Very disappointed with my new Nikon D80

[michael_p2]

I have just shelled out almost a thousand quid on a Nikon D80 after being

persuaded that a DSLR is the 'way of the future'. I wish I hadn't. After

shooting against my usual camera, a 1955 vintage Contax IIa [with Sonnar 50/2

lens], the D80 came off a very poor second. I used the 18-135 lens and shot on

Auto.

 

Yes, maybe I could have gained better results with manual exposure etc and some

post processing, but I still expected something special for all the hype I have

heard about Nikon DSLR perfomance.

 

See what you think:

<br><br>

<A href="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/199/458475880_a42c4d00c5_o.jpg

">Contax IIa</A>

<br>

<A href="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/151/437942961_b96c61c244_b.jpg

">Nikon D80</A>. <br><br>

 

Can anyone suggest how I can achieve that intensity of colour [without

oversaturation] and the sharpness that I routinely get with my Contax? I have

tried playing about in PS, without much success.

<br><br>

The D80 is now listed on eb*y.

[Matt Laur]

This strikes me as a workflow issue, Mike. What color space are you using? But with only a quick curve change and little sharpening (things you could probably have your D80 do internally from here on out), I've substantially changed your D80 image. In my attachment, the left-most shot is your provided Contax image, the center is the D80 shot you provided, and the right is that same D80 shot with about 20 seconds of routine fiddling.<div></div>

[mvtol]

I think you should give the D80 a real try! Those nice German lenses have a character you will not find (IMO) unless you buy the new Zeiss lenses made for Nikon. I also think you should not have gone with the 18-135 for you are uses to much better glass. You should not compare a 200 dollar lens with the Sonar.

regards,

Martijn

[BernardMiller]

Ha! Martijn is quite correct. If you want to see what the D80 can do, throw a cheap 50/1.8 on the front of it, and you'll be amazed at the sharpness.

 

I still shoot a lot of BW film in my venerable F4 and FE, because I enjoy getting in the darkroom and I like the way black and white film looks. But I've barely shot a roll of color 35 mm film since I went digital.

 

Under most circumstances, digital is gonna kick the butt of 35 mm color film unless you use a few particular varieties and have it scanned hi-res by someone who really knows what they are doing.

[gokce_yildirim2]

When I first saw the headline I thought of another matrix metering complaint :) However, other than that, there is really not much wrong with D80 for the money you pay. There is no better alternative in that price range IMO. You can get great results with a little post processing. It is true that you cant compare 18-135 to Sonnar lens. Be fair..

 

for the metering, just as an advice if it bothers you as well, what I do is I select center weighted and adjust the center diameter to the largest setting ( 10mm ) from the settings and that way Im getting much consisting results compared to MM metering.

[robert_hooper1]

The technology can be overwhelming at first, Mike. Give yourself some time with the D80

and Photoshop. There is a lot to learn about digital capture and post processing. Your

Contax can serve as a security blanket until your learning curve enables you to really

appreciate the miracle of digital photography.

[jorgen_udvang]

Lenses are like cooking. Your Sonnar is like going to a good restaurant. You get an excellent meal, but you pay the price. Modern consumer zooms are like buying your beef in a discount store. It's cheap and easy, but there's a lot of processing before you can eat it. Sometimes, if you do your job well, it tastes as good as it does at the restaurant, but not always.

 

Welcome to the world of consumerism.

[Jerry_]

If you buy your 'first' small airplane, would you be ready to pilot it from the dealership? Of course not.

 

 

 

As noted above, to compare a prime lens with a zoom is asking a little much. Now if you have a few extra quid to spend, try finding a AF 85mm f1.4D Nikkor if you want a lens that might equal your Sonnar.

 

 

 

Here is a shot taken with the D80 and a AF 18-135mm DX Nikkor. A little 'Trim' was done in the camera.<div></div>

[sam_thompson2]

You should go back to your Contax. The D80 with kit lens is not even a mid class camera, it is still considered entry level. Not sure why you expected something special when it really isn't. It's a good camera for the price and that's pretty much it. It's like comparing a sports car from the 50s with a Honda Accord, A Honda Accord may fit most people's needs but I'm sure the 1950s MG is a lot more fun to drive.

[gv]

To get the most out of digital one must go back to the future and learn some basic

computer darkroom skills. And the better a person gets at operating a DSLR, less post

processing is required and a lot can be done via batch processing.

 

Even a long-time film photographer can learn some new tricks; I know that from first-

hand experience.

 

I recommend Thom Hogan's excellent D80 guide for anyone new to the D80 and digital

photography. The first third of the book is essentially a digital primer and I found it very

enlightening. I also think that using Nikon Capture NX is a plus for a beginner and Jason

Odell's ebook is a must-have if you choose to go that route. For $25 you can get Jason's

tome, download and use the NX demo free for a month. You can see what a D80 can do

and whether or not digital is your cup of tea.

[gill_kirkwood]

Mike, I`ve recently purchased a D80 with an 18-70 and am delighted with it. I`m a newcomer to photography, which you obviously are not, and maybe your dissapointment is down to the camera not being good enough compared to what you`re used to. However, if you`ve just made the jump to digital this is a good entry camera without spending a whole lot more and perhaps you should, as suggested, persvere with it and work on your pp skills. As with any purchase, including non photographic items, if it doesnt do exactly what you want out of the box, one can get in a bit of a downer and its an uphill struggle. So unless you trade it in and spend lots more quids, work at it and try to have fun! Gill

[jorgen_udvang]

It's very important to be aware of a couple of facts here: the D80 is a very good camera, and has potential for an image quality on par with the best cameras that Nikon makes.

 

The 18-135mm is an amateur, consumer lens, and will never, at least not out of the camera, give as good results as a prime lens or a high quality zoom.

 

With correct in-camera settings and a good quality lens, the need for post-processing is dramatically reduced.

 

The problem with lenses is that you usually get what you pay for. If you want a lens of similar quality as your Nokton, a Zeiss ZF 35/2 for F-mount will set you back almost $900, or around what you paid for camera plus lens to start with.

 

There are other, cheaper alternatives that will give you decent results as well, but you will discover fairly fast that there are compromises too, as the price goes down.

 

To make things even more complicated, the Zeiss ZF lenses will not meter with your D80, but they will with a D200. The Nikon alternative is the Nikkor 35/2, which is a good lens, not expensive, but not nearly of the same build quality as the Zeiss.

 

The best zoom alternative for you, if you want sharp, punchy photos without paying a fortune, is probably the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.

[elliot1]

If you look closely at the two pictures, especially in the darker areas, you will see that the d80 image is actually much better exposed. You can see the detail in the shadow areas such as the tree and the bushes as well as the wood under the window at the right in the d80 image but they are too dark and contrasty in the Contax shot.

 

You are obviously used to the higher contrast, slightly overexposed look your Contax has been giving you over the years and you likely will only be satisfied with with a camera that gives that same high contrast look. Can the d80 do it? Of course it can. ANY camera can! Since you are already selling your camera and the Contax is giving you what you want, don't sweat it. Let someone else suffer with that crappy d80 and that crappy matrix metering system!

 

Reminds me of the story about the new husband who was 'suffering' with his wife's cooking. She badly overcooked the meal one night and finally he had a meal he really enjoyed - just the way his mother had always prepared his food for him!

[bruce_margolis]

Mike, welcome to the dark side of digital photography. There is definitely a learning curve here, whether you use a D80 or anything else.

 

First, it is not like film. The digital process is totally different and takes a little getting used to.

 

Second, it takes a while to learn the different internal settings of the D80. There is a lot of tweaking you can do but to avoid a long answer, I'll just say read the manual thoroughly and practice. See which settings work best for you.

 

Third, you will learn that to produce better quality images, you won't use the Auto setting. IMO all the presets are a little weak. Instead, I found I get much better results with Program mode. Sometimes I use Aperture mode or maybe Shutter mode -- even Manual mode -- but never Auto mode.

 

Fourth, as others have said, the D80 -- like your really neat Contax -- performs a lot better with a quality lens. For real comparison, stick a slow piece of plastic (that's what the 18-135 is) on the Contax and compare that to your Nikon. Alternatively, buy the very inexpensive 50mm f/1.8 and try it out on the D80. The difference will be obvious if you also do the other things above.

[Ed_Ingold]

Mike,

 

You give up too soon! Spend a little time learning the craft.

 

I doubt you have a calibrated monitor, otherwise you would see that the Contax image has a magenta tint, whereas the D80 image is neutral and (to my eyes) accurate.

 

Secondly, you are not showing the original Contax image, rather a scanned (and processed) representation. Scanning is a subjective task, which you (or your processing agent) profoundly influence. If this is done by a commercial minilab, the tendency is to over saturate and over-sharpen the results, to which you have become accustomed. There are many ways to alter the contrast and saturation in Photoshop. IMO, you have a much better starting point with the D80 image.

[michael_p2]

Thanks for all the useful advice. I expected to get flamed by Nikon users. Maybe I will give the D80 more time. I've only used a digital P&S so far, so yes, perhaps I need to get my head around the technical side of digital work and post-processing - and get the Nikon equivalent of a Sonnar 50mm lens. Any suggestions? Bear in mind that I am now very poor.

[michael_p2]

By the way, here are another set of Contax/Nikon comparison shots:

<br><br>

<A href="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/187/458475884_3d7eafa060_o.jpg">Contax IIa</A>

<br><br>

<A href="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/159/437942981_c531835d34_b.jpg">Nikon D80</A>

[zapata_espinoza]

Agree with you mike. The contax shots look way better.

[jorgen_udvang]

Try the Nikkor 35mm f/2 or the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. They are both good lenses and will give you more or less the same FOV as the 50mm Nokton on your Contax.

[anthony_bez]

Mike, I am interested in purchasing your camera what is the listing number, and I'll have a bid.

[bjørn rørslett]

"The contax shots look way better" - why is that? As shown the Contax shot has high contrast, blocked-up shadows and a very obvious reddish colour cast to it, while the D80 seems to give pleasing contrast, nice shadow detail and colours that appear natural on my (calibrated) monitor. You could always increase the contrast of the digital imagfe if you deem this desireable, but blocked shadows means details gone forever.

 

I think what we see is a poorly conducted comparison and the result is heavily influenced by the post-processing (or lack therof).

[bill_keane2]

Mike, the latter two shots you posted show a higher contrast image from the Contax. Easily duplicated via the D80/50/70/200 (or NikonView, or Capture NX). I say this as one with minimal post-processing skill.

 

As others have said, you're comparing a zoom to a prime lens, but in an earlier post, a fellow took your first D80 image, and (in my view) made it look better than the Contax.

 

I recall the satisfaction of getting a Velvia slide back, perfectly exposed, no added processing necessary. What you shot is what you got.

 

But I also recall waiting to get those 36 pictures back, not knowing which images had actually achieved what I wanted, tossing most...

 

With just a LITTLE post-processing that all DSLR's require, with instant feedback and ability to delete as you go (or not) your D80 will enable you to be far more creative and proficient than a roll of 36 shots would ever allow.

 

I'd take it off Ebay, maybe put a better lens on, and move forward. If you want a tad extra heft in the body, then sell the D80 and try a D200.

 

But with the caliber of shots you're obviously able to take, I think in time you'll find the DSLR technology a welcome change.

[albertdarmali]

What you have to know is, when you switch to DSLR, you need to also prepare for some post-processing routine. So getting a nice software (CS2 or Element) and learn how to use it will improve your image a lot.

 

Looking at your sample picture, if that's the best a D80 can do, nobody will buy that camera. I think since you are switching from film, you just need to learn the whole package of DSLR.

 

Once you're used to the workflow of DSLR (and with a good lens to go with the D80 - not your current kit one), I'm sure it'll be hard for you to part with the D80.

 

PS: If you like more "pop" straight out of camera, you can always adjust it from your D80, tone, contrast, sharpness, etc... simple. Or get a "warmer" lens.

[fred aspen]

Mike, I, too, am enamoured with the older cameras/glass that produce the quality/character that I like. I bought the D70S and was disappointed with the results until I purchased the little 45mm pancake lens which will give similar results to your vintage lens. It is the old Tessar design and only has 4 el/3 groups and does a marvelous job. Not fair to compare a multi-element zoom which will have much lower contrast and less resolution than your prime lens. My two favorites after sorting out this disappointment are the 45mm F2.8 and the 50mm F1.4 prime lenses that give me a look close to European glass. Give it a try before making a rash move and selling the D80. I felt the same as you did and wanted to unload the D70S but cooler emotions prevailed and I am glad I did a bit more research. The 45 will give you contrast, sharpness, color saturation and bokeh similar to your vintage Sonnar.

[erik_loza]

I gave my dad a laptop for Christmas so that he could email me. He still writes letters. OP, maybe film is truly where you want to be? The learning curve can be steep, but it's not the camera's fault. Best of luck.