To upgrade or not to upgrade....?

[britonk]

Hi,

Not been on here in a while. I am looking for a little advice. I have a Nikon D50 and love it to bits.

Unfortunately I was a little disappointed the other day after taking some shots of my extended family I wanted to crop a picture and have it printed quite large but couldn't because the image was too small. I had to artificially up scale the photo to get the on-line photo printing company to print it.

I thought getting a higher megapixel camera might help address this. I was looking at the D60 but I have read mixed reviews and a lot people tend to prefer the D50.

Would I be making a mistake "upgrading" to the D60? Has anyone used both cameras?

Thanks,

Brian

 

[benhasajeep]

What lenses do you have with your D50? That would be my first question. If you have AF-I or AF-S lenses then you will be fine. If you have older D type AF lenses they will not AF on the D60.

I think the D60 will have some added upgrades over the D50 in just more than pixel count. But I would highly suggest you step up to the D90. I know it's a couple hundred more. But it is that much better. And you can keep using or buy the older AF lenses and get full use from them. A D60 is a good first camera, and is a step up from D50. But I think for the money. D90 even though more expensive. Dollar for dollar I think it's a much better choice.

BTW I have a D50, D40X (D60 from year before), and D300's.

 

[Don Simon]

Higher pixel count aside, the D60 doesn't really offer much over the D50, and has the disadvantage that you can only autofocus with AF-S lenses. As a first dSLR the D60 is excellent, but I can't see the appeal for a D50 owner. I agree with Ben that you'd be better off getting a more significant upgrade by going to the D90 - or if the 90 is too expensive, the D80 which continues to drop in price. In fact, barely used D80s can be had cheaper than a new D60!

 

[britonk]

Thanks guys - advice much appreciated. Think I will leave the D60 for now then. D80 is a bit pricey I think. How does it compare size wise to the D50? I don't really want my camera to be much bigger.

I only have two lenses but they are both AF driven by the camera so I would need to use the D60 kit lens and buy new lenses.

 

[benhasajeep]

I would hold out for the D90 in your situation. Why spend money on a kit lens when you have decent lenses in the first place. I know they are not that much. But again that little bit helps. With a D90 you would only need a new body! As for D80's some bodies can be had for what a D60 and kit lens goes for. If it were me though. I would still wait it out for D90.

Have a safe new years

 

[ann]

why not check to see what file size your using before switching cameras.

perhaps you have the option set for the lowest quality image.

 

[britonk]

Hi Ann,

No already checked that. Afraid it is on fine already. Only higher setting is to shoot RAW and that isn't going to improve the resolution. Until I can afford a D80 or D90 looks like I am just going to have to make sure I get closer to the subject and / or use optical zoom more.

Cheers

 

[JerryPH]

Actually, shooting in RAW will make a difference, but if it would be significant enough for your needs, that depends.

If you were borderline, RAW would have helped. If you are cropping 90% of out a pic and want to make a 20X30 out of it, 25MP is not enough...lol.

 

[britonk]

Very true... what I meant by shooting RAW wouldn't help is that it wouldn't make the image physically bigger but I take it you are referring to the post-capture processing being a lot more versatile?

In this particular case I was cropping out about 60% of the original shot and wanted to print to 9X6"

So I would have thought a 6MP shot would have been enough but the man from photo-printing site - he say no