 |
 | 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 / August 2006The BEST DSLR
My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to people with experience with DSLR cameras. So to help me can you answer this question... If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you get? http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com > So to help me can you answer this question... > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > get? Am I allowed to choose any lenses I want as well? If yes, the Canon 1DSII. -Mike Yes, lenses too! > > So to help me can you answer this question... > > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > -Mike > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com Canon 22mp 1Ds Mk IIn. >> My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best >> way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Canon 22mp 1Ds Mk IIn. Oops, forgot about NDA - me bad :( Please ignore my last post. > Oops, forgot about NDA - me bad :( > > Please ignore my last post. That's it! No more Canons for you. :-) -Mike Today, Mike Warren made these interesting comments ... >> Oops, forgot about NDA - me bad :( >> >> Please ignore my last post. > > That's it! No more Canons for you. :-) Let's restart the Israeli-Lebanese conflict - my Canon can beat up your Nikon any day of the week and twice on Sunday! <grin>  SignatureHP, aka Jerry Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html > Today, Mike Warren made these interesting comments ... > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Let's restart the Israeli-Lebanese conflict - my Canon can beat up > your Nikon any day of the week and twice on Sunday! <grin> Betta watch it - my mumma's bigger than your mumma! :) >> Oops, forgot about NDA - me bad :( >> >> Please ignore my last post. > > That's it! No more Canons for you. :-) I'd dub you the "Canon Nazi," but then B&H may never sell to me again. :) SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. >>> Oops, forgot about NDA - me bad :( >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I'd dub you the "Canon Nazi," but then B&H may never sell to me again. :) Oh, crikey, we've avoided even passing jocular reference to those bastards. Signaturelsmft "Matt" <matthewbam@aol.com> wrote in news:1154144498.568797.19420 @b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: > So to help me can you answer this question... > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > get? Hasselblad H2D39 SignatureMatti Vuori, <http://sivut.koti.soon.fi/mvuori/index-e.htm> > "Matt" <matthewbam@aol.com> wrote in news:1154144498.568797.19420 > @b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: >> So to help me can you answer this question... >> If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you >> get? > Hasselblad H2D39 Nice, but rather slow. It'd be great for landscapes. Andrew. Today, Andrew Haley made these interesting comments ... >> "Matt" <matthewbam@aol.com> wrote in >> news:1154144498.568797.19420 @b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Nice, but rather slow. It'd be great for landscapes. The OP is incredibly naive, has no clue what he/she wants to do,or is trolling. One has to know at least /something/ about the intended use of a camera to even begin to talk about "if you could have any DSLR in the world ...". In my case, small size, light weight, and budget spelled "Canon Rebel XT". Someone else who likes Canon might think /minimally/ in terms of the 5D, or even a medium format. SignatureHP, aka Jerry Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > get? I'm pretty happy with my D70s right now, but I'd get the D2Hs if money were no object. Today, Adrian Boliston made these interesting comments ... >> My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think >> the best way to do this is post a message (about camera [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I'm pretty happy with my D70s right now, but I'd get the D2Hs > if money were no object. After 8 months with my Rebel XT and reading all the things the new 30D does so much better, principly far lower noise at high ISO and 2.5" LCD, albeit at twice the price, what would stop me from upgrading any time soon is that it is 3/4" wider, taller, and deeper, but also is 7 oz. heavier, which is a BIG concern for me when my Canon 24-70mm is mounted and my Canon 430EX external flash is atop the camera. That is almost 5 pounds and a 30D would be almost 5 1/2 pounds. But, reality may someday outweight lack of endurance ... SignatureHP, aka Jerry Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html Today, Matt made these interesting comments ... > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think > the best way to do this is post a message (about camera [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com Surely you jest ("and, don't call me Shirley!"). What is your definition of "best" and what is your budget, $100 or $30,000? Or, are you just trolling ... Now, if you're serious, what subject(s) do you intend to concentrate on, what lighting condition(s) do you anticipate, and what are your intended use(s) for the images? SignatureHP, aka Jerry Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html Just a good general body that can take a wide variety of lens attachments. http://digitialartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > Today, Matt made these interesting comments ... > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) > http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html Today, Matt made these interesting comments ... > Just a good general body that can take a wide variety of lens > attachments. What you say is true on its face, and /might/ suffice for a normally thinking person, but some qualification is still necessary as "good general body" can have broad meaning and broad price implications, and isn't at all like the theoretical way the OP phrased the whole thing. It is like "if you could have any car in the world, what would you pick? I might pick a Chevrolet Corvette Z06 or a Lamborghini while you might pick a Toyota Prius and a 3rd person would pick a GMC Yukon Denali. One must know the intended usage and what the criteria is for defining "good", "better", "best" and "anything in the whole world", doncha think? > http://digitialartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com >> Today, Matt made these interesting comments ... [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) >> http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html SignatureHP, aka Jerry Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html > So to help me can you answer this question... > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > get? Not exactly a dSLR, but one of these would be nice: http://tinyurl.com/b3pas SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. >> So to help me can you answer this question... >> If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://tinyurl.com/b3pas A number of folks won't touch a tinyurl from someone not known to them. This one is safe. <http://www.phaseone.com/Content/p1digitalbacks/P%2045.aspx> If you put brackets around it as I have done, even a three liner won't break in all the finer News clients. SignatureJohn McWilliams learn something every day (ie < > brackets) PeterH >>> So to help me can you answer this question... >>> If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > If you put brackets around it as I have done, even a three liner won't > break in all the finer News clients. According to My View <no spam ple@se.com>: > "John McWilliams" <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in message [ ... ] > > A number of folks won't touch a tinyurl from someone not known to them. > > This one is safe. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > If you put brackets around it as I have done, even a three liner won't > > break in all the finer News clients. > learn something every day (ie < > brackets) Don't bother -- it is not universally correct, and many of us consider the "finer News clients" to be those which don't do *anything* with HTML, including the brackets. It is a lot safer using those, even with boxes which are *not* Windows-based, and thus not the targets of every virus writer out there. :-) The same applies to e-mail clients. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | 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 --- >> http://tinyurl.com/b3pas > > A number of folks won't touch a tinyurl from someone not known to them. Their loss, not mine. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a ton of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford that, my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads would spin. > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com >That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a ton >of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation >whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford that, >my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads would >spin. Curious... what do you think of the 30D? >>That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a >>ton [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Curious... what do you think of the 30D? I've handled it and it seemed OK to me (not quite as intuitive as a Nikon (to me anyway), but still quite easy to figure out). Since it was only in a store and without seeing any output, I cannot comment on image quality. I do have a D200 and the 30D build quality didn't look or feel as good to me (remember that this was just a brief, casual inspection in a store...I wasn't seriously considering the camera as it solves none of the problems I have with Nikon offerings). I would like to try a 5D some time. That seems like a real winner that Nikon would be wise to emulate. As far as I am concerned, I'd rather see no more emphasis on resolution, only on price, sensor size, and noise. The attraction of a 1DS MkII to me is the sensor size and quality. I shoot some portraits (out of my home) and the problem is the APS sensor size in conjunction with the room size I have to work with...between having to use a bit shorter focal length lens due to APS-FOV factor AND the resulting increase in depth of field (undesirable), it seems that there really isn't any inexpensive way around this (i.e., either remodel my house, rent a good size studio, or switch systems)...I REALLY wish Nikon would at least ACT like they understand this and EVER intend to DO anything about it. If they are serious about APS sensors, then give me a 60mm f/1.0 portrait lens and if their spiel about APS lenses isn't just BS, then it should be priced like the FF equivalent, an 85mm f/1.4. Or, better yet, don't...I'd really rather use the lenses I already own and not just for economic reasons...more so because they don't make equivalents and many that I like aren't even made for 35mm cameras any more. >>>That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a >>>ton [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >do have a D200 and the 30D build quality didn't look or feel as good to me >(remember that this was just a brief, casual inspection in a store...I I got to play with a 30D in the store as well, but couldn't take a picture... it did seem a bit 'cheap' but hey, that's only the feel of the case... it's like getting Vodka in a plastic bottle... >wasn't seriously considering the camera as it solves none of the problems I >have with Nikon offerings). I would like to try a 5D some time. That seems >like a real winner that Nikon would be wise to emulate. As far as I am >concerned, I'd rather see no more emphasis on resolution, only on price, >sensor size, and noise. I agree. I thought that Nikon would bring out a full size, quiet sensor, but it doesn't seem so... they want to stick with the small ones. Saves on glass I guess... bigger profits! >The attraction of a 1DS MkII to me is the sensor size and quality. I shoot >some portraits (out of my home) and the problem is the APS sensor size in [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >because they don't make equivalents and many that I like aren't even made >for 35mm cameras any more. I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not exactly what I want... Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens at the $150 mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras. >>>>That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a >>>>ton [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > the $150 > mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras. Yeah, does make the APS lens argument (price/weight advantages) sound like nothing more than marketing-speak. Also, because you need to use a shorter focal length lens (for same FOV), if your concern is DOF, that shorter lens has to be about 1-stop faster too in order to really offer equivalent DOF. So, now I also need to block out more ambient light to use studio flash w/o being affected by the ambient lighting...I just find it a nasty combination for the type of shooting I do. If I were taking wildlife or sports photos outside with telephoto lenses, I'd probably be deliriously happy, but that isn't what I want to do. (That also means that to replace what I have, Nikon would need to make a 5.3mm f/2.0 circular fisheye as well.) > I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and > that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not > exactly what I want... Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens at the $150 > mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras. Nikon does have a 35 f2 seems fairly close, nice lens too. You'll never get anything the least bit WA at f1.8 and $150. Sell the 28, buy the 35 if it is closer to what you want. I find the 55 f2.8 just about perfect for product shots with a Nikon D200. Tom >> I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and >> that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Tom I'm going to stick with what I have, it cost's too much already! Using the 28 and the 50 that I have, I can cover everything I need. One thing about lenses... there doesn't seem to be a big choice in the stores around here, I would have to special order most of them, so I tend to pick something available. According to <BobF@nospam.com>: > >> I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and > >> that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > around here, I would have to special order most of them, so I tend to pick > something available. Hmm ... the local Penn Camera has a pretty good stock of *used* lenses to add to what they have in new. That is where I got my AF 50mm f1.4 (non-D series) for a quite reasonable price. You might look into used lenses if you don't need the latest features in everything. You can save quite a bit. Of the lenses which I normally use on my D70, only two were purchased new, the 18-70mm "kit" lens, and the 28-105mm which I had been using on the N90s before I got the D70. The others which I semi-regularly use were purchased used. In order of acquisition: 1) 200mm f4 Medical Nikkor -- with built-in ring flash. It is used in manual mode, with the lens rings doing the exposure calculation assuming that all light comes from the ring flash. 2) 500mm f8 mirror telephoto. No metering. Bought at a photo swap meet, IIRC. I usually use the longest auto lens to meter the area for a starting point for exposure, and then use the histogram to guide me to better exposure. Metering through the lens would be a nice plus here. 3) 180mm f2.8 (which had to be "chip" converted to meter with the D-70. This was purchased at a hamfest. 4) AF 50mm f1.4 -- Purchased at the local Penn Camera. 5) AF 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 -- purchased from a friend who deals in used cameras. Another lens which will come back into service if I ever get a D-200 is the 80-200mm f4 AI zoom lens (with push-pull zoom and rotate to focus on a single control). But for the moment, it needs more time to adjust exposure than the likely subject matter would allow me, so it is just too heavy to carry along without the on-camera metering capability. (The 500mm only comes along for certain things. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | 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 --- > Hmm ... the local Penn Camera has a pretty good stock of *used* > lenses to add to what they have in new. That is where I got my AF 50mm [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > used in manual mode, with the lens rings doing the exposure > calculation assuming that all light comes from the ring flash. If you have the f4 medical Nikkor it is a 120mm, the 200 was an f5.6. I have used one without the flash with a Fuji S1 just by chimping. Which ever medical Nikkor you have it is a very good lens. Unfortunately the flash tube in mine gave out and Nikon will no longer repair this lens. Currently I'm using a Tamron 90 f2.5 with a ring flash and getting nice results, just won't go to 1:1 without an adapter, which is a pain to put on. Tom > *From:* BobF@nospam.com > *Date:* Sun, 30 Jul 2006 00:07:18 -0400 Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens > at the $150 > mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras. It's more expensive than you wanted, but there is the 35mm f/2. > That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a ton > of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation > whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford that, > my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads would > spin. While I agree with you on the 1DS Mark II if you are doing still subjects, it would do poorly on action subjects relative to other cameras. The top choice for wildlife action and sports is the 1D Mark IIn: it is the fastest DSLR on the market. Roger >>My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best >>way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com >>http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com > That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a ton > of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation > whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford that, > my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads would > spin. If you want to get the most out of that Canon, you'll keep the Nikon lenses and buy an adapter. >My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best >way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com >http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com I'm partial to the Jovian Master Blaster 2000, with the digital conveyer data port and the 12 gigapixal 128 bit organic photon sensor, powered by the 2 liter cat brain processor and nuclear peptide battery pack. Don't forget the 4 dimensional zoom lens that can look back into time and refocus those blurry shots you might take... I prefer the 1mm to 10 kilometer super zoom, F0,02 with the light speed shutter. Oh, they don't take American Express, except maybe on Mars on the weekend. B. 2 wrongs don't make a right. But 3 lefts do. I'm really happy with both my Nikon D2H and D2X. In a different price range the Nikon D-200 has a sensor that photogs love for the color gamut. Why Nikon: I've used Nikon since 1966 and have a big investment in lenses. For example I can still use lenses like my 55mm f1.2 manual lens on these digital cameras. I'm not knocking Canon, they are obviously an important choice equal to Nikon. Something else to consider are the new DSLR's with vibration reduction built into the cmaera body instead of lenses. Good luck on your choice. Don Harper The Edge Photography Studio Leesburg, Virginia Blog is http://theedgephoto.blogspot.com/ Website is http://www.theEdgePhotography.com > Something else to consider are the new DSLR's with vibration reduction > built into the cmaera body instead of lenses. ...which is why I will be getting a Pentax k100 very soon. I have plenty of excellent old Takumar glass, so the cost of a new 'shake reduction' body is only a very small portion of the bigger picture. mike >> Something else to consider are the new DSLR's with vibration reduction >> built into the cmaera body instead of lenses. > > ...which is why I will be getting a Pentax k100 very soon. I have plenty > of excellent old Takumar glass, so the cost of a new 'shake reduction' > body is only a very small portion of the bigger picture. Technologically, it seems difficult to make camera based anti-vibration work for the big range of DSLR lenses. The amount of movement needed on the vibration reduction of a 20mm lens is quite different than that needed to compensate for a 500 mm lens: a factor of 25. The lens based system is optimized for each lens, and that is why both nikon and canon have done so well with it. Roger >>> Something else to consider are the new DSLR's with vibration reduction >>> built into the cmaera body instead of lenses. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Roger Agree Roger but some are not willing to pay for the same system every time they buy a lens when they can get 2/3-3/4 of the performance and only pay for it once. I am not getting a K100D but am waiting for the 10 MP version due out maybe in September that will be even better than their first effort with the K100D. According to Pete D <no@email.com>: [ ... ] > > Technologically, it seems difficult to make camera > > based anti-vibration work for the big range of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > system is optimized for each lens, and that is why > > both nikon and canon have done so well with it. [ ... ] > Agree Roger but some are not willing to pay for the same system every time > they buy a lens when they can get 2/3-3/4 of the performance and only pay > for it once. Of course, there is a lot less *need* for VR/IS in a 20mm lens than in a 500mm lens. So you don't have to buy it in *every* lens, just in the longer ones. > I am not getting a K100D but am waiting for the 10 MP version > due out maybe in September that will be even better than their first effort > with the K100D. O.K. Let us know how it does -- and in particular, how it the built-in VR does with the extremes of focal lengths. I'll bet that at a minimum, it does poorly with a lens from which it cannot read the current focal length -- say an older wide-range and long zoom lens mounted on the camera. (Unless, of course, it is trying to judge the camera motion by analyzing a sensor in the viewfinder (since the main sensor is not available until exposure time), instead of using a sensor which determines angular changes in the camera body's orientation.) Good Luck, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | 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 --- > O.K. Let us know how it does -- and in particular, how it the > built-in VR does with the extremes of focal lengths. > > I'll bet that at a minimum, it does poorly with a lens from > which it cannot read the current focal length On the K100D, if you are using a lens that does not communicate focal length, you can enter it manually. So in theory at least, this is not an issue. I don't know how convenient the interface to this facility is - might not be practical to change it every time you zoom in or out. I'd bet the K10D (10MP "professional" body) will be an improvement here over the K100D (6MP "entry level" body). Either way, if you're mostly using just one or two fixed focal length lenses that don't communicate focal length, this could be manageable. --------------- Marc Sabatella marc@outsideshore.com Music, art, & educational materials Featuring "A Jazz Improvisation Primer" http://www.outsideshore.com/ > According to Pete D <no@email.com>: > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > Good Luck, > DoN. Mind you I have taken many photos without VR over the last 30 or so years and just use a tripod or rest against something when needed and that has done me very well, the VR/IS is not the driver for this camera for me anyway but will be a nice bonus, what I want is faster/better focus and greater resolution (for cropping), I am not worried about higher frame rate but a bigger buffer will be nice and perhaps the bigger screen will be nice as well, other than that I am still very happy with my DS. Maybe a grip with an extra shutter release will be okay too for portrait shots. Cheers. Pete D Hi Matt I would go with a MF digital camera. Most of them come as a camera plus a separate backend, like this one: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04092902mamiya_zd.asp Of course it is not the best camera for everything. Macro for example is a lot easier with smaller sensor formats. Thomas > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com Leica R9 with the DRM. > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com By the time this thread ends both Nikon and Canon will have a new series of cameras out. :-) According to Sheldon <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net>: [ ... ] > > So to help me can you answer this question... > > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > > get? [ ... ] > By the time this thread ends both Nikon and Canon will have a new series of > cameras out. :-) And that *still* will not end the thread. :-) Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | 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 --- > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > get? Hasselblad H2D-39. This camera has compared favorably in image quality and detail even with 8x10 view cameras. Of course, you could buy a pretty nice BMW instead... > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you > get? Rats. Somebody beat me to the Hasselblad HD2-39. The Nikon D3, then. Granted, it isn't out yet. But the 35mm sensor Nikon is undoubtedly coming, despite official denials from Nikon itself. > *From:* "Matt" <matthewbam@aol.com> > *Date:* 28 Jul 2006 20:41:38 -0700 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com I wouldn't have just one! A brace of Canon 1DIIns for sports and air displays and a pair of 1DSIIs for everything else. For lenses I guess 16-35, 24-105, 100mm macro, 70-210 f/2.8 IS and 500 f/4.5 IS, with the 1.4x teleconverter. And a bag with very big wheels :-) > My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best > way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com > http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com Hasselblad H2D39 Next SignatureJim <jen....not....home..remvdots...@....yahoo |
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.