D80 opinions...

[vcuE30]

Do NOT buy the d80. The d90 has already been announced and will be out by Xmas. If you're serious about photography you wouldn't even consider the d40, d40x or d60. The d80 does not limit you to only nikon DX lenses, unlike the 40, 40x, and 60. It also has PC capability for studio shooting as well as a longer battery life than any of the lower end nikons. The size feels more comfortable in hand and it weighs a bit more. Personally I feel a camera with a bit more weight can help with stability when a tripod is not in use.

I decided to go with the Pentax k10d recently. It has 73 water seals on the body as well as weather seals on the battery grip. Pentax has never changed their 35mm or digital mount so any old lens for a Pentax will fit on this digital body. It is also 10 mp and has an awesome instant RAW button on the body. It won digital SLR of the year in 2007. Of course, the k20d was announced earlier this year- a bit better and a bit more expensive. This also means the price of the k10d has come down making it an UNBELIEVABLE deal. If you're unsure about your ability to self teach yourself about any camera, buy an additional book or instructional dvd. Many camera stores (like Ritz Camera) offer free camera classes with every digital camera purchase.

I'm not a huge fan of canon. The body material of the lower end models (XT, XTI) just don't feel as high quality as the lower end nikons. Also, lower end canons use compact flash memory (unlike all the nikons and pentax for that matter), which can lead to bent pins and easy breakage if not careful.

Go nikon or pentax. OR check out the new Sony 350. 14.1 mp WITH a sweet tiltable screen and the best live view on the market HANDS DOWN.

[steinbachphoto]

okay don't listen to everyone who is saying go for the d200 or 300. The D80 is basically the D200 in a smaller body, they use the same sensor. You do lose out on the weather sealed body of the 200 and also the 5fps(d80 is 2.5fps)

[sumyungguy]

I say go Canon, used 20d or 30d and a decent lens (not a kit lens) for around $1K.

The best thing to do, go to a camera shop and hold the different makes/models in your hands and see which one is more comfortable. Personally Canon's cameras are more comfortable and the lens selection/quality is great. REMEMBER, MEGAPIXELS AREN'T WHAT MAKE A CAMERA.

Photography forums:
fredmiranda.com
photography-on-the.net is a great Canon community and source for used gear

[DCColegrove]

okay don't listen to everyone who is saying go for the d200 or 300. The D80 is basically the D200 in a smaller body, they use the same sensor. You do lose out on the weather sealed body of the 200 and also the 5fps(d80 is 2.5fps)

D80 also has a different imaging engine, writes to a different media, has a different shutter... than the D200.

[steinbachphoto]

D80 also has a different imaging engine, writes to a different media, has a different shutter... than the D200.

which the OP wouldn't benefit from

[bimmerkarl]

I have a D80...and love it!! it is a nice enough camera to do just about any day to day photo shoots with. the lens selection is great. and it didn't cost me an arm and a leg so I don't feel guilty when I take it camping or hold it out the window at 80 mph. I find the controls great as well as the battery life (3 days or so).I shot over 5000 pictures while I was deployed to sicily (one of which is my profile pic) and thousands more since then without a single problem. I even ride my motorcycle with it over my shoulder at 150++ mph. good luck.
<--- P-3 orion with Mt.Etna erupting in the background

[bergie_318is]

id say start small and cheap. body isnt the main part of producing good photos, the lenses are. the general rule is to upgrade your glass before your body. i currently have the D40, have had for about a year now, sure its a good camera but its time to upgrade and i will be going the D200 route. the D80 was my first choice to upgrade, but then i though why go the middle range, why not go semi-pro body? its all ill ever need! for just a little more cash!

the D40 is hell cheap now, so you can buy it relitivly cheap, and then spend money on some decent lenses, then when you are comfotable using your camera on the 3 non-vari programe mode, go the semi-pro route

[steinbachphoto]

id say start small and cheap. body isnt the main part of producing good photos, the lenses are. the general rule is to upgrade your glass before your body. i currently have the D40, have had for about a year now, sure its a good camera but its time to upgrade and i will be going the D200 route. the D80 was my first choice to upgrade, but then i though why go the middle range, why not go semi-pro body? its all ill ever need! for just a little more cash!

the D40 is hell cheap now, so you can buy it relitivly cheap, and then spend money on some decent lenses, then when you are comfotable using your camera on the 3 non-vari programe mode, go the semi-pro route

most of the decent lenses Nikon offers will not work on the D40

[DCColegrove]

What do you think about the Nikon D3X ? :pimp:

Saved me from switching to Canon.



Good thing too... Glass is expensive.

[Aptyp]

I bought d60, and I absolutely love it. How pro do you want to be?

Ritz/Wolf Camera are running great deals on d300, since they bought out all of them.

D60 was reasonably priced, and I love everything about it, except for battery save mode. lenses aren't expensive either (applies to all nikons).

[DCColegrove]

.... lenses aren't expensive either (applies to all nikons).

Huh?

[apexede30]

I bought d60, and I absolutely love it. How pro do you want to be?

Ritz/Wolf Camera are running great deals on d300, since they bought out all of them.

D60 was reasonably priced, and I love everything about it, except for battery save mode. lenses aren't expensive either (applies to all nikons).

They're not expensive because you bought the cheap ones....Any "decent" lense is gonna cost ya 300+.

[DCColegrove]

They're not expensive because you bought the cheap ones....Any "decent" lense is gonna cost ya 300+.

The lens I use most often 28~70mm f/2.8 AFS was just over $3000. ( the price has come down a bit since then).

[apexede30]

The lens I use most often 28~70mm f/2.8 AFS was just over $3000. ( the price has come down a bit since then).

Heh. As a hobbyist (assuming that you're much more than that) my jaw drops, hits the floor, etc etc. I humbly think that we can produce similar pre-processed images with both our lenses, and I just can't imagine myself ever breaking the 600$ point on a lense. I am thoroughly jealous.

[DCColegrove]

Heh. As a hobbyist (assuming that you're much more than that) my jaw drops, hits the floor, etc etc. I humbly think that we can produce similar pre-processed images with both our lenses, and I just can't imagine myself ever breaking the 600$ point on a lense. I am thoroughly jealous.

Some things just can't be caught with slow glass...

And yes...not a hobby: http://www.dcolegrovephotography.com

(still re editing the portfolios...Happens about twice a year...I see my site and hate everything about it)