Sony Alpha versus the Nikon D80,which is best?

I have not bought the Sony yet and until I lay out the dosh my mind is still open.
You guys have give me a lot of food for thought.

Jessops have it for £399 and this was what caught my eye initially.But, if I went with the 18-200 or Tamron 18-250 then we are up in the £600 ball park!
So we will see!

My main use,will be for wildlife,animals,domestic cats, big cats and landscapes.Of course the reason that I will get this camera is that I have quite a lot of horse owners at various Stables and liveries want me to do photo shoots of their horses. (My excuse for splashing out £600 ! I have been drooling in camera shop windows,like a kid in a candy shop for the last 18 months now!)

I actually paint cats,horses and wildlife in my spare time and this is how I have entered into the area of Equine photography. I now have 5 definite commisions to go to liveries and photograph horses of perfect strangers who are mad about their horse and will expect me to be getting perfect results as I did with the Nikon D80. As you guys know,if I turn out some fantastic shots,then they will be shown around and I will get more orders (just like my paintings). So,rather than borrow the Nikon from work I thought that I should buy a SLR so that I can be familiar with it and this is why I entered your forum.I am a keen amateur phographer anyway and own a Minolta SLR film camera which I was always pleased with.

My digital camera at the momment is a Minolta Dimage 7i x 5mega pixels which has got me some superb shots.

I am also a digital artist with a Mac,Aperture,Painter X and Photoshop CS3 which are flyers on a pentium!So, used to working in these programmes. I must admit that I am still finding my way around getting the best from a RAW file,which I have only used since the Nikon photoshoot.
Many thanks
Martin

The Nikon D80 matrix metering! lol ;-0 ;-)

--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

That according to all reviews I've read - Kilpatrick's, Popular Photography's, and some I forgot - the 18-250 is MUCH better optically than the 18-200, strange as it seems. So If you decide to go Alpha and Tamron Superzoom, you'd probably be better with the 18-250.

...but wonder whether anyone will spring up to "decry the troll".

Probably not lol.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

I love this troll thing that keeps rearing its head.
It keeps me smiling !!!
Martin

Look here Martin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

Barry's last post is a typical example.
--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Just wanted to add a few things if they have not been said already. The Alpha currently has some of the best deals on used lenses right now. If you get an Alpha, be sure to shop ebay for a good condition 70-210 f4 (beercan) lens. These can be found for about $150 right now and Nikon has nothing close to it for the price. Look around here and you'll find lots of discussion about this lens because it's super cheap and very good. Some very excellent old Minolta glass can be had very reasonable these days, and are lenses that will cost you more $$ for the comparible Nikon version. You can build a very solid Alpha lens catalog for pretty cheap if you know what to shop for.

Check this thread I posted a while back on bargain used lenses to check ebay or local camera stores for. Hope this helps.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=15389&KW=minolta+lenses
--
My gallery for your perusal:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/root

Intersesting,I never realised that was the case.
This is the first forum that I have ever taken part in.
It kinda reminds me of the heated PC versus Mac debate that goes on!

I am picking out the good information from the forum as well as visiting all the web sites linked to the discussion, I can then form my judgement on the relevance of comments from the quality of photos on linked site.
By the way, I really like your images and website.

Welcome
--
Michel J

moggs said:

Intersesting,I never realised that was the case.

Click to expand...

An interesting and oft abused term. For some as you saw here, even suggesting "B" as a response to a query about A & B is to them trolling. Makes you then wonder what the point of asking an opinion is when only one answer is allowed lol.

The key is derogatory or inflammatory. However, as the article pointed out, that can sometimes be difficult to define.

moggs said:

By the way, I really like your images and website.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Most were taken with a KM 7D and the more recent with a Nikon D200.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Dayo said:

...but wonder whether anyone will spring up to "decry the troll".

Click to expand...

Maybe looking you @ the miror sometimes...

--
Michel J

...before stating "facts".

gipper51 said:

If you get an Alpha, be sure to shop ebay for a good
condition 70-210 f4 (beercan) lens. These can be found for about
$150 right now and Nikon has nothing close to it for the price.

Click to expand...

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-NIKKOR-70mm-210mm-70-210-F4-AF-ZOOM-Lens_W0QQitemZ220119034429QQihZ012QQcategoryZ106862QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-auto-zoom-70-210mm-70-210-f4-constant-aperture_W0QQitemZ110136133642QQihZ001QQcategoryZ3343QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Taken with my copy from Ebay



--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Dayo said:

gipper51 said:

If you get an Alpha, be sure to shop ebay for a good
condition 70-210 f4 (beercan) lens. These can be found for about
$150 right now and Nikon has nothing close to it for the price.

Click to expand...

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-NIKKOR-70mm-210mm-70-210-F4-AF-ZOOM-Lens_W0QQitemZ220119034429QQihZ012QQcategoryZ106862QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-auto-zoom-70-210mm-70-210-f4-constant-aperture_W0QQitemZ110136133642QQihZ001QQcategoryZ3343QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Click to expand...

When I say "comparable", I mean for optical quality not range. Yes Nikon has this lens I think but most will agree that optically the KM is a much better performer. Many have said the old Nikon is soft at f/4 where the beercan is usable at all apertures. I've never owned the Nikon so I'm just going from user opinions, but I do own the beercan and it is a superb lens at f/4.
--
My gallery for your perusal:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/root

gipper51 said:

When I say "comparable", I mean for optical quality not range. Yes
Nikon has this lens I think but most will agree that optically the
KM is a much better performer. Many have said the old Nikon is
soft at f/4 where the beercan is usable at all apertures. I've
never owned the Nikon so I'm just going from user opinions, but I
do own the beercan and it is a superb lens at f/4.

Click to expand...

I have no doubt the beercan is great but you are backing away from what you made as a definite statement of fact QUOTE "Nikon has nothing comparable for the price" END QUOTE to one that is more of "from what I have heard even though I have never used one, Nikon has nothing etc"

By the way, the shot I posted was wide open at f4 at the longest focal length. Here is one user opinion for you. My copy is sharp at f4.

Of course you will find people that are not happy with theirs as with every lens on the planet. Just as many have complained, so have many been happy.

The beercan was not a highly rated lens until the recent scarcity of KM lenses particularly the 70-200ssm which is what has given it a new lease of life.

The discontinued Nikon 70-210 is not really highly rated but then it goes up against the pro spec 80-200 and 70-200 which are not hard to get or as expensive as the 70-200ssm.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Michel J said:

Maybe looking you @ the miror sometimes...

Click to expand...

This is not an aggressive post but just for my information.

Can you please tell me which part of my original post you found to be trollish in nature so I can be more circumspect in future if required?

Thank you for your time.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Dayo said:

Look here Martin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

Barry's last post is a typical example.
--

Click to expand...

NO ITS NOT!

Have a sense of humor sometimes it was a joke!

I did not attack anyone, or use any foul words, or do anything other than make a light hearted comment......but this seems to have escaped you. As per usual.

Ok now for the serious bit:

"The D80's metering is simply put ..NOT GOOD ENOUGH", and IMHO not suitable for "Working photography". Shocking I know.....why? Its not consistent, its unreliable in matrix, it blows highlights left right and centre, which for weddings is a complete disaster.

Don't believe me.........ask David Kilpatrick, ask Ken Rockwell, ask Mr Nikon Thom Hogan, ask the entire nikon forum! Get the message now???

Lol.

Its a shame because in every single other way mostly its a great camera..it rocks.....bar this critical floor.

Does this bother the OP? I cannot say.........less of an issue for landscape shooters I would imagine..but its really not good.

We know where the A-100 falls downm high ISO.......

Dayo, time to take the blinkers off here buddy.....and get real on some things........

--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

Barry Fitzgerald said:

NO ITS NOT!

Have a sense of humor sometimes it was a joke!

I did not attack anyone, or use any foul words, or do anything
other than make a light hearted comment......but this seems to have
escaped you. As per usual.

Click to expand...

Barry, I knew it was a light hearted wind up. I was just judging it according to the standards my posts have been and made the joke that I bet no one will find that offensive.

Member said:

Dayo, time to take the blinkers off here buddy.....and get real on
some things........

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell the OP is closer to getting an Alpha and good luck to him. Don't know what blinkers you see on me as you will not be able to find one instance of me stating the metering issue does not exist because to be honest, I simply don't know.

As usual however, the judgements are not based on what I have written or declared but on preconceptions.
--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Dayo said:

gipper51 said:

When I say "comparable", I mean for optical quality not range. Yes
Nikon has this lens I think but most will agree that optically the
KM is a much better performer. Many have said the old Nikon is
soft at f/4 where the beercan is usable at all apertures. I've
never owned the Nikon so I'm just going from user opinions, but I
do own the beercan and it is a superb lens at f/4.

Click to expand...

I have no doubt the beercan is great but you are backing away from
what you made as a definite statement of fact QUOTE "Nikon has
nothing comparable for the price" END QUOTE to one that is more of
"from what I have heard even though I have never used one, Nikon
has nothing etc"

By the way, the shot I posted was wide open at f4 at the longest
focal length. Here is one user opinion for you. My copy is sharp
at f4.

Of course you will find people that are not happy with theirs as
with every lens on the planet. Just as many have complained, so
have many been happy.

The beercan was not a highly rated lens until the recent scarcity
of KM lenses particularly the 70-200ssm which is what has given it
a new lease of life.

The discontinued Nikon 70-210 is not really highly rated but then
it goes up against the pro spec 80-200 and 70-200 which are not
hard to get or as expensive as the 70-200ssm.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these
events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC

Click to expand...

Dude you seem to like stirring $hit up and arguing with this forum don't you?! I never said any of my statements were set-in-stone facts, they are just my opinion, but an opinion many here would agree with. Next time I'll put a legal disclaimer at the top. Yes it's true, I have never used the Nikon 70-210 lens, but I've heard many folks on the Nikon forum say that for about $150 it's just an OK lens, it's not exactly highly recommended. While most here will tell you that for $150, the beercan is a must-have lens, and for good reason. Maybe you have an exceptional copy, but I've seen enough samples from that Nikon to know that the average copy is not as good as an average beercan. Nikon does not have a reputation for cheap lenses, their good stuff costs plenty. Old Minolta (not new overpriced Sony) glass is a often a bargain compared to C/N stuff, and that is a fact.
--
My gallery for your perusal:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/root

Two Truths said:

steelski said:

Two Truths said:

Pentax K10D is only a good option if you're shooting RAW only.
JPEGs produced by the camera can tend to lack sharpness and detail.
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://www.flickr.com/photos/two_truths/
http://two-truths.deviantart.com/gallery/

Click to expand...

You would have thought so by Phils thorough review.
Except that he forgot that there are two distinct Jpeg modes as
listed in the Manual. Bright and Natural. Natural being the
default!.
The K100D got unanimous praise for its Jpeg process because its
default is Bright.
the manual which was not read says more contrasty sharpened and
saturated image are found with the bright mode.

Click to expand...

Phil did mention those modes in his review of the K10D. He states
that they are tone curve settings, which makes sense from their
names.

Click to expand...

Phil does not work for free!!!

Two Truths said:

He did compare them in this review - but - both produced similar
dynamic range, very limited compared to the competition.

Click to expand...

Please dont go into a conversation about Dynamic range.

What Pentax do is just differant, the way they use the 22bit analogue convertor is to give more tonal range in useful areas..... the middle.... and the range is slightly compromised. But I dont think any of the useful range is. A Jpeg is a very limiting format in my view. (in this respect.

If you want usefull Dynamic range beyond what you see on the screen you will always use RAW!!! that way the jpeg does not compromise things.

Plus the K10D has a instant histogram with instant preview and flashing Blown or underexposed bits of the image (VERY useful), I dont know about the Sony but I think that every camera should have this.

Two Truths said:

This setting does not sound like it would overcome the K10D's lack
of sharpness in JPEGs problem.

I would like to verify what it is in the manual that you mention
but unfortunately I cannot find any downloadable version? Seems
strange to me not to have one, every other brand does!

Click to expand...

I dont normaly do this but I will acuse you of telling a porky!

I typed into Google "pentax k10d manual" and this is what came up on the first link http://pentaxlife.com/pentax-k10d-manual-download

look at page 122 in the PDF and 120 in the manual.

for anyone who can not be bothered to look and take my word for it this is what Phil mannaged to miss out. And I have a theory as to why exactly involving C and N
"Setting Image Tone
Set the basic tone of pictures. The default being Natural
Natural = Images are finished naturaly and suitable for retouching
Bright = Images are finished brightly with hogh contrast and sharpness"

Two Truths said:

Two Truths said:

So it does produce sharp images with a simple setting change.
Also it has arguably the most untouched image, weather sealing,
cheaper lenses, two control wheels and a host of other modes which
are nice and unique to the camera.

Click to expand...

Cheaper lenses, yes, but a very limited selection in the current
line-up (15 lenses, by memory?). Whilst ex-production lenses (e.g.
50mm F1.4) are available at larger retailers such as B&H, in the UK
it is very rare to find such lenses.

Hence why the K10D has gadgets for metering manual lenses, because
that's what you're stuck with!

Click to expand...

I and stuck with a temporary shortage because of very high demand and your stuck with overpriced glass for the moment?

I just looked on UK retailer website and its available at 4 differant ones (the FA 50mm 1.4), at a max of £199.99 lowest £170 as opposed to the equivalent Sony glass which I found for 238.99 the lowest!!!

And those manual lenses give us a BIG lens range if we shoot manual!!

Two Truths said:

--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://www.flickr.com/photos/two_truths/
http://two-truths.deviantart.com/gallery/

Click to expand...

Dont get me wrong anyone, I am not against Sony, But really check the facts for yourselves.

I love the fact that they have managed to produce such a product, But at that price I would also check out Pentax. Its a compelling offering that is on the up with 22 new lenses coming in the next 2 years (proposed), not that we will ever need more than 10 (thats a stretch for most people anyway).

I appologise to anyone for sounding the way I was. If you were offended that is.
Bye,

gipper51 said:

Dude you seem to like stirring $hit up and arguing with this forum
don't you?! I never said any of my statements were set-in-stone
facts, they are just my opinion, but an opinion many here would
agree with. Next time I'll put a legal disclaimer at the top. Yes
it's true, I have never used the Nikon 70-210 lens, but I've heard
many folks on the Nikon forum say that for about $150 it's just an
OK lens, it's not exactly highly recommended. While most here will
tell you that for $150, the beercan is a must-have lens, and for
good reason. Maybe you have an exceptional copy, but I've seen
enough samples from that Nikon to know that the average copy is not
as good as an average beercan. Nikon does not have a reputation
for cheap lenses, their good stuff costs plenty. Old Minolta (not
new overpriced Sony) glass is a often a bargain compared to C/N
stuff, and that is a fact.

Click to expand...

No need to get hot under the collar dude. I simply called you on an unequalified, apparent statement of fact that was patently wrong as shown by the links and sample image I posted.

As for the cheap lenses, there is a slew of cheap secondhand stuff that can hold their own against many. The 28-105 is an ignored lens so is the 28-85 f2.8-4 for instance. Both can be had for peanuts because no one wants them anymore and would be written off as just being OK...same as the beercan was until the scarcity. Around this time three to four years ago, you couldn't give the beercan away on EBay if you tried.

Fact is that "OK" is relative. The pro spec 35-70 f2.8 is totally unloved now. Why, there are available replacements that's why. If Sony drops the price of the 70-200/2.8ssm and releases a cheaper 70-200/4ssm, the beercan will revert to "OK" status. This has fairy little to do with the actual quality.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)

'Human nature being what it is, and unlikely to change, these events will
no doubt be repeated in the future.'
Thucydides 400 BC