D80 vs X100

[baybeans]

I know, one of those threads where some gumby asks for reccomendations on two almost completly different styles of cameras, and then says, whats going to be best for ME (duh, only I can answer that, I know, but stay with me).

I have recently sold my aging Nikon D70 (+Sigma 10-20, Nikkor 50mm f1.8) after lusting over a Fuji X100. My thinking was, a great take-anywhere camera which will get me more shots compared to a DSLR that stays at home most of the time, with image quality at least as good as my D70/10-20mm.

So, I ordered a X100 yesterday, and my order was cancelled by the retailer claiming no stock. Of course i could go buy elsewhere, but perhaps this is a message from the luminus-gods. "you wont be happy, get another DSLR, son"

I have UPTO $1000 to play with here. And I am the kind of guy that likes control, the reason I have always prefered SLR's. I *could* buy a second hand D80 for around $350, add a prime of around 22mm and I have essentially the same thing. I have no idea what lens, but I am sure I could find something with the remaining $650.

I am looking for advice from someone that has a similar personality to me. the kind that could be suseptible to buyers remorse. the kind that likes to drive a manual vs an automatic car. the kind that likes a bit of DIY. My preference has always been for classic street primes - around 35mm focal length (on 35mm equiv) Do i pull the trigger on the x100, or go back to dSLR?

The kinds of photos I enjoy taking are landscapes, my kids and family, actually, probably easier to tell you what I DONT get enjoyment from photographing; flowers, birds, planes. I enjoy macro, but not enough to carry a dedicated macro lens. I would prefer to flip a 50mm around for the odd chance I would use it.

To add into the mix, I have an iPhone that I take a lot of my emmotional and instant photos (not great quality, but they dont need to be), that the x100 would replace somewhat. Am i doubling up here?

If there are any other suggestions, please let me know.

thanks,
James
Nelson Bay and Sydney.

[kiwi]

X100 is perfect, you can still have full control in raw and manual settings, as with most top end compacts

[baybeans]

ah yes, timely reminder, raw is a mandatory requirement.

[gerry]

forget the D80, its now pretty old and given your requirements I think the X100 would be a better option.

[Bennymiata]

Another choice would be the new Canon G1X.
The sensor on it is almost APS-C sized, and it had a very good 24-105 equivalent lens, and also takes HD videos.

The reports of it's IQ are very good too, and you can take photos in RAW or JPEG or both.

At around $750, it's not bad value either.

[fillum]

My concern about having the X100 as my only camera would be the fixed lens. For example is 35mm (35mm equiv) wide enough for you for landscapes? Are your kids likely to do an activity in future that would require a tele to shoot (sport, etc) ?

If you decide to go with a DSLR and want to buy used, I'd suggest spending a few hundred more and getting a D90 rather than a D80. The D90 was a significant improvement over the D80 (better high ISO performance; better rear LCD screen, just to mention a couple of things). For a similar amount of money you could get a new D5100 which should have better image quality again, but doesn't have a lens focus motor so you would be limited to AF-S lenses if you wanted autofocus. The only 24mm AF-S lens is the f/1.4 for ~$2K.

(I don't think I've helped much...:o)



Cheers.

[reaction]

you've sold EVERYTHING already right?
D5100 with a good normal zoom may be the go - I don't know how you take portraits only using a 10-20mm!
I've gone over your $1000 tho...

[baybeans]

Your right, a ultra wide is only good for portraits if I want everyones ears to be folded behind their heads and their noses to look massive ;-)
I think a 50mm works nicely as a portrait lens at a nice price on a 1.6x crop sensor. so, I think if i went back to a DSLR, will end up with a prime 50mm somewhere. the d5100 doesnt have a focus motor internally, so my old 50mm wouldnt have been suitable.

[reaction]

a normal zoom like a 17-50 f2.8 or even a kit 18-55 would be so much more versatile than a prime. I know there's some mystical thing around primes, esp in the Canon world, but I don't think it should be the first or only lens one owns. Anyway it's good you sold the old 50mm, as you'll find motorised lens AF so much better, and the 35mm f1.8 is only about $200. But even with a 35mm you won't be able to take any group pics easily.

[baybeans]

Reaction, I think that is great advice. My needs have changed somewhat and a 18-55kit lens will probably be more than fine for most of what i want from a camera. I think i will still pyne after a prime - I enjoy the benefit of more light reaching the sensor, a smaller form factor and somehow it improves my creative side - I dont know why.

[baybeans]

I have made a purchase. I just couldn't live without a camera any longer and feared making an impulse purchase dropping at least $1k without really having made a real decision.

So, I bought a Nikon D40 with kit 18-55. I know its not at all a semi pro camera, but will do me fine with some menu tweaking. Its a good replacement for my tred d70 and puts some cash in my pocket. It supports raw, has a nice display and the lens is an ok lens for the money while i decide what I want. for $150, in my opinion, its a good intermediate solution.

I dont think I would have been completely satisfied with a X100 at 10x the price. can anyone say "buyers remorse"?