 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / February 2006Help needed with which digital camera to buy!
I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to decide! I would like something that I could take great pictures of my grandchildren, indoors and outdoors and also landscape photos. Do all these cameras have interchangeable lenses and also have filters available? The ones I have narrowed it down to: Canon EOS 350D/Digital Rebel XT Nikon Coolpix 8700 Nikon Coolpix 8400 I would appreciate everyone's comments! Karen > I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. > I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Nikon Coolpix 8700 > Nikon Coolpix 8400 Since you know the model names it seems you could quickly and easily see that the Coolpixes do not have interchangeable lenses. You should be looking at the Digital Rebel, Rebel XT, Nikon D50, or Nikon D70s. I prefer the Rebel XT but since it doesn't sound like you have any lenses you've got a fresh start and need to do a feature comparison. Either way, for me it would be the Rebel XT or the D70s. Greg  Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons Don't forget Minolta ,Pentax and Olympus.They also make lower end dslr cameras worth consideration! >> I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. >> I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Greg > Don't forget Minolta ,Pentax and Olympus.They also make lower end dslr > cameras worth consideration! Only if you have their respective lenses. I'm sure she wants to spend her money wisely. Greg >>>I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. >>>I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>lenses you've got a fresh start and need to do a feature comparison. >>Either way, for me it would be the Rebel XT or the D70s. Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons I didn't see anything that says they own ANY lenses! What makes you think they own a Canon or a Nikon? The Minolta and Pentax take lenses from their film cameras.I own a Canon 20D,Nikon D70 and a Nikon D200, but I do own Pentax and Minolta film slrs also! As a matter of fact, you even reference the lens sitsuation.You say since she doesn't own ANY lenses! The Minolta has built in "anti-shake". To get that on a Canon you have to buy lenses at $1000 per pop! >> Don't forget Minolta ,Pentax and Olympus.They also make lower end dslr >> cameras worth consideration! [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >>>lenses you've got a fresh start and need to do a feature comparison. >>>Either way, for me it would be the Rebel XT or the D70s. > I didn't see anything that says they own ANY lenses! What makes you think > they own a Canon or a Nikon? There just has to be a correlation between top-posting and poor reading comprehension. I'll spell it out a little clearer for you. Since she appears to not have any lenses she should she spend her money wisely and at this price level buy a Canon or Nikon. Greg >>>Don't forget Minolta ,Pentax and Olympus.They also make lower end dslr >>>cameras worth consideration! [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >>>>lenses you've got a fresh start and need to do a feature comparison. >>>>Either way, for me it would be the Rebel XT or the D70s. Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom for a very reasonable price? JT (Who loves his FZ-10) > > I didn't see anything that says they own ANY lenses! What makes you think > > they own a Canon or a Nikon? [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > The battles we fought were long and hard > Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom for a > very reasonable price? Nice suggestion but this is an SLR group last I checked. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons >> Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom for a >> very reasonable price? > > Nice suggestion but this is an SLR group last I checked. > > Greg The OP mentioned non-SLR cameras. However, the OP also posted the same question in rec.photo.digital, which does not have the same topic limitations as here. David >>>Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom for a >>>very reasonable price? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > The OP mentioned non-SLR cameras. Obviously mistakenly because she says she's looking for removable lenses. > However, the OP also posted the same question in rec.photo.digital, which > does not have the same topic limitations as here. But the above post was posted here in r.p.d.s-s. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons >>>> Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom >>>> for a very reasonable price? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Greg Well, I don't recall anything against cross-posting in the charter for this newsgroup, but it's a practice I don't like. Even worse is when multiple postings are made! I don't think it's a "mistake" to be considering both SLR and non-SLR cameras for a particular job. However, I did respond with some information, but in the r.p.d newsgroup. David >>>>>Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom >>>>>for a very reasonable price? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > However, I did respond with some information, but in the r.p.d newsgroup. Like I said, the Panasonic is a nice suggestion. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR JT > > Why not consider one of the Lumix cameras with a 12X Leica zoom for a > > very reasonable price? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > The battles we fought were long and hard > Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > > JT Um, no it isn't. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >> >>JT > > Um, no it isn't. Just to be totally clear, as long as the camera uses one (single) lens to view and take the image and uses it via a reflecting (reflex) device (usually a mirror is qualifies as a SLR. Most, but not all, have the ability to change lenses. Consider Twin Lens Reflex cameras for example. Rolliflex has non-interchangeable lenses while some Mamiyas (300C or C300 I think) have interchangeable lenses. Both are TLR cameras. Hope this makes things clearer, Dave > > Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > > > > JT > > Um, no it isn't. Really??? On what do you base this? JT >> > Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > JT A), no reflex mirror, (thus the term "reflex") and B) non interchangeable lenses, admittedly not a literal prerequisite for inclusion in SLR categories, but generally understood to be necessary. Quite simple, really. An electronic viewfinder is not a reflex type viewfinder, if it were, then several P&S digitals would qualify, too. After all, what's an LCD but an electronic viewfinder? SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > > JT It's an SLR-style camera, yes, but it lacks the interchangeable lens to qualify it for discussion in this newsgroup. The correct group would be: rec.photo.digital.zlr David >> Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > David What it lacks is a "reflex" viewfinder, it has an electronic VF. Non interchangeability of lenses is only the second disqualifier. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > "David J Taylor" > <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > What it lacks is a "reflex" viewfinder, it has an electronic VF. Non > interchangeability of lenses is only the second disqualifier. The "reflex" is electronic rather than optical - in my view. The viewfinder image presented is through the taking lens, and can therefore avoid the parallax issues with non-TTL optical viewfinders. True that DoF is more difficult to judge with today's EVFs, but I believe improved EVFs will come. Indeed, one day it may even come to the DSLR and offer live preview and the ability to detract the finder from the camera... David > > "David J Taylor" > > <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > David I think that you nailed it quite well David and you reflect my view (er, pardon the pun) exactly. Regarding interchangeable lenses, who needs 'em when the FZ is a 12:1 ratio which admittedly has some drawbacks but in most cases will do justice for most advanced amateur photographers. If I feel the need for extreme quality, I simply revert back to one of my ancient M2(s) which of course are rangefinders. <g> JT > >> Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > What it lacks is a "reflex" viewfinder, it has an electronic VF. Non > interchangeability of lenses is only the second disqualifier. SLR = Viewing throught the lens period. The FZ 10 does exactly that. So, am I to believe that this group is made up of a number of pendantic snobs? JT >>>>Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >>>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > The FZ 10 does exactly that. No it doesn't. It displays an electronic representation of the light that hits a sensor. > So, am I to believe that this group is made up of a number of pendantic snobs? No. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons >> >> Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >> >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >So, am I to believe that this group is made up of a number of pendantic snobs? It's made up of people who believe in correct descriptions of things and to call a FZ 10 an SLR is not a correct description. ******************************************************** "...bray a fool in a morter with wheat, yet shall not his folly be beaten out of him;.." "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell" William Blake > >> >> Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > It's made up of people who believe in correct descriptions of things > and to call a FZ 10 an SLR is not a correct description. So, a viewfinder that looks through the lens doesn't count? Sure turns upside down my fifty plus years of photography... JT >>>>>>Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > So, a viewfinder that looks through the lens doesn't count? The viewfinder isn't looking through the lens on an FZ 10. A sensor collects data, a chip interprets it, and that interpretation is displayed on an LCD. Not a viewfinder to be seen anywhere in that mix. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > >>>>>>Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Greg Um, since the viewfinder shows exactly what the LCD does (you toggle between each), is simply means that the clumsy mirror has been replaced electronically. JT >> >>>>"David J Taylor" >> >>>><david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > JT The FZ 10 has been called a "SLR-like" camera. Meaning it looks a llttle like one, has aperture and shutter controls, maybe other goodies typical of an SLR, but technically, it is not one. It has an EVF, and SLRs have TTL viewfinders, period. No ifs, ands or buts, on that issue. Patrick >>>>>>> "David J Taylor" >>>>>>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > buts, on that issue. > Patrick An EVF /is/ TTL. No separate lens is involved, the image presented in the viewfinder is that made Through The taking Lens. David > >>>>>>> "David J Taylor" > >>>>>>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > David Bingo! There is hope!! JT >>>>>>>>>"David J Taylor" >>>>>>>>><david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > There is hope!! Just because one other moron agrees with you doesn't mean that all digital cameras are SLRs now. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons >>>>>>>>"David J Taylor" >>>>>>>><david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > An EVF /is/ TTL. No separate lens is involved, the image presented in the > viewfinder is that made Through The taking Lens. Knock it off, this is getting old. There is no photon that passes through the lens and reaches your eye. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > >>>>>>>>"David J Taylor" > >>>>>>>><david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Greg Look son... If you miss your pacifier that much, maybe you should restrict your interaction to that of your equals.. JT > Look son... If you miss your pacifier that much, maybe you should > restrict your interaction to that of your equals.. I am. You sure you're in the right place? Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > I am. You sure you're in the right place? Am I the only person reading this thread who knows what "AuContraire" means? Somehow, I think the poster's screen name may have something to do with the persistence of this "conversation". > > I am. You sure you're in the right place? > > Am I the only person reading this thread who knows what "AuContraire" > means? Somehow, I think the poster's screen name may have something to do > with the persistence of this "conversation". Devil's advocate... It just amazes me that individuals such as GT ignore technological advances such as electronics replacing a mirror.. JT > Devil's advocate... Are you trying to claim that "Au Contraire" means "devil's advocate"? > > Devil's advocate... > > Are you trying to claim that "Au Contraire" means "devil's advocate"? Dans mon cas, oui! JT > > > I am. You sure you're in the right place? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Devil's advocate... It just amazes me that individuals such as GT > ignore technological advances such as electronics replacing a mirror.. Oh Contrarian, Where did I imply that I ignore technical advances? Once EVFs become as great as you think they are why would you want to lessen their greatness by confusing them with such ancient tech as a mirror or prism? Greg G.T. napsal(a): >>>>I am. You sure you're in the right place? >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Greg Canon eos digital rebel xt. Super. Or canon eos 20da (version for astronomy purposes). Better than XT. I recommend it. Hi, r. >> >>>>"David J Taylor" >> >>>><david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > JT Replaced by a stop action series? Do you really think that the series of images in an EVF is as good as the viewfinder on an SLR? SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>>>>>> "David J Taylor" >>>>>>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Replaced by a stop action series? Do you really think that the > series of images in an EVF is as good as the viewfinder on an SLR? I would prefer the EVF to have higher resolution images than they have today. I have no problems with the frame rate (choose your cameras to have a high frame rate, or enable that option). I would not wish to miss out on all the information which is available to me with the EVF but not with an optical finder. Indeed, with those EVFs which "gain up" in low light may provide you with a more useful image than the dark presentation of a pure optical finder. David > >>>>>>> "David J Taylor" > >>>>>>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > > David I have been a life long Leica M user and the only (point 'n shoot SLR) that I have ever owned was the EOS RT with the pellicle mirror. It was a great little camera (I really like the Canon algorithms) but not very hardy. Hardly three years had passed before I needed a $160 repair (oil on the shutter). Point 'n Shoot cameras are great when super quality is not required and that Canon along with its two USM zoom lenses was only mediocre when is came to optical quality. (One quickly gets spoiled using Leica glass). To come close, one has to purchase the Canon professional level lenses and they ain't cheap. I sold the RT and bought an Olympus D460 digital which served me very well for the routine stuff. But I felt a need to upgrade to something better optically and also something that would provide a hot shoe for external flash. After much research, I decided on the FZ 10 and being the chea... er, frugal person I am, I bought a used unit on ebay. As far as I can see, this camera has all the features of a dSLR, many of which I'll never get around to using. The extreme zoom lens does have some compromises but it covers the entire range of focal lengths that I expect to encounter but its Leica heritage shows in more than adequate results for my purposes. Also, since the lens is not interchangeable, that nasty dust problem becomes a non factor. But, I'm slipping off topic and still maintain if the image you see in the viewfinder is via the taking lens, it's a SLR (although in this case with an electronic mirror replacement). OTOH, I can get real pandentic when it comes to standing up for the Leica dynasty... <G> JT > I have been a life long Leica M user and the only (point 'n shoot SLR) > that I have ever owned was the EOS RT with the pellicle mirror. It was [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > OTOH, I can get real pandentic when it comes to standing up for the > Leica dynasty... Ah, Grumpy, now I know who you are. Leicadict returns. I'll leave this nom d' net out of the killfile for the time being, for amusement's sake. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > > I have been a life long Leica M user and the only (point 'n shoot SLR) > > that I have ever owned was the EOS RT with the pellicle mirror. It was [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > Ah, Grumpy, now I know who you are. Leicadict returns. I'll leave this nom > d' net out of the killfile for the time being, for amusement's sake. Sorry, but I don't have the foggiest idea of what you're implying. Yer bawhkin' up th' wrong tree... JT > >> >>>>"David J Taylor" > >> >>>><david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Replaced by a stop action series? Do you really think that the series of > images in an EVF is as good as the viewfinder on an SLR? Perhaps not but the inevitable is still there and that is mirrors are on their way out. For example, the latest FZ 30 has doubled the viewfinder resolution. It's only a matter of time. JT >> >> "David J Taylor" >> >> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > JT You'd be right, if the viewfinder did, indeed, "look" through the lens. But it doesn't. It takes the electronic impulses produced by a sensor and translates them into an image. Not the same thing. And it doesn't turn anything upside down, except maybe your perception of it. And I've been at it for more than 35 years. So don't play the "I'm too experienced to be argued with" tune. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > >> >> "David J Taylor" > >> >> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > And I've been at it for more than 35 years. So don't play the "I'm too > experienced to be argued with" tune. < <giggle> JT >SLR = Viewing throught the lens period. > >The FZ 10 does exactly that. The FZ 10 is considered by dpreview to be SLR-like. Steve's Digicam definitions: SLR - Single Lens Reflex - Means the camera has a viewfinder that sees through the lens (TTL) by way of a 45°-angled mirror that flips up when the shutter fires and allows the light to strike the image sensor (or film). DSLR - Digital SLR (Single Lens Reflex) camera. Interchangeable lens digital camera. Manufacturers include Canon, Fuji, Kodak, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax and Sigma. This is not pedantic. I own both an SLR-like (Fuji S5000) and an DSLR (Nikon D70s). There is a huge difference. I can elaborate if needed. Jack > >SLR = Viewing throught the lens period. > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > when the shutter fires and allows the light to strike the image sensor > (or film). Bzzzzzzzzt!! Not all mirrors flip up... JT >> >SLR = Viewing throught the lens period. >> > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > JT Name more than 3...Now name more than one on a digital camera...now name a camera like the FZ10 that has a mirror, of any sort. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>>> Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR >>> It's an SLR-style camera, yes, but it lacks the interchangeable lens to >>> qualify it for discussion in this newsgroup. >>> >>> The correct group would be: >>> >>> rec.photo.digital.zlr >> What it lacks is a "reflex" viewfinder, it has an electronic VF. Non >> interchangeability of lenses is only the second disqualifier. > SLR = Viewing throught the lens period. > > The FZ 10 does exactly that. That description fits about every digital camera on the market ;-) "Reflex" describes a camera with a mechanism for viewing purposes that includes mirrors and/or prisms to *reflect* the beams of light away from its straight path, on which it gets to the film or sensor in the moment of taking the picture. So until now, because of that definition, an FZ 10 does not belong to the same category of device as an SLR. An Olympus E-10 or E-20, although from the user's point of view it is more similar to an FZ 10 than to a current SLR with interchangeable lens, is an SLR by that definition. Even a future 'system camera', like rumors say there's one under development for the FourThirds system, with interchangeable lens but with an EVF live-view from the sensor instead of mirrors and prisms, won't be an SLR by that definition. Maybe it's time to find new words for the new categories of cameras... Cheers, Robert > >>>> Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Cheers, > Robert It's time to realize that "mirrored" reflexes are on their way out and Panasonic is simply ahead of the curve. The operative phrase should be viewing through the lens regardless of means. JT > It's time to realize that "mirrored" reflexes are on their way out and > Panasonic is simply ahead of the curve. Quite possibly but that still doesn't make the FZ10 an SLR. > The operative phrase should be > viewing through the lens regardless of means. Oh, so all digital cameras are SLRs? Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > > It's time to realize that "mirrored" reflexes are on their way out and > > Panasonic is simply ahead of the curve. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Greg Now you are truly slipping in stupid mode. JT >>>It's time to realize that "mirrored" reflexes are on their way out and >>>Panasonic is simply ahead of the curve. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Now you are truly slipping in stupid mode. Never had a more appropriate time to say pot kettle black since you're the one who started this nonsense that an FZ-10 is an SLR. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons > It's time to realize that "mirrored" reflexes are on their way out and > Panasonic is simply ahead of the curve. Silly. I can't even imagine why someone would want an EVF on a serious camera, but I guess if you do, you should be looking at cameras that have them rather than SLRs. There is no reason at all why a camera with an EVF can't be every bit as good as, or better than, any SLR. But there are no cameras with EVFs that are SLRs; while there could be, I can't think of any reason anyone should make one. You could have a camera with an EVF that uses Nikon F lenses with a 50MP sensor with a 30-stop dynamic range that puts the D2x and Canon 1Ds2 to shame; it still would not be an SLR. > The operative phrase should be viewing through the lens regardless of > means. The name "SLR" has the means in it -- the "reflex" part. If you want to talk about "cameras where you view through the taking lens" then talk about those, but that is not a valid definition of "SLR". SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com >> "David J Taylor" >> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > SLR = Viewing throught the lens period. Single Lens REFLEX, simply viewing through the lens isn't the qualifier, if it were, the ground glass in a large format camera would qualify that category as an SLR. > The FZ 10 does exactly that. It does, but it doesn't do it through a pentaprism or set of pentamirrors, the "reflex" part of SLR... > So, am I to believe that this group is made up of a number of pendantic > snobs? > > JT No, some of us just prefer accuracy in statements. I don't particularly care whether ZLR type cameras are discussed here, or compacts, or "prosumer" cameras, or what ever. Just, when asked for info about DSLRs, don't call one that isn't and SLR an SLR. By the way, there are groups set up for the discussion of that type of camera, and, then, there is the general rec.photo.digital. -- Skip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR Duh, no it isn't. But I guess a top-poster can't figure that out. Greg Signature"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons Top posting is here... Get over it! Secondly, I suppose that you believe in the flat earth theory as well, eh? JT > > Uh, the FZ 10 is a SLR > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > / >> I didn't see anything that says they own ANY lenses! What makes you think >> they own a Canon or a Nikon? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Greg Why? -Rich > The Minolta has built in "anti-shake". To get > that on a Canon you have to buy lenses at $1000 per pop! For the lenses I use, f/1.4, etc., there is no IS lens at all. If I haven't already spent $2000 on Canon lenses, I would switch to Minolta for anti shake. http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr >I didn't see anything that says they own ANY lenses! What makes you think >they own a Canon or a Nikon? The Minolta and Pentax take lenses from their [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > she doesn't own ANY lenses! The Minolta has built in "anti-shake". To get > that on a Canon you have to buy lenses at $1000 per pop! Except for the 17-85 f4.5-5.6 IS EF-S (approx. $600), the 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM ($425) and the 70-300 f4.5-5.6 IS USM ($600). And the IS is effective to an advertised 2-3 stops, depending on the lens, as opposed to the 1-2 stops advertised for the Minolta. OTOH, you have AS on a 17-35, which you don't with Canon. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > > The Minolta has built in "anti-shake". To get > > that on a Canon you have to buy lenses at $1000 per pop! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to an advertised 2-3 stops, depending on the lens, as opposed to the 1-2 > stops advertised for the Minolta. IS is not a replacement for large aperture for low light action shots. With the kids moving, you can not set the shutter speed too slow. I need to use ISO 800 and f/1.4 to get 1/160s shutter when indoor. Even at 1/160s, the kids' hands are often motion blurred. With Minolta, I would be able to use f/1.4, and use AS to further reduce my camera shake. http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr >> > The Minolta has built in "anti-shake". To get >> > that on a Canon you have to buy lenses at $1000 per pop! [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr No kidding... SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com > Don't forget Minolta ,Pentax and Olympus.They also make lower end dslr > cameras worth consideration! The Olympus comes with a great 2 lens kit but you lose some of the low light performance that other DSLR's offer. Minolta & Pentax, I'm not sure about lens costs. D50 has a small dark viewfinder, I'm not sure darker than the affordable Canons? Nikon D70 costs a bit more but you get a better lens & a bit more professional feel and features. None of the non-DSLR's will have usable low light performance. Other's are above budget. Well, as for lens cost of the Minolta, they can be found for quite a bit less than the Canon and Nikons.Minolta made auto-focus cameras well before Canon or Nikon. True, the Canon "L" lenses are better,but at a big price! I do admit, the Minolta is not as nice as a more expensive D200 or 20D, but compared to the XT and D50, it is a good camera! I have many Minolta lenses, along with well over 50 cameras.I do not own a Minolta DSLR, but I have a number of friends who purchased, on my recommendation, and all are quite happy with the camera. I like the feel of a well built camera, the Canon XT is a toy.I grew up using Nikons, and have almost 50 years in photography.I have my mint F2ASB in a display case,along side my Canon V7. I am not anti Canon nor anti Nikon, I just choose the camera that fits the needs the best! As I said before, I own a Canon 20D,Nikon D200 and D70. >> Don't forget Minolta ,Pentax and Olympus.They also make lower end dslr >> cameras worth consideration! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > non-DSLR's will have usable low light performance. Other's are above > budget. You could also buy a lightly used 20D for about the same price or maybe a little more than the Rebel. Check out http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10 for used equipment from extremely reputable sellers. If you need help on lenses let me (us) know. Brian > I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. > I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Karen Karen, as others have said, the Canon 350 is a DSLR making it different to the others. More "professional"? Possibly yes. Nikon make a similar D50 model with a better standard lens. For faster response, and a wider angle view for landscapes, I would recommend the Nikon 8400 over the 8700. The 8400 has a wide-angle zoom (24 - 85mm), compared to the telephoto zoom of the 8700, and this telephoto zoom lacks image stabilisation (the later 8800 model has IS [which Nikon call vibration reduction - VR]). You can get lens adapters (not interchangeable lenses) for both the Nikon 8400 and 8700/8800. The Nikon cameras offer you almost as much creative control as the DSLR. Yes, you can get things like polarising and neutral-density filters - the effects of coloured filters can largely be reproduced in software. I have the fast Nikon 8400 for wide angle, and the lightweight but very capable image-stabilised Panasonic FZ5 for telephoto. I have moved away from SLR cameras because of the great weight and bulk of the lenses (particularly telephoto) and the very high costs. David >I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. >I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >have >interchangeable lenses and also have filters available? If you are asking the above question, you have even read the basic specifications about the cameras. Go learn more about them and get back to us. ***************************************************** "I cannot abide wounding things that could be simply killed if you used enough gun." Professional Hunter Harry Sebly in Robert Ruark's "Use Enough Gun" >Go learn more about them and get back to us. Go to http://www.dpreview.com to compare specifications, exam reviews and read user comments. Jack >>Go learn more about them and get back to us. > > Go to http://www.dpreview.com to compare specifications, exam reviews > and read user comments. > > Jack Those who are considering a DSLR for "snapshots" should consider the higher maintenance of DSLRs. If you change lens anywhere but a "clean room" you will have to learn to clean the filter that covers the sensor or periodically shell out $75 or more to have it cleaned. I find it easy to clean the filter using Eclipse fluid and Pecpads, but many people find it to be more of a challenge than they want. Ron Karen - it seems like your first decision may be between the 2 types of cameras. One distinction you may already be aware of between the interchangeable lens SLR and point-n-shoot cameras is that with the P&S, you view a live preview on the rear view screen. On the other hand, with the SLR, what you see through the viewfinder is what you get, in terms of composition. There are a number of other characteristic differences between the 2 camera classes without getting into the differences between, say a Nikon or a Canon. The P&S, with a variable zoom lens, is very handy and simple to use. I have used one (Olympus C3030Z) for years and still do but I also have a Canon Rebel XT (350D). You may also want to visit dpreview.com for a comprehensive comparison of all cameras. Regards. Bill Shaheen Gold Canyon, AZ > I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. > I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Karen Karen, Two things in your post points in one direction: 1) "a more professional camera" 2) pictures of grandchildren. By number 2 I assume you want pictures of them at play, and not just portraits of them sitting still. If so, this requirement eliminates most digital cameras, and biases you toward #1. The key parameter to look at in choosing a camera for action is called "shutter lag." On review sites like www.dpreview.com, the specific thing to look at is "full press shutter lag." This is the time it takes from when you press the button to when the camera *actually* takes the picture. Good response in the shutter lag area is about 1/10 second or less. You will find NO P&S that meets this requirement, at least I have never seen one, and I've looked at a lot of reviews of cameras. That leads you the the DSLR category. The second thing to look for is image stabilization (also called vibration reduction). This really helps for getting nice sharp images. The Digital Rebel XT and the entry Nikon DSLR's (I don't know those models well) are good in this regard. For image quality, larger pixels are better, and the DSLRs beat out the P&S in this aspect too. Here are a couple of articles on my web site that may be relevant to your decision: less technical: How Many Megapixels do you need? Plus Other Factors in Choosing a Digital Camera http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/how_many_megapixels more technical: Digital Cameras: Does Pixel Size Matter? Factors in Choosing a Digital Camera http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter Once you choose a camera, post it and people can suggest lenses. My favorite all around lens for my Canon cameras is a 28-135 IS lens (IS = image stabilization). Nikon may have an equivalent one too, but check (maybe some Nikon folks can confirm that). Roger Photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com > > I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. > > I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] > Roger > Photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com Outstanding web page! JT > > I have been looking at digital cameras and have narrowed it down to 3. > > I want to upgrade to a more "professional" camera. It is so hard to [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > lens (IS = image stabilization). Nikon may have an equivalent one > too, but check (maybe some Nikon folks can confirm that). Another very important thing is low light performance. Most people spend much more time indoor than outdoor. To get good lighting, you do not want to use head on flash. And most people do not want to set up multiple flash. So to shoot natural available light, you need high sensor sensitivity and large lens aperture. I need to use ISO 800 and f/1.4. At ISO 800, the noise is already not pretty, so I don't want to go any higher than ISO 800. And no zoom lens is f/1.4. Fortunately, for portrait you do not need zoom. 50/1.4 works very well on 1.6x DSLR. The problem is that there is no f/1.4 IS lens, not even f/2. The good news is that Minolta has anti shake built in camera, not in lens. So the best option for the task, family people action shots, is Minolta 5D + 50/1.4. http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr > Another very important thing is low light performance. Most people > spend much more time indoor than outdoor. To get good lighting, you do [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the best option for the task, family people action shots, is Minolta 5D > + 50/1.4. Seems like a 50mm lens on a 1.6x DSLR would be non-optimal for indoor action shots or even for many group shots as the field of view would be too tight in most rooms (in most houses). Also, most home interiors are far too dark for sharp flash-free action shots using only the default lighting in the room (by "default" I mean the lights that are normally turned on, ie- when one hits the light switch. I'm also not counting the effect of sunlight coming in through windows/skylights, as at this time of the year, there isn't any during the hours I'm home during the week). Probably only the room I'm in at the moment is even close, and thats because its a fairly small room with 80 watts of overhead fluorescent lighting (~4000 lumens when the bulbs are new), and even so, you'd still probably want a bit of flash to fill in shadows/properly light people's faces much of the time. > > Another very important thing is low light performance. Most people > > spend much more time indoor than outdoor. To get good lighting, you do [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > action shots or even for many group shots as the field of view would > be too tight in most rooms (in most houses). If you do groups, maybe you need a wider lens, maybe 35/2, 28/1.8, or 24/2. But for "portraits", generally you do not want to go wider than 50mm on 1.6x digital. The vast majority of my shootings are with 50/1.8, and now 50/1.4. > Also, most home interiors are far too dark for sharp flash-free action > shots using only the default lighting in the room ISO 800, f/1.4, and 1/160s is enough for all my low light shootings. Often it is brighter than ISO 400, f/1.6, and 1/160s. > by "default" I mean > the lights that are normally turned on, ie- when one hits the light > switch. I like those "tree" lights, that have 3 heads. Those are low and side directional, not from above like ceiling lights. So it is more like morning and evening sun than mid day sun. It has interesting light and shadow, not too harsh like a single flash, but more like light from side window. BTW, 350D can assign AF to a separate button other than the shutter release, which is very useful. Servo AF is also useful. More AF points also helps. 350D has 7. I haven't checked whether other makes have similar AF facilities. http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr > > > Another very important thing is low light performance. Most people > > > spend much more time indoor than outdoor. To get good lighting, you do [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > shadow, not too harsh like a single flash, but more like light from > side window. If the shades can be removed, the bare bulbs close to a white wall will produce softer light. http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr > Once you choose a camera, post it and people can suggest lenses. > My favorite all around lens for my Canon cameras is a 28-135 IS > lens (IS = image stabilization). Nikon may have an equivalent one > too, but check (maybe some Nikon folks can confirm that). Is it fair to list the Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II as an equivalent? Its got a little more wide (needed for cameras using the APS-C sized sensors with that 1.5/1.6x factor) and its longer at the tele-end, but its also more expensive than the 28-135IS (more than 1.5/1.6x the price), and it won't cover a FF image circle (which is not a problem for Nikon DSLR users) Anyways, its the lens thats mostly on the camera now (way higher % of the time than the 18-70 "kit lens" that was most commonly there before this. (This is probably the closest nikon equivalent from a range/cost perspective with VR: Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR not a "DX" so it does the FF 35mm film thing too) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.