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 / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / July 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Best SLR around £400?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Geoff Berrow - 17 Jul 2007 11:33 GMT
See subject. My sister in law wants to know.

Ideas, comments?
Signature

Regards,

Geoff Berrow

David Kilpatrick - 17 Jul 2007 11:45 GMT
> See subject. My sister in law wants to know.
>
> Ideas, comments?

£399 Sony Alpha 100 with kit lens - 10 megapixels and image
stabilisation, moderately small body, kit lens range 18-70mm rather than
 the usual 18-50mm/55mm and thus much better for close-ups, animals,
flowers, butterflies, kids.

David
www.photoclubalpha.com
Richard Polhill - 17 Jul 2007 12:18 GMT
> See subject. My sister in law wants to know.
>
> Ideas, comments?

Depends what you want really. No such thing as "best" just the nearest to
ideal for what you want. Without knowing what you want then we can't say.
Geoff Berrow - 17 Jul 2007 15:12 GMT
Message-ID: <a17ce$469c9ecf$3e18e6cb$18313@news.vispa.com> from Richard
Polhill contained the following:

>> See subject. My sister in law wants to know.
>>
>> Ideas, comments?
>
>Depends what you want really. No such thing as "best" just the nearest to
>ideal for what you want. Without knowing what you want then we can't say.

Well its not for me but one of my main reasons for buying an SLR was the
'instant' take.  Not sure if any non slrs do this.  After that I'd be
looking at  picture quality, followed by ease of use and value for
money.  Anything over 6 megapixel would be fine.

I'm pretty sure my SIL will not be too bothered by non interchangeable
lenses.

Signature

Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

Richard Polhill - 17 Jul 2007 15:32 GMT
> Message-ID: <a17ce$469c9ecf$3e18e6cb$18313@news.vispa.com> from Richard
> Polhill contained the following:
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> looking at  picture quality, followed by ease of use and value for
> money.  Anything over 6 megapixel would be fine.

Megapixel? So you want a DIGITAL SLR? That makes a lot of difference.

Go to a shop and try them. Seriously, if the only reason you want an SLR is
the instant response, go and try some compacts that have fast response.

Most dSLRs will still pause if they are struggling to focus, esp in low light.
Yeah they're pretty instant at focusing in good light, but you can still find
yourself waiting for the thing to refocus if it isn't sure. And that is just
as frustrating with a £400 SLR as with a £200 compact.

> I'm pretty sure my SIL will not be too bothered by non interchangeable
> lenses.

I still say you probably want a good compact. No point in having a big bulky
and expensive SLR if you're not a photography enthusiast. The best camera in
the world is one you have with you when you need it.

So... Canon compacts are pretty fast to respond. Avoid Nikon and Olympus as
they're slow. I'm sure there are other suggestions.
Chris Whelan - 17 Jul 2007 16:01 GMT
>> Message-ID: <a17ce$469c9ecf$3e18e6cb$18313@news.vispa.com> from Richard
>> Polhill contained the following:
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> So... Canon compacts are pretty fast to respond. Avoid Nikon and Olympus
> as they're slow. I'm sure there are other suggestions.

Whilst agreeing that the OP's SIL may well be best advised to get a compact,
a Canon dSLR is way faster to focus than a Canon compact, and of course you
have the opportunity with the dSLR to switch to manual focus.

The one thing I regret about changing from a digital compact to a dSLR is
that I didn't do it sooner...

Chris

Signature

Remove prejudice to reply.

Geoff Berrow - 17 Jul 2007 16:43 GMT
Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from Richard
Polhill contained the following:

>> I'm pretty sure my SIL will not be too bothered by non interchangeable
>> lenses.
>
>I still say you probably want a good compact. No point in having a big bulky
>and expensive SLR if you're not a photography enthusiast. The best camera in
>the world is one you have with you when you need it.

I'm pretty certain that you're right.  She'd probably just leave the
damn thing on auto and that would be a waste.  What people fail to
realise is that an SLR or  DSLR usually gives you many more ways to take
a bad picture.

>So... Canon compacts are pretty fast to respond.

Useful information.

Signature

Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

Chris Whelan - 17 Jul 2007 16:47 GMT
> Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from Richard
> Polhill contained the following:
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Useful information.

...and more here:

http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/shutter-lag-comparisons.cfm

Chris

Signature

Remove prejudice to reply.

Richard Polhill - 18 Jul 2007 08:00 GMT
>> Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from Richard
>> Polhill contained the following:
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Chris

Ah great I was looking for a chart like that. So Kodak or Sony it would be then.
harrogate3 - 18 Jul 2007 08:24 GMT
> >> Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from Richard
> >> Polhill contained the following:
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> >
> Ah great I was looking for a chart like that. So Kodak or Sony it would be then.

Don't be so quick to judge. The delay in taking a picture is in the
main due to the focus system - if you press the shutter half way to
prefocus then when you press further to take the picture it is
essentially instant. The focus system can take different times to work
under different lighting conditions - for instance taking a view on a
sunny day will usually be very quick, but try taking a picture in low
light, or especially a contra jour shot (sun behind subject) on a
bright day and it will take longer.

When I went to digital compact originally I missed this point, so when
I upgraded I took particular notice of it. From my own research and
tests I have found that the quickest seem to be Casio and Canon, with
Fuji and Sony (W range) not far behind. Much the slowest are Nikon and
Olympus.

Also don't get caught in the race for pixels. To print a full frame
picture to A4 only requires 3Mp, anything above about 6Mp will start
to run into thermal noise problems, so for general use and to allow a
little cropping 5-6Mp is about the optimum.

I have three digitals: an Olympus C5050 (5Mp) which is horribly slow
but has probably the best lens, flash, and metering system by far
(compared with a compact) bar a little barrel distortion at the widest
setting; a Nikon D70s SLR (6Mp) which I love; a Canon Ixus 60 (6Mp).
We have just come back from holiday in France where between us my wife
and I took nearly 1200 shots (the beauty of digital!) - I didn't take
the Olympus. Generally speaking it is almost impossible to
differentiate between snapshots taken with the Canon and the Nikon (in
jpg mode.) I say snapshots as the one thing you can do with any dSLR
but NOT with a compact is to catch a moving object successfully. No
matter how fast a compact responds it will never match the near
instant reaction of a dSLR.

As a photographer for over 40 years man and boy I would give the same
advice as I did when people used to ask me which (film) camera to buy.
You have got to live with the thing: no matter how many bells and
whistles it has if you cannot hold and use it comfortably it will
rapidly fall into disuse, or it will be blamed for poor pictures when
a poor picture is solely the responsibility of the idiot taking it! (I
have fairly large hands and so could never get on with the Olympus OM1
film SLR as it was too small, but the Minolta XG2 or XD9 was no
problem being about the same size but just a few mill thicker to get
may hands around.) Take your SIL to a good camera supplier - Jessops
or Jacobs nationally - on a quiet day and have them get out the
cameras that are in her price range or thereabouts. She should hold
them, play with them, and take some pictures. (If the shop doesn't
have a charged battery - as Currys and PCW probably won't just walk
away. If they can't be bothered to provide that facility do they
warrant your business?) As sure as eggs is eggs one camera will feel
right - that is the one to buy. If more than one feels right then look
at facilities against price and ask if most/any of those facilities
will ever be needed.

Signature

Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Richard Polhill - 18 Jul 2007 08:37 GMT
>>>> Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from
> Richard
[quoted text clipped - 80 lines]
> at facilities against price and ask if most/any of those facilities
> will ever be needed.

I second everything you say.
Mark Dunn - 18 Jul 2007 09:33 GMT
David Kilpatrick's opinion carries a lot of weight for me. That, and it's a
Minolta.

> >>>> Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from
> > Richard
[quoted text clipped - 82 lines]
> >
> I second everything you say.
Trev - 18 Jul 2007 10:04 GMT
> David Kilpatrick's opinion carries a lot of weight for me. That, and it's
> a
> Minolta.

Spelt S o n y = Minolta. I still have a soft spot for them but my brain says
Nikon Which shall win Hart or Brain And My MC/MD lens will not fit on
either.
Richard Polhill - 18 Jul 2007 10:34 GMT
>> David Kilpatrick's opinion carries a lot of weight for me. That, and it's
>> a
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Nikon Which shall win Hart or Brain And My MC/MD lens will not fit on
> either.

Hah I have a stack of lovely FD lenses which'll never fit anything.

I prefer the Nikon to the Sony just for the build quality.
Michael J Davis - 18 Jul 2007 18:36 GMT
Chris Whelan <cawhelan@ntlworld.com> observed

>> Message-ID: <3229e$469ccc55$3e18e6cb$32675@news.vispa.com> from Richard
>> Polhill contained the following:
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>> realise is that an SLR or  DSLR usually gives you many more ways to take
>> a bad picture.

>> Useful information.
>>
>...and more here:
>
>http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/shutter-lag-comparisons.cfm

If I may say so, that looks a pile of rubbish.

Presumably the timing is based on an 'auto' setting (but doesn't say
so), and therefore includes the time taken to focus (but doesn't say
so).

Presumably it doesn't take into account the delay on the viewfinder (or
screen) (but doesn't say so), which IMHO is the major problem with
digicams, and adds significantly to the delay between
*what is seen on the screen* AND *what is captured as image*

So in short, it is really measuring the time the autofocus takes (given
that the exposure is being set within that time (but doesn't say so).

If like me you focus while composing the picture and leave the camera to
assess the exposure, the delay is more likely to be in the region of 0.1
and 0.25 seconds on many of those cameras. (Of course those supposes
that the cameras have manual focus capability.)

The five photo times are presumably based on setting the camera in
continuous setting (but doesn't say so), and are thus more a function of
the time taken to store the picture. If the table is based on the user
pressing the exposure button five times (but doesn't say so) then the
delay introduced by the user is likely to be significant.

So my advice to the OP is to find a camera for his SIL that has manual
focussing - if shutter delay is his main criterion.

See http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs.asp

Mike

[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
Signature

 Michael J Davis
<><
Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused
the meaning of "discussion" with "digression".
<><

Paul Giverin - 17 Jul 2007 16:52 GMT
>See subject. My sister in law wants to know.
>
>Ideas, comments?

I don't know about "best" but it seems that with a bit of wheeling and
dealing you can get a Nikon D40 kit for £212.

See here for details :-

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=502164

Signature

Paul Giverin

British Jet Engine Website:-    www.britjet.co.uk

My photos:-  www.pbase.com/vendee

Rv! - 17 Jul 2007 20:20 GMT
From what I've read in the thread...
I'd suggest not going DSLR and getting a Fuji S9600
for about half your budget and getting the essential
accessories to take good photos. No matter what camera
you end up with, you'll buy all these bits anyway!

Rv!
Adrian Boliston - 18 Jul 2007 21:05 GMT
> From what I've read in the thread...
> I'd suggest not going DSLR and getting a Fuji S9600
> for about half your budget and getting the essential
> accessories to take good photos. No matter what camera
> you end up with, you'll buy all these bits anyway!

This is a bit like comparing chalk & cheese really - the 9600 has a very
small sensor crammed with a crazy 9 mega pixels which is going to give noise
quite badly at much over ISO200

check out the comparisons with a basic pentax DSLR to see how noisy the 9600
is!

The only "essential accessory" I have purchased so far has been a 2GB CF
card for about £20  (unless you count a lens as an accessory!)

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk
Trev - 18 Jul 2007 21:30 GMT
>> From what I've read in the thread...
>> I'd suggest not going DSLR and getting a Fuji S9600
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk
Well its smaller then a APS-C but twice as big as most compacts at 1/1.6th
but its very good on Noise levels at much higher then 200 asa and very
usable at 800 asa.
Not saying a Pentax or any other dslr is no better but there is £300 more to
pay, at least.
Adrian Boliston - 18 Jul 2007 22:00 GMT
> Not saying a Pentax or any other dslr is no better but there is £300 more
> to pay, at least.

A D40 Kit at £329 is £76 more than the Fuji9600 (using amazon as a ballpark)
Trev - 18 Jul 2007 22:09 GMT
>> Not saying a Pentax or any other dslr is no better but there is £300 more
>> to pay, at least.
>
> A D40 Kit at £329 is £76 more than the Fuji9600 (using amazon as a
> ballpark)
Ok I take the bait a D40 is discontinued a D40 X is aprox £450 with a short
range lens, (PS I got my 9600 from Amazon for £230 this year).
I rise you 1 70-300 lens at £100.. the Fuji being 28 to 300
Adrian Boliston - 18 Jul 2007 22:27 GMT
> Ok I take the bait a D40 is discontinued

On Nikon's UK site it is flagged a "new" rather than "discontinued":

http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1111/overview.html

> a D40 X is aprox £450 with a short range lens, (PS I got my 9600 from
> Amazon for £230 this year).
> I rise you 1 70-300 lens at £100.. the Fuji being 28 to 300

In many ways a short range (3x) zoom is *better* than a 10x mega-zoom as
there will not be so many compromises made.
 
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



©2008 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.