Nikon's D50 is definitely...entry level
 

I saw it in the French photomag, "Photo Response"
It looks like a shrunken Canon Rebel, not the XT.
The model they had was silver. 6 meg. It's clearly
aimed at the beginner market and given it's not much
cheaper, I can't imagine (unless retailers push them)
that someone would choose it over the D70(s) unless
they like the diminutive size. It's light too, less
with a zoom than my Olympus C8080 P&S.
From the specs I saw, it's limited when it comes to
pre-set settings, which may be a good thing when it comes
to a beginner being forced to learn how to really use a
camera.
-Rich

RichA wrote:
I saw it in the French photomag, "Photo Response"
It looks like a shrunken Canon Rebel, not the XT.
The model they had was silver. 6 meg. It's clearly
aimed at the beginner market and given it's not much
cheaper, I can't imagine (unless retailers push them)
that someone would choose it over the D70(s) unless
they like the diminutive size. It's light too, less
with a zoom than my Olympus C8080 P&S.
From the specs I saw, it's limited when it comes to
pre-set settings, which may be a good thing when it comes
to a beginner being forced to learn how to really use a
camera.
-Rich

Just posted:
http://news.com.com/A+pro+camera+that+amateurs+can+afford/2100-1040_3-5750144.html

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 11:49:49 -0400, "Randy W. Sims"
wrote:

RichA wrote:
I saw it in the French photomag, "Photo Response"
It looks like a shrunken Canon Rebel, not the XT.
The model they had was silver. 6 meg. It's clearly
aimed at the beginner market and given it's not much
cheaper, I can't imagine (unless retailers push them)
that someone would choose it over the D70(s) unless
they like the diminutive size. It's light too, less
with a zoom than my Olympus C8080 P&S.
From the specs I saw, it's limited when it comes to
pre-set settings, which may be a good thing when it comes
to a beginner being forced to learn how to really use a
camera.
-Rich

Just posted:
http://news.com.com/A+pro+camera+that+amateurs+can+afford/2100-1040_3-5750144.html

I was going to say it looked like it was an ad written by Nikon right
up until he mentioned the "inferior" Canon starter lens. Pro? No.
But it looks like DSLR evolution continues right along.

In article ,
Randy W. Sims wrote:

[ ... ]

Just posted:
http://news.com.com/A+pro+camera+that+amateurs+can+afford/2100-1040_3-5750144.html

Hmm ... some things show that whoever wrote it does not really
know the field:

================================================== ====================
And a digital SLR reduces shutter lag--the half-second delay after you
press the shutter button--to zero.
================================================== ====================

It may be reduced compared to the digital P&S cameras, but it is
certainly not *zero*. After all, you have to get the mirror out of the
way first -- and stop the diaphragm down. :-)

And -- if you are using autofocus, you have to wait for that to
complete -- except in "sports" mode, I believe.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:39:01 -0400, RichA wrote:

From the specs I saw, it's limited when it comes to
pre-set settings, which may be a good thing when it comes
to a beginner being forced to learn how to really use a
camera.

Why is it a good thing to force someone to use a camera?

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Randy W. Sims wrote:

[ ... ]

Just posted:

http://news.com.com/A+pro+camera+tha...00-1040_3-5750
144.html

Hmm ... some things show that whoever wrote it does not really
know the field:

================================================== ====================
And a digital SLR reduces shutter lag--the half-second delay after you
press the shutter button--to zero.
================================================== ====================

It may be reduced compared to the digital P&S cameras, but it is
certainly not *zero*. After all, you have to get the mirror out of the
way first -- and stop the diaphragm down. :-)

And -- if you are using autofocus, you have to wait for that to
complete -- except in "sports" mode, I believe.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

It sounds more like propaganda then a review!

"McLeod" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:39:01 -0400, RichA wrote:

From the specs I saw, it's limited when it comes to
pre-set settings, which may be a good thing when it comes
to a beginner being forced to learn how to really use a
camera.

Why is it a good thing to force someone to use a camera?

Maybe they would rather be fishing?

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 17:17:58 -0400, McLeod
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:39:01 -0400, RichA wrote:

From the specs I saw, it's limited when it comes to
pre-set settings, which may be a good thing when it comes
to a beginner being forced to learn how to really use a
camera.

Why is it a good thing to force someone to use a camera?

Force to LEARN how to use a camera. Uh, because it will give
them better photographs in the long run?

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 21:21:17 -0400, RichA wrote:

Why is it a good thing to force someone to use a camera?

Force to LEARN how to use a camera. Uh, because it will give
them better photographs in the long run?

Then why don't we just make it law that everyone has to learn on a
4x5" view camera so they get even a better understanding of optical
theory?

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:02:01 -0400, McLeod
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 21:21:17 -0400, RichA wrote:

Why is it a good thing to force someone to use a camera?

Force to LEARN how to use a camera. Uh, because it will give
them better photographs in the long run?

Then why don't we just make it law that everyone has to learn on a
4x5" view camera so they get even a better understanding of optical
theory?

Histrionics don't help anyone.