PDA

View Full Version : D50 Body Only



Rex914
04-20-2005, 05:59 PM
I have no idea if these places are making up things or not, but they claim that the D50 body will be sold (don't know when) for $750.

Here's one such place. (http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=13272608&bct=t1003%3Bc1009)

If the $750 is really true, Nikon's hurting themselves badly by not differentiating their products too well. The D50 is not that much smaller than the D70s nor is it truly "crippled" in any sense. What exactly are they aiming for here? They should either have crippled the D50 more and sold it at the Rebel's price or they should have upped the D70 to be more on par with the 20D. Or perhaps they really have a D200 under the wraps?

Regardless, this is really the end of the top-of-the-line fixed lens models. Nikon has officially doomed the 8700, 8400, and 8800 by introducing a far superior camera that's only a little larger (in the case of the 8800, it's actually LIGHTER) and one that takes far, far better photos. Moreover, it costs barely more than an 8700, the same as an 8400, and less than an 8800. The 8400 particularly is out the window. For the SAME price ($899), you can get a D50 kit. Even the kit lens is better than the one on the 8400. You'd have to be crazy to get an 8400 now...

sarcazmo
04-20-2005, 07:01 PM
Wow, $750 body only seems like a lot of money.

I just purchased my D70 w/ 200 dollar rebate and it came out to 882.

In any case, rather than release a whole new update to the D70, I would have just released the firmware update, and released something to compete with the 20D.

JTL
04-20-2005, 09:43 PM
If the $750 is really true, Nikon's hurting themselves badly by not differentiating their products too well.I'm telling you, they've seriously lost their way. And that's not good for anyone. With no serious competition from Nikon, Canon and others will have less incentive to innovate.

gary_hendricks
04-21-2005, 06:17 AM
Wow, if it goes for $750, I'd definitely buy it over the 8800, 8400 series. Maybe Nikon's marketing has screwed up indeed. ;)

TheObiJuan
04-21-2005, 11:00 AM
who would pay that much for a dslr with many missing dslr features. It is better than the 300D in some ways, but much worse in others. How old is the design on the 300D now? 2 years?

Do you know if the regular D70 will still be available once the D70s comes out?
I hope they dont jack up the price to 1200 again... :rolleyes:

D200 at 1500 with 20D like features, sure! D70s with implemented design features that should have been included 16 months ago for more than $1000, NO.

I like that Nikon have released a new super low budget dslr, this will make plenty of P&S nikon owners jump, but the design of the new D50 just seems flawed. Too many corners were cut.
I am not a camera engineer or marketing expert, perhaps this is where the future of the lower end dslr market is going.... I hope not though.

Ant
04-21-2005, 12:22 PM
who would pay that much for a dslr with many missing dslr features.

Well, when the 300D was first released it was about the same price (maybe even more..i get confused when people talk in dollars :)) and plenty people bought it...and it had far more missing features.


It is better than the 300D in some ways, but much worse in others.

In what way is it much worse? because from the specs I've seen it pretty much beats the 300D in just about everything......as it should do considering the relative age of the cameras.


Do you know if the regular D70 will still be available once the D70s comes out?

The D70 is being discontinued and replaced by the D70s


but the design of the new D50 just seems flawed. Too many corners were cut.

I thought they hadn't cut enough corners...it's actually fairly comparable to the D70 and a lot more full featured than the Canon 300D.....of course the new 350XT is a different proposition and it will be interesting to see how the sales figures go.

The real crunch for the D50 will be it's price point...and I don't mean it's initial release price or any figures that are being thrown around now. I mean the price it will naturally fall to when it's been available for a few months. All the cameras in this class fell in price gradually when the initial release period passed, which is why the D50 may seem a little expensive in comparison at this moment.

JTL
04-21-2005, 12:32 PM
You walk into a store. Sitting in front of you is a Nikon D50 and a Canon 350D/XT. Now let's say they're the same price...

Seriously... :rolleyes:

Ant
04-21-2005, 12:45 PM
You walk into a store. Sitting in front of you is a Nikon D50 and a Canon 350D/XT. Now let's say they're the same price...

Seriously... :rolleyes:

Well according to the site linked above the D50 is $100 cheaper than the 350XT. So that may make a big difference, I don't know.

Which is why I say that pricing is crucial. And it's something that we won't really be able to determine for a few months when both cameras settle down to their natural price points.

JTL
04-21-2005, 01:26 PM
The D50 is clearly meant to be a "consumer" dSLR. But when you have point-and-shoot cameras offering higher resolution at a lower price, believe me, it's gonna be a tough sell to those "consumers". What's the marketing message? Pay more and get less? And, for those who have made up their minds to go dSLR, if $50 or even $100 stands between them getting a vastly superior camera or the D50, then I doubt that those who know anything about cameras or those who even do the slightest ammount of research will buy the D50. Would any of us? Really? Let's face it...we all know that the only people who will buy this camera will be people who didn't do any homework. I mean, come on...even the camera that it's trying to compete with, the dReb 300D, with the Wasia hack is still arguably a better camera and it's a year and a half old! That, excuse my bluntness, is just plain pathetic! But, as has been said earlier...it's all speculation for now...

Needless to say, neither I nor anyone I know will be buying the D50...

Rex914
04-21-2005, 03:05 PM
who would pay that much for a dslr with many missing dslr features. It is better than the 300D in some ways, but much worse in others. How old is the design on the 300D now? 2 years?

Do you know if the regular D70 will still be available once the D70s comes out?
I hope they dont jack up the price to 1200 again... :rolleyes:

D200 at 1500 with 20D like features, sure! D70s with implemented design features that should have been included 16 months ago for more than $1000, NO.

I like that Nikon have released a new super low budget dslr, this will make plenty of P&S nikon owners jump, but the design of the new D50 just seems flawed. Too many corners were cut.
I am not a camera engineer or marketing expert, perhaps this is where the future of the lower end dslr market is going.... I hope not though.

Actually, in Nikon's defense, the D50 is an ever so slightly pared down D70. The problem I have is not with the D50 itself. I have a problem with Nikon having two cameras so close to each other in functionality that they overlap. You might wanna take a quick look at the spec sheet again. The differences are quite minute.

Now what you CAN argue is that Nikon was extremely lazy to introduce an upgrade which is hardly one and a downgrade which is hardly one. :p

TheObiJuan
04-21-2005, 03:58 PM
it does not have many of the manual controls available readily, or at all.
when I was looking at the comparison many flags were going off in my head. Let me read it again and then point them out. For them to charge that much and offer so little, come on...

i think I read tha the LCD panel doesn't even light up, any truth to this?

Rex914
04-22-2005, 12:12 PM
Which article did you get this info. from? I read the DPreview one, and I'm still under the impression that they hardly pared anything off (a small list). If they really crippled it, then I wouldn't be saying things like this.

Crippled Features
- Down one step to 1/4000 shutter speed
- Down to 420 segment RGB sensor (from 1000)
- Down to 2.5 FPS (from 3)
- Small things that go down by bigger steps rather than smaller.
- No WB fine tuning
- Status panel (not LCD!) lacks backlight - similar to the 350D/20D situation
- Only one command dial
- DOF button dropped

That's about all I could gather. Then there are actually some instances where the D50 was better than the D70 in a notable way, but I rather not try and find those again...

With the exception of the WB, the RGB sensor, and the drop of the DOF button, I don't think anything else major was dropped. All the manual controls are there, but you just have to enable them.

Ant
04-22-2005, 01:06 PM
i think I read tha the LCD panel doesn't even light up, any truth to this?

Yes, that's true. But why the heck would you need an LCD panel that lights up?

In eight months of using my D70 I've never had to light up my LCD panel. The only people who would ever need to do that are the ones shooting in almost total darkness, and how many people do that?.....even then you can get the same info from either the rear LCD menu or the viewfinder, which are perfectly visible in darkness.

sarcazmo
04-22-2005, 03:31 PM
I'm just wondering if most people are going to want to deal with a lot of the 'hassle' involved with DSLRs?

I mean post processing, different lenses etc?

D70FAN
04-22-2005, 04:44 PM
Yes, that's true. But why the heck would you need an LCD panel that lights up?

In eight months of using my D70 I've never had to light up my LCD panel. The only people who would ever need to do that are the ones shooting in almost total darkness, and how many people do that?.....even then you can get the same info from either the rear LCD menu or the viewfinder, which are perfectly visible in darkness.


Those of us who can't see that well in dim light. :) I use the info display backlight fairly frequently.

Doesn't using the main menu sort-of defeat the idea of speed settings? It's one of the shortfalls of the E-300 (no info LCD display).

D70FAN
04-22-2005, 04:52 PM
Which article did you get this info. from? I read the DPreview one, and I'm still under the impression that they hardly pared anything off (a small list). If they really crippled it, then I wouldn't be saying things like this.

Crippled Features
- Down one step to 1/4000 shutter speed
- Down to 420 segment RGB sensor (from 1000)
- Down to 2.5 FPS (from 3)
- Small things that go down by bigger steps rather than smaller.
- No WB fine tuning
- Status panel (not LCD!) lacks backlight - similar to the 350D/20D situation
- Only one command dial
- DOF button dropped

That's about all I could gather. Then there are actually some instances where the D50 was better than the D70 in a notable way, but I rather not try and find those again...

USB2.0HS and 2" LCD... although the D70s has the later but not the former (kinda weird?)


With the exception of the WB, the RGB sensor, and the drop of the DOF button, I don't think anything else major was dropped. All the manual controls are there, but you just have to enable them.

At one point dropping the back command dial would not have presented a problem, but now I use it a lot for on-the-fly, through the viewfinder, exposure compensation adjustments, while using the front dial to change aperture (or shutter speed). Very handy.

Rex914
04-22-2005, 04:53 PM
Can someone who knows what's going on enlighten us about what the D50 really is based on the specs? Some like me see it as a slightly pruned down D70. Others see it as a crippled camera much like the 300D. Which is it?

sarcazmo
04-22-2005, 06:32 PM
Can someone who knows what's going on enlighten us about what the D50 really is based on the specs? Some like me see it as a slightly pruned down D70. Others see it as a crippled camera much like the 300D. Which is it?

I'd check this (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond50/) article out.

D70FAN
04-22-2005, 07:24 PM
I'd check this (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond50/) article out.

I think the D50 will surprise a lot of people, including we D70 owners.

Rex914
04-22-2005, 08:03 PM
I'd check this (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond50/) article out.

I did, and that's the info. I gathered above. I'd be nice to get all the differences, good and bad in one spot.

D70FAN
04-22-2005, 08:14 PM
I did, and that's the info. I gathered above. I'd be nice to get all the differences, good and bad in one spot.

I think you already did...

...So compared to the 300D what's the downside?

Rex914
04-22-2005, 09:23 PM
I frankly don't know, which is what I've been trying to say all along. Besides being a little more expensive (and image quality could play in here too since it's different from the D70), I don't think it's an inferior camera at all.

Did I miss anything glaringly obvious?

JTL
04-22-2005, 10:44 PM
I frankly don't know, which is what I've been trying to say all along. Besides being a little more expensive (and image quality could play in here too since it's different from the D70), I don't think it's an inferior camera at all.

Did I miss anything glaringly obvious?Well, it would be pretty sad indeed if it weren't at least as good as an almost 2-year old camera! Once again, I have to say most sarcastically..."seriously, now..."

Rex914
04-22-2005, 11:30 PM
I sure hope that Nikon wasn't aiming at making conquest over an old camera. That would be pretty funny. :)

Ant
04-23-2005, 12:26 AM
Those of us who can't see that well in dim light. :) I use the info display backlight fairly frequently.

Doesn't using the main menu sort-of defeat the idea of speed settings? It's one of the shortfalls of the E-300 (no info LCD display).

Ah, yes. Sorry I was forgetting the optically challenged; odd because I'm pretty much that Way myself ;) but I rarely shoot my D70 in dim light.

Yes, using the main menu totally defeats the idea of speed settings but I figured that camera manufacturers think that this isn't as much an issue on an entry level SLR.

D70FAN
04-23-2005, 08:21 AM
Ah, yes. Sorry I was forgetting the optically challenged; odd because I'm pretty much that Way myself ;) but I rarely shoot my D70 in dim light.

Yes, using the main menu totally defeats the idea of speed settings but I figured that camera manufacturers think that this isn't as much an issue on an entry level SLR.

I think Nikon set out to designed the D70 to be a low cost copy of their D1 and D2 lines, (and succeeded) and it looks like the D50 takes that one step down on the price/features curve. So I think the consumer dSLR designers at Nikon probably came from the professional division, or got a lot of tips from them.

D70FAN
04-23-2005, 08:34 AM
I sure hope that Nikon wasn't aiming at making conquest over an old camera. That would be pretty funny. :)

When that old camera is still selling very well it makes perfect sense. It's called share of market. And don't be surprised if Canon announces an actual replacement for the 300D (the XT was designed to compete with the *ist DS, E-300 and the D70).

If I'm Nikon's management team, the high volume, low end, market (where the 300D is still amassing market share) is exactly where I'm aiming.

chuckp
04-25-2005, 09:40 AM
I'm telling you, they've seriously lost their way. And that's not good for anyone. With no serious competition from Nikon, Canon and others will have less incentive to innovate.

Canon does not need any incentive, people talk about Canon as if they are the greatest thing since the shutter release button!

Jredtugboat
04-25-2005, 11:09 AM
I have no idea if these places are making up things or not, but they claim that the D50 body will be sold (don't know when) for $750.

<snip>

Regardless, this is really the end of the top-of-the-line fixed lens models. Nikon has officially doomed the 8700, 8400, and 8800 by introducing a far superior camera that's only a little larger (in the case of the 8800, it's actually LIGHTER) and one that takes far, far better photos. Moreover, it costs barely more than an 8700, the same as an 8400, and less than an 8800. The 8400 particularly is out the window. For the SAME price ($899), you can get a D50 kit. Even the kit lens is better than the one on the 8400. You'd have to be crazy to get an 8400 now...

Hey Rex,

I think you might find that the all in ones stand a fighting chance of being in someone's camera bag.

I have a friend who is heading down to Costa Rica in August. He is an experienced amateur photographer who's waiting on dSLRs until the technology matures a bit more (for him) and prices settle. Until then, he's had a handful (about five or six) compact P&S cameras in the past three years.

I asked him, (when the RebXT came out) NOW do you have a good reason to go dSLR? He answered: no, I'll wait and until then I don't want to lug around an SLR. I want something that can fit in a small fanny pack and don't want to have to worry about lenses and attachments.

I think he represents a significant percentage of camera consumers. People just love all in one solutions! It's the Swiss Army Knife principle: do many jobs not so well, but fit nicely in your pocket. People will buy. I think fairly few people will even notice that the D50 is priced around the 8-series of P&S, and the ones who do will be turned away by the idea that they have to buy a lens.

Just my .02.