azn137

Looks normal on my monitor as well. Although I see some dust on your lens ^_^

Go with the D80, you won't regret. I have the D80 myself, and lemme tell ya, it's great. I used to have the D40, and tbh, it was a nothing compared to the D80. The deal breakers: lack of lens compatibility and wireless flash commander.

To the best of my knowledge:

 

"G" is the version without the aperture ring on the lens, which means you can only adjust the aperture "width" thru camera; whereas "D" version has the aperture ring on the lens, which will be compatible with a lot more models. In your case, this doesnt make a difference, for you're using D80, which you have to close your aperture to minimum if you get the "D" version. Also, "G" will autofocus faster and more quiet. Can someone correct me if I'm wrong?

 

AF stands for Autofocus. Ones with the "S" are the ones that have autofocus motor on the lens itself, which will work for D40/D40X/D60. Otherwise, those models won't be able to autofocus. Since you have the D80 with the autofocus motor on the camera, this won't affect you much.

 

Nikon's current 3 primes are FX compatible, they dont have any crop factor. This means you will be able to use them for your next FX model.

 

There is a thread somewhere in our forum on the bokeh topic, you're gonna have to do some digging. Some people believe the odd number of elements is better than even. I tend to agree.

 

Hope that help (and was correct).

TBH I don't really care if a thank you post is posted, but I'd like to know if my post was helpful or no.

Wouldnn't it be that the more blades you have, the more light is going to be blocked, therefore IQ will be lower??

I bought my D40 at Staples with the service plan last year. 2 weeks ago, I came back there, claimed my camera was broken, and upgraded my D40 to the D80 kit. They gave me full credit of what I paid for the D40 last year, which was $600. All I had to pay was the difference, which was $500. I know it's not the best deal out there, but I paid a little bit more for the "upgradability".

 

Now, I have $1100 "credit" for my next "broken" camera. This would definitely help in case I want to upgrade to something else down the road. Granted, they don't have a big selection to choose from.

Canon RAW codec: http://blogs.msdn.com/pix/archive/2007/03/30/canon-raw-codec-for-vista-release.aspx

 

Nikon RAW Codec: http://nikonimglib.com/nefcodec/

 

Hope this helped.

I'm with Bill on this one. Why store in TIFF when you can create them at will?? NEF and HQ JPEG should do the trick.

Hmm, thanks guys. Good thing I brought it up, otherwise I would never know to get the D300 instead of D200.

 

So, bottom line is, D300 is better at high ISO?? Also, it produces better quality than CCD?? I always thought they were the same difference!

I shoot with a D80 atm. But I'm thinking about upgrading to either D200 or D300 next year.

 

Looks like more and more people favor CMOS over CCD. I guess I'm still a little bit "old schooled".

So, I haven't really looked at the D90 since I don't have any interest on it. But I just noticed that it has CMOS

instead of CCD sensor. Does anybody know why Nikon went CMOS instead of CCD???

 

Also, I'd like to know your thoughts on CMOS vs. CCD: why do you think one is better?? (obviously this is a

biased place to asked this question, since I'm in "Nikon DSLRs" category) But I'd love to hear your inputs, guys

and gals.

is your lens DX or FX format?

 

There's DX and FX lens. then there's full frame sensor, and cropped sensor.

 

DX will give you full resolution on cropped sensor. FX (the F stands for Full) will give you full resolution on full frame sensor.

 

in other words, DX lens will create a smaller image on the sensor, which works great if your sensor is cropped (appr. about 1.5 times smaller than full, which is 35mm). if you use DX lens on a full frame sensor (D3/D3x/D700), what you get is a smaller image on the sensor, so you end up not using all of your megapixels. on the other hand, if you use FX lens on a cropped sensor, it will create a large image on it, but the sensor will only see a part of it.

 

bottom line: to get the best quality, use the D3/D700 if your lens is FX, use the D300 if your lens is DX.

 

you can read more about it here: http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/full-frame-sensor-vs-crop-sensor-which-is-right-for-you/

I don't want to sound mean, but 1) Read the manual, it helps a lot; and 2) I guess it's what we get for getting too many things at once (DSLR and hi-def movie recorder)

TBH I would get the D300 over the D700, because like Nick and Rene said, there isn't that much of a difference, unless you're planning to take pictures with really poor lighting. Plus, getting the D700 means you're losing your currently owned lenses. If you keep on using your DX lenses, you would end up using 6.67 MP, which defeats the purpose of upgrading in the first place.

I have the SB-600 and I love it.

 

Did I mention I love my SB-600?? o__O

Hi guys,

 

I totally forgot to ask: for the Nikkor 60mm macro: which one is better, AF or AF-S???

Looks like the Sigma lens doesn't much of love from the majority of people around. I guess I'll get the Nikkor 50mm for now, and then wait until I save up enough money to get either the Nikkor 60mm or 105mm Macro. Most likely it will be the 60mm due to, again, my low budget.

 

Thanks a bunch for your input guys. You saved me from wasting my money on the Sigma.

"If you are serious about macro then you cannot better a dedicated 1:1 macro lens."

The Sigma 50mm is a dedicated 1:1 macro lens; and that's where my dilemma is :-(

 

I know most of us would like to have Nikon glass instead of 3rd party, but you guys don't think Sigma is a good choice? Don't mean to disagree, but the Sigma can [almost] perform as if it's the Nikkor, just a little slower. That's what I have in mind right now, no?

The Nikkor 50mm f1.8 is around $110, the Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro is about $220-$270. Right now I'm trying to sell my 55-200mm VR because the new D80 comes with 18-135mm, and I've used the 55-200mm only once since I bought it last year. Now I figure I'd rather sell it a get something that I would get the most use out of.

 

I can only afford one of the two. One has big aperture, one is macro, and I love the both features. So hard to choose!!! Help.....

I meant macro as in "blown up" stuff: bugs, flowers, pens, nuts and bolts, velcro, etc... pretty much everything under the sun. To me, things look cool when you "blow" them up!

 

On the other hand, I also like to practice more on my portraits skill as well. It is something I'd definitely like to improve.

Hi guys, it's me again, Tam.

 

First off, I'd like to share some good news with you guys. I've graduated from my D40, and am waiting for the D80

to arrive in a couple of days. Second, I'd like to thank those of you who gave me great feedbacks on where to get

cheap new/old glass, and the answer seemed to be either B&H or KEH. Great!

 

But I'm facing a dilemma now that I finally get my hands on the D80: which glass to buy. Based on my SMALL budget

and experience, I've narrowed it down to these 2: Nikon 50mm F1.8, or Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro (minimum focus

0.185m, or about 7.3in, in case you guys don't have that number on top of your head). I've been in love with

macro photog since the first day i landed my fingers on a camera, but I also have a passion for great (or the

lack thereof) depth of field (i.e., the blurred background is just lovely on anything). I know the Sigma has a

couple steps difference, but it can do macro, which the Nikkor cannot do.

 

If you were in my position, what would you go for? Any comments appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Tam.

1) the images take WAY to long to (down)load. you have to resize or lower the quality down. dramatically!

 

2) text too big.

 

3) theres no difference between text and links. i cant tell.

 

4) you might wanna use <div>'s more often than tables. because not a lot of people have the same screen resolution.

 

my 2cents.

looks like KEH is a good place to start shopping around, since i've seen at least 3-4 of you guys suggested.

 

iam upgrading to the d80 because 1) i can trade my d40 in and get the original price i bought it with, which was $550 and 2) rumor has it that the d90 is coming out (well, its been confirmed), so the price of the d80 will most likely drop.

 

the problem is, i can ONLY go to staples.com and order the kit (with 18-55mm VR). atm (at the moment) its $950. iam waiting for it to drop to $850 and iam buying.

 

another conclusion i came up with after reading you guys' post is to get the 16-85 or 18-70 (or 105). those 2 were the ones i actually had in mind, so thats awesome!

 

thx a lot for your thoughts guys :)

i wouldnt expect much of a deal for the 50mm f1.8 actually, but i was hoping if i can find good places to get other glasses such as the micro's (macro photography always amazes me btw) and the zooms.

 

i forgot to mention, i also have the 55-200mm VR, but i barely use it because its just a lil bulky. any good deal on the "more friendly and practical" zoom, i.e. 18mm-however-long-it-may-be???

 

thx for you guys' comments so far.

hey guys,

 

i currently am having a nikon d40 (and having great fun with it), but iam (for sure) upgrading to the d80 within

the next couple of weeks. after that, iam planning to get some nice glass for the new toy, but the budget will be

running a lil low. i was wondering if you guys can suggest a couple of places where i can buy second hand lenses.

 

iam from north california (sacramento), but i would much rather get stuff online (if possible, obviously). i will

be mostly taking pictures of landscapes, scenes, objects, maybe events here and there; although, iam planning to

improve my skills on people's photos.

 

iam in love with the 50mm f1.8, therefore i will definitely wanna get it once i get my hands on the d80 (for i

can AF with it).

 

any input would be much appreciated.

 

tam.