The vintage old age debate?

[iWaller]

Hey, I'm coming from an Olympus Pen EP1 (kit lens). And feel it is time for me to invest into a dslr, however I feel the entry level models from both canon and Nikon are too entry level =/. And I most certainly cannot afford the current prosumer range. Therefore I have sourced several past generation prosumer models for around the same price. They are as follows

D200 - £310
D80 - £295
40D - £320

I'm tilted away from the D80, due to my friend commenting on how much he wanted the D200, but does the performance justify the small price difference.

Obviously these prices are body only, so would need at least one lens, if you could suggest a good all purpose lens under £200 - it would help greatly

[Ads]

[KmH]

The Nikon D80 is an entry-level DSLR (plastic chassis).

I would recommend the D200 over the D80, because the D200 is a prosumer (magnesium alloy chassis, more external controls, more accessory ports, etc) level Nikon.

There is no such animal as a good general purpose lens. That's why DSLR cameras allow for changing lenses.

However, I often kept the Nikon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR AF-S Nikkor Lens on my camera when I was out and about and might need to make a few quick shots. The lens also has a handy 1:2 macro capability from 35 mm to 85 mm for close focusing. A used copy of that lens may well be available in your price range.

[cgipson1]

With that budget the 18-105mm (I believe Canon has the same, or at least alike) kit lens is a nice general purpose lens.

Of course, in your feet I would get the 35mm DX again. Cheap, reasonably well built, and pretty much already maxes out your camera in respect to picure quality.

You would already have to know you can live with only a prime lens and zoom with only your feet, though.

I would stay away from the 35mm DX.. massive purple fringing CA... although it is pretty sharp!

[Solarflare]

That poll is btw not very useful. Nikonists like myself will vote D200, Canonists will vote EOS 40D. You basically have to decide which system you like more.


P.s.: LOL cgipson1 ! I deleted that posting because I thought its too redundant !

[cgipson1]

Of that lineup, the D200 would be your best bet, IMO! Grab a decent lens in the range you want.. and you are set!

[bhop]

I would stay away from the 35mm DX.. massive purple fringing CA... although it is pretty sharp!

It's not that bad in actual use IMO.. I mean, it's there, but it's fixable, which for me anyway, is an acceptable trade-off for all the other qualities of the lens.

[cgipson1]

I would stay away from the 35mm DX.. massive purple fringing CA... although it is pretty sharp!

It's not that bad in actual use IMO.. I mean, it's there, but it's fixable, which for me anyway, is an acceptable trade-off for all the other qualities of the lens.

Yea.. it is fixable.. I had one for a while! (now my girlfriend has it, but she doesn't know what CA is.. so it doesn't matter!). I just prefer lenses that don't have things built in that need fixing, if you know what I mean! lol!

[bhop]

Yea.. it is fixable.. I had one for a while! (now my girlfriend has it, but she doesn't know what CA is.. so it doesn't matter!). I just prefer lenses that don't have things built in that need fixing, if you know what I mean! lol!

Understandable

[Andretoo]

I'm so excited.

[Solarflare]

Yea.. it is fixable.. I had one for a while! (now my girlfriend has it, but she doesn't know what CA is.. so it doesn't matter!). I just prefer lenses that don't have things built in that need fixing, if you know what I mean! lol!

Right now I dont even have a way of seeing the chromatic aberrations at all. The camera fixes them automatically in the jpegs, and Nikons RAW converter does the same for the raw files. And I dont have anything like Photoshop etc. Not yet, anyway.

[Derrel]

40D is nice. Good value on those bodies. Canon sold a zillion of the 40D. ALso, for the on-a-budget guy or gal, the 40D works pretty slick with adapters and other-brand lenses, like say, M42 thread-mount Super-Takumars from Asahi or Pentax. Like, f'rinstance, I picked up an M42 mount 55mm f/2 Asahi-Pentax Super Takumar lens with a set of Vivitar Series 1 thread mount extension tubes at Goodwill last month for the whopping price of $9.99. I tried it out on my 20D with the 20mm tube and an electronic flash and some watermelon slices...wonderful "look" created by the 55/2 lens...surprisinglyu decent with an EXTENSION TUBE! And...the best part? The lens and the tubes cost me less than ten dollars! As a normal lens for longer-range work, the 55/2 is sharp, yes, but it's kind of difficult to focus, actually. Now...if my camera only had live view...I think critically focusing the 55/2 lens would be much easier!

Canon is ***the brand*** to go with if one wants to use low-cost, off-list lenses via adapters...it is far,far and away the BEST brand for use with other-mount lenses on adapters. Unmatched.

[digital flower]

Still love my wife's D80. Great Camera.

[cgipson1]

Yea.. it is fixable.. I had one for a while! (now my girlfriend has it, but she doesn't know what CA is.. so it doesn't matter!). I just prefer lenses that don't have things built in that need fixing, if you know what I mean! lol!

Right now I dont even have a way of seeing the chromatic aberrations at all. The camera fixes them automatically in the jpegs, and Nikons RAW converter does the same for the raw files. And I dont have anything like Photoshop etc. Not yet, anyway.

Makes me wonder what else all that Automated "fixing" is doing... that might not be improving improving your images. I prefer to let the camera take the image with as little other processing as possible. Then I make the decisions as to what I want done in the image! Automation can be wonderful... but sometimes it will bite you.

[usayit]

Personally,

* I would keep the E-P1 and its kit lens
* Get either an Olympus E-PL3, E-Pl2 or Panasonic G3 (body only if you wish). Which one depends on whether in body IS, built-in EVF and size/layout is important to you.
* Two bodies... backups of each other.
* All three of those suggestions are on par with any of the three DSLRs you mention in terms of quality.

Primes that have the best bang of the buck:

Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 (28mm equiv FF) - $300 USD. There are some that have found this lens at under $200 USD on the used market
Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 (40mm equiv FF) - $360 USD. I got mine for $300 USD used.
Olympus 45mm f/1.8 - (90mm equiv FF) - $400 USD. The samples and reviews were so good that I purchased this one new..

In my observation (I collect and shoot adapted vintage manual lenses), most people who go the path of shooting manual focus, manual aperture, adapted lenses for the sake of budget usually walk away disappointed. Those that are happy with manual focus vintage do so because they have a specific interest in those lenses or shooting manually. If you do decide this is your route, short flange distances of the Micro 4/3 is a huge advantage (along with most mirrorless cameras including Sony NEX) due to the short flange distance.

The upgrade path from those "best bang for the buck" lenses is pretty rich with options as both Voigtlander, Sigma, Tamron, Panasonic, Olympus are now competing in optics for micro 4/3. Including the Olympus 12mm f/2, Olympus 75mm f/1.8, Panasonic Leica 45mm macro, Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4, Voigtlander 50mm f/0.95, and Panasonic's recent announcement of two high speed zooms; wide and telephoto with f/2.8 apertures. That's not a complete list either.



Furthermore, I find the differences between so called entry level DSLRs and Prosumers nominal and mostly driven by marketing.... so I would be skeptical if you are writing off "entry level" cameras so easily. I have yet to help any entry to hobby photographer that, in my opinion, legitimately would find an entry level camera "limiting" to the point that they should not be considered.