Nikon D80 or Canon 400D

Hello everyone!!!

I have been shooting some pictures with the Panasonic FZ-20. Until a few months ago, this P.S. camera was enough.

Nowadays i feel the urge to get a camera that allows me to take the pictures I want.

I'm hesitating between the D80 and the Canon 400D.

As you know the panasonic allows users to take pictures either at low and high focal distances (12x optical zoom), giving a great flexibility.

I'm used to this and i would enjoy to have the same possibility with a D-SLR.
Has anyone shot some pictures with the 18-135 mm kit lens from the D80?

Is it a decent lens or is a lens of identical quality as the 18-55 mm from the 400D.

I would apreciate some comentaries on the d80 about actual photos taken with it!!

Thanks in advance

Paulo

This is an opinion I fully agree with:

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/A100vsD80vsXTi.shtml

Sorry, but that's hardly anything more that D80 publicity disguised as a review.

I've just sold all my gear, and I am now waiting for the market to settle after photokina to buy a new camera and a few lenses (it seems that it'll be either canon, nikon or pentax...), so I have absolutely NO brand afilliation whatsoever.

That said, I choose what I base my judgment on, and won't stand up to BS like the review in digitalreview.ca, be it in favor of any mfg. Nikon sure doens't need it.

Regarding cameras, I'd base my first decison on two things:

• Do you feel confortable with the XT grip? Forget about menus/etc , I've shot extensively with the xt and d70, and accessing functions etc is a matter of habit. The nikon has less layers, but canon seems more intuitive to me. BUT, regarding the grip, the XT can be just too small, or even a blessing in case you have small hands and prefer a smaller and more discreet camera. Either way, find out before you buy.

• Lenses. Both Nikon and Canon offer a great line-up. Think what is the range you want to cover, and search for lenses in that range. Find out their prices, and go from there. You're buying into a system, not just the camera and lens. Nikon usually has better kit lenses, factor that into the final price.

Martin_MM said:

This is an opinion I fully agree with:

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/A100vsD80vsXTi.shtml

Click to expand...

--
Duarte Lourenço, Portugal

http://kidcabide.deviantart.com/gallery/

Duarte Lourenco said:

Regarding cameras, I'd base my first decison on two things:

Click to expand...

Reading this again, I'm afraid that I might be miss-understood. What I meant is that I consider the cameras too similar to preform so distinctively as to make you regret getting one instead the other, however the two points I focus on, IMO, can.

Duarte Lourenco said:

Sorry, but that's hardly anything more that D80 publicity disguised
as a review.

Click to expand...

And you base your opinion on what? The two facts combined that you like Canon more and that 400D wasn't so succesful?

Duarte Lourenco said:

That said, I choose what I base my judgment on, and won't stand up
to BS like the review in digitalreview.ca, be it in favor of any
mfg. Nikon sure doens't need it.

Click to expand...

You'd have preferred if they praised the 400D instead? No, I don't think Nikon needs false reviews and applauses. I certainly don't think Canon needs anything more than their state of the art marketing department and the fact that people will buy 400D because it's the cheapest one, it has more or less useful gimmicks and it says Canon in the box.

I'd like to see you do a review and we'll decide if it's biased BS.

Duarte Lourenco said:

• Lenses. Both Nikon and Canon offer a great line-up. Think what is

the range you want to cover, and search for lenses in that range.
Find out their prices, and go from there. You're buying into a
system, not just the camera and lens. Nikon usually has better kit
lenses, factor that into the final price.

Click to expand...

And with Nikon you get the selection of great second hand manual lenses. You learn to differentiate good lenses from bad and once-in-a-lifetime offers from rip-offs if you read what Bjorn Rorslett has to say about more or less each and every one of the manual and AF Nikkors:
http://www.naturfotograf.com

Janne Mankila

Paulo Vilaca said:

Paulo Vilaca wrote:
I have been shooting some pictures with the Panasonic FZ-20...
I'm hesitating between the D80 and the Canon 400D.
...low and high focal distances (12x optical zoom), giving a
great flexibility. I'm used to this and i would enjoy to have
the same possibility with a D-SLR...

Click to expand...

Go Nikon, and get yourself the 18-200 VR. Yes, it's going to seem a little pricey compared to the 18-135. But one month later, you'll have forgotten all about the price...and you'll have an awesome range (28-300mm @ 35mm equiv).

If you find you desperately need that extra FZ reach, stick a 2x teleconverter on the end and push it 450mm.

I used to shoot an FZ5, and figured I'd miss the long reach...but when I got my D50 I discovered the joy of shooting wide. I recommend not getting the teleconverter immediately, unless you're shooting something that absolutely requires such a long reach (i.e. you may find you don't need that extra 150mm after all).

Paulo Vilaca said:

Has anyone shot some pictures with the 18-135 mm kit lens
from the D80?

Click to expand...

There are loads of pics at imaging resource, which include samples from the 18-135. But if long tele is important to you, go for the 18-200 VR.

Also, if $$$ don't permit the D80+18-200VR, take a long hard look at D50+18-200mm. Your lenses will last a lot longer than your body, so a D50 + great lens now is a better way to go than a D80 + ordinary lens (my opinion).

One more thing...

If you're shooting birds or something else that requires long reach, consider the Nikon's soon-to-be released 70-300VR. In other words, get yourself an 18-70 kit lens and then use the 70-300VR for your long-range stuff.

This will (most likely, but as yet unknown) give you better image quality than either the 18-135 or 18-200VR.

Also, in case you didn't know, VR is Nikon's equivalent to O.I.S.

I agree with the advice of the previous poster apart from the 2x converter stuff. First off, how is 2x 200 450mm?? and secondly, dont bother with a teleconverter on a (slow apperature) lens like the 18-200. If you need more reach then 200 for little money, either get a cheap 70-300 or something second-hand (300 f4 etc)

I used an FZ10 for 2 1/2 years, I really loved the zoom too. I found most of my

shots were either fairly close (family, kids, flowers, etc.) or at the long end, (birds

wildlife). I wanted better and quicker shots and finally moved up to a DSLR (D80).

For my shooting situations I chose the 18-70 and will be adding the new 70-300vr
or something similar. This set-up fits me well, your's may be different.

I tried the Canon's and Nikon's in the store and the D80 fit me the best.
I like the choices in Nikon lenses too. Both the 400D and D80 are a big
step up from an FZ in many ways.

J Mankila said:

Duarte Lourenco said:

Sorry, but that's hardly anything more that D80 publicity disguised
as a review.

Click to expand...

And you base your opinion on what? The two facts combined that you
like Canon more and that 400D wasn't so succesful?

J Mankila said:

That said, I choose what I base my judgment on, and won't stand up
to BS like the review in digitalreview.ca, be it in favor of any
mfg. Nikon sure doens't need it.

Click to expand...

You'd have preferred if they praised the 400D instead? No, I don't
think Nikon needs false reviews and applauses. I certainly don't
think Canon needs anything more than their state of the art
marketing department and the fact that people will buy 400D because
it's the cheapest one, it has more or less useful gimmicks and it
says Canon in the box.

I'd like to see you do a review and we'll decide if it's biased BS.

J Mankila said:

• Lenses. Both Nikon and Canon offer a great line-up. Think what is

the range you want to cover, and search for lenses in that range.
Find out their prices, and go from there. You're buying into a
system, not just the camera and lens. Nikon usually has better kit
lenses, factor that into the final price.

Click to expand...

And with Nikon you get the selection of great second hand manual
lenses. You learn to differentiate good lenses from bad and
once-in-a-lifetime offers from rip-offs if you read what Bjorn
Rorslett has to say about more or less each and every one of the
manual and AF Nikkors:
http://www.naturfotograf.com

Janne Mankila

Click to expand...

ahahah congratulations, you like cameras, not photography!

What's all the babbling about C vs N? Allmost seems you own stock :~

Duarte Lourenço, Portugal

http://kidcabide.deviantart.com/gallery/

1) Do not take anyones recommendation on either the Canon or Nikon forums, you will never find a Nikon person who doesn't love Nikon nor a Canon person or who doesn't love Canon and as such the opinion will be biased.

2) Wait for the review here at dpreview.com. I honestly don't understand why people don't wait for the reviews before making a purchase. I never, ever purchase a big ticket item without thorough, educated, and well thought out research. Just because a product is newer does not mean that it is better, this has been the case many times before.

3) Go to a store and place both camera's in hand, look through the viewfinder, play with the menus and buttons and take a few shots with both.

4) Look at samples that average joe is taking on these forums to get an idea of the general camera output, but be cautious - just because one picture is overexposed/underexposed, or flawed in some manor doesn't mean they all will be.

5) Avoid side-by-side comparisions on these forums. Alot of people love to make Canon vs Nikon comparisons, but realize most of these are unscientifc, unfair, and can easily be 'photoshoped' to make one image appear better than another.

6) Avoid people bashing or making claims unproven such as Brand X has hotpixels or Brand Y has more noise. People on these forums are not engineers, and most are not professional photographers (even if they claim to be), so take everything with a grain of salt.

Daniel

--
Nikon D50
Lenses: 28-80G, 55-200DX, 70-300G, and 50 1.8

J Mankila said:

Duarte Lourenco said:

Sorry, but that's hardly anything more that D80 publicity disguised
as a review.

Click to expand...

And you base your opinion on what? The two facts combined that you
like Canon more and that 400D wasn't so succesful?

Click to expand...

You are waaaaay insecure! :~

Like I said I have no particular bias. Ok, I must confess I have a soft spot for old leicas. But C and N?? C'mon!! I just want to get the most for my money, regardless of the brand.

J Mankila said:

J Mankila said:

That said, I choose what I base my judgment on, and won't stand up
to BS like the review in digitalreview.ca, be it in favor of any
mfg. Nikon sure doens't need it.

Click to expand...

You'd have preferred if they praised the 400D instead? No, I don't
think Nikon needs false reviews and applauses. I certainly don't
think Canon needs anything more than their state of the art
marketing department and the fact that people will buy 400D because
it's the cheapest one, it has more or less useful gimmicks and it
says Canon in the box.

I'd like to see you do a review and we'll decide if it's biased BS.

Click to expand...

:~ Again... Where did this all came from?

The review in digitalreview.ca is GARBAGE. The D80, is not, and therefore it doesn't need such favors. As the 400D doesn't need also.

J Mankila said:

J Mankila said:

• Lenses. Both Nikon and Canon offer a great line-up. Think what is

the range you want to cover, and search for lenses in that range.
Find out their prices, and go from there. You're buying into a
system, not just the camera and lens. Nikon usually has better kit
lenses, factor that into the final price.

Click to expand...

And with Nikon you get the selection of great second hand manual
lenses. You learn to differentiate good lenses from bad and
once-in-a-lifetime offers from rip-offs if you read what Bjorn
Rorslett has to say about more or less each and every one of the
manual and AF Nikkors:
http://www.naturfotograf.com

Click to expand...

Finally something I can comment on!!

This is nice, but not for everyone. I for example have no need for manual focus lenses (I shoot mostly sports), and not everyone is going to research and invest time in finding out old lenses. Not only that but this argument is aplicable to canon also, there are lot of adaptors that allow you to use great older lenses.

Now Janne.. I'm not implying that N has a worse lineup than canon, in fact there are a few great lenses that C folks miss, but the possibility of using older glass is not a factor IMO to base a choice like this, especially to someone coming from a P&S and, I presume, without older lenses.

Remember we're talking about plastic, metal and glass... don't go beserk.

--
Duarte Lourenço, Portugal

http://kidcabide.deviantart.com/gallery/

Buy D50 (two lenses kit) and you'll be more than happy.

Paulo Vilaca said:

Hello everyone!!!

I have been shooting some pictures with the Panasonic FZ-20. Until
a few months ago, this P.S. camera was enough.

Nowadays i feel the urge to get a camera that allows me to take the
pictures I want.

I'm hesitating between the D80 and the Canon 400D.

As you know the panasonic allows users to take pictures either at
low and high focal distances (12x optical zoom), giving a great
flexibility.

I'm used to this and i would enjoy to have the same possibility
with a D-SLR.
Has anyone shot some pictures with the 18-135 mm kit lens from the
D80?

Is it a decent lens or is a lens of identical quality as the 18-55
mm from the 400D.

I would apreciate some comentaries on the d80 about actual photos
taken with it!!

Thanks in advance

Paulo

Click to expand...

--
Feel free to visit my homepage: http://tom.st
my best shots: http://www.dreamstime.com/resp189502

Dan said:

1) Do not take anyones recommendation on either the Canon or Nikon
forums, you will never find a Nikon person who doesn't love Nikon
nor a Canon person or who doesn't love Canon and as such the
opinion will be biased.

2) Wait for the review here at dpreview.com. I honestly don't
understand why people don't wait for the reviews before making a
purchase. I never, ever purchase a big ticket item without
thorough, educated, and well thought out research. Just because a
product is newer does not mean that it is better, this has been the
case many times before.

3) Go to a store and place both camera's in hand, look through the
viewfinder, play with the menus and buttons and take a few shots
with both.

4) Look at samples that average joe is taking on these forums to
get an idea of the general camera output, but be cautious - just
because one picture is overexposed/underexposed, or flawed in some
manor doesn't mean they all will be.

5) Avoid side-by-side comparisions on these forums. Alot of people
love to make Canon vs Nikon comparisons, but realize most of these
are unscientifc, unfair, and can easily be 'photoshoped' to make
one image appear better than another.

6) Avoid people bashing or making claims unproven such as Brand X
has hotpixels or Brand Y has more noise. People on these forums
are not engineers, and most are not professional photographers
(even if they claim to be), so take everything with a grain of salt.

Daniel

--
Nikon D50
Lenses: 28-80G, 55-200DX, 70-300G, and 50 1.8

Click to expand...

--
Duarte Lourenço, Portugal

http://kidcabide.deviantart.com/gallery/

climbingstevie said:

climbingstevie wrote:
...apart from the 2x converter stuff. First off, how
is 2x 200 450mm??

Click to expand...

Whoops, I mean't 600mm (200 x 1.5 x 2 = 600 @ 35 equiv). I've gotten too used to multiplying by 1.5

climbingstevie said:

and secondly, dont bother with a teleconverter

Click to expand...

Completely disagree in situations where long reach is required, and deep pockets are nowhere to be found. This is often the case with people upgrading from FZ style cameras, where reach is more important that Nat. Geo levels of quality.

And of course, had I done my math correctly, I would have suggested a 1.4 teleconverter in this case.

climbingstevie said:

If you need more reach then 200 for little money,
either get a cheap 70-300

Click to expand...

Well, you could do...but take into account VR versus practicality of a tripod where you do most of your tele shooting.

Duarte Lourenco said:

You are waaaaay insecure! :~

Click to expand...

I don't think I am, anymore. There were times when I wasn't confident about my looks and personality.. My nose was big and my teeth were too. They sometimes called me a beaver... But I've grown out of that, grown a thick skin and all that.

But hey, none of that makes any difference anymore. To call me insecure about such thing as photography gear? I think that, knowing myself a bit better than you, you couldn't be any more wrong.

Yes, I do have a grudge about such things as marketing. I hated it when Sony overtook Nintendo and became the number one brand. I always played Nintendo, though, as I felt perfectly comfortable about taking the harder way. My friends bought Playstations because they didn't care to look into the gaming - they just followed the ads. Playstation was cool... That made me frustrated, yes. To see what influence a good marketing had on my buddies might've made me a bit more conscious and definately made me (and my twin brother) even more determined about making our own decisions based on our own knowledge.

Now, Sony had almost killed videogaming.. A dear hobby of mine. Now that makes me angry. To see that Canon has the same kind of marketing superiority makes me think about things, two times. Go and ask what brand do people associate with photography and nine times out of ten you'll get "Canon". That's marketing power.

And finally, no, it wasn't the Canon's marketing that put me off on the 300D. It was just that D70 felt so much more better and that I like Nikon's approach of giving the best stuff in the consumer gear, too. Now I'm in the Nikon gear, hopefully it will be my last camera brand, too.

Now, the lecture ends... I hope you don't think I dislike Canon for the products - they're fine. I just don't think Nikon is any worse and I think D80 is way better than 400D. Just like the review said.

Duarte Lourenco said:

Now Janne.. I'm not implying that N has a worse lineup than canon,
in fact there are a few great lenses that C folks miss, but the
possibility of using older glass is not a factor IMO to base a
choice like this, especially to someone coming from a P&S and, I
presume, without older lenses.

Click to expand...

I didn't say Canon had a worse lineup... But having bought and liked so many dirt cheap and still extraoridinarily well built and high quality manual focus lenses, I can't ignore it. I want to get best bang for my bucks too, and I see this as the way to go. Canon doesn't give me this.

Duarte Lourenco said:

Remember we're talking about plastic, metal and glass... don't go
beserk.

Click to expand...

I won't I love my photographs, I just like my gear and appreciate it for giving me those. I hope you still don't consider me as a Nikon lunatic. I'm not - in fact I can say that if I liked me D70, I like my Canon S70 even more for giving me the photos in places a DSLR would've been too much. See? I like Canon, too!

Janne Mankila

megaresp said:

And of course, had I done my math correctly, I would have suggested
a 1.4 teleconverter in this case.

Click to expand...

I'd suggest 1.4x in all cases ... it works really well with a high quality zoom and extremely well with a prime tele. But 2x is going to pound the image quality no matter what lense you use.

On the other other, some have specific uses and higher tolerance ... so in rare circumstances I'm sure 2x is fine.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos

Hello, another non-biased person here, I have a Pentax (boo!

I've tried both of these in the last few weeks and here's my unprofessional but honest opinion:

I thought I'd like the D80, and I did, great camera, fast AF, felt good, intuative controls, I would recommend to anyone.

I didn't think I would like the 400D . . . . BUT I did. Again, despite the grip, I thought it was a lovely little camera, especially with a 50mm 1.4 attached (unfortunately I couldn't try the same combination on the D80)

If I had to recommend one, I doubt I could. They are both really good cameras. I feel Nikon has the ergonomics, but Canon has sensor cleaning (unproven but better than nothing I suppose). I read the review and did feel it had a Nikon bias, not sure why, but it was there. I, for example, did not like the idea of displaying your settings on the big LCD (as on the 400D), however, it works. I felt the reviewer dismissed this a bit too easily, after all, it doesn't take too much time or energy to move your head back the extra inch to view your settings.

To be honest, you probably know full well that the best way to decide is by trying them both, side by side. HOWEVER, I have a fun alternative that will work, because it WILL end up with you owning a very good camera:
toss a coin

--
I'm so bored!

And the 400d is compared ...

Looks like a wash on image quality, so it comes down to price versus features ... what a surprise

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos

J Mankila said:

...Wow... I think you got it wrong.

Click to expand...

No worries, internet acts as a filter through wich one cannot fully perceive the others true meanings or intentions.

J Mankila said:

J Mankila said:

Now Janne.. I'm not implying that N has a worse lineup than canon,
in fact there are a few great lenses that C folks miss, but the
possibility of using older glass is not a factor IMO to base a
choice like this, especially to someone coming from a P&S and, I
presume, without older lenses.

Click to expand...

I didn't say Canon had a worse lineup... But having bought and
liked so many dirt cheap and still extraoridinarily well built and
high quality manual focus lenses, I can't ignore it. I want to get
best bang for my bucks too, and I see this as the way to go. Canon
doesn't give me this.

Click to expand...

Actually it does. You should be able to use old nikon lens in the EOS mount through an adaptor (the reverse is not possible, you cannot use Canon EF lenses on the Nikon cameras). You retain the use of the AV function for manual lenses too, since the canon cameras are able to meter with this older lenses.

So, even if a future buyer intends to buy older lenses, this isnt a deciding factor, none of the brands presents a clear advantage over the other in this respect.

J Mankila said:

I won't I love my photographs, I just like my gear and
appreciate it for giving me those. I hope you still don't consider
me as a Nikon lunatic. I'm not - in fact I can say that if I liked
me D70, I like my Canon S70 even more for giving me the photos in
places a DSLR would've been too much. See? I like Canon, too!

Janne Mankila

Click to expand...

No problem

I think sometimes people in this forum forget that the true reason they enlisted... photography.

Regards

--
Duarte Lourenço, Portugal

http://kidcabide.deviantart.com/gallery/