# Dead camera what to get?



## oldwhitewood (10 May 2010)

Hey guys,

My beloved Nikon D40 has bitten the dust this weekend care of the concrete outside my apartment! I'm looking to replace the body with something better and was thinking about the D90. I figure this is a good bet, it's a nice upgrade from the D40 and I could use my existing lenses if I just got the body only, I use a 35 1.8 mostly but would probably get a macro lens for it in the future. 

Problem is a lot of the time I shoot film with a rangefinder; the size and discrete nature of it when you're out and about is great, so I'm torn between the D90 or an Olympus EP-1. The EP-1 would be similar in feel to a rangefinder (I use a voigtlander, essentially a Leica M type of camera and a zeiss lens) but be digital. I'm not sure how versitile it would be though, I know with a DSLR even though they're big and obvious as a jack-of-all-trades type tool they're great. 

Not sure what to do what do you think?


----------



## chump54 (10 May 2010)

hey Neil, that ep1 is a beautiful camera! have you used one? the 17mm lens looks good. I'd see if i could borrow/hire one for a few days. It could either be fantastic or pants...
Chris


----------



## oldwhitewood (10 May 2010)

chump54 said:
			
		

> hey Neil, that ep1 is a beautiful camera! have you used one? the 17mm lens looks good. I'd see if i could borrow/hire one for a few days. It could either be fantastic or pants...
> Chris



I've looked at them a few times, very impressed with the build quality. Not sure about hiring one though I haven't managed to find a hire place which will let you hire relatively speaking cheaper stuff.


----------



## chump54 (10 May 2010)

would the lack of optical view finder be an issue? I know screens have improved since I last used one but they used to feel slow to me.

Chris


----------



## oldwhitewood (10 May 2010)

chump54 said:
			
		

> would the lack of optical view finder be an issue? I know screens have improved since I last used one but they used to feel slow to me.
> 
> Chris



It would yes I can't use things without a viewfinder, the EP-1 just gets in there because of the hotshoe mounted opitcal viewfinder for the 17mm 4/3rds lens, it wouldn't give me any information just be something to compose with. That would be an issue against it IMHO.


----------



## ceg4048 (10 May 2010)

Neil, what's wrong with buying another D40? A used D90 would be the way to go for the extra features like DoF preview and ADR which I believe the D40 lacks...

Cheers,


----------



## Garuf (10 May 2010)

If you change to the olympus I think you'll probably regret it. I had a D90 for a short while and really liked it but found it too much of a camera for what I wanted, I think I only ever took it out of auto once so I got a point and click and sold it. I've regretted that ever since. I've tried the olympus ep-1 in Jessops and I have to admit the pictures seemed good but the weight and the feel of it just didn't seem as good as I remembered from my D90.


----------



## Mark Evans (10 May 2010)

buy a canon


----------



## George Farmer (10 May 2010)

I vote D90.

You still get to use your nice glass.

The D90 has almost the same tech spec as the D300 which is a great camera.  Incredible sensor and superb ISO handling, so great for aquarium photography if you don't have external flash etc.  

It also has HD video which you may like to use at some point?

You love your wet film, Neil, so why not stick with your old cameras for that style of photography?

I feel the EP-1 is too much trade-off, personally, but ultimately only you can decide what's best for your taste and requirements.

And sorry to hear about your D40.  Gotta love magnesium alloy bodies over plastic...


----------



## oldwhitewood (10 May 2010)

Solid advice guys thanks   

George is right the HD video is something which interests me a lot although I've read it can be a bit tricky to film with. 

I really liked using my D40 but I kinda feel I want a bit more from a DSLR now on the techie side, truth be told I want a top LCD panel where I can whats going on rather than having to look at the screen on the back so that I guess is a reason.

As far as film goes if you shoot Fuji Reala or Kodak Portra through some really nice glass and get good scans the results are flippin' amazing, full frame don't forget   

Saintly I would be drawn to your gauntlet in the past being a dyed in the wool Nikon guy   but I had the pleasure of shooting with a 5D a few months ago, not even the Mk II and wow I was blown away by it.


----------



## Dave Spencer (11 May 2010)

Personally, I am really going off modern DSLRs. Companies seem to make them ridiculously overcomplicated, with all their menus and sub menus. 

Fortunately, my camera has everything I need on some button or wheel somewhere on the outside. This makes it simpler to use than my Nikon D40, which I have thought about selling, but may need as a back up for some up and coming wedding photography. 

I hate having to take the camera out of shooting position to access a menu. The Nikon D300 has very similar ergonomics to mine, making spontaneous photography so much easier, as you can make adjustments whilst still looking through the view finder.

It has been said that the only camera that is important is the one you have with you, so there is a lot to be said for having one that will fit in your pocket, such as the olympus. I have missed many a shot because I couldn`t be bothered to lunk all my gear around. 

That said, the D90 does get rave reviews.

Dave.


----------



## oldwhitewood (11 May 2010)

Dave Spencer said:
			
		

> Personally, I am really going off modern DSLRs. Companies seem to make them ridiculously overcomplicated, with all their menus and sub menus.
> 
> Fortunately, my camera has everything I need on some button or wheel somewhere on the outside. This makes it simpler to use than my Nikon D40, which I have thought about selling, but may need as a back up for some up and coming wedding photography.
> 
> ...



I know what you mean using my rangefinder has been a very liberating experience, you just have a dial for shutter speed, aperture and focus on the lens, bit of AE lock, bit of exposure comp on it and aperture priority and that's it really, I mean it's film but that does make it a whole lot simplier to use and free's you up to concentrate on the actual shot and what's around you more, it's been a good learning experience so far. 

These scene modes you get on DSLRs I've never used for a start, why clog up the dial with more symbols!


----------



## Dave Spencer (11 May 2010)

oldwhitewood said:
			
		

> These scene modes you get on DSLRs I've never used for a start, why clog up the dial with more symbols!



These disappear on the D300 upwards.  They are replaced with a button for ISO, WB plus other useful buttons such as bracketing. It is just a shame that I had to spend Â£1700 for a camera body with a sensor the size of my Minolta X300 from back in the 80s. 

Dave.


----------



## George Farmer (11 May 2010)

Dave Spencer said:
			
		

> It is just a shame that I had to spend Â£1700 for a camera body with a sensor the size of my Minolta X300 from back in the 80s.
> 
> Dave.


But how much would it have cost to process all the equivalent film you've shot with your D700...?


----------



## oldwhitewood (11 May 2010)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Dave Spencer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeahhhh but then how many shots would you take if you were using film and not a big memory card which can store loads of shots? It's true what they say film does slow you down and you spend a lot of time taking the right kind of shots, rather than just shooting willy nilly at anything (although that's pretty cool sometimes). Costs me about Â£3 to get a roll of 36 processed and scanned at costco. The scans are at a decent resolution too. I'd have to shoot a lot of film to even get near the cost of a D700   

That said of those 36 probably 5 I think are good enough to keep   so my point is rather confused.


----------



## George Farmer (11 May 2010)

Ah, the great film vs. digital debate.

I got into photography late, so have never seriously tried film.  One day, perhaps.  Probably when I'm retired, as I won't have time otherwise...


----------



## murph (11 May 2010)

I can very much recommend the 5d mkII. 

used a 40d for a while but the set up to the 5d is worth it for the High ISO performance alone.

Outstrips my ability but its nice to have a vice of two!


----------



## George Farmer (11 May 2010)

murph said:
			
		

> I can very much recommend the 5d mkII.


If I had the cash it would be my no.1 choice too.


----------



## murph (11 May 2010)

I've seen you lusting after it in a few posts George!

The quality of your photos, both online and what I've seen in print, justifies the expense!

To be honest everything that i've came across in aquascaping since I came to it about a month ago has featured your work in some way. PFK, This forum, Flickr  (I'm stevie-), competitions where you have either entered photos or commented on entires.

You really have a lot to answer for!

I might well come pick your brains when it comes to photographing my tank for real, if thats alright!

And anyway I think the 'd' stands for debt! Need to get a few more weddings in to break even!




stevie


----------



## George Farmer (11 May 2010)

Thanks, murph (Stevie).

It's so tempting to wax the credit card but the missus would kill me!  I suggested we swapped one of her horses for a 5D Mk2 and she was not amused! lol



> I might well come pick your brains when it comes to photographing my tank for real, if thats alright!


It would be my pleasure.

One day I'll do an article for PFK on aquarium photography, as the photography hobby is becoming more accessible with excellent entry-level DSLRs.


----------



## oldwhitewood (11 May 2010)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Thanks, murph (Stevie).
> 
> It's so tempting to wax the credit card but the missus would kill me!  I suggested we swapped one of her horses for a 5D Mk2 and she was not amused! lol
> 
> ...



You should deffo get a 5D Mk2 George you deserve one. You owe it to yourself! One of the guys at work is a wedding photographer and has a M2 and 5D as a backup, plus 24-70L and 70-200L that is some serious outlay on kit! 

The photography in PFK would be very interesting looking forward to that.


----------



## oldwhitewood (11 May 2010)

The camera itself the D40 is behaving very oddly, basically when you try to fire the shutter the mirror at first wouldn't move, so I did a mirror lockup to see what it did and it did move but is now just stuck in place, I fire the shutter and I just hear faint click but nothing. It's been a cracking little camera as well.


----------



## George Farmer (11 May 2010)

Might be worth getting a quote for repair mate?

Or you can get a new D40 body for around Â£200 these days.

Decisions, decisions!


----------



## oldwhitewood (12 May 2010)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Might be worth getting a quote for repair mate?
> 
> Or you can get a new D40 body for around Â£200 these days.
> 
> Decisions, decisions!



Onwards and upwards! D700. Now where's my credit card...


----------



## tomsteer (14 May 2010)

You have lots of options within the Nikon DSLR range â€“

Buy a replacement second hand D40 body â€“ Probably the cheapest option, no improvement over what you have currently but if your happy with the images from your existing D40 then itâ€™s a perfectly reasonable purchase.

Buy a D90 â€“ Spend a reasonable chunk of cash but get a big jump in features over your existing D40, Live View, HD Video etc.

Buy a second hand D80 body â€“ the D80 isnâ€™t as feature packed as the D90 but is a solid DSLR with some useful features such as the lens motor (So you are able to auto focus without having to use the AF-S lenses (The D90 will do this too)). 

If you went for a D80 you could always spend the same amount as you would on the D90 but spending the rest of the cash on some fancy glass.

I have a D80 and love it but I mainly like available light photography and I would ideally like something with better high-ish iso performance, as such I've been waiting for the D700 replacement to be announced (You can follow the rumour mill on NikonRumours.com) but after about 5 months of avidly checking the rumour sites daily I decided to put it on a back burner and just get on taking pictures.

It all depends on what you want from your photos, I think many people would agree that the glass in front of the camera has more to do with the image quality than the body. 

Just some ideas.

Cheers,

Tom


----------



## oldwhitewood (17 May 2010)

Yeah agreed Tom. Good stuff. 

I've ended up getting a D90, been testing it over the weekend and it's pretty cool I think. I'm using my 35mm 1.8 on it only at the moment and it seems really good. The images I've got from it so far look better than the D40, not dramatically just more...'punchy' I guess is the word. I like the increased focus points over the D40's 3 and the top LCD display is very useful, I'm not used to having one of those and I like the way you can tell at a glance what you've set. Live view is a bit odd; can't get used to using that but it's good if you don't want to bend down I guess, the movie mode is okayish but fiddly to me, although it'll be fun to experiment with it. I think it's been a sensible option.

Glass is definately I reckon the key, I don't know if this is applicable more to film cameras though than digital, if you shoot film having some nice glass infront of it seems much more important than the body. With digital I reckon a lot to do with it is the sensor and the way the camera processes it's image, then you have the whole world of post processing, RAW shooting etc. Just musing here.


----------

