The perfect prosumer DSLR.

Author's Rating:

Pros: Great ergonomics, great image quality!

Cons: No mirror lockup.

The Bottom Line: 
It may not have a full frame sensor, built-in "anti-shake" or "anti-dust" systems, but this camera has superb ergonomics and offers D200 image quality in a D50 sized package.

Author's Review
I have been a Nikon camera user for a very long time, starting with a Nikon FE (a manual 35 mm body) my father gave me in 1984. The Nikon FE, combined with a Nikon 50 mm f/1.4 lens, served me well until the middle of 2004, when I acquired a Nikon D70 with 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 kit lens.

After dipping my toes into digital photography for two years, I was comfortable, and decided to upgrade the camera. The question was simply what camera do I upgrade to?

Nikon's Competition

Since I had yet to acquire any glass aside from the kit lens, if I were going to make a move to a different manufacture, it would be now. I planned to acquire a collection of lenses post-upgrade. Nikon's primary competitors are Canon, and to a lesser extent, Sony (with its purchase of Minolta's camera line).

Canon 5D

The only Canon camera I considered was the Canon 5D. This was because originally, the Nikon I was considering was the D200, and the Canon 5D was more in line with the D200 in terms of capability as well as price.

"Full frame" or APC-C sized sensors?

The biggest technical difference between the D200 (well, any Nikon DSLR) and the 5D is that the Canon 5D uses a "full frame" sensor. Where as the Nikon DSLRs have standardized on APS-C (so called because the size are reminiscent of APS film) -- or what Nikon calls DX -- sized (16 x 24 mm) sensors (based on the "academy" standard 35mm [movie] film frame size of 18 x 24 mm), the Canon 5D sports a "full frame" (actually, this used to be called "double frame", as it was double the size of a frame used on 35 mm movie-film) 36 x 24 mm sized sensor. It is my belief that if one is to buy a Canon camera, one should buy a camera with a "full frame" sensor. This is because unlike Nikon with its standardized sensor size and a 1.5 lens conversion ratio (that is, a 30 mm lens on a DX sensor will give an image roughly equivalent to a lens of 30 x 1.5 = 45 mm on a 35 mm camera), the Canon cameras have sensors of every different size from a 1.3 conversion ratio to 1.6. It seems to me that Canon cannot really decide what sensor size they want to push. Give this, the only sane choice if one were to buy a Canon camera is to stick to one with a "full frame" sensor. In addition, Canon does not seem to create nearly as wide a range of APS-C compatible lenses.

The argument as for which sized sensors are better often runs like the arguments between EMACS and VI users (VI is better of course, it stands for Very Intuitive, after all!) or those between adherents of the M-16 and AK-47 (The AKs are better of course, as the girls in Izhevsk are much prettier than those in Columbus, SC)… :-) Of course, the bigger the sensor size, the better, theoretically, except it cost a lot more, which means you have less money to spend on what's really important, the lenses. There are other technical issues relating to light fall off for large sized sensors et al. This is all beyond the scope of this review, and needless to say, Google or Wiki can explain this much better than I.

But damn, the 5D cost over $1000 more than the D200. And frankly, just as the soldier behind the rifle matters more than what rifle he is carrying, the photographer matters more than the camera. (For that extra $1000 dollar, I can buy a ticket to Izhevsk and photograph really cute girls... but I digress.)

Ergonomics

The real axe to grind against Canon are the ergonomics of the 5D. The power button on the bottom of the back? Why? Compare that with Nikon -- the power switch and shutter release button is in one location. Assuming you have the mode dial already in the mode you want, you can pick up the camera, turn on the camera, and immediately fire off a shot all with one hand. I also found the dial controls on the Canon to be sub par. Whereas on a Nikon, one can control almost everything without taking the hand off the grip -- with index finger on shutter release, middle finger on front control wheel, and thump on secondary control wheel, the Canon controls seem to be thrown at which ever random location.

No Focus Distance in EXIF with Canon DSLRs

The show-stopper for me was the lack of focus distance information in the EXIF (i.e. the 0x9206 tag). The reason this is important is that when you are using post processing software like DxO Optics Pro (basically, PTLens and Photoshop Raw on steroids), it uses the focus distance to determine how much lens aberration to correct for. Unfortunately, this information is missing in all Canon bodies. A query on www.openphotographyforums.com produces this reply from Canon's customer relations:

June 5th, 2006, 08:27 AM

To the best of my knowledge, none of the current EOS digital SLRs records distance information in Exif data, even with lenses that support it. Most likely this is because our current software applications like DPP, RIT, etc., don't use it.

I understand that some 3rd-party software applications like DxO do use this information. Several users have requested that distance information should be restored to the Exif data generated by our cameras, in order to support these 3rd-party applications. We have forwarded these requests to Canon Inc. via our monthly reports, but so far there is no indication that these requests will be granted. If anything changes on this subject, I will let you know.

Best Regards,

Chuck Westfall
Director/Media & Customer Relationship
Camera Marketing Group/Canon U.S.A., Inc.

I frankly consider this a flaw that needs to be fixed. However, Canon's engineering division seems to be only interested in things such as low noise full frame sensors, but often drops the ball on other simple to fix things that are useful to a photographer. Another case in example is Canon's ubiquitous compact flash door flaw that can wipe out the image buffer. DPReview's comments on this issue regarding the newly released 400D:

I won't repeat myself, it's clear Canon has no interest in addressing the design flaw which has affected every Canon digital SLR since the EOS D30. If you want more information see my comment six years ago from my EOS D30 review.

Sony Alpha 100

Sony's Alpha has a lot going for it, built-in anti-shake, the auto sensor cleaner, and a very low price. The problem for me is the ergonomics.

The Nikon, Canon all allows the user to control ISO, WB, et al by pushing a single button. According to DPReview, to make changes to the above settings, the user "simply select the setting you wish to adjust and then press the central 'Fn' button to display an on-screen menu of options, either use the control dial or 4-way controller to make changes. Again a press of any other button (such as a shutter release half-press) will return the camera to shooting mode. Some certain settings (flash mode, focus mode, white balance and DEC) have multiple sub-options which have to be navigated using the 4-way controller."

What kind of design is this? Did any of the engineers who designed this thing consult an actual photographer? A good camera should always allow the user to change the most common settings like ISO, WB, and QUALITY quickly and easily with a minimum amount of fuss. Sony fails miserably on this account.

Given this, the Alpha is not a serious contender. A camera that has a load of technology is useless if it takes me half a minute to set up, by which time I will have already lost the shot!

D200 or the D80

After having decided to stay with Nikon, I was about to purchase a D200. The Nikon D80 announcement was certainly unexpected. After reading the specifications of the D80 (which I will not repeat here), I decided that the D80 suits my purpose much more than the D200.

Similarities between a D200 and the D80

Both the D200 and the D80 has a 10 mega pixel CCD (most likely sourced from Sony). The D200 has more read channels and can be read to memory faster, but otherwise, the performance characteristics are very similar.

Both cameras has a gorgeous 2.5" LCD display on the back.

Both cameras have a large .95x view finder.

Both have a built-in flash, unlike the pro models. This is yet another Japanese peculiarity that I do not understand. A camera with a built-in flash is considered "unprofessional." Only "consumer" cameras has built-in flashes. Why? Do professionals always walk around with a Nikon Speedlight? What if I just need a little bit of a fill flash?

Advantages of a D80

However, the D80 has many advantages.

The camera is smaller and weighs less.

The D80 is compatible with the D50/D70 remote control. I do not for the world of me understand why the D200 does not support the remote control. Do professionals never need to fire their camera remotely? Yes, you can buy an expensive remote release setup for the D200, but I suspect 99% of the people simply want to be able to put their camera on a tripod and take photos of themselves remotely.

Cleaner photos at high ISOs -- no banding problems what-so-ever at 1600 ISO or even pushed to 3200. I suspect this is due to the fact that Nikon had more time to tweak the noise reduction algorithms. I expect that Nikon will fix these problems on the D200 with a firmware update, so this is probably not a permanent advantage for the D80.

Finally, the D80 has the vari-programs with preprogrammed modes -- you know, point and shoot fully automatic modes. I know, some readers will want to crucify me for this, as they believe that professional cameras have no need for these modes. I disagree -- when you're on vacation, and you want someone to take a photo of you, the digital vari-programs comes in very handy. Also, there is a night portrait mode where the camera fires the flash briefly and keeps shutter open longer; his allows you to easily create a clear portrait in low light while avoiding the deer in the headlight look. This is difficult to duplicate with the D200.

Advantages of a D200

A bigger buffer allows you to take more photos in succession. I'm not a sports shooter, so this feature is not important for me.

Mirror lockup. If you don't know what this is, you don't need it. The D200 allows you to prelock the mirror in the up position so that you have less vibration when shooting. While a nice feature, I've never had any problems shooting extended night shots (lasting several seconds), as any brief vibration occurs in such a short amount of time that it will not show up in the final photograph.

The D200 has [theoretically] a better exposure meter with more segments. However, I think this is more marketing hype. I've never even had a problem with the simple meter on my Nikon FE. In any case, the photographer should learn how to use the histogram or bracket the shots.

The D200 is weather sealed and with a metal body instead of a plastic one. Again, this isn't really useful for me. I don't plan on using my camera in the rain. I have a point and shoot with a underwater case for that.

The D200 has dedicated buttons for QUAL, WB, and ISO on the upper left of the camera. I will miss this feature. However, as nice as these three buttons are, they're not worth an extra $700. Having these buttons on the side as in the D80 are still quite easy to use.

Better raw support - right now, no one other than Nikon supports the D80 raw format. Of course, this will change within the next few months.

About the D80

The one thing I absolutely love about the D80 is that Nikon has removed the LCD backlight button and has integrated the LCD backlight switch into the power switch. The power switch is still off in the left most position; pull it right and the camera turns on. Now you can pull it slightly further to the right, and the LCD backlight switches on! Brilliant!

Furthermore, Nikon has moved the autofocus mode (to select whether the camera focus on demand or continuously), the shooting mode (to select for single, multiple, timer, remote et al), exposure compensation (by plus or minus 1/3 EV increments), and metering mode (center, center weighted, 3D Color Matrix II) buttons to the area by the LCD. I love it, it means that everything you may need to adjust is now in one location.

The Auto Exposure and Auto Focus Lock button is now to the right of the viewfinder. Apparently you can reprogram this button for your own purposes. I haven't figured out how yet.

Nikon has now added help menus for the veri-program modes; just hold down the button and the camera now displays a blurb on the LCD on what this mode does.

There are some built-in retouching functions. I doubt any reader of this review will use the in camera functions and will probably use Photoshop or some other software.

Oh yes, the D80 uses SD cards instead of compact flash. This shouldn't be much of a problem, considering that a 4 GB SD card cost $60 online.

I can't be effusive enough on how much I love the D80. It takes the best features out of the D200, and put it in a small D50 sized body. On top of this, the D80 has a fairly usable high ISO modes. Also, exposures of around 2 or 3 seconds didn't show any sensor hot spots. I suspect this is because the internal software is very good at mapping out the hot spots. Or perhaps the new CCD is less prone to hot spots. Whatever the reason, I am quite pleased with the results.

Lens

Speaking of which, take the $700 you'd save compared to the D200 and buy some decent lenses. The 18-50 kit lens included with certain packages is pretty crappy. I don't know good the other 18-135 lens is, as I bought the body only package.

Instead, I bought a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 constant aperture (that is, the aperture does change as you zoom in and out) lens for DX sized sensors. Read the reviews on this lens. The quality is extremely good, and $359 shipped, much cheaper, much lighter (on your wallet as well as in weight) and much smaller than the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens. All the reviews I've read claim similar image quality from the two lenses.

I also acquired the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 prime. This lens is both fast and sharp! I've always been a lover of fast prime lenses for available light photography, and this f/1.4 does not disappoint.

Then there is the Sigma 10-20mm wide angle lens. I received it, but haven't tested it yet -- I will keep everyone posted.