D80, worth the extra money?

[thomson_chan]

I've bought my D70s a month ago, and now the D80 is out. But I don't feel the

D80 worth the extra money. It has 10 mega pixel, bigger LCD screen and more

focus points, 18ms start time (2ms faster than D70). One thing I learnt when

I started photography was to frame the picture before pressing the shutter.

And the resolution of D70 is, IMHO, detail enough. So, does it worth the

extra money? Have anyone out there tried it? what's your comment?

 

Tom

[elliot1]

For someone that has not bought a camera yet, I would say absolutely yes, as long as you have the money for it. The d50 is a lot of camera and will produce similar results for almost half the price.

 

There are many improvements from the d70/d70s to the d80. The larger viewfinder alone is probably worth the difference in price if that is an issue for you. There are many other features that make it an outstanding camera. I get identical results from the d80 as with the d200.

 

There is virtually no difference in image quality from 6mp to 10mp unless you do extreme enlargements or cropping, and even then, the difference is minimal. I takes about a four times increase in resolution to see a difference, and then again, it would only be for enlargements or cropping. Assuming the same camera/lens setup is used, a 100mp camera and a 3mp camera would produce the same quality print up to 8 x 10 or even a bit larger. Don't worry about the pixel count betweeen these two cameras.

 

If you are happy with your camera and the results you are getting, keep it and apply the extra money to a better lens, flash other accessory or just bank it.

 

If you have a few extra $$$$$ and want the bigger screen, viewfinder and other goodies packaged into the d80, sells yours and upgrade. You end up the winner either way because both are great cameras. Go to a local camera store and check it out yourself to be sure.

[eric friedemann]

The D70s body retailed for $699. The D80 body is retailing for $999.

 

 

I think the extra resolution, improved finder and larger LCD are worth an extra $300. But if were shooting with a D70s, if my eyes were better and if the 6 Megapixel resolution on the D70s were adequate for me- as it would be for the vast majority of customers I sell DSLRs to- I'd stick with the D70s.

[eric friedemann]

And, if you didn't already have a D70s, you wouldn't have much choice. My store has had D50 and D70s bodies on back-order for more than three months. All we can get ahold of right now are D80's and D200's.

[walterh]

Eric thats really funny considering the D200 situation a few weeks back :-)

[ronbudway]

If I was shopping for my first digital right now I'd be looking at the D80, but as someone who

has a D70 I see no rush to upgrade. The viewfinder would be very nice, and a little extra

resolution and the bigger screen, but not nearly enough for me to ditch the D70.

[eric friedemann]

Walter, Nikon clearly lacks adequate production capacity. As a result, retailing Nikon products is often a matter of feast or famine.

 

 

For instance, at the beginning of the year, Nikon apparently had D50 production in high gear. The U.S. market was flooded with D50 bodies and kits.

 

 

We ran out a few months ago and have had D50 bodies and kits on back-order ever since. Our Nikon rep has told us the D50 hasn't been discontinued, but no one can get ahold of them. One assumes Nikon shut down its D50 production line, moved on to another product and has has not gone back to producing D50s.

 

 

Since Nikon is doesn't give straight answers regarding when or whether product will be shipped, we don't know whether the D50 has been effectively discontinued or whether we'll receive a few dozen D50s tomorrow. One assumes that if Nikon was going to replace the D50 before the holidays, a D50 successor would have been introduced at Photokina- but who knows.

 

 

Years ago, we had a sports finder for an F3 on back-order for a customer for almost three years. Nikon has recently surpassed this record- we've had 58mm Nikon lens caps on back-order for more than three years.

[mattalofs]

For me, the extra mp and the improved viewfinder were worth paying an extra 300 bucks. It was mostly the vf. Although the vf is a far cry from perfect, the D80/D200 vf is a lot better than the D70 or any other cropped frame camera I've looked through.

[ShunCheung]

We are getting off topic, but IMO one of Nikon's problems is the kit packaging. For example, currently at B&H, while the D50 is not in stock, it is in stock as a kit with the 18-55 DX. Not too long ago at my local Costco, they had stacks and stacks of D50 kits with two lenses, including a 28-80 (or something like that). Why would I want a zoom that only goes to 28mm on a DX DSLR?

 

The 18-200 DX that is "impossible" to find and people are paying like $200 over the suggested price is now in stock at B&H as a kit with the D200 as we "speak":

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=413124&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

But if you only want the lens, you are out of luck.

 

Back to the original topic. If you already have a D70s and are happy with it, stay happy. If you are deciding whether you should buy a new D70s or a new D80, IMO there is only one reason to get the D70s: you want to save some money.

[steve_dawson1]

The question 'is it worth the extra money' isn't really answerable - value is not intrinsic to the product but is in the benefit the user gets from the product. A better question is: 'Is it worth it to you?' If you don't care about the higher resolution, the benefits are in the larger LCD and the better viewfinder. Other people's views will be useful, but only trying out the camera can tell you whether the extra money is worth it for you.

[tom_jenner1]

One should also consider that higher pixel density gives more noise. This may be an important consideration for those into low light photography.

[ShunCheung]

There are many factors that can contribute to noise. I haven't seen any side-by-side comparison between the D70s and D80 yet, but I would not suggest that higher pixel density automatically leads to more noise. For example, my D2X is much better than my D100 at higher ISO even though the D2X has twice the pixel density. I am sure the fact that the D2X's technology is about 3 years newer has something to do with it.

[dave wyman]

Thomas, if I purchased a D70s a month ago, I'd have to think hard about spending so much more money on a D80. But that's just me.

 

Consider the true depth of your conundrum:

 

You know there isn't so much difference between the two cameras that your photography will suffer if you don't have the latest and greatest. The one, true difference is in megapixels. Sometimes it is good to crop a photo. You'll be sorry if and when the time comes to make the crop, and you can't.

 

But you also know that you will have the same, depressingly acute sense of lack when a D80s or a D90 comes out, so purchasing a new camera is pointless. You also should know that bicubic upsizing in Photoshop means you really have a 12 megapixel camera - you can crop!

 

So either way, you are going to lose.

 

You lose if you purchase a D80, because you'll have spent gobs of money on something you covet, but don't actually need. You will feel sick at heart for your needless profligacy, a feeling that won't go away for a long time, and will only be enhanced when Nikon releases a newer camera. (You'll also feel much guilty pleasure, of course, but let's not think about that.)

 

On the flip side, you lose if you >don't< spend gobs of money on a D80, because you are going to feel cheated out of one of the finer things in life you know you deserve, namely a camera that's got some cool features your camera does not have. (And you'll only enjoy a little innocent pleasure knowing you saved yourself money that you could have used to purchase something more important, like going to the movies, to nice restaurants, etc).

 

To answer your initial question, I have tried the D80, I own the D80, and the D80 is worth the extra money because it has those extra features missing from the D70s. Is it worth it to YOU? Only one person has the answer (and remember, it's a losing answer).

 

I can't make any more money from photography with my new camera than I could with the last several cameras I've owned (which is precious little). So, to justify my purchase, I'm selling an older camera (admittedly, not one that I purchased a month ago).

 

One way out of your conundrum: you can try cutting back on on how often you dine out, or go to the movies, or other luxuries you typically allow yourself, and keep a tab on your savings until you've equaled what you will have spent on the D80. That way you'll be able to justify your purchase, spend more time on your photography than sitting in a dark movie theater, and you'll lose some weight!

 

Good luck.

[walterh]

Shun - I have no real data in hands but after shooting about 1000 images in 4 weeks with my new D200 (essentially same sensor as the D80)I have a "feel" for the noise. I shot about 25000 images with 2 D70 bodies and can say that for my shooting there is not a tremendous PRACTICAL difference in high iso noise (usually seen as the most important thing) between the two.

 

One thing bugs me though - the noticeable noise at ISO 200 in images from the D200 - yes only at very close inspection. I never had to reduce noice from my D70 images at ISO 200 but I occasionally have to do with D200 images. Its not that the noise is easy to see in uncrocessed images but it interferes with sharpening if you are a bit of a perfectionist. The D70 spoiled me by beeing practically noise free at ISO 200. I am not a noise snob but sometimes "noise free" can add a special aesthetic quality.

[paul levin]

Is the D80 worth it? It depends. I own a D70s and if I'm completely honest with myself

it

is plenty camera for my needs. But now that I've gotten my introduction to digital via

the D70s there are things I'd like if not need. Personally, I'd really like to have RGB

histograms, I'd also like the bigger viewfinder. The D80 would address those plus

give me more pixels. Here's the rub, I don't like the D80. I preferd the D70 body over

the D50 when I bought the D70s, and Nikon based the D80 on the D50 body. I

wanted to like the D80, I really did, it would have saved me a bunch of bucks over my

future purchase of a D200. So what is anything worth? Depends who you ask I guess.

[chris_vincent2]

Don't do it.

 

You should only upgrade when the images you want to produce cannot be delivered by the equipment you already have.

 

Get the 12-24 and discover a whole new world.

[._._z]

<i><blockquote>

 

I don't feel the D80 worth the extra money.... So, does it worth the extra money?

 

</blockquote> </i><p>

 

You already answered your own question, yes?

[roger_s]

Here's why I've ordered a D80 to upgrade my D70 (after 2 years).

I am seeking a keeper -- one that I'll be happy with, even though technology passes me by. During the film era, I remained with my FE2 and F801 (bought for autofocus), and never was tempted to upgrade, until I went digital.

 

People argue that DSLR's are not investments, and go obsolete in 2 years max. I can't see that happening for me (famous last words). I was stunned by the first D70 8x10 color enlargement, and from here on it is a matter of me making better photos, rather than getting better print quality.

 

Here are the limitations of the D70 that caused me to upgrade:

 

1 - viewfinder. Good when wearing spectacles, but on balance I like to see more detail in the viewfinder. I found I was missing shots when taking portraits with wider lenses, because the D70 small viewfinder meant I wasn't as able to clearly see the subject's facial expression, i.e. can't really get in the subject's face in the viewfinder. It is especially had to see the facial expressions when using ultra wide lenses, such as 12-24.

 

2 - more flexibility to crop. People say that 6MP is fine, and it is if you do not crop. But often I like to crop. Hence the extra megapixel gives you quality even when you crop.

 

I believe, for me, the D80 is a camera where I can camp with for a long time, even though technology passes me by.

 

I wasn't prepared to camp with the D70 for a long time because of the poor viewfinder and loss of quality when doing cropping.

[larry_kincaid1]

Since it looks like no one else has said it yet, I will: Enjoy your new camera and save your money for the D90 which will be the same price but much better than the D80. Or follow my wife's philosophy when buying new cloths: The first time you use the camera the first photo costs you $699. The second photo costs you about $350. The third photo costs you half that and so forth. Before you know it, your photos will be down to less than a penny a piece. When it get ridiculously cheap, the D90 will come out and you can start all over again. Don't buy any film while you're doing this. Also, you can take the best possible photo that you are capable of taking with a D70s, so why worry about another camera? Relax. Get better.

[eric friedemann]

"The first time you use the camera the first photo costs you $699."

 

 

I just sold two D100s, two MB-D100s and three spare EN-EL-whatever batteries for $800. Three years ago, at dealer net, these items cost me about $3,000 with tax.

 

 

That's not to say I didn't make some money shooting with the D100s. Still, the drop in value was a cold slap in the groin.

[ShunCheung]

Eric, three years ago, you could have bought a brand new F5 and an F100 bodies for that same $3000 or perhaps somewhat less since you work at a camera store. Today, you wouldn't be able to sell those two for that much more than $800 combined. I know the last 3 years it was a special period when the value for film bodies had dropped drastically so that it was not typical, but overall, I don't think you did too badly, especially if you factor in how much you would have spent on film and processing.

 

As I have said before, unless you shoot professionally and must have two/multiple identical bodies for backup purposes, I wouldn't buy two DSLRs and have them both depreciate quickly together.

[tech-pan]

I was at the same road. I ended up choosing the D70s over a D80. I got to use a D200 and a D70s side by side for a day. The viewfinder was great on the D200, but when I sat down and looked at the pics, there was not that big a difference in image. In fact in the 300 shots I took that day with both cameras I realy cannot tell which camera took which pics. Personally I am using the money saved by not buying the D80 and putting it into glass. Glass is an investment, bodies are disposable.

 

When I shot film I always framed my shot in the viewfinder and used my lenses and legs to crop. Even in my brief digital life I barely crop, so the D70s works great for me.