Nikon D50 good buy right now? Former P&Ser, noob dSLRer :-)

[Abstract]

Can we stop with these fan boy arguments? Just because you bought it doesn't mean it's the best.

So, basically you own a D50 and can't stand the fact that its being replaced by the D40. So you have to convince everyone that your purchase is the best purchase because you're a pro. A pro who uses a D50 at that. Good job.

You keep waving that point (cough) around, but where is this coming from? Is it just because we don't agree with you? You pulled that out of the air. Nice scapegoat.

Sounds like someone's trying to justify his purchase, not us. I certainly never said that the D40 was inferior. I just said it wasn't superior to the D50 in image quality, and you probably can't tell. Heck, you're judging the colour and quality based on that tiny LCD!! My goodness. You're saying a 2.5" LCD is suitable for judging photos, but a slightly smaller 2" screen is not suitable. Surely you can understand how silly that sounds.


And if you shoot RAW, the photo you see on the LCD is just a RAW file processed by the camera anyway (similar to the camera making a JPEG out of it), and not what you'll actually see on your computer before adjusting it. I don't know why you're so concerned about the LCD. Looking at an LCD provides very little information regarding the photo, while a histogram does. The image you see on the LCD may not even look like that when you upload it to your computer.

Notice how I never say professionals? That's because Nikon is more for hobbists, the majority of the people who make the big bucks making a living off of their camera likes sports photographers, use full frame Canons.

Nikons aren't more for hobbyists. They certainly weren't designed that way. What is this based on....market share? That's like saying Macs are only for casual computer users.

A Canon 5D doesn't even have weather seals, while even a Pentax 10D does. From the way you make the distinction between cameras for pros and amateurs, the 5D shouldn't even fall under the category of "pro camera", not even by your definition.

-- are you trying to tell me that professional sports photographers shoot with XTis and D70s or D80s? That's absurd. I know that to be false because in those boys clubs, a 5D is practically required to not get laughed out. D70 and D80s are not pro cameras, they're high end hobbyist cameras.

You'd want a 5D to shoot sports? The 5D shoots at a slower fps rate in continuous mode than the 30D does. Plus, on a 5D, lenses don't reach as far as they do on a 30D.

 

[carbonmotion]

ok well, i if that's what you believe then we're on the same page ... what the hell are we arguing about?!

i apoligize for contributing to make this thread a pissing contest like so many other d40 v d50 threads... OP, it doesn't make a diff. just go and pick one that you like.

i shoot events too, all im saying is if you get the job done with jpgs, then use jpgs... noone wants to fill them mem card up with raws and miss the shot of the speaker getting **** faced and making a pass at the intern. ...that and their basically all rather similar in the end will end up being personal preference.

 

[Clix Pix]

shooting in raw is not realistic for some tasks. besides, im not sure if i buy the argument that the d50 is somehow a better camera than the d40.. i think give or take their about the same, although the d40 cames in a ahead with the lcd and size for me ....though for a non nikon noob with lots of lens, the d50 is probably more economical.

True, shooting in RAW is not for everyone. It took me a long time to make the jump into doing that, and now it is what I prefer to do in most shooting situations.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up the D50 here within the context of my post, as I made no reference to it at all; I don't have a D50 and have not used one. Since we're on the subject, though, yes, one thing about the D50 which could make a difference for some purchasers/users would be that the D50 handles all of the Nikon AF lenses, whereas the D40 is limited to autofocusing with just the AF-S ones. In my opinion, that's no big deal; one can manually focus quite easily and comfortably with many lenses. I've shot with a 35mm f/2 and a 28mm f/1.4 on a D40 without any problem at all.

Those who want to be able to autofocus each and every time regardless if a lens is AF or AF-S will have to make their purchasing decision accordingly. There is also a significant difference between the D40, D50, D70/D70s, D80 and the D200 -- and that is: on the D200 one can use AI-S lenses and set them up in the camera for correct metering. Can't do that with a D40, D50, etc.... Does that mean these lenses cannot be used on any of those cameras? No. Not at all. It is simply a matter of functionality. So you can't get accurate metering on a D40, D50, D70/D70s, or D80 when using Uncle Joe's older Nikkor non- AF lens. No big deal. If you chimp you can see right in the LCD screen and in the histogram what you need to do to ensure correct exposure. End of problem....

Oh, by the way....I don't think that at your work you have a 15-200mm VR AF-S.... there isn't such an animal. There's the 18-200mm VR AF-S. I'm sure that's what you meant.