«

any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
functional level?

--
There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.

no
"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
> functional level?
>
> --
> There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.

Agree, all the D'SLR's are good. Pick the one that you like in your hands.

"oceangoing" <> wrote in message
news:G6-dnc0Vp-...
> no
> "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
> news:Mencken-...
>> any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
>> functional level?
>>
>> --
>> There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.
>
>

In article <Mencken->,
Ockham's Razor <> wrote:

> any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
> functional level?

The D50 is digital - nothing to do with negatives at all.

There is no light in the top LCD, this is a bit impractical if you are in a
darkish place. Seems a strange place to save 50 cents on the production
cost... Other than that, a nice camera.


"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
> functional level?
>
> --
> There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.

Ockham's Razor wrote:

>any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
>functional level?

Nope. In fact, I believe it's currently the best choice in entry level
DSLR cameras.

If you decide to get one and you want good optics, I would suggest you
consider looking at the 18-70 lense instead of the 18-55 kit lense. The
18-70 has a better zoom range, is sharp enough to use wide open, has a
non-rotating front element, and a true AF-S silent wave motor (SWM) with
full time manual focus override.

If you want a single walk around lense, consider the 18-200 VR lense.
It's expensive, but it's a gem from Nikon due to it covering such a wide
usable zoom range. However, it's a bit hard to find due to popularity.

Now if you have a limited budget, look at the D50 with the two lense
kit, which offers you the 18-55 and 55-200. That'll cover just about
everything at a very reasonable price.

"Bill" <> wrote in message
news:.. .
> Ockham's Razor wrote:
>
>>any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
>>functional level?
>
> Nope. In fact, I believe it's currently the best choice in entry level
> DSLR cameras.
>
> If you decide to get one and you want good optics, I would suggest you
> consider looking at the 18-70 lense instead of the 18-55 kit lense. The
> 18-70 has a better zoom range, is sharp enough to use wide open, has a
> non-rotating front element, and a true AF-S silent wave motor (SWM) with
> full time manual focus override.
>
> If you want a single walk around lense, consider the 18-200 VR lense.
> It's expensive, but it's a gem from Nikon due to it covering such a wide
> usable zoom range. However, it's a bit hard to find due to popularity.
>
> Now if you have a limited budget, look at the D50 with the two lense
> kit, which offers you the 18-55 and 55-200. That'll cover just about
> everything at a very reasonable price.

Hi.

I certainly would NOT recommend the 55-200. It must be in the running for
the worst ever lens with a Nikon badge.

Roy G

Roy G wrote:

>> Now if you have a limited budget, look at the D50 with the two lense
>> kit, which offers you the 18-55 and 55-200. That'll cover just about
>> everything at a very reasonable price.
>
>I certainly would NOT recommend the 55-200. It must be in the running for
>the worst ever lens with a Nikon badge.

Not hardly...I think the 70-300G gets that award. ACK!



The 55-200, while not a great lense, is similar to the 18-55 in overall
performance and would be a decent match.

What do you expect for $250?

Bill wrote:
> Roy G wrote:
>
> >> Now if you have a limited budget, look at the D50 with the two lense
> >> kit, which offers you the 18-55 and 55-200. That'll cover just about
> >> everything at a very reasonable price.
> >
> >I certainly would NOT recommend the 55-200. It must be in the running for
> >the worst ever lens with a Nikon badge.
>
> Not hardly...I think the 70-300G gets that award. ACK!
>
>
>
> The 55-200, while not a great lense, is similar to the 18-55 in overall
> performance and would be a decent match.
>
> What do you expect for $250?

The absolutely incredible 18-70mm lens. But most guys would save money,
time, and a lot of frustration just getting the 18-200mm VR. Remarkably
sharp, it does show some of the distortion you would expect from 11x
zoom, but for most photographers it is the only lens they would ever
need.

On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:32:41 +0900, Stewy wrote:

>> any negative comments on the Nikon D-50 in its price range and
>> functional level?
>
> The D50 is digital - nothing to do with negatives at all.

Are you positive?