Nikon D50

I believe this is a good camera, but what would anyone who wants to have control over his pictures want with a camera without DOF preview?!

Most of my cameras have DOF preview and I often select settings on the basis of DOF.

However I find DOF preview essentially useless most of the time. If you're stopped down significantly, the view is so dark it's hard to tell what's in and out of focus. It's hard to tell just how sharp various areas of the image will be even if you don't stop down too far.

My view is that those who complain about the lack of DOF preview are simply looking to find fault. For 99% of users, it's a total non-issue.

You can sort of "forgive" a DSLR for not having a DOF preview feature because you can review the picture just taken, to check for DOF.

OK Bob, coming from film and especially the very good EOS 3 viewfinder, i maybe exaggerate the problem.

But i certainly was a little dissappointed when hearing about the lack of DOF preview .

All my current bodies (film and digital) have DOF preview but I almost never use it. If you stop down more than a few stops, it is too dark to see anything much. LCD playback is much better for checking how the out-of-focus areas look. DOF preview is just as useful as a film transport lever on a digital body.

The D50 does not seemed aimed at the market of serious amateur photographers. It is a consumer oriented camera aimed at casual shooters who do personally not consider photography a serious hobby and probably wouldn't list photography as a hobby at all. The lack of a feature that is typically found on more expensive DSLR's reflects the intended market's realistic expectations and needs. The D50 is no more aimed at serious amateurs and professionals than a D2x is aimed at snap-shooters.

Having a DOF preview is essentially useless with the mini-viewfinders that Nikon uses in their dSLR's anyway. I would be more apt to ask for a decent viewfinder image before I would ask for a way to exert control over that image.

When will Nikon come out with a full frame dSLR? I'll pay the price just to get a decent viewfinder!

Some of the things I've read people comment about this camera make me shake my head...

Looking at the press release for the camera, the first heading after what is basically an introduction says it all I believe..

The Ultimate Family Camera

Im not so sure we should expect Depth of Field preview and all sorts of other things people are crying out for...

Lets have a look at the other headings.....

Simple Sophistication Instant Gratification Compact, Lightweight and Designed to Go Everywhere

To me, there isnt anything here thats screaming that this camera is meant for photography enthusiasts or professionals...

It is what the press release says..

I lived some photographic years without DOF and now that I got it I don't think it is all that useful.

As someone pointed, it is common to get such a dark image that DOF is hard to be evaluated. And also, thinking about small viewfinders, if with most DSLR I find it hard enough to evaluate focus what would I expect when evaluating DOF in such a small, dark viewfinder (even darker when stopped down). I don't expect it to be that useful.

Of course we would like to have all the possible features in one camera, but we surely don't want to pay for them. I agree it is a 'nice' camera.

Bob, do you have a hands-on review in the works? The somewhat obnoxious official Nikon press release is good for raw info, but clearly a bit short on real-world usability issues. TY!

-Greg

"One of the unique benefits of shooting with a Nikon digital SLR is the ability to take advantage of the expansive creative possibilities offered by interchangeable Nikkor lenses."

Wow, I really must get one of those Nikon's with their new fangled and apparently unique interchangeable lenses.

Maybe the Nikon marketing folks should look up what unique actually means in a dictionary. I've heard of some other camera companies that offer a similar interchangeable lens concept.

"When will Nikon come out with a full frame dSLR?"

They have. It's called the Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n. ;-)

And Marcus, press releases have to say something, even if it's anything. I don't like it and I wouldn't do it but there you go. Have you seen Adobe's FAQ about their takeover of Macromedia? I bet you'll love this piss-take.

I think mirror lock-up is more useful to an end result than DOF preview.

Bob Atkins wrote:

"My view is that those who complain about the lack of DOF preview are simply looking to find fault. For 99% of users, it's a total non-issue."

Count me under the 1% who thinks that DOF preview is essential, at least on an SLR which should be bought for reasons of viewing through the taking lens. Instead of simply looking for a fault, I'm still waiting for a DSLR that has the same functionality as an F75 or EOS300V, but not at a 3x price penalty.

With regards to usefulness, when you find that the finder darkens too much to see anything anymore, you've not selected the apertures where DOF preview shines. At f22 depth of field is at its max anyway, it's deciding in the range of f2 to f8 where you're bound to see how changes in aperture show up in the end result.

This doesn't go to state that lack of DOF preview can not be defended from a marketing point of view. But isn't the estimated street price a bit at odds with the intended audience?

I started out with stop-down metering screw mount SLRs, I then bought a Pentax ME and a K1000, I didn't miss the DOF preview much. Ask all of the rangefinder users, they have always had to judge DOF from the lens scale. I think the only reason a DOF preview has become such an essential item to some people is that the use of zoom lenses has caused us to lose the DOF scale from lens bodies.

Personally I would appreciate a DOF preview but I would not make a purchase based on that one point. All of my Pentax cameras (except for a KX I bought used) have been missing this feature, but I haven't missed it. Serious macro photographers and portrait photographers may need to see the DOF but most of us can simply determine weather we need shallow focus or lots of depth and set the aperture accordingly. The D50 is not for the "serious" amateur but it is far more capable then to be relegated to a consumer status.

Ira

Although I often use DoF preview on my film cameras, I think that DoF preview is pretty much wasted on the D70/D50 because of its narrow viewfinder. The image it so small that DoF isn't really that easy to judge for any semi-critical decisions.

Larry

Interesting move by Nikon but the price point pits it against the older DRebel and sort of leaves the D70 in an intersting niche more between the new Rebel and the 20Dfrom a marketing standpoint. I just wonder if they are going to come out with a replacement for D100? Has there been any buzz?

There is no "price penalty" in digital SLRs. They're downright cheap compared to any serious amount of film and processing. Almost like they were free.

I've had an F100 and F3hp for a number of years and have hardly used DOF preview. I think beginners will not need it, the D50 looks like an excellent camera, although i think it's too expensive!

My first SLR was a Minolta XG 1 which I bought new at around 1980. After some time, I started to partially unmount the lenses when I wanted to preview the DOF (which has the same effect as a DOF preview button on the Minolta MF and Nikon pre-G lenses). I thought I would never buy an SLR camera without DOF preview. But with digital it seems to be less of an issue - the D70 viewfinder (and the D50 has the same) is sub-optimal for manual focusing and checking DOF anyway, making it necessary to review images on the LCD. But I would not forgive leaving out a DOF preview button on - say - a camera with a Maxxum 7D class viewfinder.

I think this sets up an 8 MP replacement for something, but not the D100. Look for the D70 to be replaced by the 8 MP "D80" in the next year or so, now that Nikon has put a 6.1 MP camera in the lower price point.

The D50 is what it is. The camera produces the same image quality as more expensive Nikon DSLRs, but it's considerably smaller and lighter. It seems to me this trumps any "missing" features. And despite the consumer-oriented sales pitch from its maker, the camera's small size, light weight and great image quality will make it a useful tool for plenty of non-amateur photographers who might value those qualities. Adding the diminutive D50 body to my equipment bag will mean fewer lens changes at those critical moments - without too much more weight or bulk. Seems to me the D50 will make a very good 2nd (or 3rd) body for a lot of photographers. It even uses the same battery as the D70. Too bad it does not use the same memory card...That's my two cents worth.

Bob,

As of today, Nikon View 6.2.6 can read and process Nikon D50 RAW image.NEF files.

The upgrade from 6.2.5 is available on the various Nikon support sites. You need to install the upgrade which is compatible with your currently installation, so if your copy of Nikon View 6.2.5 was downloaded from Nikon UK site, then you need to download the 6.2.6 update from the same UK site.

Peter

p.s. As for those who decry the absence of DOF preview on the D50, I really do not think the camera is aimed at those who care about such a feature, and if you do, then you can simply spend just a little more cash on the D70s...

I agree that mirror lockup is the most disappointing omission from this camera. Perhaps, as with the N80, mirror dampening is really good, so locking the mirror up isn't needed in most situations?

As for DOF preview, it's nice to have, but not needed, especially if you're experienced or if there is a DOF scale on the lens. Rangefinder users (e.g. Leica) are very fussy about DOF, but there's no preview button.

This camera is not an average family camera - not one single person I know would use a bulky camera like this for family pics. They all have small cameras they can stick in their coat pocket.

From a quick scan of the comments, there seems to be a touch of snobbishness that a serious photographer wouldn't own this. It makes me laugh. Some people do have budgets. Besides, this really is very far from a family camera.

It is a great camera and not that different from the D70. I've been using it for several months and can't really fault it. Have a look at my site for samples from this machine.

Michael Brochstein: I would actually state photography as a serious hobby.

Having made the move from the Nikon F5 Film Camera to the D50 digital, I have to say it`s been a very easy transition into Digital SLR with a sensible price tag, and producing excellent results. Also it has improved my photography no end, due to the fact that I have shot many more shots than with film. On the whole it`s a great entry level SLR and once your used to menus instead of functions on the body, eg. metering, it`s a pleasure to use.

There was some discussion on the D200 board about using manual focus lenses on that body. I have the D50, so I thought I would repeat here what I said there: I have not had a major problem with focusing. Plenty of my photos come out nicely. For an example, please see the Mr. Todd photo in my portfolio. He was *not* stationary for very long, but I got him. :-)

I am 45 and my eyes are becoming a problem. That "green dot" in the viewfinder is my life-line.

Happy shooting.

John

The D50 is my first digital slr coming from a school of thought that smaller, lighter, simpler, and cheaper is preferrable to the bells and whistles of the always bulkier, heavier and more expensive hyped up pro models. My favorite traditional slr is the Nikon FE and FE2. That's perfection for me as a travel and doumentary photographer. The bigger and fancier the camera, the more you make your subject aware and nervous of your shooting. I think it's sad these pro guys seem ashamed or embarrassed to be seen using a D50. It's annoying really that there's this atmosphere that a pro can't realistically use a D50. In the end, the final image is what matters! Putting my money into pro lenses and training my eye and my skills to capture the strongest imagery is what's important to me, not all this obsessive nit picking with the bodies and I refuse getting involved in comparing camera sizes! In conclusion, to each his own. Nothing is concrete. I don't need DOF preview because I practice zone focusing and I know my lenses' characteristics. Timing is more important to me than fiddling with previewing anyway.

Personally, I'm in love with the D50. The fact that it doesn't have a DOF preview is of no disconfort. The only thing that really bothers me is the fact that there is no LCD backlight. I can't really see the logic behind that. It's not like one led and mabie a button would have made that much of a price diffrence... Aside from that, the image quallity is great. I've also worked with a D100 and the diffrences between the final images are minute.

DOF preview is obviously essential to having a professional camera. That's why people like David Douglas Duncan, Henri Cartier Bresson, and Alfred Eisenstadt didn't use Leicas.

Wait a minute...

DOF preview is just a feature. It may be important to your style of photography or it might not be.

i am thinking i am going to get the D50 as my first Dslr this is my upgrade from a pentax P3N i personaly only care about that it will shoot like a 35mm film camera. so i care dont evan need a screen i want it digital and quick. i am concerned about how the the digital is smaller than 35mm so i need a 30mm or smoller lens to get my 45 degree agle or larger. it would have been nice if they had made the receptor for the image 35mm. it is exspencive to get a F/1.4 lens in 30 mm. i think the body being functional and quality is more important than options that dont exsist on a film camera.

Michael Brochstein Wrote: "The D50 does not seemed aimed at the market of serious amateur photographers. It is a consumer oriented camera aimed at casual shooters who do personally not consider photography a serious hobby and probably wouldn't list photography as a hobby at all. The lack of a feature that is typically found on more expensive DSLR's reflects the intended market's realistic expectations and needs. The D50 is no more aimed at serious amateurs and professionals than a D2x is aimed at snap-shooters."

I couldn't agree less with this statement, esp after owning the camera for 6 months. I AM a serious amateur and I agree with the fact that the glass rather than the D50 would not be a limiting factor in getting professional results. I think the 1/500 flash sync speed is priceless. I could never have taken this handheld shot at any lower shutter speed with an effective focal length of 450mm and SB600 flash in shade.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3952524&size=lg

as photographers should we not be in total control of a camera without DOFP , when learning about slr's we learn the critical elements of each f number so simply put it into practice on this camera, lots of older 35mm camera's had no DOFP and yet look at the images that the pioneers of photography achieved. to me this looks a good camera and ive seen the results achievable from it , frankly for its price its great and im thinkin of purchasing one .

The D50 is a great first DSLR i think the images are wonderful,the d50 has not let me down in any way. thanks~steve,

I can't believe that people are dismissing a camera for such a trivial reason as the omission of DOFP. When I purchased my Nikon f4 in '91 it was imperative, to my mind, that it have just such a DOFP on it - since then I could count the number of times I used the 'important facility' on the fingers of one hand, the reason being that a hyperfocal chart for common focal lengths was, more or less, burned into my brain in the late Sixties (it still is) and that's what I've always used - perhaps, nowadays, we're too accustomed to having things done (simplified) for us. Stop-down metering was never a particular favourite of mine and DOFPs are far too reminiscent of it for my liking.

Anyone who would rather rely on their own brain, in preference to a built-in function, can download an adequate hyperfocal chart from here - http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/guides/dof/hyperfocal2.html

I love my D50 and think it is totally underrated. The images are superb and its specification is enough for even serious photographers. I know someone who owns a D200 which is used almost exclusively on 'auto' - go figure.

I don't understand the DOF argument at all. Take a picture at each aperture in question and view the images later on screen. Isn't that the beauty of digital. Or am I missing something?

Cheers.

My F3 was stolen, and the insurance company replaced it with an F5 -- which I hated and promptly sold. What is with this trend toward huge, heavy cameras in the pro lineup? My medium format setup is smaller and lighter than the F5 or the D2X.

So I think the D50 is a move in the right direction. What I'd like to know is how the image sensor compares to Canon's. Of course, I wouldn't care a bit about that if Nikon had the sense to make the D50 compatible with my MF Nikkor lenses -- some really great ones, actually. If I could use these lenses with the D50, I'd already own one.

If you want to see the Nikon D50 SLR Sample Photos click below.
You can see there various photos taken with different Nikon settings and different lenses.

Nikon D50 SLR Sample Photos Galery

_

Look! No Hands!

I have both the D50 and D70s in the arsenal with old 35's, some are TOTALLY manual. Are we forgetting that this is about lensmanship? I think part of the skill, and the application of experience should more than compensate for the omission of this "automated" feature. If there is total reliance on the chipset, the programming, etc. etc.; who is actually taking the photograph? I still enjoy rolling up the windows in my old truck......manually.

Are we to evolve from Kubricks apes to full blown Techno-sapiens? I can only imagine some of these nay sayers in a power outtage.

Got light?

I own a D50, and I have only had 2 problems.
1. I miss the DOF button. I have rarely been able to view the DOF correctly in the LCD.
2. My two lenses are Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 and 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 which are too slow in low light and iso 800 and 1600 are too grainy for me.

Don't tell me to spend more cash and get a D70s or a faster lens, I promise to do so when I have more cash.
To me photography is more than a hobby but then again photography seems to be an expensive hobby.
Happy shooting.

I have been a student of photography for a decade, beginning when I was about 13 years old. I currently own a Canon K2 which I bought at WalMart. I started on an old school Nikon, an F2 I believe, which was handed down to my from my pro parents. I want to upgrade to digital because the cost of film and development is eating me alive.

I can't afford a D200. I can't even afford the D70. I'm *almost* offended by people who say that people who buy the D50 aren't serious enough about photography to even put it in a list of hobbies.

Is the D50 a waste of money? My point in buying one (which will take a couple of months anyway) would be simply to be able to keep studying photography without that pain in the pit of my stomach that tells me I'm losing money everytime I release the shutter. It would be a stepping stone to the D200 (or equivalent, I doubt they'll still be selling that one by the time I can afford it.)

Should I not even bother? Everyone seems to be complaining about this camera so much (basically saying it's not on par with it's $1,700 counterparts, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me, because it's considerably less than that.) Would it be a waste of my money to buy this camera? Is it really that bad?

I've had a my D50 for 4 months.I think it's capable of doing a great job in hte right hand, and by no means is it a familly camera.The 18-55 kit lens is superb at 18 mm and f/8 or higher. So, i recommend it both to beginers in photography , and to serious amateurs on a budget.The main investment should be the lenses ,a and most of all the work behind the camera.

I find it terribly amusing how so many people decry the lack of a DOF preview. I've been taking photo's for about 3 years and I have a good idea in my mind what the DOF will be for my photo's.

One of the few valid complaints with this camera that I haven't even seen made is the lack of Commander mode that the D70s and and D80 have. That's the only real thing holding it back from being truly professional level.

This is a great camera and can produce incredible professional quality images (20in long side). This certainly isn't "The ultimate family camera" it's a great camera for serious amateur on the budget or a pro looking for a backup, though if you're a pro you should have the cash for the D80 or a D70s.

Firefly & friends on a coneflower

I've been using the D50 with various lenses for various purposes for a year and a half. My only complaint about it is that it frequently doesn't see what I see and therefore has to be used in Manual mode, especially when the subject involves a "frayed" image, such as weeds or scattered branches. Sometimes, the shutter release locks when I'm not using it constantly, so I now just turn it off when I'm not actually shooting, so as NOT to miss a shot (like a bird taking off). Aside from its few annoying little habits like that, there is nothing wrong with this camera as a photographer's tool. I've learned to work around its bad habits.

It is the photographer (you) that takes the pictures, not the camera. Any good photographer can take good photographs with anything from a Brownie Holiday box camera or a pinhole camera up to a monstrously expensive Hasselblad. If the images are good, it's because the camera operator (photographer) did his/her job and paid attention to getting the image and getting the camera to "see" what he/she saw.

My cameras are a 16mm spy camera with no exposure control other than the shutter release; Nikon F2, recently overhauled and operates like brand new; Mamiya C330; Mamiya RB67 Pro S; Nikon Coolpix8700 (yes! it's an amateur camera! holy crap!); Nikon D50; Nikon F4; Nikon F100; one really good, working Speed Graphic; and last but not least, my baby, my Calumet 4x5. I use them all. I do my best to get a good image, on film or in megapixels, the image that I saw with my two eyes.

The advantage to the digital camera is that you can view the image immediately without the wait for film processing. You can download the images to a pocket wallet if the card gets full, carry an extra battery pack and extra cards, and spend three days shooting nonstop until you pass out from exhaustion. There is no expense for film processing or concern about the images being compromised by heat. I have, in fact, found that the D50 seems less susceptible to extreme cold than my film cameras.

The lack of a depth of field preview is less important than realizing that you can control that very thing by putting the well-thought-out digital D50 camera (or any other automatic film or digital camera) on manual and adjusting your exposure accordingly.

Remember basic photography: the more you stop down the lens, the more sharp focus you have from front to back in your image. That is your depth of field.

Any good photographer knows that the optics are the second most important thing in photography. The MOST important thing is using your eyes and brain and camera skills to get the image. If you don't take the time to learn to use your equipment in every way possible, you will not get consistently good images.

The D50 is an affordable alternative to film costs for someone who is on a budget. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Buy the camera body and load up on lenses.

I Bought the D50 as an upgrade from a Minolta DiaMage S414. The Minolta produced much better crisp up close detail at 4 meg.

Yet I must say the ease of use and flexability of the D50 is outstanding. There has been much discussion here of DOF, since I have never had a DOF preview capable camera I can't say I miss it, I have learned to judge DOF on the fly. I agree with others that Manual is much better than Auto for a FA photo especially with situational changes. The D50 will help any amateur develope their manual skills (inexpensively). The camera is very forgiving, durable, fast and fun. I have changed nearly every function on the camera just to see what it does and changed it back with ease.

Is there such a thing as a serious amateur? I'm one. If you are, this is the camera for you.

If you go to the Photo.net Nikon page you will find the D50 is oddly missing yet the D40 is discussed quite a bit. The D40 lens limitations make the D50 far more appealing for the price (in my humble opinion). Peb.

Here is a picture from Seward Alaska with my D50