Just Ordered a Nikon D60 DSLR

[GregPQ]

I was recently astonished--and delighted--to discover that digital SLR's have really come down in price. The original Canon Digital Rebel was $999 as I recall, and that might have been body only.

Today I placed an order for a D60 with kit lens (18-55mm zoom, w/image stabilization) for under $600.

I have a Minolta X-700 film SLR (a wonderful tool to pick up and use) and a couple of digital point-and-shoots.

Looking forward to this new Nikon. I know there are some Nikonians here.

Any fans of the D40, D40x or D60?

Greg

[IanM]

Hi,

I have a D80 and love it. I like the D40/40X but they're too small. The only thing that I would change on the D80 is the continuous shooting speed. I'd like it to be faster!! If you have a look here

http://www.shavemyface.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32633

you'll understand why.

Ian

[jww]

Some day I will move from my 5 and a half year old Canon G3 -- which was an awesome camera for its time but is now somewhat long in the tooth.

I am a fan of the D40 because of it's faster flash sync speed, and you can get it bundled with both the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses right now for an unbelievably good price. I haven't seen a D40x in ages -- but see it's still on the Nikon web site.

I do see advantages to the added features of the D60 - but no DOP is a bit annoying to me. I still have my original 35mm Nikon FM - which was a great camera in its day as well - it still takes great film shots and had DOP which is a great feature for composing shots and getting that right in-focus / out-of-focus balance in portraiture.

One of these days I'll move to a DSLR - the question for me will be when, not what - a Nikon will likely be in my future again.

[desmoface]

Congrats, thats a very nice camera. I use a Canon EOS 10d, but like them all.

Steve

[GregPQ]

I've had the D60 since Monday. Having a lot of fun with it. We are in the midst of an incredible Indian Summer in Massachusetts:



-Greg

[jww]

Nice shot Greg.

A DSLR is likely in my future, but not for some time yet. I have been quite intrigued with the Nikkor 18-135 lens with either a D40, D60 or D80. It's touted to be an excellent lens providing 7.5X zoom over it's range. In the end budget will play a big part of the purchase. I am kinda holding out in the hopes that Nikon adds DOP to it's next offering of lower-end DSLRs.

Otherwise, for the same price as a D60 with two lenses, I can get the D80 with the 18-135. Although I am not bothered about more MPs,per se - I am convinced the D40 would work fine for me in that area - I am interested in some of the more advanced features of the D80.

[GregPQ]

Thanks, Wendell. My wife and I drove up to Crane Beach in Ipswich, Massachusetts this afternoon. I'm using the kit lens with the D60: 18-55mm with Vibration Reduction.





I shot at ISO 200, using shutter-priority (set to 1/250).

Greg

[jww]

Excellent pics -- the sky was indeed photo-friendly for you.

[fallingwickets]

Do you gents think that in 40 years a d80/? will still be a good camera to own.

Talk of the FM got the curiosity going.

thanks

Clive

[jww]

Do you gents think that in 40 years a d80/? will still be a good camera to own.

Talk of the FM got the curiosity going.

thanks

Clive

Interesting point. I haven't taken any prints with my FM in probably 4 years or longer now. The reality is, however, that I can pick it up, go outside, and get some great film shots if I want to. Will we be able to do the same with a digital camera in 30 years' time? Dunno -- I think the optics will be fine, not sure if the electronics will be though. The thing about the FM is that it's pure mechanical except for the light meter -- and even that you can do without if you had a separate meter to use. Will digitals have the same life-span? I am thinking probably not.

Still want to get the D80 and 18-135 lens though.

[Steve-o]

Do you gents think that in 40 years a d80/? will still be a good camera to own.

As a museum piece? Absolutely. No disrespect to the D80; just that only ten years ago digital cameras were struggling to get past 1 MP in resolution and even Nikon's own low-end point & shoot then cost as much as the D40 kit does today. Another 10 years should see 12-20 MP cameras in mobile phones and our great-grandchildren will wonder if images at 10 MP were even worth looking at, much the way we marvel at early black & white TV.

Even assuming, though, that a good 10 MP camera like the D80 still is taking pictures of sufficient quality, it's unlikely you'll be able to do much of anything besides trip the shutter. Will USB 2.0 exist in 40 years? Will USB 16.0 be backward-compatible? Will the computers we're using in 40 years include the right connections? Or be able to read NEF (Nikon RAW format) files? Or even JPEGs or TIFF files?

It's probably all do-able if people are interested in transferring their picture files from one format to another as time goes by. But so many people have tossed their old film prints into a shoebox for years/decades and, luckily, have found them still viewable. Digital photographers who just shove the memory cards or files into a folder somewhere likely will not be that fortunate.

[IanM]

Do you gents think that in 40 years a d80/? will still be a good camera to own.

Talk of the FM got the curiosity going.

thanks

Clive

Cameras generally don't have anywhere near the length of production run that they used to have. Cameras such as the Nikon FM and the Canon AE-1 were produced for a long time. That just doesn't happen anymore.

The D90 has recently appeared, which kind of spells the end for the D80, but I think that the D80 will still be useful, but probably considered "under-spec'd" by some. What you have to bear in mind, is that the glass in front of the camera has the biggest influence on the image quality.

Ian

[jww]

I wouldn''t expect DSLRs to have the same life expectancy of film SLRs just because of the mass of electronics in them.

As Ian says -- it's all about the lens in front of the body.