Long-time users - body replacement pattern

[bmm]

Hey all,

 

My first OP for the new year so I guess I should start by wishing you all the

very best for 08 from sunny Sydney.

 

The fact that I'm just a couple of months into my D80 as a first DSLR, yet

there is talk of an impending "D90" to replace it raises a question for me,

particularly pointed at you guys who have lived through a few generations of

DSLR.

 

What do you tend to do as new models come onto the market? Do you buy every

upgrade? Every second upgrade (ie. leapfrogging one)? Or do you look at each

upgrade and only buy in based on an assessment of the real marginal

benefit/improvement?

 

I should note in posting this that I'm not planning on going with the upgrade

myself - the D80 is plenty of camera for a newbie like me to learn on for the

next year or two, and any extra $$ that I get in the meantime will go towards

my fast glass fetish!

[ShunCheung]

It doesn't matter whether it is camera body, lens or accessories, I upgrade if I determine that the new piece of equipment is going to significantly improve my final images. Of course, exactly what is "significantly" is a matter of opinions. In mid 2005, I went from the D100 to the D2X and recently from the D2X to the D300. Each time it makes a big difference, and it is very noticable in the results.

 

I would suggest stick with the D80 until you realize that it is limiting your photography. There certainly no need to upgrade every time a new camera is introduced.

[michael_bradtke]

Shun has it right. Don't just jump at the latest and greatest thing out there. It may not be that great.

 

Me I have and use a F from 1970 I also have and use a F3 from 1981. I also have a F5. Each one was a big jump in technology

 

I also have and use a lot a D100 that is IR modified. I use it for B&W photography when I want that look. For color I use a D2h.

I haven't felt the need to upgrade my DSLR's yet. To be honest the D3 really is calling to me. But I will probably wait a little while.

 

Michael

[mars790]

Bernard, you'll soon realize that lenses matter even more than the body, as far as image

quality is concerned. Your last line of your post is a wise one.

 

Figure out what focal lengths you need and buy the best lenses that you can afford.

 

I started out in June '05 with the D70 and the 18-70mm. In the spring of '06, i felt that i

was ready for the D200 as i already had some good glass. Now i sit with my D300 and a

fine lens collection:

 

10.5 fisheye, 12-24(Tokina), 17-35, 50 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 105 micro, 70-200VR.

 

They serve me very well and i recommend any of them. Learn your D80 inside and out and

you'll know when you outgrow it. In the meantime, feeding your fast glass fetish is healthy

as long as you use them.

 

My pattern of upgrading bodies may seem hypocritical to my advice, but i'm now earning

money through photography and the investments are paying off.

 

Good luck and happy shooting in 2008

[Dieter Schaefer]

I just sold the D70 that was my entry into the digital world and that I purchased in November 2004. When I picked up bird photography in fall of 2006, I upgraded from the D70 to a D200; I decided then against a D80 because I wanted to retain metering with my older AI lenses - which I hardly ever use, as it turns out. Nevertheless, the D200 turned out to be the better choice, if only for the deeper buffer and higher frame rate. A D2Xs with the better AF system was out of the question because of cost.

 

I am not earning money with my photography and while replacing my two D200 cameras with D300 would give an improvement in AF and frame rate (would definitely buy with the battery grip) the cost of more than $1000 for each upgrade (figure I could sell each D200 for about $1000 and hence would have to pay a little over $1000 for each upgrade) gives me some pause and I will likely wait a little longer.

 

Currently, a used D2Xs can be sold for about the cost of a new D300 - good and bad news for photographers making this "upgrade" (I would choose a new D300 any time over a used D2Xs) - almost no out of pocket expense but a huge hit compared to what they paid for their D2Xs new. Upgrading from the D2Xs to a D3 is a financial worst case scenario...

 

I cannot envision what an upcoming D90 would look like - but it will likely close the gap to the D200 and could result in a further drop in D200 market value.

[doccamera]

I agree with Ric, Fast Quality Glass is everything! The camera has always just been a capture device for the lens. I earn my livelihood from photography and do Photo Equipment Repairs for specific Clients. My world is all about photography and the equipment. I have bought and sold and upgraded almost every lens Nikon hads made up to about 1995 and then I started getting real picky due to the onset of Nikon producing two grades of lenses. Basically, don't buy ANY lens that has a variable minimum aperture that ends in 6.3 (ex. 4.5-6.3) it will basically be optically mediocre and useless before or after 12 noon. Keep your D80 for a couple of years at least and learn to do manual exposures for your Serious Shots. Any Basic Photography book that talks about how to properly expose a slide or transparency will give you the right info for the digital world. Spend the bucks on Great Glass and have fun!

[albertdarmali]

Unless you are into sports or wildlife most of the time, I don't see why you need to put fps into the equation. Bernard, I am also currently using D80 at the moment. yes, I know D300 is very tempting, but for AUS$2,300 I could get one heck of a lens (or lenses!)

 

I don't have any plan upgrading my camera, but I think I will upgrade every second generation or so - but not everytime when a new one comes out. Unless I won some money or something.

[lex_jenkins]

"What do you tend to do as new models come onto the market?"

 

I roll over, go back to sleep and wait for the price to drop. Cutting edges scare me sleepy.

 

I bought my used F3HP the year that model was discontinued. Got my FM2N that same year - it was discontinued within a couple of years. Got my D2H on closeout/blowout.

 

If I was still a working pro, sure, I'd have to consider the latest and greatest. Up to a point, anyway. I think the D3 may finally have set the point at which many serious photographers will no longer feel the need to upgrade for a few years. The D300 may have accomplished the same thing for many folks.

[fraczekp]

>> I roll over, go back to sleep and wait for the price to drop.

 

Funny but quite true for some of us...

 

Call me a slow learner, but I finally got my 2004 D100 worked out to a point where I appreciate the pictures more than my D200 that still has to be seriously "bonded with?. In the process I learned to appreciate good software, digital post processing and knowledge of my camera's strengths/weaknesses more than claims of a new "beefy" model.

 

At this pace maybe I will be ready for another "ground breaking", clerance/refurbished DSLR in 2010....

[lee_ricks]

Like Shun and Lex said. Stick with your camera until the replacement significantly improves specific photo issues.

 

I have a D300 (low light) D2X (dumb) and D2H (the best camera ever made;) Care to guess which one I use most?

 

Your D80 is a great camera. It will take wonderful pictures for years to come. Enjoy it and invest in an SB-800 next if you don't have one. Then upgrade your lenses if necessary. Do you have Photoshop yet? If not that is a real important step.

[kohanmike]

Over a year and half ago I traded in my two F2 bodies and 3 index lenses I bought in the

early 1970s for a D70s. I could have chosen with a D80 or even D200, but the D70s cost

me $650 US so I went with two.

 

I'm very glad I made that choice because as I learned about digital photography, I now

know that the D300 will be the perfect camera for me. I shoot some sports, rock and

symphonic concerts, catalogue, (with two SB600 in remote mode), landscape,

architectural interiors, candids, a good variety of stuff. I also print 13x19, which I find

look very good from D70s RAW, so the D300 should be that much better. Sometime late

this year I will buy two D300 and will use them for many years to come, with no need to

look at the next greater thing.

[tri-x1]

I've used Nikon cameras and lenses since the 1960s. Last year I finally broke down and bought a used D100 and since then that's about the only camera I use. Later this year I will move to the D300 for several of reasons. First, I'm comfortable enough now with digital that I know I won't be going back to film. We're also starting to do a lot of traveling so I want a camera capable of getting the best shots possible. Also, the D300 will meter with several MF lenses I have. Finally, I'm at the age where the D300 will probably handle my photographic needs for as long as I'm doing serious shooting--so I figure I might as well spend a couple of hundred extra and get the D300 rather than the D200.

[graham_line]

My upgrades come when something wears out, or there's a significant jump in function, and I'd rather have two or three good lenses than a bag of mediocre "just until I get better stuff" glass.

 

For example, when I was shooting Pentax screwmount back in the '70s, the AE capability of the ES made it worth the money. When the need developed for high-frame rates, the Spotmatics went away and Nikons (FA & FM2n) replaced them. Once autofocus technology got really good, an F100 was added . . . see the pattern?

 

Sometimes the next new camera/lens is just another increment of utility, and sometimes it isn't fully developed. Better to get comfortable and familiar with your gear so you can recognize when a change in hardware will really be an improvement.

 

It's kind of like the guys that like to work on their cars all the time -- a driving school would make them faster, but they'd rather dink around with hardware and hope for a miracle.