So many of the new Nikons look kind of ‘plasticy'...just haven't got that solid feel of the older ones. Am I right in thinking this and can someone give me a quick comparison to try to get this overall quality issue sorted?
When I started with digital, for most people that wanted Nikon SLR, it was the D70. It was quite expensive and used prices were very high, given that it was a 6.1 Mp. (as against Canon's XT at 8 mp)
The D50, I thought, was a down-graded version at a more user-friendly price, and I chose one of these because - A, I couldn't detect a significant difference between the 8 and the 6, ( I borrowed the Canon for a couple of days from the Uni. ) But I could detect a difference in the build quality compared to Canon.
Also, I allowed myself to be influenced by a well known reviewer, who said that he was unbiased and paid for all his own kit, but it was Nilon or Nikon. And never mind the Mp.
Well, that was then, and the difference was ‘only' 2mp. Now 10 is the base line I would think.
Now that we have a whole new range of Model numbers, is there a 10 Mp equivalent to the split between the 50 and the 70 above?
And as importantly, how does the build quality and general functionality of this new range, compare with the old D70?