D50 vs FZ20

[mario_sav]

hello everyone!
I've been a FZ20 owner for 6 months and I'm planning on upgrading to dSLR because of the high-iso capability, optical viewfinder, image quality, etc.
I'm thinking about th D50 + 18-55mm DX + 55-200mm DX but i'm a bit worried about 2 things so here they go:

1)Will that setup top the image qality of my FZ20
2)Is the difference between the 432mm (35mm eq) of my FZ20 and the 300mm(35mm eq) of the setup above really notorious (i.e. will i miss those extra 132mm a lot?). I'd love to see a comparison.

I do mostly kids photography, a bit of action, no landscapes, little macro.

thanks in advance!

Mario

[eduardofrances]

Well in the lens term you will see the difference but lenses for SLR Cameras offer better sharpnes and less problems of chromatic aberrations.. but hardly you will miss the quality of your FZ20 when you see a photo made with the D50 *and most Digital SLRs* since Digital SLR camera have a bigger sensor this improves, Image quality, per pixel sharpness, detail in photos, Dynamic Range, Noise Handling is better in SLR cameras, the options and features for the manual functions is deeper and the automatic modes are more responsive... over all you wont be missing much your old camera

you can get a 70-300 lens (equiv to 100-400mm) for 150 bucks the tamron 70-300mm Macro LD or the Nikkor 70-300mm AF-G are the best option

My advice the D50 is a great camera but dont narrow you options have a look at the Canon Rebel XT it is a great camera too, and for small hands it is better, while the D50 is more comfortable for big hands


I wish you good luck and that you enjoy your new camera

[coldrain]

Originally Posted by eduardofrances

you can get a 70-300 lens (equiv to 100-400mm) for 150 bucks the tamron 70-300mm Macro LD or the Nikkor 70-300mm AF-G are the best option

Uhmm... you better get a Sigma 70-300 APO DG instead of that crummy Nikkor or that Tamron. And yes, you are better off with tha Sigma instead of that 55-200 too, the 55-200 doesn't perform totally great at 200mm, and the Sigma will do better there... it also offers 100mm extra and a 1:2 macro mode.

[jcon]

I did the exact thing you are thinking of doing. I owned an FZ20 and upgraded to the D50. I dont regret doing it and I know you wont. Its sharper and alot more clean than the pretty noisy FZ20. As for those lens, I cant comment on them, I use the Sigma 18-125mm(for walk around) and soon the Sigma 18-50mm(for wedding work). If you shoot mostly kids photography I would venture to say you wouldnt need a big tele lens. Good luck on your decision!

[mario_sav]

hi again!

Thanks for your replies, i prefer the siigma 70-300 apo too but the thing is i canīt afford it, my max budget is $750 + s/h:

1) the d50+18-55mm+55-200mm for $750 + s/h from bhphoto.
2)(Canīt afford it) the d50 + 18-55mm + sigma 70-300 apo for $823 + s/h from bhphoto.
3) the d50 + 18-55mm for $634 + s/h from bhphoto. ($116 for a lens).

All these are Brand new.

4)In ebay there are these d50 + 18-55mm for $550 + s/h ($200 for a lens)

BUT theyīre either factory demos or refurbs and I donīt know if theyīre good. Thatīs the only way i could get the sigma 70-300mm apo.

Mario

[Blob]

I myself made the switch from a Panasonic FZ 15 to the Nikon D50. I do miss the all-in-one convenience and image stabilization of the Panasonic but the increase in image quality of the D50, faster start up time, increased low light ability, etc. more than make up the difference.

Try and get some good glass even if it means buying one lens at a time. The kit lens is actually a good lens from what I've seen. A great lens for a cheap price, ($100), is the Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime lens. It's great for shooting pictures of your kids indoors and out. The f/1.8 aperture allows you to shoot under many lighting conditions and the superlative optics provide incredibly sharp photos.To start this may be a good choice because you would have a little more money for a long lens.

Have you considered a used lens? Below is a link to KEH.com. They sell used equipment and have a good reputation. This is a link to the Sigma 70-300 APO that every one likes so much.

http://www.keh.com/OnLineStore/ProductDetail.aspx

I use a Nikon 70-210 as my long lens. It is a little short compared to the Panasonic's range but it does take beautiful action shots of my son's soccer games. Pictures of birds in the distance are a bit soft but I'm not sure if that's the lens, the photographer or the lack of a good tripod.

I find I must be more careful with the settings on the D50 over the FZ 15 because there are many more options that you can unintentionally change, like white balance or ISO, and find out later your pictures look bad. Some people will recommend you shoot in RAW to correct these mistakes. Right now I'm using JPEG while still getting used to the nuances of the camera. I'm paying special attention to my settings while I'm shooting to minimize my switchology errors. Eventually I plan on switching to RAW but that's in the future. My point is, this is a much more complex instrument than the FZ20, it will reward you will brilliant pictures but you must work to achieve these results.

Enjoy!

Bob

[mario_sav]

Hi all!

Thz for your reply Bob and yes i've thought about the 50mm f1.8 but i think iīll buy that one later, I need a telezoom for now.

I just realized bhphoto went out of stock for de 2 dx lens kit so now i have less options.

I have a question: Is there a lot of difference between the nikon 70-300 g ($109) and the sigma APO 70-300 ($190) ?

Because if I go for the nikon i can buy a NEW D50 + 18-55 dx but if i go for the sigma APO i'd have to buy a FACTORY DEMO or REFURB D50 + 18-55 dx. Does anyone out there have experience with either factory demos or refurbs from ebay? Please let me know. Thanks

Mario

[K1W1]

Originally Posted by mario_sav

I have a question: Is there a lot of difference between the nikon 70-300 g ($109) and the sigma APO 70-300 ($190) ?
Mario

IMHO as an owner of both (well I actually sold the Nikon last week) the $90 is well spent.
Neither is anything like Pro level glass but the Sigma is way better than the Nikon. The Nikon produces good images when there is plenty of light but is ordinary otherwise. The plus for the Nikon is that it is quite a bit lighter in weight than the Sigma - if I were travelling and weigh was an issue and I could expect the light to be good (lot's of ifs there) then I would consider the Nikon but to own one or the other for all round use the Sigma gets my vote.

[D70FAN]

So here's the deal:

Go to sigmaforless.com...

- D50 body only... $539.95 new

- Sigma 18-125 f3.5-5.6 DC $234.95

Total = $774.90

You could buy the factory refurbished body for $439.95 and add a 5 year Mack warranty this would save an additional $55 and give you 4 more years of coverage than a new new D50. I have purchased 2 refurbs from Nikon in the past 6 years, and they are still going strong, and I have never heard of o problem with any factory refurbs.

The Sigma 18-125 is a great walk around lens. I have been using one on my D70 for a couple of years.