PDA

View Full Version : D50 body only or kit?



umbalito99
01-12-2006, 12:35 PM
Hello,

I am loooking to purchase a DSLR anytime soon and the D50 is at the top of my list. My main issue, as always is of course price.\

I have also read the excellent thread on the general Dslr thread on lenses, but it has me even more confused.

My question is, would it be cheaper in the long run if I purchase just the D50 body and a separate lens, third party maybe, than get the body with the kit? Assuming regular prices of course.

I am looking mostly to shoot landscape shots, so something that starts out wide (at least 28mm) is a must. If it starts wider, even better.

But I would rather get a lens that starts out at 28 or 35 and goes longer than one that starts out wider than 28 but doesn't go that long at all.

Any advise on good lenses?\

Thanks

jcon
01-12-2006, 01:27 PM
You will be able to find alot of discussion on this forum on that very topic. I had the same dillema starting out. You sound like a prime candidate for the body only and the Sigma 18-125mm or if youd like a little more reach the Sigma 18-200mm. After doing research and hearing suggestions from others I went with the body only and the 18-125mm and dont regret it at all! Since your main shooting prupose is outdoors, I think you would be happy with the same. I am sure others will give suggestions and opinions too. Also, the price of the 18-125 is under $270 and I am not sure of the 200mm.

D70FAN
01-12-2006, 02:01 PM
Hello,

I am loooking to purchase a DSLR anytime soon and the D50 is at the top of my list. My main issue, as always is of course price.\

I have also read the excellent thread on the general Dslr thread on lenses, but it has me even more confused.

My question is, would it be cheaper in the long run if I purchase just the D50 body and a separate lens, third party maybe, than get the body with the kit? Assuming regular prices of course.

I am looking mostly to shoot landscape shots, so something that starts out wide (at least 28mm) is a must. If it starts wider, even better.

But I would rather get a lens that starts out at 28 or 35 and goes longer than one that starts out wider than 28 but doesn't go that long at all.

Any advise on good lenses?\

Thanks

Well... the kit lens is 18-55 (which translates to a 35mm FOV of 27-82.5) so while it meets your needs for wide angle, it is a cheap lens, and as such, is limited in it's wide-open (aperture) capability. If you shoot mostly daylight at f/8-f/11 then it should suffice. The Nikkor AF-S 18-70 DX (~$380) is a good choice as well, but for a little higher image quality at about the same price you might also want to look at the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 ($389), or 18-50 f/2.8 ($464).

If you are looking for a little better focal length range, and good image quality then the Sigma 18-125 f/3.5-5.6 is a very good everyday walk around lens for about $270. For a real reach, on a budget, the Sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 does a pretty decent job for about $375.

If you don't mind a little foot-zoom there are a nice collection of fixed focus lenses out there as well, but if wide angle (28mm-36mm) is your preference then the fast zooms from Sigma are probably the way to go. If you want wide angle and greater zoom range the 18-125 or 18-200 would work as well.

From a cost/performance point of view the D50+Sigma 18-125 is a good compromise versus the 18-55 kit lens.

My hands-on with these lenses apply to the Sigma 18-125, Nikkor 18-70 (sold to buy the Sigma), and the Sigma and Tamron 18-200. I also have the Nikkor 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.8 (either or both highly recommended) for low light, portrait, and some landscape as well.

Finally there is also the very well reviewed Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 but it is definately out of the wide angle zoom class when applied to dSLR's with an equivalent FOV to 42-112.5.

These are just suggestions based on my own experience (with a D70), talking to a lot of photographers, and reading a lot of reviews.

Have fun.

umbalito99
01-13-2006, 03:24 AM
Thanks for the replies

The Sigma 18-125/200 seem to be the "cheapest" options right now. If I want something with that kind of range. But as pointed out, the f/3.5 is a bit of an issue.

I was a bit floored with the prices of lenses as I was looking through them.. I really did not expect them to be that much. Now I'm beginning to see why ultrazoom-prosumers are popular despite being almost worth as much as an entry-level DSLR body.

Btw, I also came across this (http://vistek.ca/details/details.aspx?WebCode=134037&CategoryID=CameraLenses) guy: Nikon AR-9 Soft Shutter Rels.For F3,FA,FE2 which from what I understand is like an image stabilizer?? Or is it?? Will it save my indoor lowlight shots with out a tripod?? Or can I even use it on the D50?

thanks again./

coldrain
01-13-2006, 03:48 AM
Thanks for the replies

The Sigma 18-125/200 seem to be the "cheapest" options right now. If I want something with that kind of range. But as pointed out, the f/3.5 is a bit of an issue.

I was a bit floored with the prices of lenses as I was looking through them.. I really did not expect them to be that much. Now I'm beginning to see why ultrazoom-prosumers are popular despite being almost worth as much as an entry-level DSLR body.

Btw, I also came across this (http://vistek.ca/details/details.aspx?WebCode=134037&CategoryID=CameraLenses) guy: Nikon AR-9 Soft Shutter Rels.For F3,FA,FE2 which from what I understand is like an image stabilizer?? Or is it?? Will it save my indoor lowlight shots with out a tripod?? Or can I even use it on the D50?

thanks again./
That "guy" is for older film SLR's, it is for use on a tripod, where your pressing the shutter button presses the camera down on one side a bit. This causes vibration, making long exposure photos maybe less sharp, and this is just a mechanical thing to minimize the vibration. Nothing to do with your D50 and nothing to do with image stabilization.

K1W1
01-13-2006, 02:12 PM
T
I was a bit floored with the prices of lenses as I was looking through them.. I really did not expect them to be that much. Now I'm beginning to see why ultrazoom-prosumers are popular despite being almost worth as much as an entry-level DSLR body.

The lens and the photographer are the two most important factors. Lenses are an investment that can be used over many camera bodies for years to come so it's worthwhile getting the best you can afford.

umbalito99
01-15-2006, 02:58 AM
Ah, thanks for clearing tha up coldrain.

@k1w1 : Hmm, yes, true, but if the only way I can get an equivalent lens of something like say the $ Cdn 580 Panasonic FZ20 is to spend $800 on a bazooka lens, then it might not be for me.

Although granted I am very much interested in photography, it will still be a strictly weekend thing.



Ok, here's my intial list:

1.> Body + Sigma 18-125, f/3.5-6 >> Cdn $ 1209.95 / 1269.95 for the 18-200

2.> Body + Tamron 18-200, f/3.5-6.3 XR >> Cdn $ 1279.95

3.> Kit + Sigma 55-200, f/4-5.6 DC >> Cdn $ 1169.95

4.> Kit + Nikkor AF 70-300 f/4-5.6 G >> Cdn $ 1139.95

5.> Kit + Tamron AF 70-300 APO >> Cdn $ 1229.95

6.> Kit + Panasonic FZ20 36-432mm f/2.8 >> Cdn $ 1519.95

Whatcha guys think? Which one?

I went down to the shop today at played around with the cameras and the Nikons are definitely feeling at home in my hand. The D70s actually felt great, but its just a bit beyond what Im willing to spend. And the D50 will be perfect I believe.

thanks in advance. :)

phatkid77
01-15-2006, 03:15 AM
im telling ya, i paid $50 more for the d70s over the D50
cory

coldrain
01-15-2006, 03:31 AM
Go for either

1b. Body + Sigma 18-200

or

8. Body + kit lens + Sigma 70-300 APO DG.

This Sigma performs a lot better than either the 70-300 from Nikon or the 70-300 from Tamron. And it has a useful 1:2 macro feature to boot.

umbalito99
01-16-2006, 01:18 AM
Hmm.. thanks coldrain

I just realized something, so that means that I actually cant do macro work with say just the kit lens? Or if I go with the Sigma 18-125/200? Unless of course I get a macro lens.

And another thing, the Sigma 70-300 APO that you recommended, how can it have a macro feature if it starts at 70 at the wide end? Sorry, Im just a bit confused.. My only experience is with the Canon S2 IS which just required me to press a button for macro, hehe.

Although I wont be taking a lot of macro shots, I just want to be as flexible as possible..

And I have another question, when I was trying out the D50+kit lens, I noticed the kit lens didn't have a manual focus ring? So how do I manually focus then? There was a switch in the bottom with something like AF-M whch I assume meant auto-focus and manual..??

@phatkid77:

Hmm, sorry, I just read your reply in the other thread. Where did you price match from? I checked Henry's website and they have higher prices than even where Im lookin at.

Im getting my camera here:
http://thecamerastore.com/ProductsList.aspx?ManufacturerID=2924&CategoryID=1&selection=2&SubCategoryID=45&subSelection=0&sub=true

I think they might be willing to match as long as something is advertised in Cdn $$. I've searched the net and they seem to have the best Canadian prices Ive seen.. Plus they give out free batteries with any SLR purchase.

thanks all.

K1W1
01-16-2006, 02:38 AM
Which kit lens did you try? I assume it was the 18-55.
In that case it does have a manual focus ring it's right at the very front of the lens and very narrow 9about 4mm wide). Put the camera and lens into M and focus away!

Bullitt
01-17-2006, 01:36 AM
I have been reading everyone's opinions on lenses here and not sure which way to go for my D50. I have tried the Sigma 18-200 for the last week and find an awful lot of vignetting when I use it full open, is it me or the lens... Does the Sigma 18-125 show the same results as the 18-200 for vignetting... I have never had a lens that produces vignetting like this, I wish I would have kept my Nikon 24-120 VR, never had this kind of problem with it, going to take this Sigma back tomorrow and try something else, thank goodness for the 2 week grace period from the photoshop I deal with... Any suggestions anyone? Sure could use some help on this subject...

coldrain
01-17-2006, 10:49 AM
It is the lens. A lens like that zoom range always has quite some vignetting.
Even my 18-50 has some (but not as much as 18-200's) vignetting wide open.

Bullitt
01-17-2006, 09:01 PM
Today I took back the Sigma 18-200 and tested the 18-125, having the same results with vingetting so I opted for a shorter lens after extensive testing and found no vingetting with the Sigma DC 18-50mm 1:2.8 EX... Needless to say I put it in the bag and left the camera shop happier than when I walked in... I think this lens is much sturdier than the kit lens...

jcon
01-17-2006, 09:22 PM
You saw vignetting with the 18-125? The same as the 18-200??? I am surprised to hear that the 18-125 had vignetting, Ive never had black corners with mine!

Bullitt
01-17-2006, 09:40 PM
Yes, the 18-125 had vingetting but not nearly as much as the 18-200 and the funny thing is, I was told this should happen at the wide angle not the tele-end of things like they both did...I could have bought back my Nikkor 24-120 VR but I thought for the money the 18-50 f2.8 Sigma was a better alternative...I will add a longer lens later when I find one that might be worthwhile. I was shown a Sigma 70-300 D retailing for 169.00, wasnt too sure about that one so I will wait for the right one to come along...

Bullitt
01-17-2006, 10:31 PM
Question...

When looking at longer lenses such as 70-300's, is it better to have the f2.8 or would f4-5.6 work just as well for outside shooting...Little green on these sort of things...:D

jcon
01-18-2006, 12:47 AM
OK, now I am really confused, the 18-125 was vignetting at the TELE END???:eek: Something is wrong here unless what I've learned about vignetting is way off. To answer your question, you dont really need 2.8 for outdoor shots. I am sure someone better qualified can answer that for you. Im just amazed at your findings with the vignetting.

Bullitt
01-19-2006, 12:08 AM
Yes, at the TELE end, which I was told was totally opposite of where you should see vingetting... Anyway, it was showing with both lenses so I was turned off both of them opting to use the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 until I can find a longer lens that will produce crisp sharp pictures... I quickly looked at a Sigma 70-300 D lens but was leary about it when I saw the price tag was only 169.00 new, wasn't sure of the quality of that one so I left with the 18-50 in my bag for now... All I wanted was one lens to cover almost everything but dark corners just wouldn't cut it for me even though I'm sure Sigma is a good quality lens... I don't condemn Sigma, just the two lenses I happened to try...

coldrain
01-19-2006, 02:08 AM
You saw vignetting with the 18-125? The same as the 18-200??? I am surprised to hear that the 18-125 had vignetting, Ive never had black corners with mine!
He did not see real vignetting but rather serious light fsall off towards the corners.