ronbudway

<p>I'd like to see a smaller dslr too, but I don't think there is any need for a consumer dslr to have a metal body. The FM was designed to last for 20 years. Nobody will use a dslr for more than a four or five years.</p>

<p>What I don't understand is why they can't make a dslr that would fit right into an fm body. I know adding a screen will add a little to the back, but why can't they fit all the electronics in the space where the film used to be?</p>

<p>I don't know if you have any interest in the video capabilities of the D90/D5000, but I think the 18-200 is great for this application. Big range, VR, and very easy to manually focus. The focus ring is about a centimeter wide, near the camera body, and smooth.</p>

<p>Well I think photography programs at most schools that offer PhD's are part of the fine arts department and to my knowledge there is no such thing as a doctoral degree in any studio-based art major. You can get a PhD in art history, but not in painting or drawing or ceramics or, I believe, photography. MFA is the terminal degree in studio based art.</p>

<p>If you're considering the T1i, you should also be considering the Nikon D5000. Low light performance is about the same. In many ways they are about the same, IMO, but the Nikon has that articulating screen. T1i has much higher res. screen, though. Nikon is about $50 cheaper.</p>

<p>I recently upgraded from a D70 to the D5000 and I couldn't be happier with my purchase.</p>

<p>Hi Sonia. If you think a good percentage of the photos you take will be of your four kids I don't think you would be disappointed by the 18-200. I used mine last week to shoot photos and video of an event at my daughter's school, indoors with fairly poor lighting. I'm very pleased with the results. ISO 1600 + VR, I never needed more than 1/25 for any shots. Some were blurry if she was moving her head, but about 80% were good. Outdoors in good light you can stop down and the lens will be great. For me, the convenience of just the one lens easily outweighs the limitations most of the time. </p>

<p>Also, if you think you want that lens, B&H offers a kit with the D90+18-200.</p>

<p>Damn you, Matt Laur. I was all set to happily pay $200 for the Nikon 35mm 1.8 to replace my 35mm f2.0 which I recently sold because my new camera (d5000) can't autofocus it. Now I've gotta have the Sigma for twice the price.</p>

<p>Actually, thanks for the thoughtful and enlightening posts on the subject. Bokeh quality is important to me and you've helped me see that the Sigma really is far superior in that area.</p>

<p>I just made that decision myself, Boris. I think most people are going advise you to go with the D90 because it does indeed have more flexibility due to having a few more features, but you should ask yourself if you really need any of those features. For me the answer was no and I really like the articulating screen, even though it's lower res. I don't question the fact that Nikon is targeting soccer moms or whatever with this camera, but the fact is the image quality and autofocus ability (11 point) are identical to those of the D90. There is no reason you can't get professional results from the camera.</p>

<p>A lot of people seem to think the lack of an AF motor in the D5000 is a really big deal, and for some I'm sure it is, but unless I counted wrong Nikon already makes 29 lenses that are fully compatible with the D5000 and they are adding new ones like the 35mm f1.8 all the time. It's true that a bunch of those lenses are 18-xxx zooms, but they've got something in almost every category. Sigma and Tamron also make a ton of lenses that have motors in them.</p>

<p>For me the lack of flash support is irrelevant. Personally I have no interest in flash photo and I don't do any kind of photography that requires it. Of course you may feel exactly the opposite. If so, probably get the D90.</p>

<p>Another factor for me was the kit lens. I already have an 18-200vr, 10-20 sigma, and a couple of fast primes (which I'll be replacing with the 35 f1.8). I wanted to add the 18-55 vr to my collection for a light, compact combo for family stuff. Buying that lens as part of the D5000 kit knocked about $80 off the price of it. I didn't see anyone offering the D90 with that lens for a discount. Add that in and the whole package was quite a bit less than it would have been if I bought the D90</p>

<p>Finally, I really wanted that articulating screen. I've seen a lot of people calling it a gimmick. I think many of these people are folks who bought the D90 recently and are wishing they had waited just a little longer. If you do a quick google search you will see that many people are getting fantastic results with the video feature on the D90. The articulating screen, IMO, makes this feature much more useful and easy to use. Imagine holding the camera up in front of your face for 5 minutes (D90) vs. letting the camera hang from the strap around your neck while filming. Big dif. IMO. Also, I have a Hasselblad that I use occasionally with the waistlevel finder. I love the idea of composing in this way with a DSLR. I think 5 years from now every DSLR at every pricepoint will have it. Why not? If you're worried about breaking it just don't unfold it.</p>

<p>I agree most will pick the D90 for a couple hundred buck more. Doesn't mean the D5000 isn't the right choice for some. If you're not sure what you will be doing with photography down the road you should probably get the D90.</p>

<p>Best Buy - 18 months no interest. Also, D90 has the the same image quality as the D300. So does the D5000.</p>

<p>I know it's shallow and silly, but not wanting my camera to have a cheesy "Rebel" logo on it was one of the reasons I switched to Nikon about 5 years ago.</p>

<p>James, I totally understand your desire to buy new with a warranty, but you can get one used for about $130 less than B&H is asking. Maybe you can find a seller who has a recent model who will guarantee there is no oil on the blades ;-)</p>

<p>I don't know if I'm allowed to do this and I'm sure it'll be promptly removed if not, but I've got one in mint cond. for sale in the classifieds here. I just bought a D5000 which doesn't have an autofocus motor and I'm going to buy the new 35mm f1.8 to replace it.</p>

<p>Speaking of video, I just made a couple with the D5000 and I think maybe the video capabilities for it and the D90 are underrated by a lot of people. It's true you can't autofocus while recording, but if you're outdoors you can stop down quite a bit and really not need to autofocus for a lot of stuff. </p>

<p>How often do you use the 200-300mm range? If you don't use it too much you may consider selling both your 18-135 AND your 75-300 in favor of the 18-200. I have the 18-200 and I love it, especially with a polarizing filter. Yeah, it's got some issues at certain spots, but it's so darn convenient. There are plenty of samples online showing how incredibly sharp the 16-85 is, and it does have the extra at the wide end, but do you really want to be swapping and carrying lenses? If you do often use the 200-300mm range and you don't mind swapping/carrying you should probably go for the 16-85.</p>

<p>Nice video. I think you did a good job of highlighting the significant differences. I picked up a D5000 a couple of days ago. Upgrading from a D70, needless to say, I'm loving it. Do you think the D90 has a better build quality? A couple of early reviews have made that claim, but I didn't notice any difference in the store, nor do I notice any difference between the D5000 and my D70.</p>

<p>I don't know. I'm trying to decide between these two cameras and the D90 seems to me to have at least a couple of hundred bucks worth of extra bang: much higher res. screen, lens motor, 2nd command dial, easier access to WB. And the d5000 isn't any smaller at all. </p>

<p>I really don't understand all the negativity towards this camera. Nikon made a camera with exactly the same IQ as the D90, minus a few features that may or may not be important to you, added an articulating screen, and priced it about 25% lower than the D90. Where is the problem?</p>

<p>I also don't understand why so many are assuming only rank amateurs will be attracted to this product. It's got the same IQ as the D90 which is pretty close to the D300 from what I've read. And it's got the articulating screen which a lot of folks, myself included, think is a major plus. Now I can compose with my DSLR like I compose with my Hasselblad. I've got an 18-200 vr which will work fine, the Sigma 10-20 which will work fine, and the 35mm f2 and 50mm f1.8 which will not autofocus but can be replaced by the new 35mm f1.8. I am going to miss my 50mm, but if that's the only lens price I have to pay I can live with it. I'll probably buy the kit with the 18-55 vr just to give me a compact lightweight zoom for family stuff.</p>

<p>Seriously, this is a sweet camera for a perfectly reasonable price. For me, it's exactly what I've been waiting for to replace my D70. I was starting to seriously consider the Panasonic GH-1 because it's small, does HD video, and has the articulating screen. Now that idea is out the window. Anyone know when the d5000 will be shipping?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I don't see what the problem is with this camera. The reason is doesn't have a focus motor is that it can be smaller and lighter without it. A lot of people, myself included, want a dslr that is as small as possible. The new 35mm f1.8 makes the internal motor much less important for a lot of people. Tilt/swivel is awesome. Not sure why they can't just stick another command dial on there, though. </p>

<p>I'm buying one. This is the camera that finally gives me enough reasons to upgrade my d70.</p>

<p>I'm as amazed as anyone by what we can do with the new technology. However, I was recently blown away by the quality of color slides from the 60s. At a family gathering someone brought an old projector and screen and a box of old slides -- unbelievable dynamic range. I shoot a D70 so I don't know how much better the newer cameras are with regard to dynamic range, but these old slides we're simply stunning. Noon on a sunny day looked fantastic. Incredible color rendition and contrast. Sharp as can be, too. These old slides made 50 years ago look like yesterday.</p>

<p>For me, the articulating screen is a big selling point. I have an old nikon coolpix with one that I loved. Samsung mock-up lacks this. Also, the main selling point of these cameras is size and the 4/3rds sensor will allow the GH-1 to be slightly smaller than the Samsung or any other camera with an aps-c sensor. Not a big difference, but definitely worth noting.</p>

<p>Peter, thanks for the info, but I'm pretty sure the GH-1 kit will be with a 28-280 (equivalent) lens. That's the only lens Panasonic has optimized for video. It's silent so the microphone doesn't record the focusing noise. My understanding is that this lens required a lot of engineering to produce, hence the high price. Will Samsung be able to pull off a similar feat? who knows.</p>

<p>The Lumix line has a history of producing very nice digital camera and lens combos. Samsung no. Maybe Samsung will be the next big thing, but for now Panasonic is a much more proven entity in digital photography.</p>

<p>Lastly, there are rumors all over that Nikon will be releasing a "D5000" any day. Some think this could be a hybrid camera similar to the GH-1. Given Nikon's slow pace for releasing new products and the neccessity to include a long and silent all purpose zoom to compete with the GH-1 I don't think I'll wait.</p>

<p>I've had the 18-200 for almost a year now and its' performance and handling have exceeded my expectations. I find it plenty sharp with very nice contrast. I say this as the owner of two fast Nikon prime lenses. Works beautifully with a polarizing filter. Most of the photo's on the site below were taken with the lens on a D70.</p>

<p>http://mcleodorchards.com</p>

<p>Harry, are you talking about small medium format cameras from the past? I don't think the G1 is comparable to those. Everybody made 35mm cameras that were half the size of current DSLR's. I own and use a Nikon F3HP film SLR. I think this was a very popular camera with professional photo journalist. It's also about half the size of my D70 and about the same size as the GH 1.</p>

<p>Those old small cameras like the K1000, OM-1, AE-1, and a range of tiny Nikon's were/still are great cameras. Those are the cameras I thought of when I saw the G1. You're right to point out that it can't fit in a shirt pocket, but it can certainly go places a current DSLR can't. And it shoots hi def video.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the great responses. Since the camera isn't out yet, I'm in no big rush, but I am planning to switch from Nikon over to Panasonic. What will I be giving up, really? Some low light performance and access to lots of lenses, but Panasonic seems to be offering all the types I use. I don't do sports so that isn't a problem. Kit lens + 20mm 1.7 pancake, maybe get the wide angle at some point. That's all I need. I have the Sigma 10-20 now, but rarely use it. My 18-200vr and 35mm f2.0 cover 95% of my needs.</p>

<p>Seems to me that this camera will be the ultimate family shooter for both photos and video, and will also have the ability to do pretty nice fine art stuff. Only drawback I can see is that the 20mm pancake probably will not be soundproofed for video. I'd love that lens for family low light stuff with the ability to shoot video.</p>

<p>Where are Nikon and Canon with options like this?</p>

<p>Way back when the D300 came out I said "when Nikon makes a prosumer SLR with that kind of low light capability I'll get it". Then when the D90 came out and I saw that it had hd video too I was reaching for my credit card. But when I found out you couldn't autofocus while filming or record stereo sound I said "I'll wait until Nikon offers a camera that can do that too". Now someone else is offering all that save for the low light performance in a much smaller package. And Panasonic is at least claiming pretty decent low light ability. Better than the already decent G1. Add in a fast pancake lens and I think I'm sold. Sorry Nikon.</p>

<p>I also think the 4/3rds format might be ideal for this type of camera. APS would need a little more space and would be a little bigger. It also looks like Panasonic and Olympus have put together something far beyond a typical first attempt. G1 gets very good reviews for IQ, handling and features. That articulating screen might seal the deal for me. If it takes adaptors, maybe there will be an adaptor for my nice Nikon glass down the road. I know this format has been talked about for a while, but it was news to me. Very exciting.</p>

<p>Just recently I have discovered that Panasonic and Samsung are, or will be, marketing cameras that put 4/3rds or APS size sensors in cameras that are much smaller than an DSLR. They do this by eliminating the SLR mirror and replacing it with an electronic viewfinder and a live view screen on the back. They will also be offering hi def video and the ability to use Olympus, Leica, (for Panasoinc) or Pentax (for Samsung) lenses with an adaptor.</p>

<p>Am I the only one who thinks this is HUGE?</p>

<p>I can only find a tiny bit of talk about this development on these boards. I find this an amazing development. DSLR quality in a much smaller package with hi def video (with autofocus and stereo recording, BTW). Panasonic is planing a 20mm f1.7 pancake lens for their camera that would make a truely pocketable package. I'm already checking used prices for all my Nikon gear in anticipation of switching.</p>

<p>Anyone else thinking along these lines? Am I overlooking some serious disadvantages to a system like this?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I forgot to mention that we use them exclusively for B+W negatives. I can't comment on their color performance and in fact, when I've tried to scan color negatives I haven't been able to. Something about the ICC profiles, I think. Yes I have set the program for color negatives. Don't know if this is because it's being used on an Intel iMac or because I overlooked something simple.</p>