Can we have a poll of this 2 cameras?
Can we have a poll of this 2 cameras?
my vote went to Km5d more value for money but seriously if As is not yr main priorityOriginally Posted by jerry2308
nikon D50 is very good too
KM5D for the excellent kit lens and anti-shake. its using the same Sony sensor that NIkon is using so that is ceteris paribus
wow..seems like KM5D is a more popular choice..Btw,is it hard to find 2nd hand lens with KM mount in the market?
hang around the BnS and you'll know
quite difficult but not impossible.Originally Posted by jerry2308
Many CSers letting go their KM mount lenses, but these would be what you would (I'm assuming here) already have. Some you can look into would be the thread by zenten. Do a search.
all else fails, order from www.keh.com
anybody saw the nikon d50 advertisemt on Straits Times today?
wonder if it's reali a "special price"...
nikon and cannon are so popular because of their extensive range of lenses(pro and consumer)Originally Posted by jerry2308
with KM ur best bet would be sigma lenses. check out this site: www.sigma4less.com
Has anyone done a side by side test in real shooting conditions. Does anyone have any image for comparison. I am planning to buy a DSLR soon and just managed to convince myself that the D50 is more value than a D70s.
Now this poll has put me back where I started. The advantage for me with nikon is that a lot of my friends shoot nikon and hence I would easily be able to borrow lenses.
I have a D50... EXCELLENT camera. Good for beginners and veterans to photography. The Nikon D50 is seriously the best thing that's ever happened to me.
For those who doubt about KM5D and its kit lens maybe you guys should take a look at these pics all taken with Kits lens with mininal processing done with Sharpen only according to the threadstarters.
and now the one with the cheapo 75-300 lens which came with the package at an offer of $99
Now who says Minolta lens are lousy? I dun think so.. Optically, they are of higher optical quality and cheaper than the competitors. Nevertheless, the image quality of the above pictures produced look like taken from competitors' expensive Premium lenses. I myself was also surprised to know it was taken with cheapo kit and a $99 75-300 lens. The pictures said it all.
Last edited by tokrot; 28th November 2005 at 11:58 AM.
One can only use 1 lens with a camera at any one time and very few are needed to to cover situations one normally encounters.Originally Posted by roti_prata
Therefore, it does not make sense for any manufacturer to produce too many lenses with overlapping specs. All this does is to dilute the demand for various lenses and increase production cost.
Canon and Nikon have to practically duplicate their range for those who need image stabilisation with versions such as IS or VR. Otoh, Minolta have AS built in their camera and all lenses automatically become image stabilised without the need for in-the-lens stabilisers.
However, that said, one must recognise that each manufacturer have their strengths and weaknesses and take into consideration one's unique needs when decided on the system to invest in.
Seriously, when you buy any minolta lens or 3rd party lens. You enjoy the anti-shake free shooting.
When you get Nikon D50, although you invest a little cheaper than KM5D, but when you get the anti-shake lens you need to pay alot.
I bought my 5D on friday, and I'm happy with it
The only complaint is that the handgrip is TOO small for my hand.
Get what you can afford. What bad or good is up to you to over-come and take advantage.
Me using D50, find it having what i need but lack of vertical grip cos i take portrait.
+1 to D50, but seriously get a 350D or a D2X will bring you a longer way
KM5D for me ....
for the AS
for the great kit lens
for the even-greater bundled lens
... all this at a very affordable price.
Last edited by catseye; 28th November 2005 at 09:30 PM.
I'll vote for KM5D. Even though Canon & Nikon have a very extensive lens range, only a few can afford it. Let alone those IS or VR range.
Anti-shake for a camera system is very useful feature if not important. Picture quality, I won't go there bcoz thats's very subjective.
Again, for those who make money out of photography or grow money, for the bulk of us, IMHO, can't afford such lens.
I wonder why Canon & Nikon don't have such feature? IMHO, should be business orientated.
My only concern is Konica Minolta has been bought over by Sony. It's future is still uncertain at the moment. Again, I believe, Sony should decided from the business aspect of things.
My 5 cents.
huh!!!Originally Posted by setiardi
Take the same pic using a pro grade glass, zoom in 100% and you'll start seeing differences, judging images at 100% view resized doesn't show much. If you can handle the camera, any camera can produce the images just as well. Canon, Nikon, Sony etc.Originally Posted by tokrot
Not true, you have invested in a variety wide range of glasses available for the camera.Originally Posted by alwayschampion
You have a 10.5 f/2.8 FishEye, 12-24 f/4DX and 17-55 f/2.8DX that compliments the DX format of the camera, how many HAS what Nikon has provided for the wide end?
Also not forgetting is the easy availablility of Nikkor glasses for wide from 10.5 to telezooms up to 1700mm.
Finally, not least, the renowned CLS - ability to control up to 64 SB-600/800s simulteanously as an entire flash system.