Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / July 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Finally gettong on the wagon and getting a digital slr, advice please.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
zanpachi@gmail.com - 04 Jul 2006 05:02 GMT
Hi all.

I am planning to get my first digital slr!
I've been using my med. format as point and shoot, but not efficient.
This dslr is primarily for point and shoot and a little lighting test
camera.

Should i get the oly evolt 500 with the 14-45mm or the nikon d50 with
the 18-55?

The max i will print with this camera is 8x10".
Which one has a larger sensor area?
Is the 8mp of the oly better than the 6mp of the d50?
Focusing, which one is better?

Is there a digital slr that is less than $500?
thanks
Pete D - 04 Jul 2006 07:32 GMT
Either will do the job but also look at the new Pentax K100D and K110D, I
think you will like the ergonomics better, even an old stock Pentax *ist Ds
might work for you and you will like the ergonomics.

> Hi all.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> Is there a digital slr that is less than $500?
> thanks
Tomm101 - 04 Jul 2006 16:51 GMT
> Either will do the job but also look at the new Pentax K100D and K110D, I
> think you will like the ergonomics better, even an old stock Pentax *ist Ds
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> > Is there a digital slr that is less than $500?
> > thanks

I think there are Pentaxes under $500, reports say decent lens, OK
results.
What MF camera are you shooting with? Hassleblads are hard to beat, but
I have known several pros who have dropped Mamiya 645s and 2 1/4s for
digital, APS and full frame. Get a Canon 20D or a Nikon D200 and put a
35f2 on it. You might be surprised. You can use the same lens on a D50,
or Rebel 350X, but they aren't built nearly as well as the next step
up. If you are interested in Olympus, the E1 (only 5mp but a good 5mp)
is going for just about the same as the Oly 500E, it is another well
made camera, shutter sound on Leica M level.
With the newer higher end cameras you can think MF quality images not
35mm.

Tom
zanpachi@gmail.com - 04 Jul 2006 22:34 GMT
Thanks for the info

I use mostly 8x10 cameras, so i bought the mamiya rb 67 for point and
shoot. However, its not instant enough. My plan is to buy a cheapy dslr
one now and then wait for 2 or 3 years for another cheapy that can be
close to MF. Right now, I don't think consumer level digital cams are
similar to 6x7, at least the canon 5d isn't (i've compared).

lord, the pentax looks awefully good, my gut feeling is that one cannot
tell the diff
between canon, nikon, pentax?

Thanks for the input.

> > Either will do the job but also look at the new Pentax K100D and K110D, I
> > think you will like the ergonomics better, even an old stock Pentax *ist Ds
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>
> Tom
Pete D - 05 Jul 2006 07:57 GMT
Pentax is also expected to have a new 10MP camera with IS in the body by the
end of this year, I plan on buying one of these to use with my DS, hard to
go past the ergonomics and useability of the Pentaxes IMHO! :-)

> Thanks for the info
>
[quoted text clipped - 48 lines]
>>
>> Tom
Michael Benveniste - 06 Jul 2006 04:21 GMT
>I use mostly 8x10 cameras, so i bought the mamiya rb 67 for point and
>shoot. However, its not instant enough. My plan is to buy a cheapy dslr
>one now and then wait for 2 or 3 years for another cheapy that can be
>close to MF.

Have you considered waiting for the Pentax 645D?  Or, at the other
end, getting a high-end non-SLR digital?

I very much doubt that "cheapies" will approach 6x7 quality in two-to-
three years.  To even approach that sort of resolution for a 24x36mm
sensor will require top quality glass manufactured to state-of-the-art
tolerances.  That's never going to be cheap, even if the sensor cost
dropped to zero.

With an APS-C or a 4/3rds format dSLR, you'll hit the diffraction
limit at either f/8 or f/11 before you match your Mamiya and Velvia.

Although I'm a Nikon user, for a temporary solution I think either
Canon or Pentax might be better for you.  Canon has shown a willingness
to bet on a 24x36mm sensor that Nikon has not, so it may get close
to 6x7 quality faster than Nikon.  While either the Pentax or the Nikon
will let you use some of the bargain-priced manual focus glass that's
out there, the Pentax gives you far more functionality when using it.

Signature

Michael Benveniste -- mhb-offer@clearether.com
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419.  Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

This old Bob - 04 Jul 2006 21:04 GMT
> Hi all.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> Is there a digital slr that is less than $500?
> thanks

Good deals on used DSL-R's on ebay.

See this one

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Digital-Rebel-EOS-300D-6-3-MP-Camera-w-Case_W0QQitemZ1
40002797977QQihZ004QQcategoryZ107896QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Evan Platt - 05 Jul 2006 19:29 GMT
>See this one
>
>http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Digital-Rebel-EOS-300D-6-3-MP-Camera-w-Case_W0QQitemZ1
40002797977QQihZ004QQcategoryZ107896QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Way tooo many red flags to touch that one with a 10 foot pole.

$35 shipping?

Assuming he's based in New York (he's not) shipping to me in Northern
California, to be $35 for Priority Mail, the package would weigh 18
pounds.

$7 Insurance? Insurance is based on selling price.
$499 insurance is $6.50. Ok, .50 markup there.

All auction sales are final?

No warranty.

12 negatives. TONS of mutually withdrawn feedback.

I'd stay clear of this seller, and this camera.
G.T. - 05 Jul 2006 21:57 GMT
> >See this one
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> I'd stay clear of this seller, and this camera.

I probably wouldn't buy from this seller, either, but to give the full
story:

7852 feedbacks
99.8% positive
2 negatives in the last 6 months
454 positive, 1 neutral, no negatives in the last month
RichA - 05 Jul 2006 01:36 GMT
> Hi all.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> Is there a digital slr that is less than $500?
> thanks

The E-Volt will get you closer to the resolution you are used to with
your larger
format cameras (a bit) and if you buy it, consider getting the 40-150
kit lens as well,
it's made in Japan (not China) and is sharper than the 14-45, at their
coincident
focal lengths.  It's also a terrific deal in the two-lens and camera
body kit.
Pete D - 05 Jul 2006 07:58 GMT
>> Hi all.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> focal lengths.  It's also a terrific deal in the two-lens and camera
> body kit.

Sadly they are ergonomic disasters.
ben at myselfmusic dot com - 05 Jul 2006 15:58 GMT
> Sadly they are ergonomic disasters.

Sadly for you; joyfully for me.  I tried out both the E-500 and the
Canon 350D ("XT") and I found the E-500 to be *by far* more comfortable
to both hold and use for an extended period.  It simply felt more
robust, with a hand grip which was more grabbable and mechanically less
sharp against my fingers.

After several months of ownership, no complaints at all about the E-500
ergonomics!  The Canon is comparatively more of a disaster in my
experience.

-ben
Pete D - 05 Jul 2006 21:33 GMT
>> Sadly they are ergonomic disasters.
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> -ben

Agree. The 350 is a total disaster and it amazes me that anyone that picks
one up actually parts with the money.
ben at myselfmusic dot com - 05 Jul 2006 23:01 GMT
> Agree. The 350 is a total disaster and it amazes me that anyone that picks
> one up actually parts with the money.

I misunderstood the grandparent post, then.  I thought you were saying
that you felt the Olympus E-500 was an ergonomic disaster.

-ben
Pete D - 06 Jul 2006 07:11 GMT
>> Agree. The 350 is a total disaster and it amazes me that anyone that
>> picks
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> -ben

I only agree that the E-500 is better than the 350D, tassal.
RichA - 06 Jul 2006 02:10 GMT
> > Sadly they are ergonomic disasters.
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> -ben

I'd have sworn the XT was designed for women's hands, or perhaps the
Asian market.
I saw some poor guy with large hands trying to use one in a camera
store when it
just came out, it was pretty sad.
 
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.