Digital Camera: Get the best lens or get the best camera?
I am *finally* in the market for a digital SLR and I need help. I hesitate to post to a photo forum, cause they might get too technical for me. Besides, I trust Apple folks more...
I have been a NIkon person for years, but I think this question is general:
Do I spend the $$ to get a decent SLR (I'm thinking the D80, 10MP for 1K$) and a kit lens of 18-135mm?
Or do I spend big $$ on a VR (vibration reduction) 18-200 lense that everyone raves about($750) and settle for the D40 camera body (only 6MP)?
Either way I am spending about $1200-1300.
I had been thinking to get the good camera body and update the lens as I saved money (hopefully) in the future, but as I look into things, I get the feeling that a good lens is a good lens, while a good camera body is out of date in a few years.
I have a decent point and shoot 5MP Nikon and part of me would hate to spend serious $$ to end up with only one more MP even though I know that there would be no comparison between a 3 year old point and shoot with one second shutter lag and a 6MP SLR with a 10X VR lens.
I would appreciate feedback even though my newbie question may make me not look worthy of a real camera...
I have been a NIkon person for years, but I think this question is general:
Do I spend the $$ to get a decent SLR (I'm thinking the D80, 10MP for 1K$) and a kit lens of 18-135mm?
Or do I spend big $$ on a VR (vibration reduction) 18-200 lense that everyone raves about($750) and settle for the D40 camera body (only 6MP)?
Either way I am spending about $1200-1300.
I had been thinking to get the good camera body and update the lens as I saved money (hopefully) in the future, but as I look into things, I get the feeling that a good lens is a good lens, while a good camera body is out of date in a few years.
I have a decent point and shoot 5MP Nikon and part of me would hate to spend serious $$ to end up with only one more MP even though I know that there would be no comparison between a 3 year old point and shoot with one second shutter lag and a 6MP SLR with a 10X VR lens.
I would appreciate feedback even though my newbie question may make me not look worthy of a real camera...
Comments
I'd still check out photo forums as they live and breathe this stuff like people here live and breathe Apple. The two photo sites I like are www.dpreview.com and www.robgalbraith.com .
As long as you're sure you want to stick with Nikkor glass I'd go with the better lens. The sharper lens will take the better picture, no matter if it's a 6MP or 10MP picture. Like you said, you'll be updating the digital back down the road anyway.
I'd still check out photo forums as they live and breathe this stuff like people here live and breathe Apple. The two photo sites I like are www.dpreview.com and www.robgalbraith.com .
I have both the D80, the kit lens, and the 18-200mm lens. The 18-200mm lens is very nice, but I would recommend you getting the D80 with the kit lens. The kit lens has fairly good quality and is fairly fast at auto focus. You don't really need vibration reduction if you have a stead hand or if you are not shooting telephoto. I've held the D40, and it feels slightly small, cheap, and awkward. I would definitely buy the D80 with the kit lens if I were you. And btw, 10MP makes a big difference over 6. As you get higher into the megapixels it makes less difference because you have to quadruple the megapixels to double the resolution.
Good luck.
I'd go for the best lens.
No!
You are wasting the quality of the lens with the cheaper camera. Something is only as strong as the weakest link, and in my opinion, the D40 is a weaker link than the kit lens. If you get the D80, the technology will last longer, and should you decide to get the expensive lens later, there will be no money lost. You can't get the cheap camera with the expensive lens and decide to get the expensive camera later, because then you will have two cameras.
GET THE D80 with the kits. Decide later if you want the 18-200mm.
Also, I'll warn you, the 18-200mm lens is out of stock EVERYWHERE except large retailers like circuit city who are charging $899.
You'll be sorely disappointed if you settle for something as tiny as 6megapixels at the moment.
A Panasonic Lumix with a superb Leica lens and 10.2MP is way cheaper and higher grade optically than a cheaper zoom lens (that's for convenience).
The difference with digital compared to film is, once you have a superb optical set-up in film, you can switch film for finer or faster results using the advantages of film. Raw mode shoots in digicams are not great and require post-processing work; in-built computer algorithms aren't exactly great.
If you're in it for a decent carry about camera with great potential, The Lumix LX2 is worth a look at a fraction of what you're talking about and also has vibration reduction.
The problem with digital camera lenses is the birefringence/colour fringing and moire effects from the digital sensors - Nikon aren't exactly experts at codifying this problem although theyare no worse than the crop of the bunch.
By the way - my mobile phone has 3.2MP - not far to catch up with your 5MP....
Save up and get the new digital Hasselblad :P (not that it's affordable)!
Bagel -
You'll be sorely disappointed if you settle for something as tiny as 6megapixels at the moment.
A Panasonic Lumix with a superb Leica lens and 10.2MP is way cheaper and higher grade optically than a cheaper zoom lens (that's for convenience).
That's cute, except that if I'm not mistaken, there are no Panasonic Lumix DSLRs.
(edit) Turns out they have one.
As in: one.
Perhaps they're testing the waters and such, but they certainly aren't any worthwhile contender in the market.
Also, I'll warn you, the 18-200mm lens is out of stock EVERYWHERE except large retailers like circuit city who are charging $899.
Yeah, I've noticed. I do have some Nikon glass from my old regular film setup (sadly gathering dust) that I could use while waiting--if i decide to go that route.
Bagel -
The problem with digital camera lenses is the birefringence/colour fringing and moire effects from the digital sensors - Nikon aren't exactly experts at codifying this problem although theyare no worse than the crop of the bunch.
Ummm, this is why I didn't ask my question at dphotoreview--I dont ken the lingo. Are you speaking specifically to the VR lenses, or all lenses for digital cameras in general? If it is a general thing, then it may be beyond my perception.
By the way - my mobile phone has 3.2MP - not far to catch up with your 5MP....
Yeah, that is what I am trying to remedy! Thanks for rubbbing it in, though!
I have both the D80, the kit lens, and the 18-200mm lens. The 18-200mm lens is very nice, but I would recommend you getting the D80 with the kit lens. The kit lens has fairly good quality and is fairly fast at auto focus. You don't really need vibration reduction if you have a stead hand or if you are not shooting telephoto. I've held the D40, and it feels slightly small, cheap, and awkward. I would definitely buy the D80 with the kit lens if I were you. And btw, 10MP makes a big difference over 6. As you get higher into the megapixels it makes less difference because you have to quadruple the megapixels to double the resolution.
Good luck.
IC,
Thanks for the POV. You seem to be reinforcing my initial impressions. Two questions:
Is your 18-200 the VR?
You say that the VR only benefits telephoto shooting--would it not help in low light (under a forrest canopy or indoor/non flash) situations?
Cheers
IC,
Thanks for the POV. You seem to be reinforcing my initial impressions. Two questions:
Is your 18-200 the VR?
You say that the VR only benefits telephoto shooting--would it not help in low light (under a forrest canopy or indoor/non flash) situations?
I have the 18-200 VR. While the VR does help to a certain extent, it doesn't make enough of a difference to justify you buying it with a cheaper camera. With low light setting, hand shake is hand shake; the VR can only help so much. I've had no problems taking low-light photos with the kit lens without shake - all it takes is getting used to taking steady photos -- and I can tell you, it's a hell of a lot easier with a heavier, more ergonomic camera like the D80. The D80 feels very comfortable in the hands; the D40 does not. If in a year or so you decide you have enough money to get the 18-200mm lens, it is an excellent lens. But for know I'd go with the D80 and the kit lens.
I have a D50 but I would probably have gone for a D40 if it was on the market when I bought mine. If you go for the more expensive camera you will be getting more control over your pictures, and you can always buy the better lens later. It depends how much you really need or want.
This is the summary of advice as I see it:
Camera People: The D80 is noticably superior to the D40 in feel, construction and obviously megapixels.
I can always upgrade the lens when I have the $$ in the future--especially if I see that I need it and am using it.
Bottom line: best upgrade now for the $$ I have to spend.
Lens People: Lenses last. A really nice lens will enhance several camera cycles.
Cameras, on the other hand, are in a state of flux. Today's mid range SLR will be outclassed in a year or two by the low range SLR. Therefore, if I spend on the camera and defer the lens, in two years I will want not only a nice lens, but also a new camera (with 27 megapixels, holographic cube storage and 35 frames per second)...
It depends how much you really need or want.
This, in the end, is my problem. I don't really NEED anything. And I WANT everything.
D*mn. I still can't decide...
I'd go with the D80. People are right when they say that good glass lasts forever but I'd certainly want to start with a camera that will allow me to grow and then acquire the better glass when I know for sure what lens/lenses will best meet my needs.
OK, I am itching to spend some money (that I hope I will have when the credit card bill comes) and get a camera soon.
This is the summary of advice as I see it:
Camera People: The D80 is noticably superior to the D40 in feel, construction and obviously megapixels.
I can always upgrade the lens when I have the $$ in the future--especially if I see that I need it and am using it.
Bottom line: best upgrade now for the $$ I have to spend.
Lens People: Lenses last. A really nice lens will enhance several camera cycles.
Cameras, on the other hand, are in a state of flux. Today's mid range SLR will be outclassed in a year or two by the low range SLR. Therefore, if I spend on the camera and defer the lens, in two years I will want not only a nice lens, but also a new camera (with 27 megapixels, holographic cube storage and 35 frames per second)...
This, in the end, is my problem. I don't really NEED anything. And I WANT everything.
D*mn. I still can't decide...
The DSLR market slowing down in terms of improvements. Remember that in order to double resolution, you have to quadruple Megapixels. So too double resolution of a 10MP camera, you would need a 40MP camera. And then there comes to storing such images. Image can't be hundreds of megabytes per image. Really I don't see major technological improvements in dSLRs anymore; just the gradual improvement as well as some bells and whistles.
Remember, it is much easier to upgrade to a better lens than to upgrade to a better camera. Keep in mind, in the scenario that you get the D80 with the kit lens, if you decide to get the 18-200mm lens later, you haven't wasted any money because you will probably still use the kit lens for some things. Or even if you don't use the kit lens, thats still only ~$100 you loose. If you get the D40 with the 18-200mm lens, you don't have the option to upgrade the camera to the D80 or you will be stuck with two cameras.
And btw -- if your old film Nikkor lenses were made after ~1978 and are "AF" or newer, you can use them with your new Nikon dSLR.
Also, the D40 camera will be really front-heavy with the 18-200mm lens attached, and that might make taking photos uncomfortable.
I'd go with the D80. People are right when they say that good glass lasts forever but I'd certainly want to start with a camera that will allow me to grow and then acquire the better glass when I know for sure what lens/lenses will best meet my needs.
Yes!
I'd go with the D80. People are right when they say that good glass lasts forever but I'd certainly want to start with a camera that will allow me to grow and then acquire the better glass when I know for sure what lens/lenses will best meet my needs.
OK Old C, you helped to tip the scales with IC and brought me back to the D80--my original plan. I do think that I would have questioned myself with the D40, and I don't want to have questions after spending lots.
Now I am excited. I am quite certain that I will be thrilled with the D80. I can't wait to get it!
Thanks for everyone's advice.
One last question: how does a VR lens work? Does it shorten the lifespan of the lens? Does it take power? I'm sure that this is my last question.
OK Old C, you helped to tip the scales with IC and brought me back to the D80--my original plan. I do think that I would have questioned myself with the D40, and I don't want to have questions after spending lots.
Now I am excited. I am quite certain that I will be thrilled with the D80. I can't wait to get it!
Thanks for everyone's advice.
One last question: how does a VR lense work? Does it shorten the lifespan of the lense? Does it take power? I'm sure that this is my last question.
"The [VR] system comprises of a suspended lens element that is positioned according to data from gyroscopic sensors and that compensates for accidental vertical or horizontal movement during slow shutter exposures. The Nikon VR system can also detect deliberate movement - such as panning - automatically. Exposures with three or more stops slower shutter speed compared to a lens without VR can be achieved depending on shooting conditions and the technique of individual photographers.
This VR performance can be applied in a choice of two modes to suit shooting conditions. Normal mode is ideal for common shooting conditions, including panning or when using a tripod, whilst Active mode is designed to compensate for specific shake caused when shooting at slow shutter speeds from moving platforms such as cars or aircraft."
Some estimate you loose 40% of the cameras total battery power in one charge cycle due to the use of the VR lens.
To my knowledge, VR does not detract from the longevity of the lens.