! says the vegetarian) Porkchop Flavored Cupcake among them—but not enough. Most of what I read here reduces to cheap and comically transparent self-promotion from small dogs who bark loudly from behind tall fences. If I wanted posturing and sandbox shakedowns, I’d create me a MySpace account. What I want instead are worthwhile but intelligent opinions from worthwhile and intelligent photographers who can help me make a purchase decision.
Understand, I’m NOT asking anyone to make that decision FOR ME, I never do. Rather, I’m in the research phase here and am trying to collect those cogent, clear, and insightful comments. Any suggestions for THAT? Or am I dreaming…?
Lastly, how about discussion boards on glass? Seems like the best comments here suggest that lens limitations are far more important at this price point than anything else. Canon vs. Nikkor?
Ugh. Let a new round of posturing begin…
R. Kelly Liggin
I switched from the 20D Canon and all my nice lenses to the Nikon D-200. I made the right choice to be sure!!! I NEVER got accurate flash shots with any of the Canons i have owned -- 10D and 20D. The Nikon D-200, D-70 and the D-50 are all spot-on. Better color, better everything inmy opinion. The top of the line Canons which cost $8,000 are superb however. But teh Nikkor lenses STILL beat Canon lenses for over all quality and sharpness.
SO....I would choose the new Nikon if I had a choice. I like the 18-200 VR ED lens as it will cover 80% of my shooting. The other needs are met by the new 105 ED VR Macro lens and a Sigma 80-400. The Sigmas was a bad choice however. Shoulda stuck with Nikkor lenses, but I was trying to save money.
SHEP in San Diego, Calif., USA
Whatever you end up with just remember...'Real photographers don't use Sonys'
I don't see the need to upgrade from my D70. I had the new firmware added, so some improvement were made there. When Nikon adds vibration cleaning and live LCD like the Olympus E330, I might consider buying a new Nikon then. Until some technoligical improvements are made, at a reasonable price, I am perfectly satisfied with my D70.
For those of you complaining about SD cards versus CF, forget it. I work in that industry. CF is history. The new standard will be SDHD which the D80 supports. SDHD will be super fast and support up to 64 GB! RIP CF.
I got my brand new Canon rebel XT and my two objectives stolen two weeks ago.
before I had no doubt on what to buy for the budget I had. Today I have a lot of doubt between Canon, Nikon and (maybe) Sony.
I understand the disputes for the level of noise but I can not follow the issue between CF and SD. 6 years ago they had the smart media (very fragile) than the CF (easy to bend the pins). My PC swallow parcticaly any kind of card and evry week th eprice of the card per MB goes down.
Nikon D80 Description
The Nikon D80 packs high performance and high resolution into a body that is more compact and slimmer than previous Nikon digital SLR cameras. True to Nikon’s commitment to intuitive operation, the size, layout and operation of all buttons and controls are designed for maximum ease of use.10.2 effective megapixel Nikon DX format CCD Optimized to capture sharp details, the 10.2 effective megapixel CCD image sensor yields extraordinarily high-resolution images, providing plenty of freedom to crop creatively or print impressive enlargements.Advanced Auto Exposure system Consistently dependable exposure is the hallmark of Nikon’s exclusive . . .
http://www.redopinion.com/digital-camera/category/nikon/d80/
_
I like to read debates on the image quality of the Nikon D80 ... in addition to actually collecting links to great photography by D80 owners :> http://nikond80.dpnotes.com/category/amazing-nikon-d80-image-samples/
I'm shooting with the D200 now and only shoot raw. I've been converted.
http://www.photohumorist.com