Which camera is better and why?

crawdaddio · Dec 5, 2005

Hi all, new to the forum here. I used to be into photography when I was younger and I'm trying to get back into film. Great forum, very informative. First question: I'm going to buy a Nikon (under 500 w/lens), which would you recommend and why?

This:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=215044&is=GREY&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

Or:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=284409&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

Or:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=271263&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

What is the difference between the F and the N series? I'm looking for a well rounded camera for artistic, portrait, close-up, landscape shots, etc....I also intend on getting a nice telephoto lens as well, but I'll leave that question for another time.. Any help on what makes these models different/better/worse would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
~DC

KevinR · Dec 5, 2005

The N series is the US market, everywhere else is the F. So no diff in the F80 to the N80 except warrenty. If you have the money, get the N80. It's nice camera.

crawdaddio · Dec 5, 2005

KevinR said:
The N series is the US market, everywhere else is the F. So no diff in the F80 to the N80 except warrenty. If you have the money, get the N80. It's nice camera.

Thanks. What is the difference between the N75 and the N80? What do I have to know about the lens mount to select extra lenses for each?

~DC

Rob · Dec 5, 2005

In my opinion, you should ignore the kit lenses, get the body you like the feel of most and buy a 50mm f1.8 lens to go on it. When you've saved up a bit, add a 70-200 f2.8 IS lens for longer work.

A standard lens i.e. the 50mm will be soooooo much better for your skills than one of those nasty f5.6-f8 (or whatever) kit lenses and is perfect for art, portrait, close-up and landscape.

To compare the cameras, go to dpreview and compare them side by side. Generally the only thing the differentiates the price at this end of the market is the maximum shutter speed and the build quality. You can't go far wrong with Nikon, but they can be a bit plasticy at the low low end.

Rob

Youngun · Dec 5, 2005

I would go with the N80 personally. I was shopping in that price range a while back, and the N80 has a much better build and features. I also agree to ditch the kit lenses. They're worthless. I bought a 50mm 1.8 and then added an 85 1.8. Big apertures like those are a huge advantage.

Rob · Dec 5, 2005

Second hand F100s can be had cheap as well, hunt for a bargain in second-hand shops (cos you can handle it first!)

http://photography.search.ebay.co.u...refZC12QQfromZR8QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQsacatZ15230

crawdaddio · Dec 5, 2005

Rob said:
In my opinion, you should ignore the kit lenses, get the body you like the feel of most and buy a 50mm f1.8 lens to go on it. When you've saved up a bit, add a 70-200 f2.8 IS lens for longer work.

Thank you. What does the f2.8 mean? Largest f-stop? What is the difference between that and this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=149607&is=GREY&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation
This is the tele. lens I was looking at. Is this better or worse than the 70-200 f2.8 you mention?

A standard lens i.e. the 50mm will be soooooo much better for your skills than one of those nasty f5.6-f8 (or whatever) kit lenses and is perfect for art, portrait, close-up and landscape.

So the 50mm is fixed and has no zoom? I take it that is what the 28-100mm means with the kit lens?

To compare the cameras, go to dpreview and compare them side by side. Generally the only thing the differentiates the price at this end of the market is the maximum shutter speed and the build quality. You can't go far wrong with Nikon, but they can be a bit plasticy at the low low end.

I could only compare digital cameras (I think) at that site. Thank you so much for the insights, it has really helped.
Rob

Thanks again,
~DC

Rob · Dec 5, 2005

"that" is a heap of poo by comparison to:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=274780&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

Price is however a bit of a factor for most people - the other lens will take fine pictures.... but....

The f number is the ratio of length and width. The lower the f-number the wider (in proportion) the lens is and the more light gets in. This allows faster pictures.

However that's not the only thing. The 2.8 is a constant aperture zoom i.e. the f-number can be the same at any point between 70 and 200mm. The cheaper lens has an f of 5.6 when zoomed out. That's two stops of light less, or a quarter of the light ability. (I may have got the numbers wrong, cos I'm notoriously poor at maths).

The 2.8 has VR image stabilisation. This affords you the equivilent of nearly two stops of wobble (your images will be crisper when hand-holding).

The 50mm is fixed as you say. 28-100 is a zoom which is approximately centred around that. Zoom is bad when you are beginning, it hinders your ability to think through the shot and compose. Auto focus is also bad for the same reason. You'll have loads of dull mugshots of things dead-centre in frame with AF and a cheap telephoto when you start and your pictures will suffer as a result. (that's a blatent bit of opinion, but many will agree)

Sorry about dpreview, I forgot! Try elsewhere on the internet, but take everything with a pinch of salt!
http://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews1455.html

Rob