D80 Users Survey

[elliot1]

I have been a d200 user since it first came out. I am a new d80 owner. I

bought the camera for backup and was hesitant in getting it because I have read

many times in this forum that the d80 tends to overexpose. I do not have this

problem. In fact, to my surprise, I am getting better exposures with it than

my d200 (didn't think that was possible).

 

Just curious if anyone who has actually had this exposure problem has sent

their camera in for service and if the camera worked better when it came back?

How satisfied are you with your pictures and with the camera?

 

I also really like that it is much lighter in weight than my d200.

I am considering getting the 18-135 to replace my heavier 18-200 VR. If you

have this lens, can you give your opinion of the quality of the pictures in

comparison to other lenses you may have?

 

Thanks in advance!

[Peter_in_PA]

Thom Hogan talks about the exposure metering issues with the D80 in his review. You can

also search photo.net for some discussion on this. It is a problem for some, not for others.

It is a problem in some situations more than others. Check out the review...

 

http://www.bythom.com/d80review.htm

 

Also, his review of the 18-135 is helpful, too. From what I've seen, you want to stick with

what you have. Evidently, there's more CA and distortion.

 

http://www.bythom.com/18135lens.htm

[aramat57]

I have this combination. The 18-135 is better than I thought it would be. I use it on the D80 almost all the time, and have taken to keeping a 50mm 1.4 on my F100. So far, it has been a happy combination for me. But the distortion on the wide end bothers me indoors.

[diane_madura]

Elliot, I got the D80 because I thought the D200 was too heavy for me. I used to have some exposure problems, but I think I've adapted to that and haven't had the problem lately. But I've never used the D200 so I cannot compare the two. I had the D70 before, and I find many things about the D80 that I like, especially the larger viewfinder. I have the 18-200 VR lens which I like because of the convenience, but when I've used the 50mm f1.8, I see a big difference in the quality of the photos, the 50mm being much sharper.

[crabseye]

I'm still using Matrix Metering on my D80 and still not having any issues with it. Even if somehow, things change, I have to problem switching to center-weighted metering. It's what I used on my Canon A-1 for decades, so it's a familiar thing to me.

[sandysocks]

+1.3 to -2.3 usually does the trick for me.

[tony bell]

I think it is all in your perspective. In my case, every single camera I have ever owned has in my opinion overexposed if left to its own devices. The camera is merely a tool that each person needs to utilize to their own satisfaction.

[Keith Gierman]

I have been amazed by all the complaints about exposure accuracy on the D80. The only times I have experienced any blown highlights are in extreme high contrast situations. Even then, the NEF's are less likely to have blown highlights than the jpg's.

 

I am totally satisfied with the D80 with one minor complaint. That is the lack of an AF off-on switch. I got used to using it to focus my F100 and miss it on the D80. I still haven't figured out if there is a way to achieve the same feature through custom functions.

[bruce_margolis]

"I am considering getting the 18-135 to replace my heavier 18-200 VR." Elliot, what's going on. Your're moving to the dark side? :-)

 

Seriously, you have praised your 18-200. Do you really want to give up range and VR, much less everything else? If you are really thinking about it, why not do what you always do...... test the two lenses. Maybe you will be satisfied with the range and quality of the 18-135. If so, enjoy. But do us a favor and post your test results. They are always great.

[elliot1]

Bruce,

 

Why am I considering the 18-135? For the same reason I bought the d80 - weight. I have been using the 55-200 on the d80 and like it - great image quality and light weight, but, it is not wide enough. I have used the 18-200 with it and get great results but it makes the setup heavy.

 

As far as range goes, there is virtually no difference from 135mm to 200mm. I rarely use the VR. But I do get exceptional image quality with the 18-200. Before buying the lens, I thought I would get some feedback on it from here. Perhaps you are right, I will need to buy one and test it out, and keep one or the other. One of the reasons i was considering selling my 18-200 was so I could buy the 18-135 and then also get the 12-24.

 

So many choices and never enought $$$$!

[lahuasteca]

I've been going back and forth on this for a year - D200 or D80? I already have the D70s.

 

I am a professional environmental science person first, photography second. Still I

demand good image quality. My use is candid street photography in the cities and rural

areas of Latin America. I like either camera for the 11 point focus area - I'm not a fan of

focus and recompose. So the initial focus and meter has to be spot on (my F100 never

failed me, nor my older FE2 with CW).

 

To read a number of posts here and in other forums, there's lots of negative PR about the

D80 and its matrix meter. Well, right now, the D80 goes for $890, the D200 is creeping

upward of $1450-1500. That's a chunk of change. I need a good camera for the street

and natural environment. I shoot in A, and try to use fast lenses.

 

Here are my galleries if you have any questions.

 

http://www.pbase.com/lahuasteca

 

Will the D80 do the job? I'm not interested in sports, but once-in-a-lifetime cultural

events. I've got one coming up in late September. The other choice is to keep saving and

get the D200 or latest incarnation of such.

[eric_arnold]

hmm, interesting... most people prefer the 18-200 over the 18-135, also the 18-70 is considered a better lens than the 18-135. if i had the 18-200, unless i was really dissatisfied with its performance, i'd probably keep it. the 12-24 sells for over $900 in the nikkor version, the 18-135 is around $300. so that's $1200, much more than you can get for an 18-200 (used price between $700-$800, depending on condition). why not keep the 18-200 and buy the tokina 12-24 for the wide end, which is around $500? or maybe you were talking about selling the 18-200 for the 18-135 and the tokina? i'm confused. of course, if weight is a problem, the 12-24s are kinda bulky. but hey, do what you think is right, even if it doesn't make sense to anyone else.

[bruce_margolis]

"So many choices and never enought $$$$!"

 

I hear ya, Elliot. I have had my eye on the 17-55 for a while but when I weighed the cost of it against getting thrown out of my house and the cost of a divorce, the economics just didn't work for me. :-)

 

Not trying to change your mind but here's an idea...... You really haven't been *that* crazy about your 17-55 and you do have the kit lens with almost that range. Why not sell it to get the 12-24? The only downside, you wouldn't have fast lenses but if you shoot stopped down anyway, why not?

 

Just a thought....

[ccfutbol]

Elliot, ... I'm one of the people who thought my D80 was deffective, but it was due to oil on the lens diaphram blades of the 35mm lens I was using. Sorry if I added to anyone's worries. Still relatively new to the D80 but the comparison I ran with my F5's meter show that the spot and center are getting essentially the same readings. The matrix is starting to impress me as it is making what seems like good "decisions" about the scene, but I still have to occasionally tweak it as anyone should expect. I have noticed a little variance in exposures shot at high speed, but it's something I can live with. After my experience with the oily 35mm, I wonder if lenses aren't sometimes the culprits in exposure variations.

 

It sounds like you are looking for a smaller, lighter rig. I had such a choice with my F5 and N80. The D80 is kind of a compromise in the size and weight on those two bodies and I feel that it gives me the best of many worlds. N80 or D80 with a 50 1.8 is a light sonafagun. I gotta get my 35 2.0 fixed though as the perspective is more versatile in my digital world shooting than either the 24mm or the 50mm. I'd very much like a zoom for the many practical reasons those are handy and I'm checking my options for that future purchase (probably a 28 to something, reasonable in terms of performance, ergonomics, and costs). I'll see what folks say about the 18-135 DX. CC

[thomas_fiege]

hi elliot, if I read everything right you want some light wight setup. you already have the 55-200 so why don't you look for the smaler 18-50 kit lens which comes with the d40? it is lighter than the 18-135. I don't know how heavy the sigma ore tamron 17-50 f2.8 are but maybe they are also not as heavy as the 18-135 / 18-200.

 

by the way I would go with a more prime like the sigma ore tamron but I don't like the screw drive so I stick to my 18-135 it has some ca and also as sayed some distortion on the wide end. I can't compare it with the 18-200 but I already have made some good pics with the 18-135. I realy don't like the plastic mount but for your wight it might be ok.

[elliot1]

Gene,

 

"To read a number of posts here and in other forums, there's lots of negative PR about the D80 and its matrix meter. "

 

Those comments are what prompted me to make this post. I have been using the d80 for a few weeks now, and based on my testing and usage and find the exposure to be excellent - in fact, in many cases, better than my d200. Many people hear a 'rumor' or a comment and circulate it without having first hand experience.

 

Anyway, so far I am fully satisfied with mine.

[elliot1]

Bruce, I love my 17-55 lens. I have never stated otherwise. I never shoot an event without without it. Here are some sample shots from my lens.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=741500

[albertdarmali]

Gene,

 

From your shooting style, I think what you need is a D80 combined with 17-55mm f/2.8.

 

D80 can give image as good as D200 provided that you use it with a top grade lens. If I were you, instead of spending more on D200, I'd rather get a D80 body only and save up a bit for a pro wide angle zoom (17-35 or 17-55). Or maybe if you don't wanna spend that much, you can get the Tamron 17-50mm. Never used that one though. But looks like it's very good when I see the samples from users who got the good copy of the Tamron.

 

Also don't worry so much about the so called "metering problem" on D80, the only time it will overexpose or give wrong metering is when you have very difficult subject (lots of contrast difference). But then, given that difficult situation, people who knows how to use a camera will usually switch to manual or compensate or switch metering system anyway, so I don't know why it's such a big deal. Just my 2 cents.

[paul mitchell]

I did suffer some early over-exposure with my D80, but I put that down to user error, as I was adapteding to digital photography after 20+ years of slide film. In centre-weighted I have not had any problems and even matrix metering is better now I'm getting more of a feel for the camera.

 

I'd have reservations about your proposed lens swap. Personally, I'd prefer more speed and less range, if only I cold afford it!

[Mike_R1664876643]

I don't have a problem with the D80 overexposing on mine either, but don't doubt that some struggle with it for whatever reason. Mine seems to get the right exposure nearly every time unless it's some unusual lighting situations, where I know enough about exposure to bracket. Shooting slides for 25 years has helped me deal with the limited dynamic range of digital, which took me a litte by surprise when I first got my D80. Also, I bought the 18-70mm lens, and really like it. Doesn't have quite the zoom range of the 18-135, but it's really well built for the price. It stays on my D80 nearly all the time.