Linco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1379 posts, RR: 18 Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3672 times:
Kaitak744,
All will do a great job for you. At this time Canon and Nikon will offer you a superior range of lenses. The D80 and the Alpha win the megapixel race here with 10 against 8 for the 30D. 30D is faster with 5 fps. Its down to what you need. Personally i'd go with the 30D for its speed, but the other two cams are worthy of the challenge.
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, RR: 32 Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3655 times:
All of these bodies will give good results if used properly.
As Colin says, Nikon and Canon provide a wider range of (good) lenses.
No matter which body you buy, remember that the camera body is the third most important thing. The second most important thing is the lens in front of the camera body. The first most important thing is the photographer behind the camera body.
A better camera will not make you a better photographer - only you can do that.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
Rufruf From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 42 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3653 times:
Go with the Nikon.
SLR means single lens reflex. As the shutter closes the mirror flips up and exposes the film or ccd. It can be noisy and will create vibrations. The old leaf shutters did not have that proplem. They opened like your pupil in your eye .Very quiet and no vibration. A leaf ccd would be nice.
Aero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3070 posts, RR: 23 Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3639 times:
If you go for the D80, you have more money for good lenses than you have if you purchase the 30D, but the 30D is more to be compared to the D200 AFAIK.
CalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3587 times:
Quoting Linco22 (Reply 1): All will do a great job for you. At this time Canon and Nikon will offer you a superior range of lenses.
I shoot Nikon but I'd recommend either Nikon or Canon. Sony's new to the dSLR game and it'll take time for them to work bugs out. Go to a store and try out the two cameras - some folks like the way Nikons shoot, and some prefer Canon. Both make a great line of lenses.
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3584 times:
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 6): True. The 30D is a direct competitor to the D200, as the Sony and D80 are direct competitors to the Canon 400D.
Yea, I should have rephrased that.
400D
Alpha
D80
I would have got the D80 right away, but the thing that is turning me away is that I found out that the Alpha has built in image stabilization. Something neither the Canon nor the Nikon has. So, what I want to really know is if the Alpha is worth it for this extra feature.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4732 posts, RR: 8 Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3579 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 9): So, what I want to really know is if the Alpha is worth it for this extra feature.
In my opinion, no.
Sony are new to the DSLR market and, although their first shot at it is impressive, probably have a bit to learn. Image stabilisation is better when it's in the lens, not in the camera.
I believe the D80 is a very good camera (one of Nikon's best), perhaps better than Canon's 400D - it's pricier though, and I tend to rate Canon's range of lenses above that offered by Nikon.
If you want IS, go with a cheaper Canon and spend that bit extra on the lens.
Aero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3070 posts, RR: 23 Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3573 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 9): So, what I want to really know is if the Alpha is worth it for this extra feature.
I ditto what Karl said.
Alpha is Sony's first dSLR. They have had problems with all kinds of things in the past, and a lot of them, so I won't be surprised if the Alpha has lots of problems. And also I hate in-built IS, I like it to be in the lens.
The lenses from Sony are AFAIK not good.
Also I think it's right that Canon's lenses are somewhat better than Nikkor's, but I'm not going to start a battle... just what I think. I also don't like Nikon (D50?)'s green colour casts.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4732 posts, RR: 8 Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3540 times:
Quoting Aero145 (Reply 11): I also don't like Nikon (D50?)'s green colour casts
Older Nikons, and certainly the D50, tend to suffer from a blueish colour cast, which I find distracting. It can easily be corrected but it's an unnecessary pain.
I believe this has been remedied greatly in the D70S, D80 and D200, so I would have full faith in any of those three.
Fsgay From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 23 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3528 times:
Nikon and Canon would both be good choices. While the A100 is technically Sony's first DSLR, it shares a fair amount of technology from the old Konica Minolta line of DSLRs, which was discontinued when Konica Minolta sold their SLR portion off to Sony, as they were getting out of the business.
Another interesting option to consider in your price range is picking up a used Canon 10D or 20D, or Nikon D70/D70s/D100, and some good glass as well (maybe a Canon 70-200 f/4L or a used f/2.8 from either company). This would most certainly get you off to a better start than a 30D or D80 with a kit lens. However, as Viv pointed out, photography skill and experience is paramount when making good pictures, and this only comes with practice, so get out there and take some photos!
Chris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2813 posts, RR: 52 Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3519 times:
I use canon and my housemate uses nikon. I have had the pleasure of shooting with both extensivly and i have to say i still prefer the way nikon handles and i think that the files are a lot nicer and easier to edit.
I also think that for someone not willing to spend £5000+ canon is an easier system to get a nice kit setup for less money.
Canon have gems such as the 17-40 and the 70-200F4L which are reasonably priced. Nikon only has the 17-55 or the 70-200VR which are fantastic lenses they are just very £££ for someone getting into the hobby.
Canon still has the edge on high ISO performance on there cameras.
I would reccomend canon and would reccomend the 400d.
Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
ChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 18 Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3517 times:
Just had a look at the Sony lens range, and while the lenses look great, i couldnt believe the prices? The 70-200 is nearly 800$ more than the Nikon 70-200 VR... must be some lens.
Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 14): still prefer the way nikon handles and i think that the files are a lot nicer and easier to edit.
Chris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2813 posts, RR: 52 Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3497 times:
I'd not knock the sony glass, it's made be Zeiss who's lenses can generally outresolve anything canon/nikon can offer.
Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
ChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 18 Reply 18, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
Quoting Aero145 (Reply 16): I really think that it's not that good, only over-priced...
I take it you've thoroughly tested every lens in the line-up then? Tell me, what causes you to "hate" anti-shake in the camera? Must have messed up quite a few of your pictures to stir such emotions.
Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 17): I'd not knock the sony glass, it's made be Zeiss who's lenses can generally outresolve anything canon/nikon can offer.
It seems there are 3 lenses labelled Zeiss (probably magnificent, Zeiss usually is), but the rest are just Sony-labelled? Would be interesting to see some results from the teles.
Aero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3070 posts, RR: 23 Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3458 times:
Quoting ChrisH (Reply 18): I take it you've thoroughly tested every lens in the line-up then?
Where did I say that? Not even every lens in the Alpha line is available.
Quoting ChrisH (Reply 18): Tell me, what causes you to "hate" anti-shake in the camera?
Oops. No, I didn't want to say that, I was trying to say that I'd more like the IS to be in the lens; I think it's possible that the camera will be more fragile with IS in itself... Ah nevermind... I just have to try it.
Jorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3141 posts, RR: 9 Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3446 times:
Quoting Aero145 (Reply 11): And also I hate in-built IS, I like it to be in the lens.
What's wrong with having an IS for every cheap lens instead of buying an expensive with IS. Not everyone has the money to afford IS lenses or the parents paying them.
I think it's nice to have an IS even on the cheapest kit-lenses.
Aero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3070 posts, RR: 23 Reply 21, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3443 times:
Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 20): Quoting Aero145 (Reply 11):
And also I hate in-built IS, I like it to be in the lens.
Quoting Aero145 (Reply 19): Quoting ChrisH (Reply 18):
Tell me, what causes you to "hate" anti-shake in the camera?
Oops. No, I didn't want to say that, I was trying to say that I'd more like the IS to be in the lens; I think it's possible that the camera will be more fragile with IS in itself... Ah nevermind... I just have to try it.
ChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 18 Reply 22, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3438 times:
Quoting Aero145 (Reply 19): Where did I say that? Not even every lens in the Alpha line is available.
So what lenses have you had hands-on experience with? Obviously the 70-200. Please do post some pictures taken with it, I'd love to see how it performs.
I mean, you weren't just posting randomly for the sake of increasing your postcount, were you?
Chris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2813 posts, RR: 52 Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3434 times:
Quoting ChrisH (Reply 22): So what lenses have you had hands-on experience with? Obviously the 70-200. Please do post some pictures taken with it, I'd love to see how it performs.
I mean, you weren't just posting randomly for the sake of increasing your postcount, were you?
The Sweedish humour is on fire today!!! Ta for making me laugh, that was just what i needed!!
Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3398 times:
Well, thanks for the help guys. It seems I have settled for the Nikon D80.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1379 posts, 
From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2021 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 42 posts, 
From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3070 posts, 
Yep!
From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3141 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
