Nikon D50 SLR Digital Camera w/ 28-80mm

[spatel]

Hi everyone,

I have been looking around for a digital slr for a while. I decided with the D50 instead of the D70/D70s because I don't need the features the D70 has over the D50. My uncle has the D70 so I got to play around with alot and I like the body style the way it grips and the weight and so forth. My question is the 28-80mm F/3.3-5.6G lens good enough for the amatuer photographer, or should I get another lens? I have been reading reviews on Amazon.com where they have to to use the 18-70mm lens but I thought that the 28-80mm lens would be better. Also a reviewer said to purchase a UV filter for the lens. What does the UV filter do for the camera, and is it really nessacary? Thanks alot,

Shamir

[Franglais]

Hi everyone,

I have been looking around for a digital slr for a while. I decided with the D50 instead of the D70/D70s because I don't need the features the D70 has over the D50. My uncle has the D70 so I got to play around with alot and I like the body style the way it grips and the weight and so forth. My question is the 28-80mm F/3.3-5.6G lens good enough for the amatuer photographer, or should I get another lens? I have been reading reviews on Amazon.com where they have to to use the 18-70mm lens but I thought that the 28-80mm lens would be better. Also a reviewer said to purchase a UV filter for the lens. What does the UV filter do for the camera, and is it really nessacary? Thanks alot,

Shamir

I've used the D70 and the D50 and they are very similar. The D50 looks like an excellent buy.

I don't think that the 28-80 f3.3-5.6G lens is a good choice for the D50. This is a low-cost lens designed for film cameras. It doesn't have the high resolution and low chromatic aberration that digital cameras require, plus the view you get with it on a D50 is the equivalent of a 42-120mm in 24x36 terms - normal to moderate telephoto, a rather bizarre combination that is missing a wide-angle setting.

The 18-70 DX is an excellent choice for the D50. It's a medium-cost lens optimised for digital. It's the equivalent of a 27-105mm in 24x36 terms - wide-angle to moderate telephoto, the most useful range.

The 18-55 DX is another good choice. It's a low-cost lens like the 28-80 but it doesn't feel like it. It's the equivalent of a 27-80 in 24x36 terms - wide-angle to short telephoto.

The UV filter just protects the front element of the lens and stops it getting scratched. It's not essential, but it's a good idea if you don't use the lens hood all the time.

Charles

[OldSchool]

at 28mm, you will have hardly any wide-angle capability. Remember, the D50 will have a 1.5 crop factor. Thus, 34mm on the D50 will be equivalent to a 50mm on a film SLR as far as field of view goes...

Tim

[spatel]

Okay cool. I am not a hardcore photographer. I would probably use this camera for vacation/special events purposes and maybe for a couple of Photoshop courses I am going to take. So is the 18-55mm is a good lens for me to buy with the D50 because my budget is only $700. Thanks for all the help,

Shamir

[another view]

Some people use UV filters; some don't - and there are strong opinions on why to use them or not. Basically, it's a clear piece of glass that goes over the front of the lens to protect it from damage. It can cause optical problems though - loss of sharpness, ghosting and flaring mainly. I don't use them and try to be careful. If you do get one, at least get a good one - Hoya HMC filters are good quality and a fair price.

[Franglais]

Okay cool. I am not a hardcore photographer. I would probably use this camera for vacation/special events purposes and maybe for a couple of Photoshop courses I am going to take. So the 18-55mm is a good lens for me to buy with the D50 because my budget is only $700. Thanks for all the help,

Shamir

Yes I think the 18-55 is a very good choice if you're on a limited budget. In the tests I've seen it doesn't quite reach the same level as the 18-70 but it's still a good performer. It felt good on the D50 as well, much better than the 28-80 that I once bought with a film body.

Charles

[freygr]

Hi everyone,

I have been looking around for a digital slr for a while. I decided with the D50 instead of the D70/D70s because I don't need the features the D70 has over the D50. My uncle has the D70 so I got to play around with alot and I like the body style the way it grips and the weight and so forth. My question is the 28-80mm F/3.3-5.6G lens good enough for the amatuer photographer, or should I get another lens? I have been reading reviews on Amazon.com where they have to to use the 18-70mm lens but I thought that the 28-80mm lens would be better. Also a reviewer said to purchase a UV filter for the lens. What does the UV filter do for the camera, and is it really nessacary? Thanks alot,

Shamir

I have a Nikor 28-200 lense, I do a lot of landscape & Panoramas. 28mm is too long for landscape, buy the 18-70mm or get the D50 kit with the 18-50mm lense. As far as the UV filter it keeps my lense clean, it's much cheaper to replace a scratched UV filter than a lense any day of the year. I've done horse shows, and the 70-300 would not zoom down, that is why I purchased the 28-200.

GRF

[OBie]

I would like to jump in here for a minute - I am about to convert to digital after being a die hard 35mm SLR for many (too many) years. When I replaced a very old Konica several years ago, digital was not where it is today, so I stuck with 35mm and got a Nikon N65. The main reason I went with Nikon is that their lens mounts haven't changed in forever. So (I figured to myself) when they finally come out with a digital SLR, I'll be all set. I bought a 70 - 300 Quantaray zoom for the N65. It has macro, and it's 1:4 - 5.6D.

So now the day is almost here, and I am pretty much set on purchasing the D50 - I was told that it would be very comparable to the N65. I have been assured by the local stores that my zoom lens will work perfectly, but this seems like a good place to get a 3rd (100th) opinion(s). Will my zoom work great with the D50? Will I be happy with the quality? I don't know that much about zoom lenses, so any help would be great. If you need more information, let me know. Before this purchase, I never gave much thought to the quality of the lens (I know - gasp!). So now I want to learn.

I shoot a lot of action (kids in sports, animals moving at high speeds), thus the zoom is very helpful. No plans on blowing things up to poster size, maybe some 8 x 10s.

[Franglais]

I would like to jump in here for a minute - I am about to convert to digital after being a die hard 35mm SLR for many (too many) years. When I replaced a very old Konica several years ago, digital was not where it is today, so I stuck with 35mm and got a Nikon N65. The main reason I went with Nikon is that their lens mounts haven't changed in forever. So (I figured to myself) when they finally come out with a digital SLR, I'll be all set. I bought a 70 - 300 Quantaray zoom for the N65. It has macro, and it's 1:4 - 5.6D.

So now the day is almost here, and I am pretty much set on purchasing the D50 - I was told that it would be very comparable to the N65. I have been assured by the local stores that my zoom lens will work perfectly, but this seems like a good place to get a 3rd (100th) opinion(s). Will my zoom work great with the D50? Will I be happy with the quality? I don't know that much about zoom lenses, so any help would be great. If you need more information, let me know. Before this purchase, I never gave much thought to the quality of the lens (I know - gasp!). So now I want to learn.

I shoot a lot of action (kids in sports, animals moving at high speeds), thus the zoom is very helpful. No plans on blowing things up to poster size, maybe some 8 x 10s.

I used to have the F65. Personally I find that the D50 is a class above the F65, except for the viewfinder, which is smaller. The D50 is almost the same thing as the D70. It's a nice machine.

I don't have the Quantaray 70-300 and I have never seen a test of it so it is difficult to give a definitive answer. One thing is clear - the 70-300 will give you the view of a 105-450 (in film terms) because the digital sensor is smaller than a 24x36 film.

Assuming that the Quantaray is a low-end made-for-film lens then it will have the same problems as the 28-80 we mentioned earlier - fairly low resolution and high chromatic aberration. However you will only be using the center of the lens, which is where there is the best performance. I don't think it will be as good as a Nikon lens but if you do mainly postcard-sized prints and the occasional 8x10 then you may not notice the difference.

Charles

[OBie]

One thing is clear - the 70-300 will give you the view of a 105-450 (in film terms) because the digital sensor is smaller than a 24x36 film.

Can you explain this just a little bit more?

Thanks Charles.

Well - I just checked out the price of Nikor lenses - GULP! I'm going to have to be satisfied with my current zoom!

[Franglais]

Can you explain this just a little bit more?

Thanks Charles.

Well - I just checked out the price of Nikor lenses - GULP! I'm going to have to be satisfied with my current zoom!

This one comes up all the time.

The digital sensor in almost all Digital SLR's is the same shape as a 24x36mm film negative but it's smaller - about the same size as an APS negative. The lens draws the same 24x36mm image but the sensor only captures a part of it. It's like the sensor cropped the edges off the image, giving you a view which is more telephoto than what you would expect with the lens.

People talk about the "crop factor" which allows you to imagine what the view you get with a given lens is going to be in 24x36 terms. You multiply the real focal length of the lens by the crop factor to get the 24x36 equivalent.

For instance, the 18-70mm kit lens that you get with the D70 - multiply by 1.5 and you get 27-105mm. In other words the classic 18-70 on a Nikon DSLR is the equivalent of the 28-105mm lens that is a classic on film SLR's. And your 70-300 becomes the equivalent of a 105-450mm.

The true focal length doesn't change, and neither does the image. A DSLR just leaves out the edges of the image.

So why don't DSLR manufacturers just make a 24x36mm sensor so that the image looks the same on digital and film? Several reasons:

1. It cost several times more to make a 24x36 sensor compared with an APS-sized sensor
2. Light falloff. Unfortunately current sensor designs with microlenses are less efficient at capturing light arriving at an angle than head-on, and this is just what happens at the edges of a 24x36 sensor
3. Chromatic aberration. If the lens splits white light into a rainbow of colours then this results in coloured fringes and loss of definition on a digital sensor. This is just what tends to happen at the edges of a lens. If you just use the central part of the image you tend to avoid it.

The 24x36 sensor does have several advantages. It's bigger than an APS sensor so either it can have more photosensitive sites (pixels) or else the photosensitive sites are bigger and collect more light. This means that at a given ISO setting the electronic grain (noise) is lower. The transition in the highlights from exposed to overexposed is also softer and more natural. Canon seem to be absolutely convinced that it's the future...

Charles

[OBie]

So I'm not really gaining any zoom, it just looks that way ;)

Great explanation Charles. The camera store had explained it somewhat, but being the first time I was hearing it, it went into my brain and right back out. Thank you for being so clear.