Posted: 4/3/2008 4:44:09 PM EDT
|
I'm looking to buy my first DSLR and I think I've got it narrowed to these suspects. Which would you guys choose? I was leaning towards the Nikon at first but it doesn't have RAW+JPEG mode and I've heard that is the one to use if you want to get deep into tweaking. I'm open to suggestions. My usual shots are portraits and landscape. Thanks! |
|
I voted Nikon, but that is because I have been shooting Nikon for 20 years, and have a collection of lenses and accessories. I would hesitate to buy anything other than Nikon or Canon for optics reasons. The CCD in the Nikon is actually a Sony CCD, but Nikon has a much better grasp on metering in my opinion. Also, if you go Nikon or Canon, as you buy lenses, you can grow a LOT, and then upgrade the camera and maintain the system you have already built around it. I think the Nikon-Canon difference is so small as to be a personal feel question. Handle and play with them both. shooter |
|
I am surprised the D60 doesn't have RAW+JPEG, because the older Nikon DSLRs do. But, I never use it. I tend to shoot in JPEG-fine mode most of the time, because I am not too into tweaking (I am old school film, when you had to do it BEFORE you fired the shot). shooter |
Thing is, you're STILL tweaking...you're just letting the tiny computer in the camera do the tweaking instead of controlling it yourself. |
Should have said I am not too into photoshop (haven't really taken the time to learn it well). I obviously tweak, but I prefer to do it in the field with the camera (as in, exposure control), than at the computer at home. Some pictures inevitably get PS'd later, but I am pretty light-handed with post-processing. shooter |
My point is, the RAW image that you get when you take a photo in RAW is all the data that was taken in by the sensor, and it's not sharpened or post-processed in any way. In any DSLR, the anti-aliasing filter will soften the image somewhat, so it requires post-processing. When you set your camera to take JPEGs, the camera's onboard computer automatically adjust the levels, brightness/contrast and sharpness of the image according to the parameters set into it. Usually those are okay, but many times they are not what you were trying to capture or how you would have done it. |
Even Ansel Adams said that his work was more reflective of what he did in the darkroom than anything he did on site. Post-processing is just easier with a dSLR 
|
|
Get the D80 instead. The D60 is a little limiting, IMO. All images get converted from RAW to JPEG at some point. In camera conversion is very good, and at least with the higher end cameras, you can customize the amount of contrast, sharpening, and saturation that you use. I have found it to be good enough that I only rarely use RAW. Using 100% RAW would create a lot of overhead work, time, and storage that would give little gain. I am in a minority here, I know. YMMV. I switch to RAW+JPEG mode when I am doing a photo project for someone. I have also played around with overexposed High ISO RAW images, and had some success. |
No, not really. I store all my post-processed "arty" pics (landscapes, portraits, wildlife pics...everything except snapshots) in lossless .TIF format. |
Well, true.  I meant that I convert then all... |
| GO to the EE under "Everything Else" There is a HELL of a deal on an XTi body for $425 shipped. Do this, and then order the 18-55 IS lens for $175 from B&H. Or if funds are low, I'll sell you my kit lens 18-55 NON IS for $50/$60 shipped. You will be in a like new XTI for under $500! This same set up cost me $900 with tax last fall. |
| Nice choice. Nikons are better IMO. They feel better in my hands, and are a lot easier to use. Plus, the battery life on my D70 is unbelieveable. I can take at least 1500 shots before the battery goes down a notch. Even using a active VR lens it doesn't drain much. I run out of memory card space before the battery dies. |
My stepdad just bought a Rebel a few weekends ago and I got a chance to play around with it some. I liked it but after reading a few more reviews on the Nikon I decided to go with it. It just got done charging so I'm going to take it outside and see what I can get. |
Nikons are nice, but I am wondering why specifically the D60? If I was going to buy a Nikon at that level, I would get the D80, or splurge a bit more and get the D200, which is a hell of a camera. The D60 seems a bit limited to me. |
|
I agree with this guy's advice: www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm |
Only problem is that he's very Nikon biased. His reviews run the gamut from excellent to absurd. Unfortuneately, most amatuers can't tell the difference. |
He correctly states that Canon makes the best of the point and shoot cameras, says that Canon dominates the high end, and says that the Canon 5D is as good or better than the much more expensive Nikon D3. He says that the Nikon is more comfortable in his hands and that he prefers the Nikons for carrying around and for more action based shooting. Some of his other reviews may be questionable but I'm not seeing anything to disagree with so far as the recommendations he makes on that page. |
|
I'd vote, but you don't have the Nikon D80. That's what I use with a Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. Excellent camera. Exact same as the D200, with two main notable differences: The frames are different and the shutter speed is different (3fps v. 5fps). That's it. Depending on your budget, the new D300 is out - I plan on upgrading later. I've shot Nikon for the past 6 years, since I became a more serious photographer. I've shot with Canon, Kodak, Pentax, and Minolta. I love Nikon. I recommend the D80, the price just keeps dropping. Oh, and it has RAW+JPG. 
|
Ken Rockwell is an idiot. |
|
Here is one example of why a lot of people don't like Ken Rockwell: For years he had a review of the Nikon AF 50mm f/1.4D. Without ever owning one, or trying one, he lambasted it as overpriced Chinese junk, and exhorted everyone to refuse to buy it. Now, it is one of his favorite lenses.  This is just one example, and there are others. If you are educated about what you are reading, and willing to seperate the wheat from the chaff, Ken has some good stuff. He should not be taken as gospel however. Another example: He constantly rags on "pixel peepers", those who look closer than the typical 5x7 size and notice imperfections, but then he raves about the ability of the D300 to remove color fringing at the edges of a wide angle lens.  As with getting advice from ANYONE, it is best if you educate yourself as much as you can, and determine the things that are important to YOU before reading reviews. |
I absolutely LOVE my D300. I've been shooting with it for a couple of months and I'm still amazed at its capabilities, especially in low light. If I were buying a backup body, it would be another D300.
|
I've heard great things. Unfortunately, after buying my 18-200mm VR lens, a new flash, and some other goodies for the D80, I've used up my photography budget for the next few months. The D300 is next, because I like low-light photos. That and I have dead pixels on my D80 now...
|
When I get home, I'll post a few pics that I took at ISO3200, under some pretty poor stage lights, all hand held using an 18-200 VR. BTW, Torf, I think I've decided to keep the 18-200. 
|
If you like low light photos, get a fast lens. The 18-200 is not terribly fast unfortunately, which is it's biggest drawback. For less than $130 you can find a Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8D, it will give you dramatically more light to work with. Other fast lenses are the 35mm f/2 @ $270, 50mm f/1.4 @ $270, or the 85mm f/1.8 for around $400 or so. As gus said, the 18-200 can be used effectively in many situations, but sometimes you just want a big light hole! |
I found the VR to be as helpful in the place I was as more light would have been, especially since I was shooting off hand. I also used my 50 f1.4 a good bit, but the versatility of the zoom lens won out overall. I'd like to have something in an 18-120mm F2.8 (or even faster) with VR. The place I shoot at has a house lighting system that is fine for watching a show but murder for taking pics (too small/not enough friggin lights). I may look into a monopod for the next show (which will be former Beatles drummer Pete Best). |
|
It's the unfortunate trade off with my 18-200mm. It's slower, but I've got an "all-in-one" lens for daily shooting, and I've got the VR. It's the best solution I've got right now. At some point I'll add more lenses to my collection, but the VR helps make up for the slow speed of the 18-200mm. Thanks for the recommendations though!
|