What about the Canon 30D?

zephxiiii said:

One thing though, my 10D's view finder a noticeably better than the
d50/d70s viewfinder, larger and brighter. I believe the 20d/30d
share the same viewfinder as i'm too lazy to actually compare specs
at the moment.

Click to expand...

OK if you want to be honest why are you comparing the viewfinder of your 20D/30D to the viewfinder of the D50/D70? The two cameras being compaired is the 30D and the D80. As you maynot be aware the D80 hase the Same 0.94x Penta-Prism of the Nikon D200 and your 10D has a smaller 0.88x Penta-Prism and the 20D/30D has 0.9x Penta-Prism.

So in all honest on your point with the viewfinder was a little less honest and irrelavant arguement and as you said lazy.
http://nickmjr.smugmug.com/
Nick M

jagge said:

jagge said:

Well think about it what makes a D200 a class above the D80? What
puts a 30D above a 400D? Why was a F80 above a F65. Those are the
same reasons why a 30D is above the D80. The whole camera was made
for a tougher, more demanding use than the D80. You can deny it or
maybe you just don't care. That is your choice and your right. But
of course think about this one why were some people still buying a
D100 years after the D70 was out which outspeced it and was
cheaper..... Pricing has nothing to do with this it is only a
result.

Click to expand...

I think its a bit loose argument just to claim that the 30D is
generaly of much better quality than a 80D. I know that the 30D
shutter is rated but thats the only thing where I can see a
difference. I know that it has a metal house but its absolutely not
a fact that metal makes a sturdier camera than the "plastic" D80.
Hint a fighter plane is not made of metal.

Click to expand...

Well I knew in advance you would not agree because you would like the D80 to be of the same level and cheaper. And I agree these things are not so obvious but did you think about the comparisons I made here above? F80 vs F65? D200 vs D80? 30D vs 400D? The way you are looking at things would mean there is no difference that matters between any of these bodies. But you know this is not true. The D200 and 30D are better fitted for heavy use. But still not really "pro" The D80/400D need to be the cheaper more limited ones.

I'm certainly not alone with this just look at the forum groups phil created. D80/D70/D50 vs 400D/350D/300D. All in the bottom group. The others are in a different group. Now don't tell me you believe this was done randomly I will not believe you.

jagge said:

The 30D is not weather sealed and i think its a bit thin just to
claim that buttons etc are of better quality on the 30D compared to
the D80. You really need to convince using arguments here.

Click to expand...

Well weather sealing can have a certain importance for some(although it is not important for the most of us) but it certainly doesn't matter photographically. So you want something which shows this to you in the specs well look at fps. 30D clearly above D80. And certainly look at the buffer. The D80 raw buffer is ridiculously small for this era. The 30D doubles this. This also shows they were meant for a different kind of user. The only things a D80 has on a 30D are gimmicks and don't make a real difference in photographicall capabilities. I personally think the 400D is much more surprising by being so close to the 30D in RAW buffer.

If you have a good feeling about the D80 just buy that one you will not regret it. I couldn't care less.

NickMJr said:

slipstream said:

Just checked pricing of D80 + 18-200VR vs 400D + 17-85 IS + 70-300
IS. C = 130€ more but you do get optically better lenses with
more range. I would pay that 130€. But only you can decide
this for yourself nobody here can do that for you.

Click to expand...

OK if your going to play those kind of numbers game you have to add
another $200 (US) for the Canon ST-ET2 to add Wireless Flash
Features Nikon already has. Then if you want Spot metering your
out of luck on that one unless you upgrade to a 30D and re-run the
numbers.

Click to expand...

I don't think we would like to go into the system differences. These things can go either way. If you need wireless flash and are convinced you want a nikon because of this buy a nikon. But I did not mention an external flash so that feature doesn't matter in this comparison. Like I said only you can decide this for yourself nobody here can do this for you

As for that spotmeter thing I think it is a funny one. Are you also one who believes a partial meter is something like center weigthed.....you wouldn't be the first and you will not be the last.

slipstream said:

NickMJr said:

slipstream said:

Just checked pricing of D80 + 18-200VR vs 400D + 17-85 IS + 70-300
IS. C = 130€ more but you do get optically better lenses with
more range. I would pay that 130€. But only you can decide
this for yourself nobody here can do that for you.

Click to expand...

OK if your going to play those kind of numbers game you have to add
another $200 (US) for the Canon ST-ET2 to add Wireless Flash
Features Nikon already has. Then if you want Spot metering your
out of luck on that one unless you upgrade to a 30D and re-run the
numbers.

Click to expand...

I don't think we would like to go into the system differences.
These things can go either way. If you need wireless flash and are
convinced you want a nikon because of this buy a nikon. But I did
not mention an external flash so that feature doesn't matter in
this comparison. Like I said only you can decide this for yourself
nobody here can do this for you

As for that spotmeter thing I think it is a funny one. Are you also
one who believes a partial meter is something like center
weigthed.....you wouldn't be the first and you will not be the last.

Click to expand...

Its a perfectly fair comparison as you attempted a apples to apples comparison with Optional Lenses and I was doing an apples to apples compairsion to equal features (i.e. Wireless Flash and Spot Metering)
http://nickmjr.smugmug.com/
Nick M

boohoo, lets get all critical and harsh, someone had a bad day.

I think my point was that 10d/20d/30d's (thinking they were the same) viewfinder was better than the d50/d70s, if that was something someone didn't like (like me). That was made under the assumption that everyone here on this forum was aware about just how good the D80's viewfinder was. Now through your post, you just let everyone know that the 20d/30d's viewfinder is even better than the 10D's VF, wich makes the 30D's VF look not that bad, thanks!

NickMJr said:

slipstream said:

NickMJr said:

slipstream said:

Just checked pricing of D80 + 18-200VR vs 400D + 17-85 IS + 70-300
IS. C = 130€ more but you do get optically better lenses with
more range. I would pay that 130€. But only you can decide
this for yourself nobody here can do that for you.

Click to expand...

OK if your going to play those kind of numbers game you have to add
another $200 (US) for the Canon ST-ET2 to add Wireless Flash
Features Nikon already has. Then if you want Spot metering your
out of luck on that one unless you upgrade to a 30D and re-run the
numbers.

Click to expand...

I don't think we would like to go into the system differences.
These things can go either way. If you need wireless flash and are
convinced you want a nikon because of this buy a nikon. But I did
not mention an external flash so that feature doesn't matter in
this comparison. Like I said only you can decide this for yourself
nobody here can do this for you

As for that spotmeter thing I think it is a funny one. Are you also
one who believes a partial meter is something like center
weigthed.....you wouldn't be the first and you will not be the last.

Click to expand...

Its a perfectly fair comparison as you attempted a apples to apples
comparison with Optional Lenses and I was doing an apples to apples
compairsion to equal features (i.e. Wireless Flash and Spot
Metering)

Click to expand...

Oh you want feature vs feature? Well you need to upgrade that D80 to a D200 also as a raw buffer of 6 is rather small in comparison with the 400D don't you think.

Or sdamn this thing has got sensor cleaning. So before comparing lets wait another year until Nikon brings out a camera which can compare.

And forget about that 18-200 also as it is not 300 the differences go on if you want.

You'll never find an exact feature vs feature comparison. So that is a wrong way to compare.

Again I'll repeat myself: only you can decide this for yourself nobody here can do this for you

zephxiiii said:

boohoo, lets get all critical and harsh, someone had a bad day.

I think my point was that 10d/20d/30d's (thinking they were the
same) viewfinder was better than the d50/d70s, if that was
something someone didn't like (like me). That was made under the
assumption that everyone here on this forum was aware about just
how good the D80's viewfinder was. Now through your post, you just
let everyone know that the 20d/30d's viewfinder is even better than
the 10D's VF, wich makes the 30D's VF look not that bad, thanks!

Click to expand...

I'm not in a bad mood at all, your the one not understanding the posters question and then being too lazy to even look up the specs and the fact to prove your point. Just incase you also made some assumptions at to the original posters thread here it is:

"As some of you know I'm probably going to end up buying the D80, but I just started researching the Canon 30D, it's ISO performance is so superior to what I've seen from the D80, and it's only $180 more for the body only. How do it's other features compare to the D80?"

He made no reference as to the Nikon D50/D70 or to the Canon 10D so any compairison to those two camera are simply irrelavant. Then to make assumptions to form an opinion on something you were too lazy to research in the first place.
http://nickmjr.smugmug.com/
Nick M

I just want you to know that i love you and i hope you feel better..

NickMJr said:

How is that wasting money when Nikon has those additional Spot
Metering points in a cheaply priced D50,

Click to expand...

get over this one feature.. seriously your fixation of it now borders on the ridiculous.. trying to equate a D50 to a 30D cuz it has one feature YOU think is the most important!

--
I see dead pixels

David Martin said:

I don't speak as a spokesman for any forum, only for myself, and
rather dislike it when people think that way - it can lead to blind
brand-worship, and unproductive use of words like troll and fanboy.

Click to expand...

I asked you because when reading all these D80 related threads I've seen so many Canoneers saying what they want to say and you have been, at least to my eyes, the most reasonable and un-biased I hope you take it as a compliment.

Member said:

If youa re asking me personally then I actually prefer a plastic
body, as it is more flexible under impact.
However, mountings for lenses etc seem to me to be better built
from metal.

Click to expand...

Now, even though I hate generalisations as much as the next person, I have to say that I probably would've guessed that before I even asked. The thing is that here at Nikon forums people become mad about the solid, rugged, robust, metallic bodies... They really seem to like it that way (me too, I can't help but sigh in awe when I hold a D200).. Whereas I noticed a huge difference in opinions regarding this issue the moment I visited the Canon forum.

This is a very interesting note to make. Either people (both sides) are blinded by their "own team" and ready to defend their view or people have succesfully chosen their gear. I'd like to think the latter is the answer. I know that I'm making generalisations again, but they are there for clarity.

Member said:

Member said:

Just stroke me to find out on my short quest to the Canon forums
that people didn't seem to care about either the build quality or
the handling... They all seemed to say it doesn't matter at all. I
find it odd, to say the least.

Click to expand...

That is precisely the sort of generalisation which I find not
advisable.

Click to expand...

Then I'm sorry. I shouldn't have said "all", but rather "many if not most of them".

Janne Mankila

Slough said:

The 30D is a semi-pro body - metal casing, MLU, 5FPS etc - with
excellent image quality and features. The D80 is a nice consumer
grade camera - plastic casing, no real MLU, 3FPS - with excellent
IQ and features.

Click to expand...

Agreed, 30D is one heck of a camera. The ergonomics come down to personal preferences, I think.

Slough said:

Don;t forget that with the D80 you will rally need
to buy Nikon NX at £120 or whatever barter currency you use. So
really they are a similar price. I would handle them both, look at
the system, then decide. I would be tempted by the Canon (and I
speak as a Nikon user) subject to checking the feel and ergonomics.

Click to expand...

I honestly don't believe this will be the final price for the D80! As it simply won't. The price will come down after people have gotten their cameras. The 400D price alone dictates that. Let us not forget 30D is really an old camera - it's just an 's' version of 20D. Hence Canon can sell it in a very competitive price.

Janne Mankila

By the way, Janne, talking about misreading - it's David, not Martin! ;-)

To try to answer your question as well as I can, many including a lot of Canon shooters prefer the 'heft' of the Nikons, and theiir general ergonomics.

Just the same, this is a pretty subjective area, and what works for one person and a particular style of shooting does not work for another, so I think some Canon people on the forums get a bit frustrated when it seems to them that it is given out as a 'fact' that the Nikons are nicer to use, when that is one of the most subjective areas of cameras.

That frustration can lead to too much down-playing of making sure that the cameras is pleasurable to use, and to thier passing over the bits they themsilves don't like in the interface in the heat of the argument, just as a lot of Nikon shooters got fed up with people banging on about high ISO to the exclusion of all else, and so down-played that area.
Similar considerations apply to 'build quality', or rather the perception of it.

There is no doubt in my mind that Nikon build their cameras to feel very solid - Phil mentions this specifically in his review.

Just the same, this is a very different thing to saying that cameras like the 400D are objectively 'flimsy' - they are built to be very lightweight, but you don't see many complaints around of them falling apart, and they have been used in some very hostile environments, or rather their predecessors have.

In fact, probably due to Nikon sourcing different sensors, some kind of case can be made that there are more, or perhaps one should say a greater variety, of problems with sensors, AF and so on on the Nikon models - I would not go so far as that without much more knowledge and much better data, but I do feel that the Canon's, even the light ones like the 400D, are probably just as robust as the Nikons - they just feel different, and not so nice to many.

Personally, I enjoy visiting the Nikon forum, and try to do so on the basis of maintaining an overall postive imput about Nikon cameras - not hard to do, as there is a lot to like about them.

It would simply be too bland though, even when on this forum, not too sometimes note areas which are not ideal - the plastic mount on the kit lens perhaps being one of them!

To try to ensure good balance, I do try to be rather more ciritical of Canon gear than any other though, and certainly they have many areas in which improvement would be appreciated - Nikon's way of getting a very solid feel to their cameras being one of them, IMO.
Hope this answers your question - it's the best I can do, anyway!

J Mankila said:

David Martin said:

I don't speak as a spokesman for any forum, only for myself, and
rather dislike it when people think that way - it can lead to blind
brand-worship, and unproductive use of words like troll and fanboy.

Click to expand...

I asked you because when reading all these D80 related threads I've
seen so many Canoneers saying what they want to say and you have
been, at least to my eyes, the most reasonable and un-biased I
hope you take it as a compliment.

J Mankila said:

If youa re asking me personally then I actually prefer a plastic
body, as it is more flexible under impact.
However, mountings for lenses etc seem to me to be better built
from metal.

Click to expand...

Now, even though I hate generalisations as much as the next person,
I have to say that I probably would've guessed that before I even
asked. The thing is that here at Nikon forums people become mad
about the solid, rugged, robust, metallic bodies... They really
seem to like it that way (me too, I can't help but sigh in awe when
I hold a D200).. Whereas I noticed a huge difference in opinions
regarding this issue the moment I visited the Canon forum.

This is a very interesting note to make. Either people (both sides)
are blinded by their "own team" and ready to defend their view or
people have succesfully chosen their gear. I'd like to think the
latter is the answer. I know that I'm making generalisations again,
but they are there for clarity.

J Mankila said:

J Mankila said:

Just stroke me to find out on my short quest to the Canon forums
that people didn't seem to care about either the build quality or
the handling... They all seemed to say it doesn't matter at all. I
find it odd, to say the least.

Click to expand...

That is precisely the sort of generalisation which I find not
advisable.

Click to expand...

Then I'm sorry. I shouldn't have said "all", but rather "many if
not most of them".

Janne Mankila

Click to expand...

--
Regards,
DaveMart

'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment

J Mankila said:

Slough said:

The 30D is a semi-pro body - metal casing, MLU, 5FPS etc - with
excellent image quality and features. The D80 is a nice consumer
grade camera - plastic casing, no real MLU, 3FPS - with excellent
IQ and features.

Click to expand...

Agreed, 30D is one heck of a camera. The ergonomics come down to
personal preferences, I think.

J Mankila said:

Don;t forget that with the D80 you will rally need
to buy Nikon NX at £120 or whatever barter currency you use. So
really they are a similar price. I would handle them both, look at
the system, then decide. I would be tempted by the Canon (and I
speak as a Nikon user) subject to checking the feel and ergonomics.

Click to expand...

I honestly don't believe this will be the final price for the D80!
As it simply won't. The price will come down after people have
gotten their cameras. The 400D price alone dictates that. Let us
not forget 30D is really an old camera - it's just an 's' version
of 20D. Hence Canon can sell it in a very competitive price.

Click to expand...

The design decisions taken on the 400D are very good from a cost POV -eliminating one LCD and so on- there are a lot of extra goodies on the D80 you have to pay for, notably the better VF.

Somewhere in between the price of the 400D and the 30D is about right for it, surely.

A simpler version to replace the D50 is the obvious next step - and apparently, at least according to Nikon UK, a new consumer cam before Christmas is on the way - not much time to get it into the shops and make some money on it, I would have thought, but Nikon at least seems to have been quicker on the roll-out of the D80 than they have usually managed.

J Mankila said:

Janne Mankila

Click to expand...

--
Regards,
DaveMart

'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment

The 18-200VR is a better glass than the 17-85, although it's bigger range. It's a dream to have wider range and still better (or even near egual) quality. Thik about the missed shots when you don't have the apropriate lense on the camera and you have to change. I have some performant glass a "home", but for travelling, in wich you can always be surprised, I'd always get the 18-200. I'm saving money for that lens now.

N & C do not share the same class with any of their cameras. The class refers to the price/features generally, where the 30D has the metal body and 5fps. This is clearly superior; D80 might be superior in many other smaller "tweaks" (as is the D70 also, and the D70 to D80 also) with the exception of the VF, which is also an element who defines a class - a wonderfull exception. D200 is more expensive than 30D but superior everywhere (except noise, wich is a technology thing, not a costly add on). The 5D makes exception because of his very very expensive sensor.

Appologises for my english...

--
Velisar

J Mankila said:

Let us
not forget 30D is really an old camera - it's just an 's' version
of 20D. Hence Canon can sell it in a very competitive price.

Click to expand...

Maybe it is. But, I can bet that we won't be able to buy anything really better for that price range for next 2 years. When I say "really better" I think about upgrade which really is worth of money.

Looking at 400D I think that upgrade from 30D to 40D won't be worth of money.
10 Mpix - no thanks I love pixel density on my 30D
Anti Dust - not worth too much since dead and dust nobody can beat.

The things that I respect are:
1. better DR
2. better high ISO

... and I don't think that here will be some bigger changes for next two years. Just marketing tricks on both sides.

Best regards,

--
Dusko Jovic / DuxX /

velisar said:

The 18-200VR is a better glass than the 17-85, although it's bigger
range. It's a dream to have wider range and still better (or even
near egual) quality. Thik about the missed shots when you don't
have the apropriate lense on the camera and you have to change. I
have some performant glass a "home", but for travelling, in wich
you can always be surprised, I'd always get the 18-200. I'm saving
money for that lens now.

Click to expand...

If the 18-200 is your dream lens that is excellent for you and you are right to buy it. For me it definately is not. I well never buy these big compromise lenses. They don't do it for me. As for holidays I prefer the 2 lens combination wich will give you more possibilities. And if I really was afraid I would miss shots because of having to swap lenses on holidays. I would get a big zoom prosumer like the FZ50 which will do even better in those circumstances.

velisar said:

N & C do not share the same class with any of their cameras. The
class refers to the price/features generally, where the 30D has the
metal body and 5fps. This is clearly superior; D80 might be
superior in many other smaller "tweaks" (as is the D70 also, and
the D70 to D80 also) with the exception of the VF, which is also an
element who defines a class - a wonderfull exception. D200 is more
expensive than 30D but superior everywhere (except noise, wich is a
technology thing, not a costly add on). The 5D makes exception
because of his very very expensive sensor.

Click to expand...

I'm not gonna debate D200 vs 30D here as this is not the place but honestly the D200 has about nothing essential on the 30D. They can be perfectly compared.

David Martin said:

By the way, Janne, talking about misreading - it's David, not
Martin! ;-)

Click to expand...

What? Where did I write Martin? Now that would be embarrassing... Of course, if I used it as in Mr. Martin? No?

Member said:

There is no doubt in my mind that Nikon build their cameras to feel
very solid - Phil mentions this specifically in his review.

Click to expand...

I think it's a subtle difference, looking at, say, 30D and 200D. The Canon has a robust feel to it, most certainly, but when I try 200D, my hands say the Nikon is built better... The truth might just be the other way, that the Canon was tougher, but we'll never know.

And I know that the outside of a 400D is misleading I honestly don't think it would be any less durable than, say, a D50 or D80 if you dropped it on a cement floor. But here the psychology comes into play - if you're buying a sports car, you tend to look and feel how comfortable the ride is, how the interior is built and etc. And it might turn out that the one you pick ends up being the slowest on the race track.

That is to say that with their 8mp sensor Canon truly kicked @ss (and still does), but as long as I was comfortable shooting with my D70 and enjoying the ergonomics that suited my hands and style far better, I could live with the far worse high ISO results and less resolution (but on the other hand I got colors that I've grown to appreciate in my photos during this time)... And I guess many Canon users thought the other way around - they forgot that their camera didn't necessarily feel as robust as a Nikon counterpart, but they enjoyed the great IQ.

Member said:

Hope this answers your question - it's the best I can do, anyway!

Click to expand...

It did, thanks! Now, I'm off to search the post where I said you were Martin...

Janne Mankila

J Mankila said:

David Martin said:

By the way, Janne, talking about misreading - it's David, not
Martin! ;-)

Click to expand...

What? Where did I write Martin? Now that would be embarrassing...
Of course, if I used it as in Mr. Martin? No?

Click to expand...

Try the post title here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=19976022
;-)

J Mankila said:

J Mankila said:

There is no doubt in my mind that Nikon build their cameras to feel
very solid - Phil mentions this specifically in his review.

Click to expand...

I think it's a subtle difference, looking at, say, 30D and 200D.
The Canon has a robust feel to it, most certainly, but when I try
200D, my hands say the Nikon is built better... The truth might
just be the other way, that the Canon was tougher, but we'll never
know.

And I know that the outside of a 400D is misleading I honestly
don't think it would be any less durable than, say, a D50 or D80 if
you dropped it on a cement floor. But here the psychology comes
into play - if you're buying a sports car, you tend to look and
feel how comfortable the ride is, how the interior is built and
etc. And it might turn out that the one you pick ends up being the
slowest on the race track.

Click to expand...

Actually, some of the Nikon equipment seems to do rather better, at least for sealing against humidity - check out this post, which is very interesting and by a fine photographer anyway:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=19194770

I can't remember what his rationale for swapping to CAnon was - you may come across it if you have a browse in the thread.

The 5D also seems to have done him proud in his latest expedition in equally demanding conditions:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=19966602

I must admit I do smile a bit at some of the comments about weathersealing and so on, when people are using the cameras in pretty average conditions - most of these cameras are plenty tough, although you have to be a little careful of them and not hammer tent pegs in the way you would with a D2x or 1 series.
Hope you enjoy the read in the links I gave.

J Mankila said:

That is to say that with their 8mp sensor Canon truly kicked @ss
(and still does), but as long as I was comfortable shooting with my
D70 and enjoying the ergonomics that suited my hands and style far
better, I could live with the far worse high ISO results and less
resolution (but on the other hand I got colors that I've grown to
appreciate in my photos during this time)... And I guess many Canon
users thought the other way around - they forgot that their camera
didn't necessarily feel as robust as a Nikon counterpart, but they
enjoyed the great IQ.

J Mankila said:

Hope this answers your question - it's the best I can do, anyway!

Click to expand...

It did, thanks! Now, I'm off to search the post where I said you
were Martin...

Janne Mankila

Click to expand...

--
Regards,
DaveMart

'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment

When I examined a 350D and a D50, the former felt somewhat cheap, due in part to the plastics used. The D50 felt better. But I suspect the differences are cosmetic and that there is little real difference in robustness.

There was a thread some while back where several users in a humid country reported moisture ingress into a 20D causing camera failure. The D200 should be more resistant to moisture ingress. Having destroyed a Nikon F90x by dropping it into a stream, I would hope a D200 would survive. The problem is that the lens is not watertight, and water might enter the mirror chamber via the lens, and destroy the camera anyway.

Leif

jagge said:

DuncanM1 said:

The D50 has better IQ and SNR than a 30D for less than 1/2 the
price. The D80 will be very close to the 30D as well. Save your
money and buy a nikon.

Click to expand...

OK Duncan

I dont want to flame you or question the D50 that i own myself, BUT...

Your statement is wrong at best. D50 is a very good performer, and
unbeatable value for money but to suggest that D50 gives better IQ
than a 30D just shows that you are not basing your statement on
facts here.

Its VERY hard to claim that D50 is superior to the 30D on IQ. The
D50 might be absolutely good enough, but it isnt superior to the
30D i think you got that argument upside down.

I DONT want a heated debate so if you want to discuss this please
base your arguments on facts and go after the ball not the man.

Best wishes

Jakob

Click to expand...

It is very easy to claim that the D50 has better IQ than a 30D. The D50 has lower noise and better dynamic range. see:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50IMATEST.HTM

Duncan