PDA

View Full Version : Stay D80 or go 30D..?



cchart.photo
06-24-2007, 05:20 PM
Hello everyone. My name is Chris Chartchaiganan. I was looking up information on cameras and came across these forums. It seems very well informative and a great place to be in this digital photography world. But on to my real dilemma..

Well right now I'm in the dilemma of switching to Canon. I realize that a majority, meaning over 75% use Canon, for sports/automotive. I mainly shoot automotive but I will be shooting events/modeling/everyday shots when I take my camera along. I keep reading reviews about both. I recently read in an article comparing D80 vs. 400D. Both were very close in comparison but Nikon has better flesh tones. Would the 30D be up to par with event/modeling shots?

I know that both Canon and Nikon are very good cameras. I'm just trying to get the best equipment. Would you have any say about Canon vs. Nikon? Have you tried using both, (old/new D200, D80, 30D, 5D), and compared them? And what about the lenses? Which manufacturer makes a 'better' quality lens? I realize both are at the top of the game, but I was hoping that you could give me more insight. I would really appreciate it. Because I might be selling my D80 and getting a 30D. The only problem is is that I've gotten so used to using my D80 and gotten fairly comfortable using the camera.

It's not such a big hassle to have two types of memory cards w/ Nikon, but Canon I can use just one and switch back and forth as they are the same format.

I realize that I would be able to keep the D80 and get the D200 if I want to upgrade, but there is also Canon 30D and 5D. Both companies have great benefits and that's why it's making my decision harder. Would you say that there is anything that Canon might have an advantage over Nikon? or vice versa? Also, if I do happen to switch the Canon, would there be any lenses you would recommend? Price is not a factor.

Please give me as much insight as possible.



ps. I know it shouldn't be a factor and I'm trying not to make it, but I like the Canon shutter sound better :X


Thanks everyone for their time w/ helping me out.


*edit
By the way, I forgot to mention that I do like the fact that the Nikon D80 can take about 2700 images on one battery charge. Also, the 10 megapixel is a great feature, but going down to 8 isn't so bad I suppose. But I do play on blowing up (enlarging/printing) my pictures and framing them.

Tim018
06-24-2007, 07:30 PM
i used to own a canon(20d), and i sold that on ebay for a nikon d50. i really did not like my 20d. the image quality was really not that good- low saturation, sharpness issues sometimes, unreliable exposure, i hated the hand grip(uncomfortable), and so on. i switched to the d50 and i love it. the photo quality is great, very reliable metering, sharp almost all the time- and the grip is very comfortable. when i bought my d50 at wolf camera, i also tried the 30d out- the photo was actually LESS saturated than my 20d, and the 20d sucked(i compared them side by side)

so anyways- i am now a nikon fan, and i would keep the d80 all the way. from what i have seen/used of it- its awesome. there is still a possibility i am wrong, but that has been my experience. if you want to really find out, go to a camera store that will let you try them out(wolf camera type thing) and make the decision yourself

hope that helps

timmciglobal
06-24-2007, 07:38 PM
What's the problem with your D80? What can't you do with it?

These kinds of posts have no value unless you say WHY you want to switch and WHAT you expect to get out of it.

Tim

Alex D80
06-24-2007, 09:12 PM
By the way, I forgot to mention that I do like the fact that the Nikon D80 can take about 2700 images on one battery charge. Also, the 10 megapixel is a great feature, but going down to 8 isn't so bad I suppose. But I do play on blowing up (enlarging/printing) my pictures and framing them.

I don't know were you got the information that you could take 2700 pictures of a battery charge. I was able to take about 400 on my father-in-law party just last week. By the end of the night I had to grab my secondary battery because it wasn't focusing as fast. I am no professional, but I chose the Nikon D80 over the Canon XTi (400D) for the size and the feel. It is my first dSLR and I am taking some neat pictures even though of my 'rookieness' at this picture hobby. I have some samples I just took last week on my flickr; click just below.

Also, if NASA chose Nikon for the past who knows how many years, there is something about Nikon better than Canon. They are both great cameras, with great features and great lenses. It took me three months of reading here and going back and forth and asking questions before I made the choice of purchasing my D80. Don't regret it and waiting to save some money to get the 70-200 VR lens. Don't forget to get the 50mm f1.8 Nikon if you do decide on the D80; I have heard the same about the Canon.

Good luck and they are both great camera's.

cchart.photo
06-24-2007, 10:40 PM
I don't know were you got the information that you could take 2700 pictures of a battery charge. I was able to take about 400 on my father-in-law party just last week. By the end of the night I had to grab my secondary battery because it wasn't focusing as fast. I am no professional, but I chose the Nikon D80 over the Canon XTi (400D) for the size and the feel. It is my first dSLR and I am taking some neat pictures even though of my 'rookieness' at this picture hobby. I have some samples I just took last week on my flickr; click just below.

Also, if NASA chose Nikon for the past who knows how many years, there is something about Nikon better than Canon. They are both great cameras, with great features and great lenses. It took me three months of reading here and going back and forth and asking questions before I made the choice of purchasing my D80. Don't regret it and waiting to save some money to get the 70-200 VR lens. Don't forget to get the 50mm f1.8 Nikon if you do decide on the D80; I have heard the same about the Canon.

Good luck and they are both great camera's.

I got it off a magazine article. Can't find it now but also from experience. The battery will drain faster w/ long exposures, but day shots with enough light, I'm able to take minimum of 2000 shots.

tim11
06-24-2007, 10:48 PM
I don't know were you got the information that you could take 2700 pictures of a battery charge. I was able to take about 400 on my father-in-law party just last week. ....

It's true that D80 is promoted as such; which is not wrong but misleading. Battery tests for cameras, however, are done without flash, no zoom (for PnS), and no preview on LCD. All those functions will drain up the battery faster.

Rooz
06-25-2007, 02:04 AM
this is not as outlandish as it would seem. i have 6000 shots on my camera and have recharged the battery i think 4 times. i have auto preview turned off btw.

i don't see a move to a 30d as being anything other than a step sideways at best. the only reason i could see a 30d being a good purchase is if you have canon friends and want to share their lens'. or, like andy, you prefer the feel and use of one system much more than the other.

i think tim had the best response..."why ?"

if you want to upgrade and want canon wait till xmas and look for a 5d sale.

coldrain
06-25-2007, 02:11 AM
I often read that Nikon does "better flesh tones".
The weird thing is, though, that whenever you see actual results from a Canon and a Nikon DSLR, the Canon flesh tones look totally natural, where the Nikon flesh tones often either look a bit cold (blue-ish cast) or red, juts not all that neutral.

Same as with metals and glass (like car head lights and chrome), the Canon DSLRs seem to have the materials spot on in photos, where other DSLRs often have something slightly artificial about them.
And when you look more at Nikon and Canon:
Just about every Nikon DSLR model has a different character to it than others. The Nikon D70 was sharper than anything (oversharpened), cool, blue, underexposing slightly.
The D70S was slightly less sharpened, less cool. The D10o before those was very "soft"... The D50 less sharpened than the D70(s), but still clearly a lot of sharpening going on. And this one over saturates and over exposes slighly... very in your face, out of camera results. The D80 has this saturated, extra contrast look too. Where the D200 has the slighly blue-ish character of the D70(s), without the oversharpening...

With Canon just about every DSLR has the same feel to the photos... same saturation, colour, contrast feel, same sharpening, the metals look like metal, skin like skin, and so on.

So... why it always is proclaimed that "Nikon has better flesh tones" is a mystery to me. Especially when you see just how different in character the Nikon DSLR models are compared to eachother.

About the person above who did not like the 20D output:
He likes the saturated and oversharpened look of the standard output of the D50. But does not realize that the 20D has a layed back approach to offer the photographer the best results in post processing. You can not undo sharpening and sharpening artifacts, or over saturation, or over exposure, in post processing... you can sharpen and adjust contrast/sharpness in post processing, and there you have the reason for the standard settings of the 20D.
And it is not exactly hard to figure out that you can CHANGE the standard settings of the 20D... adding in-camera sharpening... adding contrast and saturation... but oh well. Good that he is happy about the D50, a shame it results in this kind of misinformation in these threads.

About the 30D vs the D80... The 30D has better JPEG output by far, but when you switch to RAW the differences are quite small. Also the difference between 10.2 and 8.2 mp is very small. The 30D has 3 advantages, which may not be of importance to you:
Better noise performance of the sensor at ISO 800/1600/3200.
Mirror lock up.
5 frames per second versus 3 frames per second.

I think the Canon lens lineup is the better lineup overall, but without knowing what kind of lenses you have/want/would need, it is pointless to say which lenses and lens system would be best.

The D80 is a good camera, and when you shoot in RAW format you should be able to make very good photos.


Also, if NASA chose Nikon for the past who knows how many years, there is something about Nikon better than Canon.
This just made me chuckle!

Turn
06-25-2007, 01:37 PM
No.

stick to your D80

thats just being silly and the shutter sound? err

Ray Schnoor
06-26-2007, 06:36 AM
And it is not exactly hard to figure out that you can CHANGE the standard settings of the 20D... adding in-camera sharpening... adding contrast and saturation... but oh well. Good that he is happy about the D50, a shame it results in this kind of misinformation in these threads.
As you can change the standard settings of all dSLR cameras... increasing/decreasing in-camera sharpening, contrast and saturation.

As CR says, it is not hard to change the JPG output to suit your tastes and shooting in raw will give you even more lattitude to change the photo after taking the shot.

Ray.

Rooz
06-26-2007, 06:43 AM
So... why it always is proclaimed that Nikon has better <insert anything here> is a mystery to me.

just leave it at that and be done with it.

canonwire
06-26-2007, 07:40 AM
Well right now I'm in the dilemma of switching to Canon. I realize that a majority, meaning over 75% use Canon, for sports/automotive. I mainly shoot automotive but I will be shooting events/modeling/everyday shots when I take my camera along. I keep reading reviews about both. I recently read in an article comparing D80 vs. 400D. Both were very close in comparison but Nikon has better flesh tones. Would the 30D be up to par with event/modeling shots?



I agree with Coldrain that Canons produce better flesh tones but this is a very very small niggle and can easily be corrected in processing.

What kind of lenses do you have?

cchart.photo
06-26-2007, 12:50 PM
I currently have 28-80mm f/3.3-5.6 and 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 both Nikkor.

What I plan on purchasing from Nikon (and Canon's counterpart if I do happen to switch)

17-55 f/2.8
12-24

coldrain
06-26-2007, 03:27 PM
I agree with Coldrain that Canons produce better flesh tones but this is a very very small niggle and can easily be corrected in processing.

What kind of lenses do you have?
Just to clear up:
I did not bring up flesh tones (I'd call it skin tones anyway) to sway anyone to whatever camera, I only disputed the often repeated myth of "Nikon has better flesh tones", that was posted again in this thread.

About the lenses:

The Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM is sharper and more contrasty at the long end than the Nikon AF-S 17-55 f2.8 DX, offers image stabilization, and costs $200 less.

The Canon 10-22mm f3.4-4.5 costs around $700, has less distortion. The Nikon 12-24mm f4 costs around $1100.

If you do decide for a 30D, in this case the lenses do make a difference in your pocket.