madhopper
newbie
Reged: 14/06/2007
Posts: 12
|
|
Hi all. Name's Chris and I just discovered I've posted on this site before (news to me, I can't even remember coming here before?). Anyway, I thought I might as well say high and drop the usual 'make my decision for me' based question which, as I understand it, is standard protocol for any newbie joining any forum anywhere since the nets began.
So, I walked into a Jessops the other day and came out having decided to buy the A300. Brilliant, easy and from what I've read not a bad choice. Then, AFTER making my choice, I bought a load of photo mags and started to wade through the vast array of equipment, and followed the breadcrumbs to the net, where I saw more cameras than I ever knew existed. To cut this tedious story short(ish), I saw the D80. It kept popping up, and so back to jessops went I to hold it. I held it, I played with the menus (not really knowing what I was doing) and fell in love. The A300 suddenly feels dinky in my hands and my fingers just don't 'fit' on it, and in all fairness I didn't really know what I was doing with that when I was fiddling with it either. The D80 feels like it was made for me. I suddenly don't need swivelling live view, no matter how much the nice man in the shop kept raving on about it and showing me sony propaganda brochures. I never really used it on my old camera anyway.
There's just one more niggling issue I have before I take the plunge. The nice man told me Nikon doesn't need a VR lens. He seemed to know what he was talking about most of the time, but I could have sworn Nikon and Canon are both well known for only putting 'anti-shake' features on their most expensive bodies. On a separate note, I keep hearing about how anti-shake in a lens is better. If this is so, why only put this feature in your most expensive camera bodies?
Anyway, after all that and in case you missed it my question is, does the D80 have some kind of anti shake feature? If not, then why wouldn't it benefit greatly from a VR lens in the same way I've heard people say a D60 does, for example?
If you got this far, well done. Seriously, I can go on and on and... 
Cheers
--------------------
Newbie. Please be gentle. I'll think of something better I swear!
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4493
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
but I could have sworn Nikon and Canon are both well known for only putting 'anti-shake' features on their most expensive bodies. On a separate note, I keep hearing about how anti-shake in a lens is better. If this is so, why only put this feature in your most expensive camera bodies?
Sorry, but you're mistaken, neither Nikon nor Canon have (yet) marketed a DSLR body featuring anti-shake of any kind.
They have a vested interest in not doing so, as they want people to buy their (relatively expensive) anti-shake lenses.
It's true that having the sensor in the lens makes sense - there's a world of difference in the sensitivity reguired in e.g. a 400mm lens than there is in a wide angle; having said that, all the systems do work, though it does appear to be the case that the in-body systems (Pentax, Olympus) are marginally less effective than the in-lens systems, offering around 3 stops protection instead of 4. But then the in-body systems work with all lenses, not just those that happen to have it.
As usual, you pays your money & takes your choice.
If the D80 feels "right" in your hand and the A300 doesn't, then the D80 is the camera for you ... anti-shake is a convenience, not a necessity, and you can always buy VR lenses if you need them (many people don't).
Note, for instance, that anti-shake technology does nothing to stop blurring caused by subject movement. All it does is reduce the light level at which mounting the camera on a tripod becomes necessary.
|
Norman
Reged: 23/09/2004
Posts: 1579
Loc: West London, UK
|
|
Quote:
Hi all. Name's Chris and I just discovered I've posted on this site before...
Hi Chris welcome back.
Quote:
The nice man told me Nikon doesn't need a VR lens. He seemed to know what he was talking about most of the time, but I could have sworn Nikon and Canon are both well known for only putting 'anti-shake' features on their most expensive bodies.
Not true. Neither Nikon or Canon have anti-shake technology built into any of their camera bodies. Anti-shake for both marques comes via VR (vibration reduction) lenses (Nikon) or IS (image stabilisation) lenses (Canon).
Quote:
On a separate note, I keep hearing about how anti-shake in a lens is better. If this is so, why only put this feature in your most expensive camera bodies?
As I said they don't. Whether anti-shake is better in body or in lens has generated much discussion. There probably isn't much in it but VR or IS in the lens does let you see the effect through the viewfinder.
--------------------
Regards,
Norman
www.photobox.org.uk
A woman has the last word in any argument.
Anything a man says after that is the start of a new argument.
|
AlexMonro
old hand
Reged: 05/06/2006
Posts: 704
Loc: Exeter, Devon (and Somerset so...
|
|
Hi Chris, and welcome from me, 'coz I don't remember seing you here before either! 
Seems like you know more than the man in Jessops (now there's a surprise, unless it was the one in Reading ) - Nikon and Canon don't put any form of anti shake in any of their DSLR bodies, only in (some of) the lenses. Nikon call it "Vibration Reduction", and put the letters VR in the string of letters and digits that make up the lens designation, Canon call it "Image Stabilisation", and use the letters IS in a similar way.
So, as you thought, no, the D80 doesn't have anti shake in the body. As to whether it would benefit from a VR lens, that depends slightly on the sort of pictures you take - if you use a not very long lens for shots of fast moving things close by, then probably not, the shutter speed you'd need to avoid motion blur would be high enough to avoid shake anyway. If you use a long telephoto for shots of static subjects in poor light, and can't use a tripod, it would be very useful.
As to whether VR in the lens is better than AS in the body, well, in the lens has the advantage that it stabilises the view in the viewfinder as well, which can make it easier to frame the shot, and it can be tuned to the precise characteristics of the lens, so may be slightly more effective. AS in the body has the advantage that you automatically get the benefit of it with all your lenses, without having to pay extra for each lens.
And the question you didn't quite get around to asking - "Which VR lens should I get?" - well, if your budget is very tight, there's the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR, if you can afford to spend a bit more for quality, the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S.
Hmm... seems I can go on a bit too...
|
madhopper
newbie
Reged: 14/06/2007
Posts: 12
|
|
Cheers guys. Of course me being me I didn't consider the 'moving subjects' factor, and I've only ever skim-read high end specs just to see what bodies you can get at the top end. For some reason I got the impression nikon and canon do anti shake in those bodies. My mistake... 
Quote:
Seems like you know more than the man in Jessops (now there's a surprise, unless it was the one in Reading
You were suspiciously close; it was Basingstoke. How'd you do that? 
Quote:
"Which VR lens should I get?" - well, if your budget is very tight, there's the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR, if you can afford to spend a bit more for quality, the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S.
Quality, thanks for that. I'll check 'em both out and see how deep my pockets go after other little things like a camera bag, card and tripod! Nikon D80 and subsequent inevitable bankruptcy, here I come! 
--------------------
Newbie. Please be gentle. I'll think of something better I swear!
|
NorthernNikon
Bulls Hitter
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 5698
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Quote:
Anyway, after all that and in case you missed it my question is, does the D80 have some kind of anti shake feature? If not, then why wouldn't it benefit greatly from a VR lens in the same way I've heard people say a D60 does, for example?
Just to add that here I think you're mistaking the fact that the D60 (and D40 & D40x) needs an AF-S lens for auto focus to function because unlike the D80 and higher spec Nikons they don't have an auto focus motor in the camera's body. These cameras will gain no more benefit from VR than a D80 would.
--------------------
www.BarneyAllen.com the new home of ComicShots.
|
madhopper
newbie
Reged: 14/06/2007
Posts: 12
|
|
Quote:
Just to add that here I think you're mistaking the fact that the D60 (and D40 & D40x) needs an AF-S lens for auto focus to function because unlike the D80 and higher spec Nikons they don't have an auto focus motor in the camera's body. These cameras will gain no more benefit from VR than a D80 would.
Oh I know about the Auto focus issue, but the fella in shop gave me the impression the D80 had some anti-shake features, that's all. It's alright, I'm over it and having had a night to think it over I'm pretty certain the D80 is for me. If for nothing else, I love that it actually fits in my hands! (Have I mentioned that yet?)
Trust me, if all goes well then within a week you're going to have this forum flooded with crap photos that I thought were great I'll try to restrain myself...
--------------------
Newbie. Please be gentle. I'll think of something better I swear!
|
ermintrude
Hinkypuff
Reged: 30/06/2003
Posts: 12365
Loc: London, UK
|
|
Quote:
The nice man told me Nikon doesn't need a VR lens.
I can only figure he was meaning that shutter speed is less of an issue as you have better quality with higher ISOs than you would in a compact/bridge...
But it's more likely he was clueless... 
--------------------
   
Further, longer, higher, older...
|
AlexMonro
old hand
Reged: 05/06/2006
Posts: 704
Loc: Exeter, Devon (and Somerset so...
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Seems like you know more than the man in Jessops (now there's a surprise, unless it was the one in Reading
You were suspiciously close; it was Basingstoke. How'd you do that?
It's just that Tom Sargeant, a regular poster on these forums, and by all accounts, a polite, helpful, and well informed (on matters photographic) man, works for Jessies in Reading. My experience of Jessops staff in other locations is that politeness and helpfulness are quite common, but sadly photographic knowlege is getting thin on the ground these days.
BTW, the VR lenses I suggested aren't a complete list, there are several other VR Nikkors, as well as some 3rd party manufacturer's (Sigma, Tamron) products which might suit you. Let us know your particular areas of photographic interest (landscapes, sports, wildlife etc.) and I'm sure you'll get loads of suggestions.
|
madhopper
newbie
Reged: 14/06/2007
Posts: 12
|
|
Quote:
I can only figure he was meaning that shutter speed is less of an issue as you have better quality with higher ISOs than you would in a compact/bridge...
But it's more likely he was clueless...
Possibly, although I didn't exactly present myself as a fountain of knowledge for all things photography so he probably thought he could get away with a little jazz. On the other hand, he confessed to still using film cameras, so maybe on the digital front he wasn't up to scratch. Who knows? and now I've found out the truth here, who cares?
Oh, accept maybe the next hapless beginner who wonders into the store 
--------------------
Newbie. Please be gentle. I'll think of something better I swear!
|
madhopper
newbie
Reged: 14/06/2007
Posts: 12
|
|
What do I want to photograph? Oh well now you're asking, I wanted to take a few pics of my pet dog and my new bike. I've just washed it you see and I reckon a D80 would really help with controlling overexposure in the sun...
Seriously I love landscapes and animals, and I've been inspired partly by some of the views I've seen on my travels and around Reading (there are some I promise! It's got trees, hills and a river and everything!) and also what I've seen other people create using nothing more than their cameras- and a little colour manipulation- has helped no end.
As for animals... again I've always loved wildlife, but I suppose it's the work of people like Davey A and Mr Bloom that really got me excited. I have to contain myself here, but ultimately it's birds that have caught my eye recently, and if the bug sticks, I'll definitely be looking to take this abroad at some point.
--------------------
Newbie. Please be gentle. I'll think of something better I swear!
|
surf_digby
journeyman
Reged: 04/04/2008
Posts: 56
|
|
It's possible that he's getting the Sonys and Nikons mixed up. Sony put their anti-shake technology in the body, whereas Nikon have it in the lens.
|
madhopper
newbie
Reged: 14/06/2007
Posts: 12
|
|
Quote:
It's possible that he's getting the Sonys and Nikons mixed up. Sony put their anti-shake technology in the body, whereas Nikon have it in the lens.
No he had the sony thing down, trust me. Anyway, I went out and got the D80 with the Sigma 18-200 OS lens yesterday... Stilll reading through the manual, then I'm going to watch a couple of youtube vids for some hints, and at some point I'll venture outside and take a photo. Yesterday's weather wasn't exactly confidence inspiring around here though. Everytime I stepped outside it started drizzling!  Don't want to get this thing wet before I've even used it, and I'm seriously considering one of those armour bodies I've seen. Can't be a bad investment at £40 starting price...
--------------------
Newbie. Please be gentle. I'll think of something better I swear!
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9311
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
Everytime I stepped outside it started drizzling! Don't want to get this thing wet before I've even used it,...
This is Britain............... I reckon you'll never get to use it then.......
Quote:
...and I'm seriously considering one of those armour bodies I've seen. Can't be a bad investment at £40 starting price...
Other than to make your camera look silly I can't honestly see the point of that stuff - and all the points where water might* get in (battery door, card door, remote control and USB ports etc.) are still open to the elements..... 40 quid wasted if you ask me.
* Monsoon, hurricane, water fall, etc... 
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Adesw
The phantom flasher
Reged: 07/02/2008
Posts: 706
|
|
Now that you have the D80 dont let yourself touch a D200/300/700 as you'd fall in love with that instead..
That is if you're like me. I thought my D40 was nice to hold, untill I got a D200, it now feels like a toy!!!
Its a bit late to suggest getting second hand? How much did they rip you off for that combo? (Im assuming that you got mugged by jessops)
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
