# New D-SLR camera- what model?



## honda-r

Hi there

I am looking to get my first D-SLR camera, and i am reading reviews online for different models, the one that I am considering are Nikon D40, Nikon D40X, Canon EOS400D, Pentax K10D and Olympus E-510.

I would like to know if anyone in the forum has used any of the models mentioned above, and how do you rate them.

I will use the camera to take pics of my car, family, etc 

Thanks in advance

Gaz :thumb:


----------



## Shiny

I bought the EOS400D, very happy with it. Was a choice between this and the D40X and i much preferred the Canon. By all accounts the Canon's CMOS is a lot better than the Nikon one too.

You will always get conflicting opinions though, depending whether someone is in the Canon camp or the Nikon camp!


----------



## swordjo

They are pretty good mate and a big step up from compact/fixed bridge. I got a d40 in the summer and love it, still very much a begginer but find it easy to use, i'm sure more the experts will pop along with some sound advice for you!

thats a few i took with the d40 and the standard lense:


----------



## Delboy_Trotter

I also fall into the Canon EOS400D camp - love it does everything i want


----------



## -ROM-

Go for the canon 400D they have the edge over nikon in the entry level segment of the market.


----------



## Multipla Mick

If the latest and greatest kit is important, Canon are bringing out an EOS 450D with 12mp and live view on the rear screen apparently. Not sure of pricing yet, think it's available in March. To be honest, the benefits of the 450 over the 400 may well not be worth the extra dosh, depends really if you intend to do a lot of shots at funny angles I suppose, in which case the live view could be handy. The 400 should stay in the line up for a good while yet too (the 350D has only just been discontinued I think).

Edit, SRP of £599 so a chunk over the 400D.


----------



## Transit

If you do a lot of tripod work (macro or other) the Liveview is very useful. I had an EOS350D which I've replaced with a EOS40D and I love the way the Canon's work. Budget for upgrading the lens though, the standard ones are a bit lacking when you take into account the quality of the body.


----------



## Trist

Cant go wrong with the entry level Nikon DSLR cameras:thumb:


----------



## EliteCarCare

I'd advise either the Canon EOS400D or the Nikon D80, there isn't much difference in performance between the two. Personally I would pop into Jessops and have a play with both and see which one feels better to use............. then buy online. :thumb:


----------



## clipstone

Got to be between the Canon and the Nikon for future lenses, etc.

Personally I went the Canon route - had a 300D first and now the 30D.

Both quality pieces of kit.


----------



## beardboy

Ive got an Eos400d and its an awesome camera. I'm no expert either and its pretty easy to get used to and the auto mode gives great shots too.


----------



## -ROM-

EliteCarCare said:


> I'd advise either the Canon EOS400D or the Nikon D80, there isn't much difference in performance between the two. Personally I would pop into Jessops and have a play with both and see which one feels better to use............. then buy online. :thumb:


There is about a £200 MSRP difference between the 400D and the D80, what you are paying for is more the fact that the D80 is a better quality product in terms of build quality and durability, rather than image quality.


----------



## Andy_Green

Canon 450D is £599 body only and £679.99 with a 18-55mm. There's also a Nikon D60 coming out which might be worth a look, it also might bring down the price of the D40x a little to as people will be opting for the newer model over the older.

As rmorgan says there's a big difference in price between the 400D and the D80, cant really compared the two, obviously if we had the money to spend the D80 would win every time.

You thought about the Pentax K10D, its worth a look, same price as the 400D and D40x and has some excellent features.










Review of the K10D here, best price i've seen without looking in to much depth is surprisingly at Argos @ £449.99


----------



## Transit

Park Cameras have some very good deals on bodies and lenses. Nice quick service too.


----------



## freon warrior

Nikon D40X for me.









The kitten has odd coloured eyes, very difficult to sort out the red eye when taking photographs.


----------



## Kev_mk3

ive just bought my first digi SLR - a canon eds 350d. it seems a simple enough to use.

bought mine from a canon Refurbished company on ebay and there half the cost with a full warranty etc

here is the shop - http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Canon-Outlet_W0QQssPageNameZstrkQ3amefsQ3amesstQQtZkm

hope this helps


----------



## honda-r

Today i received Nikon D40, as recomended by 1 professional photographer, and i am really pleased so far, quality compare to my previous compact camera Panasonic Lumix is huge


----------



## Muska

I use Nikon's and for entry level i'd recommend the 400d canon. Not that the D40x is a bad camera, more the point is that there are a few things i dislike about it:

there is no LCD on the top of the camera, i find it really handy to have a constant display giving the current settings used/shots remaining/aperture/shutter speed/white balance etc etc etc.

there is no internal motor for the auto focus. This limits the lens choice you will have if you'd like auto focus (which i'm sure nearly everyone will!)

In my opinion the D50 was a much better entry level camera and had the same sensor as the D70 which was (and still is) a very good camera. If you were putting the D50 up against the 400D it would be a very close call in my opinion. A D80 however is far superior to a 400D.

I hope my waffle has helped somewhat!

Matt.


----------



## -ROM-

Muska said:


> I use Nikon's and for entry level i'd recommend the 400d canon. Not that the D40x is a bad camera, more the point is that there are a few things i dislike about it:
> 
> there is no LCD on the top of the camera, i find it really handy to have a constant display giving the current settings used/shots remaining/aperture/shutter speed/white balance etc etc etc.
> 
> there is no internal motor for the auto focus. This limits the lens choice you will have if you'd like auto focus (which i'm sure nearly everyone will!)
> 
> In my opinion the D50 was a much better entry level camera and had the same sensor as the D70 which was (and still is) a very good camera. If you were putting the D50 up against the 400D it would be a very close call in my opinion. A D80 however is far superior to a 400D.
> 
> I hope my waffle has helped somewhat!
> 
> Matt.


At the minute IMO Canon are best for entry level, Nikon are best for mid range, and depending on your needs it is pretty much tied at the top.

However the D80 is more in line with the 40D from canon than the 400D, so it is bound to be better.


----------



## Muska

rmorgan84 said:


> However the D80 is more in line with the 40D from canon than the 400D, so it is bound to be better.


I know that but someone mentioned the two in the same sentence earlier, i was only stating my opinion on that choice. To someone who doesn't know it's just numbers. 

ps, Nikon have overtaken Canon at the top end with the D3 (and D300 for enthusiasts)


----------



## Transit

D3 better than the Canon 1Ds?


----------



## -ROM-

Transit said:


> D3 better than the Canon 1Ds?


They both have their strong points, which one is better depends on the person using it and the subject.


----------



## Muska

In low light situations yes. there is not a camera to match the D3.

Unfortunately the 1Ds has had loads of issues when launched in the US.

As rmorgan84 says though, subject matter and the ability of the user determine alot.


----------



## Harley

I asked this question to a Photographer friend of mine and this was his reply

*"My thoughts:

First ask yourself what you trying to achieve. If the object of the exercise is simply to take family pictures that will never be viewed bigger than a 17" PC monitor or a 6x4 print then any DSLR on the market today is likely to exceed what you need.....

As far as I can see the D40x is Nikon's entry level DSLR. They have removed a number of features and simplified the controls, a lot of this is to reduce cost. It has a small, simple body. The D80 has a similar image sensor but a body more aligned to the semi pro cameras with a second display, so the specs are the same but they are very different to handle.

The far bigger question here in my opinion is the lens. Canon ship the most dreadful lenses with their bodies as a standard kit lens. The Nikon lenses are better, but they are still not anything like to the standard of the bodies they are shipped with. The D40x ships with an 18-55 and the D80 an 18-70. There are three problems that I see with these lenses. 1. They are quite slow at F3.5 - f5.6 for the 18-55mm, this means we are going to be reaching for ISO400 in dull conditions, and indoors we will need all the ISO1600 the bodies can muster if we are to avoid flash, which will bring a lot of noise with it. The 18-70 wins again here as it is f3.5 - f4.5. 2. They have pretty wild barrel distortion, this can be removed digitally with DXO optics pro, if you can be bothered. 3. They are horribly soft at the edges. If you are shooting your family in the centre of the shot with just random background stuff in the corner of the frames who cares? However, when I shoot landscapes I often place a deliberate piece of foreground in the bottom left or right corner of the shot. If this goes soft it ruins the picture, we can stop down and improve things of course... but now we are really running out of light. I see some people upgrade these to 18-135 or 18-200 lenses but such wide range zooms are a severe compromise, so we are taking a step down in quality to get a longer zoom.

The problem is that the next Lens up from Nikon in the pro range is the is 17-55 f2.8 at about £800 so really out of reach. I handled one of these at Focus last year and it weighs a ton. When I was looking at the Nikons I was going to plump for the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro (if you care about fast focusing go for the USM version for another £50) which is a step up from the Nikon kit lenses, but stays a sensible size and weight. The f2.8 gives us a handy extra bit of speed and the resolution and corner roll off are much better than either of the Nikon's, the downside is that it only goes to 50mm so if you were wanting to zoom in on stuff a lot, then you are into your second lens much quicker. If cash was tight I would say that staying with the D40x and spending the cash saved on the Sigma lens was the right way to go, if you can live with the 50mm or the Nikon 18-70 if you can live with the soft corners and losing a stop. One final point is that the bodies will be obsolete in 3 or 4 years.... a good lens will be worth fitting to a next generation body, so again money spent on lenses may well be a better long term investment.

The problem is that everything in Nikon land is a compromise.. Canon is much the same, and this is due to the heritage of the systems. They are digital cameras built around a lens mount system originally designed for film, that brings in a world of complexity in the optics. Olympus started with a clean sheet of paper, and built a digital only system and so they tend to have less compromises to work around and so they can create better lenses for less money that are smaller and lighter (for a discussion of 4/3rds and near telecentric lens design see Olympus website). So if we look at the E510 body... which must fall between a D40 x and a D80 in terms of spec it come with an 14-42mm f3,5 - f5,6 kit lens. The performance of this lens in terms of distortion and soft corners is much better than the Nikon 18-55mm (Olympus is a x2 multiplier, Nikon 1.5 so 14-42 = 28-84 in 35mm terms and 18-55 = 27-82.5 so both lenses have the same zoom range). Now it get's really exciting when we go to Pro lenses. The Olympus 14-54 f2.8-3.5 is as good as the Nikon 2.8 pro lens but half the price and half the weight. SO we could go to park cameras and get an E-510 body bundled with the 14-54 lens for less than £700 and we are getting a camera that has a far better lens than the D80 with the kit lens for about the same money. In fact to get an equivalent lens on the Nikon we have to spend another £800!!!

Many many reviews seem to focus on the body specifications and forget the lens, I have no idea why this is but I think once you are over 8MP the lens is by far the most important part of the deal in terms of image quality. Olympus can make better lenses for less for fundamental design reasons, so they will always win on the lens side. SO if I was thinking of a D40x I would take a long hard look at an E-410 with a 14-42 lens and if I could afford a D80 then I would look at the Park cameras bundle of the E-510 and the 14-54 (The E-510 throws in image stabilisation for free). Both of these cameras will take sharper pictures than the Nikon equivalent. If you decide to stick with Nikon then spend the money on the LENS.

However to come back to your recurring point. The spec is pointless if you don't like using the camera so you need to play and see which one you like handling and which viewfinders work for you etc."*

I hope that helps it certainly helped me.:thumb:


----------



## Ade25

I was all set to buy a Canon but in the shop the Nikon just felt better and more solid of the cameras I was choosing between better to try before you buy and not buy on spec and price.


----------



## CK888

I preferred the feel and comfort of Nikons over the Canons regardless of the spec. The D40/D40X will mount all the Nikon lenses (include 1960s pre-AI ones) which is handy but only work in manual metering. I wouldn't bother with the D40X imo. From experience buy the cheapest body and put your money towards good quality lenses. Don't be sucked in too much about MP size, ISO performances and this vs that. TBH, I've seen many images from both brands and I can't see much differences in PQ. I have no experiences with the Pentax (apart from film SLR) and Olympus DSLRs.


----------



## Muska

all you nikon users, if you want a very good kit lens thats had great reviews and is well priced (£180ish iirc) then consider the 18-55mm VR.

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/photo/lenstech/nikon/1855f3556gifed2.html


----------



## -ROM-

Muska said:


> all you nikon users, if you want a very good kit lens thats had great reviews and is well priced (£180ish iirc) then consider the 18-55mm VR.
> 
> http://www.warehouseexpress.com/photo/lenstech/nikon/1855f3556gifed2.html


IMO VR is just a gimmick in this focal length, another very god lens is this little baby:

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/photo/lenstech/tamron/1750DiII.html

17-50 sharp as a tack and F2.8 throughout the range, it gives 80% the performance of the Nikon 17-55 2.8 @ 1/3 the cost.


----------



## Muska

rmorgan84 said:


> IMO VR is just a gimmick in this focal length


Why do you say that?


----------



## sub7

due to the rule of focal length over you shutter speed needed ie at 55mm you only need roughly a 1/60 or slower shutter for a clear capture (May need to account for the crop ratio). VR comes into play more with say a 300mm lense where on a dull day its hard to get over 1/300 shutter . That making any better sense ?


----------



## Muska

ah yes, i see what you mean but would you really say a gimmick on this lens? It has it's advantages does it not?


----------



## sub7

in low light it has its avantages yes but as pointed by someone else here the f2.8 will be twice as good and also give a better DOF effect ( subject focus , background blur ) than the VR lense


----------



## dinodog

I use Canon 400D and find it very good all rounder.


----------



## dubnut71

Mate - I am with the Nikonista's on this because I have one (D80) but in fairness, any dslr will show you a good improvement over a compact.

Go get both canon and nikon in your hands in a camera store and see what suits you mate.


----------



## Muska

sub7 said:


> in low light it has its avantages yes but as pointed by someone else here the f2.8 will be twice as good and also give a better DOF effect ( subject focus , background blur ) than the VR lense


In that case i'd have to agree, if you could afford the extra £100 then it would be a much better purchase.


----------



## -ROM-

Muska said:


> ah yes, i see what you mean but would you really say a gimmick on this lens? It has it's advantages does it not?


It does have it's advantages, but it isn't as big as the advantage of say a 200mm+ lens. Not to be sniffed at, but given the choice between a 2.8 lens throughout the range and VR i'd take the 2.8.


----------



## Ade25

If you want nikon go to

www.graysofwestminster.co.uk

they only sell Nikon and are very helpful with a first class delivery service


----------



## Harley

Found this to be either
1. The cheapest place to buy this camera with both lenses!
2. They have made a pricing error

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/133784

HTH :thumb:


----------



## -ROM-

Harley said:


> Found this to be either
> 1. The cheapest place to buy this camera with both lenses!
> 2. They have made a pricing error
> 
> http://www.ebuyer.com/product/133784
> 
> HTH :thumb:


Looks like a good buy, i imagine the price is correct as ebuyer are pretty cheap.


----------



## The Apprentice

dinodog said:


> I use Canon 400D and find it very good all rounder.


I have the 350D and mate just bought the 400D both do a good job :thumb:


----------



## 7MAT

dubnut71 said:


> Mate - I am with the Nikonista's on this because I have one (D80) but in fairness, any dslr will show you a good improvement over a compact.
> 
> Go get both canon and nikon in your hands in a camera store and see what suits you mate.


Good advice, I did this and found that I prefered the Nikon. Went for a D40x.


----------



## Andy_Green

d40x price will drop within the next few months with the introduction of its replacement the D60, might be worth waiting a few months to see if your not in a rush, think thats what i'm going to do.


----------



## -ROM-

Andy_Green said:


> d40x price will drop within the next few months with the introduction of its replacement the D60, might be worth waiting a few months to see if your not in a rush, think thats what i'm going to do.


Won't be by much though as they are already running a cash back offer.


----------



## Andy_Green

cashback on the d40x runs till 29th feb so not a great deal of time left, they'll prob be another scheme introduced after i'm hoping as i'm not thinking of buying till april/may time. Unfortunately the EOS Canon deals expired on 31/12/07 and there's yet to be any mention of another cashback deal appearing.


----------



## chrissy_bwoy

Argos are doing the Nikon D40 with 18-55 lens for £279


----------



## -ROM-

chrissy_bwoy said:


> Argos are doing the Nikon D40 with 18-55 lens for £279


That's a good buy, only 6MP vs 10MP for the D40x, but unless you are gonna print over A3 then it will be superb.


----------



## Epoch

I've been looking at the Sony A700 as the lens look to be very good

Has anybody any experience?


----------



## -ROM-

Epoch said:


> I've been looking at the Sony A700 as the lens look to be very good
> 
> Has anybody any experience?


It is a good camera, but at that price range i think you'd be far better off stretching your budget slighlty to the Nikon D300.


----------



## Epoch

rmorgan84 said:


> It is a good camera, but at that price range i think you'd be far better off stretching your budget slighlty to the Nikon D300.


Cheers i look into that

It always seemd to be a case of stretching a little :thumb:


----------



## dubnut71

rmorgan84 said:


> It is a good camera, but at that price range i think you'd be far better off stretching your budget slighlty to the Nikon D300.


Thats good advice Mr Morgan, The Nikon will give you far more of a complete Dslr system than the Sony. The D300 is the daddy too, took one out last weekend and found it a very easy step up from my D80 and the features it has on it are mindblowing (number of AF points, burst capture to 6fps and ISO up to 6400)

Plus I struggle to see them as anything other than Minolta's anyway!! even though they are badged Sony now!


----------



## Lespaul

^^^^^
Same here, I started of looking at the D40x or the 400D, now trying to buy a D80  

Darren


----------



## dubnut71

Lespaul said:


> ^^^^^
> Same here, I started of looking at the D40x or the 400D, now trying to buy a D80
> 
> Darren


Stretch to the D80 mate you won't regret it. AF drive is on the body so gives you a greater range of lenses and mine blows me away with the quality you can achieve.


----------



## Dingo2002

If you have been looking at the K10D amongst the other nikon D40 and lower level canons then go for the K10D it is has far more options than the equivalent nikon and canon and its more of a mid-range DSLR on par with the D80 and EOS 20D type of camera for far less money. You also get shake reduction in the body rather than a lens option as well as dust removal and it also has sealed doors and buttons meaning it is splash resistant.


----------



## dsolds

Just my 2p...

Nikon all the way. Far and away the best lenses you can get in this price bracket and imho more robust electronics as well. 
I have had so far in DSLR's:
Fuji S1 Pro with Sigma lense
Fuji S2 Pro with Nikon Lense
Nikon D200 with Nikon lense (still have this)
Fuji S3 Pro with Nikon Lense (still have this)
And the latest addition is a Nikon D300 with another Nikon lense

Prior to digital I had several 35mm Nikon's. The main points to consider are these:
Nikon resale values for trade in are a lot higher than Canon or Olympus etc. There are many specialist independants who only accept Nikon units as trade ins, far more than those who accept others.
Most independent photographers, journalists etc tend to use Nikon as they are virtually bomb proof.
Their newer lenses have a very sophisticated anti-shake system.

I have tried other lenses such as zeiss etc, even borrowed a £3000 zoom but unless you really look close in at the results there is little apparent improvement in quality except at the extremes of zoom. Certainly nothing to justify the massive price difference.

If you go down the Nikon route then avoid the bodies which have no AF motors. They may be smaller and sleeker but you will pay lots more for the lenses and lose flexibility in your choice of lense as well.

Best versatile lense I have found so far which gives impressive results across the entire zoom is the Nikon AF-S DX VR 18-200 F3.5~5.6 IF-ED. Approximately 27 - 300mm in 35mm terms. Half decent F stop. Not overly expensive for what you get.
I still have several Prime lenses for things like portrait and landscape work but this little beauty is a thoroughbred day to day lense which will cover most requirements very well.

One last point is that you may wish to consider a second hand unit from a Nikon dealer. You will get a warranty and pay well under the new price. For example you could get a D200 for not a lot of money which, if you ignore the megapixel ratings (which are not a good guide anyway) is a far better bet than a new D40. The more expensive 6MP camera will give a better colour balance and a greater warmth and depth to the shot than a cheap 12MP one. The sensor (cmos or ccd) may be the same but the surrounding electronics are not !
Take a look at 
www.graysofwestminster.co.uk
and
www.peterwalnes.com
There may be something there to tempt you.

Last thing, if advice is what you want stay out of places who employ spotty little oiks, D1x0ns, Je550ps etc. Unless you want a burger and fries with it that is 

Hope this helps

Dom


----------



## -ROM-

dsolds said:


> Just my 2p...
> 
> Nikon all the way. Far and away the best lenses you can get in this price bracket and imho more robust electronics as well.
> I have had so far in DSLR's:
> Fuji S1 Pro with Sigma lense
> Fuji S2 Pro with Nikon Lense
> Nikon D200 with Nikon lense (still have this)
> Fuji S3 Pro with Nikon Lense (still have this)
> And the latest addition is a Nikon D300 with another Nikon lense
> 
> Prior to digital I had several 35mm Nikon's. The main points to consider are these:
> Nikon resale values for trade in are a lot higher than Canon or Olympus etc. There are many specialist independants who only accept Nikon units as trade ins, far more than those who accept others.
> Most independent photographers, journalists etc tend to use Nikon as they are virtually bomb proof.
> Their newer lenses have a very sophisticated anti-shake system.
> 
> I have tried other lenses such as zeiss etc, even borrowed a £3000 zoom but unless you really look close in at the results there is little apparent improvement in quality except at the extremes of zoom. Certainly nothing to justify the massive price difference.
> 
> If you go down the Nikon route then avoid the bodies which have no AF motors. They may be smaller and sleeker but you will pay lots more for the lenses and lose flexibility in your choice of lense as well.
> 
> Best versatile lense I have found so far which gives impressive results across the entire zoom is the Nikon AF-S DX VR 18-200 F3.5~5.6 IF-ED. Approximately 27 - 300mm in 35mm terms. Half decent F stop. Not overly expensive for what you get.
> I still have several Prime lenses for things like portrait and landscape work but this little beauty is a thoroughbred day to day lense which will cover most requirements very well.
> 
> One last point is that you may wish to consider a second hand unit from a Nikon dealer. You will get a warranty and pay well under the new price. *For example you could get a D200 for not a lot of money which, if you ignore the megapixel ratings (which are not a good guide anyway) is a far better bet than a new D40.* The more expensive 6MP camera will give a better colour balance and a greater warmth and depth to the shot than a cheap 12MP one. The sensor (cmos or ccd) may be the same but the surrounding electronics are not !
> Take a look at
> www.graysofwestminster.co.uk
> and
> www.peterwalnes.com
> There may be something there to tempt you.
> 
> Last thing, if advice is what you want stay out of places who employ spotty little oiks, D1x0ns, Je550ps etc. Unless you want a burger and fries with it that is
> 
> Hope this helps
> 
> Dom


The D200 has a 10.2 Megapixel Sensor and the D40 has a 6MP and the D40x a 10.2, so the above sentence doesn't make much sense.


----------



## dsolds

rmorgan84 said:


> The D200 has a 10.2 Megapixel Sensor and the D40 has a 6MP and the D40x a 10.2, so the above sentence doesn't make much sense.


D100 and D1 units were 6mp. Early D200 and D2 were also 6mp. I think the D2 remained at 6mp for it's entire production life. The D3 is now the new version of this, something I have yet to try out in the real world but the specs look to be a good improvement over the D2 which, imho was the best camera ever made in the DSLR world. At over 3000 quid I shall not be trying the D3 anytime soon though.

However, the point you missed was that this is general advice and that was to ignore such megapixel specs. Fuji for example quote 12mp for the S3 Pro. But it is CCD, not CMOS and it is interpolated as well, in other words, 50% of the picture is down to the camera's best guess. So actually it can be seen as being worse than a 6MP CMOS since that will give what it sees as an output and not bother adding in guesswork for you to deal with. Incidentally, the Fuji is a Nikon body with fuji electronics in it, a good example of not simply comparing specs in isolation. Look at the whole picture.

Ask youself a question. Which unit (in the right hands) will produce better results? A 10.2mp D40 or a 3mp D1.
Q.E.D.

The precursor is also true. ANY DLSR, regardless of mp ratings will produce vastly superior results to a compact of any MP rating. It is made to a higher standard.

Then there's branding. Nikon, Hasselblad, Leica etc are head and shoulders above any of the others such as sony, olympus, canon etc. Budget cameras are budget for a reason. Premium brands are built to a standard whereas the budget ones are built to a price.

Any part of a comment, when taken in isolation, can be made to look incorrect just the same as statistics can be manipulated to support any theory. Read the whole thing and draw general information.


----------



## p1tse

i'm a newbie and got a d40. there's so much to learn.

first pic i have done without auto mode. although auto can capture sharp shots, but starting to understand or should i say feel of shutter speed and aperture and flash time a bit more, although it's trial and error alot of the time.

this was on a P setting on the d40, and i'm new to photoshop and on photoshop elements with a flashlight thing i produced this:


----------



## -ROM-

dsolds said:


> D100 and D1 units were 6mp. Early D200 and D2 were also 6mp. I think the D2 remained at 6mp for it's entire production life. The D3 is now the new version of this, something I have yet to try out in the real world but the specs look to be a good improvement over the D2 which, imho was the best camera ever made in the DSLR world. At over 3000 quid I shall not be trying the D3 anytime soon though.
> 
> However, the point you missed was that this is general advice and that was to ignore such megapixel specs. Fuji for example quote 12mp for the S3 Pro. But it is CCD, not CMOS and it is interpolated as well, in other words, 50% of the picture is down to the camera's best guess. So actually it can be seen as being worse than a 6MP CMOS since that will give what it sees as an output and not bother adding in guesswork for you to deal with. Incidentally, the Fuji is a Nikon body with fuji electronics in it, a good example of not simply comparing specs in isolation. Look at the whole picture.
> 
> Ask youself a question. Which unit (in the right hands) will produce better results? A 10.2mp D40 or a 3mp D1.
> Q.E.D.
> 
> The precursor is also true. ANY DLSR, regardless of mp ratings will produce vastly superior results to a compact of any MP rating. It is made to a higher standard.
> 
> Then there's branding. Nikon, Hasselblad, Leica etc are head and shoulders above any of the others such as sony, olympus, canon etc. Budget cameras are budget for a reason. Premium brands are built to a standard whereas the budget ones are built to a price.
> 
> Any part of a comment, when taken in isolation, can be made to look incorrect just the same as statistics can be manipulated to support any theory. Read the whole thing and draw general information.


You seem quite misinformed on this subject:

The D200 has from day one been a 10.2 megapixel camera.

The D2 range has had the following specs:

D2H - 4.1MP
D2hs - 4.1MP
D2X - 12.4MP
D2Xs - 12.4MP

There has never been a camera called a "D2" it is a range of cameras and none of the D2 range has ever been 6MP.

As far as the different brands:

Hasselblad are head and shoulders above eveyone else (in the list you stated).

Canon is just as good as Nikon (and i am a nikon user) Leica is a fantastic brand but not quite the same thing as a DSLR, think rotary vs PC, do the same job but go about it in a slightly different way.

And everyone else is the underdog.

You are correct megapixels don't count for everything but i pointed out your mistake as you had specifically said the D200 was a better camera in every way than the D40 apart from megapixels, this was a blatent mistake, hence me pointing it out for clarity, not trying to rubbish your entire post.


----------



## dsolds

rmorgan84 said:


> You seem quite misinformed on this subject:
> 
> The D200 has from day one been a 10.2 megapixel camera.
> 
> The D2 range has had the following specs:
> 
> D2H - 4.1MP
> D2hs - 4.1MP
> D2X - 12.4MP
> D2Xs - 12.4MP
> 
> There has never been a camera called a "D2" it is a range of cameras and none of the D2 range has ever been 6MP.
> 
> As far as the different brands:
> 
> Hasselblad are head and shoulders above eveyone else (in the list you stated).
> 
> Canon is just as good as Nikon (and i am a nikon user) Leica is a fantastic brand but not quite the same thing as a DSLR, think rotary vs PC, do the same job but go about it in a slightly different way.
> 
> And everyone else is the underdog.
> 
> You are correct megapixels don't count for everything but i pointed out your mistake as you had specifically said the D200 was a better camera in every way than the D40 apart from megapixels, this was a blatent mistake, hence me pointing it out for clarity, not trying to rubbish your entire post.


Well, I am willing to stand corrected on the detail, another example of checking final results rather than looking at specs in isolation. Yes the D2 was a range but predominantly the X versions were purchased by papparazi etc. Laymen like me would have opted for the basic version although I personally always had the 00 range. D100, D200 etc.

Whilst it seems we agree on the essential concepts of DSLR's I beg to differ than Canon are as good as Nikon. They may produce similar results if you are good enough to get the most out of them but the build quality is way off the mark. Just look at S/H values to confirm this. Nobody wants S/H Canons but Nikon is always in demand.

Overall though I accept your points regarding the detail (no pun intended) and that the Leica is not exactly a DSLR. I am sure it will give similar results if their 35mm record is anything to go by.

Anyway, good discussion.

Cheers

Dom


----------



## -ROM-

I think you may have a point when looking at the lower end of the Canon market, but when considering the 1D range they are bomb proof, but this is a discussion that people far better and more knowledgable in the world of photography can't agree on so you and I have little chance.


----------



## Black_Pearl

dsolds said:


> Most independent photographers, journalists etc tend to use Nikon


The vast majority, ime, use Canon (5D - 1Ds 1/2/3 /N ) bodies and L series glass. Just because .. we do....

The D2X is a great camera but it has its faults. The new D3 is a very decent body with some v. cool new features
which are mostly irrelevant to the man/woman on the street. The D3 is a class leader tho, no mistake.

At consumer/prosumer price points (with the APS-C sensors) there's not much difference between the canon/nikon bodies. 
Much of a muchness. Lens choice is as important with cameras as speaker choice is with hi-fi. Canon L glass is widely recognised 
as being the dogs danglies and having a full frame sensor behind a decent lens is why most of us use Canon bodies, with L glass.

For the casual dSLR user the choice of Nikon v Canon is usually based on marketing vs hype vs what someone heard down the pub.

Source whichever camera body you choose, as cheaply as possible (avoid the kit lens - they're usually crap) and source a decent 
walkabout lens independently. dpreview is a good starting point for kit reviews.


----------



## -ROM-

Black_Pearl said:


> The vast majority, ime, use Canon (5D - 1Ds 1/2/3 /N ) bodies and L series glass. Just because .. we do....
> 
> The D2X is a great camera but it has its faults. The new D3 is a very decent body with some v. cool new features
> which are mostly irrelevant to the man/woman on the street. The D3 is a class leader tho, no mistake.
> 
> At consumer/prosumer price points (with the APS-C sensors) there's not much difference between the canon/nikon bodies.
> Much of a muchness. Lens choice is as important with cameras as speaker choice is with hi-fi. Canon L glass is widely recognised
> as being the dogs danglies and having a full frame sensor behind a decent lens is why most of us use Canon bodies, with L glass.
> 
> For the casual dSLR user the choice of Nikon v Canon is usually based on marketing vs hype vs what someone heard down the pub.
> 
> Source whichever camera body you choose, as cheaply as possible (avoid the kit lens - they're usually crap) and source a decent
> walkabout lens independently. *dpreview is a good starting point for kit reviews*.


They were until they got bought by amazon now they are 6 months behind everyone else in the reviews, they still haven't done the D300 or D3.


----------



## Muska

thats very true, and annoying because i've found their reviews very good in the past.


----------



## Don-R

When i was looking to buy a DSLR i had the Nikon D50, Canon 350D and the pentax K10D on my shortlist. 
I was fairly happy with the pentax, but looking into lenses and found them harder to get hold of and just as pricey as the two top brands. Once i held the 350D it was knocked straight off my list as it felt like a cheap piece of plastic and the standard lenses are not worth buying. also it was not stable...I.E. it did not feel weighted right, i then got to see what it was like with the battery grip attatched which made it better, but i don't need one of these. In the end i chose the Nikon and have been very happy with it. Purchased it with the 18-70mm lens and treated myself to the 70-300mm VR lens as an early christmas present to myself.

I work for a photographic retailer.....and no it isn't Jessops. It's mainly internet based and located in Norwich (WEX) 
Whenever someone phones for advice on what to buy i tell them to handle them first, it's no good just looking at specs. Decide what you want the camera to do, reading forums, write ups and then making a shortlist. Once that has been done then find your nearest shop to handle them.
Then l personally always check the net for the best price, making sure it is genuine UK stock so you don't have to worry about warranty problems should anything go wrong.

I get a lot of thanks for that advice and not trying to sell them whatever i think is flavour of the Month!!!

I must say though since my purchase i have now had the chance to play around with the Olympus E510 when it was launched in 07. What a cracking little camera too.....Live view, IS built into the body and sensor clean on start up. Glad to see these being added onto other manufacturers cameras now.


----------



## Matt T

dsolds said:


> Nobody wants S/H Canons but Nikon is always in demand.


You obviously only frequent Nikon forums then, Canon stuff is plenty in demand, especially L glass and 1D bodies, just look at the proportion of pros who use Canon over Nikon.

Everyone will have their preferred choice, some 'fanatically' so, however the best advice in this thread is to go out and try some, and get the one _you _like best.


----------

