[UdubBadger]

canon FTW

[Vudoo4u2]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

canon FTW

:-D +1

my stuff is coming this week!

[TWiTCHY]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

...friends don't let friends shoot Nikon.

Wish I would've known you BEFORE I bought the D60

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

...friends don't let friends shoot Nikon.

My first nominee for the most ignorant post of 2009.

[TWiTCHY]

Originally Posted by TurboFan

My first nominee for the most ignorant post of 2009.

[Carrera RSR]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

...friends don't let friends shoot Nikon.

Originally Posted by TurboFan

My first nominee for the most ignorant post of 2009.

I was thinking the exact same thing and decided not say anything

[TWiTCHY]

Alright so in a day or two I will be putting my D60 body up for sale, and then I will order a D90 body, using the money I will get from the D60 as well as the money I got for selling my Xbox 360 (pssh, video games :P ). The reason I avoided the D200 was because it's older, and the D90 is based off of the newer D300 which seceded the D200. While the D200 is about $100 cheaper and has a magnesium body, I feel like in technology, if you go outdated, you stay outdated, and going with the new is the only way to go.

[kuvesh]

i just upgraded from the d60 to the d90 and I am very happy with my choice. I am still a novice so it works for me but if you are a more serious photographer maybe the d200 is a better option.

[TWiTCHY]

Why do you say that? Is there something about the D90 that seems...limiting?

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by TWiTCHY

Alright so in a day or two I will be putting my D60 body up for sale, and then I will order a D90 body, using the money I will get from the D60 as well as the money I got for selling my Xbox 360 (pssh, video games :P ). The reason I avoided the D200 was because it's older, and the D90 is based off of the newer D300 which seceded the D200. While the D200 is about $100 cheaper and has a magnesium body, I feel like in technology, if you go outdated, you stay outdated, and going with the new is the only way to go.

There are a few things to consider here.

1. It's a little bit the fiddle, but much more who holds the bow. My point being, you don't need the technology to take great pics, you just need to learn how.

2. The gasketed Mg body of the D200 is kinda nice if you take your camera out in the elements frequently. They will last much longer than the plastic chassis cameras from either Nikon or Canon.

3. The D200 will handle very differently than the D90. Buy the one that is more comfortable. Also be sure to compare the interface of the D90 and D200. That is probably the next most important decision, after how the camera handles for you.

4. I do admit that the D90 has a better imaging system, but I can also tell you that 90%+ of photographers will yield nothing from it over the D200. Or even the D70 for that matter.


To put it in car terms, the megapixels and imaging tech hoopla, af sensors, etc. is kinda like having a car that will run a 10 sec 1/4 mile stock. Sure its great, but compared to a car that will do it in 12 sec stock, for real world applications, what starts to matter? Handling, how it feels, how it works, etc. If the only thing that made a difference was the 1/4 mile time, we'd all drive STi's.

That said, I'll probably upgrade to the first 20+ megapixel camera that Nikon makes in an FX format for less than $3500, but I also print my pictures 4 feet wide. I just got 3 new images back tonight, and I can see where the extra megapixels would help me. For an 8x10 or even a 16x20, my old D100 makes just as good an image as my D200.

[TWiTCHY]

Thanks for your comments, Turbo.

But about skill vs. tech, I fully agree with that, but not when the tech limits you from taking specific types of images. The reason I wanted the D90 was because of its compatibility with the 50mm AF lens. On the D60, it's manual focus, which takes time and results in the loss of many photo ops. I refuse to take the time to learn and perfect the arts of turning a dial, and believe it is more of a technical issue than a skill. Secondly, the D60's noise control is awful, which leads to many people to purchase a dedicated flash unit. Thirdly, the D60 will not command a flash wirelessly. You are forced to to use it on-camera. Fourthly, the Mg body and weather-sealing will really help when the rain comes down in the PNW. Fifthly, for my style of shooting, AEB will help me get true HDR images, while the D60 does not offer any type of AEB.

Of course, the D60 can do all that by pouring some money on it (Buying the $450 AF-S 50mm, the radiopopper for wireless flash triggering, a plastic cover to protect from rain, and an insanely stable tripod to take consistent images for HDR. I've decided to use the money on a new camera instead of those items...

[TurboFan]

I absolutely agree with your comments about the D60. I wasn't even considering that camera in my comments. I probably wouldn't spend money on an entry level DSLR, because in those cases, the tech is far below what even a basic film camera and scanner can do, and would be a step backward for me.

I was only commenting on the D90 vs the D200.

[TWiTCHY]

I see why many people go Canon, now - they're not as harsh on their entry-level consumers as Nikon is with their D40/D60.

[SixDegrees]

Originally Posted by TWiTCHY

I see why many people go Canon, now - they're not as harsh on their entry-level consumers as Nikon is with their D40/D60.

While Canon have more features on their entry level DSLRs, I've shot with both an Nikon feel better built, more solid and complete.

The lack of AF in the body is the real let down for the 40/60 otherwise Nikon have the edge in the low and mid range DSLRs. Its when you get into the top-o-the-range that Cannon have some serious competion to Nikon and can show them the way with some of their models.

Plus, at entry level Nikon kits lenses wipe the floor with Canon. Haven't seen a good review of a Canon kit lens yet, where-as a coupple of Nikon kit lenses have rated quite well.

But as per the comments above, its all academic as the mega pixles and technlogy are much use unless you know what you're doing and so these cameras are more an intro to DSLR photpgraphy, and once you're up and running you'll want to upgrade.

Thing to remember is that if you invest in quality glass, flash and other brand specific components you're locked into that brand.

If you jump from a D60 (say) with kit lens to a D300 you don't really want to put the kit lens on that body you want to invest in better glass. So, at that point you couldf jump to Canon as you invest in just a D60 and 1 lens don't really stop you switching. Moving to a D90 you're likely to keep the lens and you're now beginning to get locked in.

[TWiTCHY]

Heh, funny thing you mentioned the D300. I figured that if I went with the D300, I wouldn't need to upgrade bodies, ever. I don't need full-frame, and I really don't want to pay for full-frame lenses. The D300 has everything I want in it, and then some!