 |
 | 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 / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / November 2007DSLR options - your opinions welcomed
Rather out of the blue, my wife has suggested that it might be a good idea to move up to a DSLR as our joint Christmas present this year. The main benefit we're looking for is the better dymanic range for DSLRs, and generally better performance in low light conditions In the past we've been a Pentax family, having started with a K1000 almost 30 years ago, and later getting an ME-super and a P30 before we moved to digital (mainly Fuji) about 5 years ago. Having already had Pentax SLRs, this means that we have a couple of lenses that we're no longer using - 28-80mm KA mount and 75-205mm K mount. As far as starter DSLRs are concerned, there seem to be 3 main contenders, the Nikon D40 (6MP), the Canon EOS 350 (8MP) or the Pentax K100D Super (6MP). The big question we have is how much of our decision should be based on the fact that we already have compatible lenses? They aren't top end lenses, but they will extend the available zoom range if we went with the Pentax. If we bought either of the others we would probably be looking for a longer telephoto at some point anyway. We know that we wouldn't get AF on either of these lenses, and we wouldn't be able to use shutter priority auto mode on the longer telephoto, but these aren't major considerations. From reading around the subject, the anti-shake chip mount on the Pentax seems to make a real difference in low light conditions. At present, it seems that going for the Pentax sounds like a good idea, but I would value the opinion of people on the group as to whether I'm 'over-rating' the value of the existing lenses. Any thoughts? Cheers Owen > Rather out of the blue, my wife has suggested that it might be a good > idea to move up to a DSLR as our joint Christmas present this year. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Cheers > Owen If you have Pentax kit and you like Pentax then stay with Pentax. Having said that you have to live with the camera that you buy and as there are two of you it is more important that you go to a camera shop and hold and play with the cameras in your budget. No matter how good it is and how many bells and whistles it has, if it is not comfortable to hold and the right weight and balance then it will quickly fall out of use - and that's an awful lot of money sitting in the corner doing nothing. As for the others, the D40 and D40X are best avoided as they need HSM lenses which are the moment are a bit rare and expensive. The camera body does not have the motor to operate the iris lever on mechanical lenses, so the HSM (HyperSonicMotor) lens with the motor in the lens is mandatory. If you can afford it the D80 is a much better buy and I think comes with an 18-140 lens or something like that. Nikon do not have an anti-dust capability. The EOS350D has long been superseded by the EOS400, both of which are good cameras, but the 18-55 lens that comes as standard leaves much to be desired. There is now the EOS410 which has live view. Don't overlook the Olympus E410 and E510, the latter especially. It is small, light, and Olympus lenses have long been regarded as sitting at the better end of the market. Only catch is that lens mount is plastic which may wear more quickly than metal. I'm a Nikon D70s owner with the 18-70 lens which is a cracker and I delighted with it. Next step up for me would be the D200 or new D300 but I can't afford either!  SignatureWoody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com > The EOS350D has long been superseded by the EOS400, both of which are good > cameras, but the 18-55 lens that comes as standard leaves much to be > desired. There is now the EOS410 which has live view. > Woody Is there an EOS410 ? Regards DAVE http://djmp.co.uk/slr/ >> The EOS350D has long been superseded by the EOS400, both of which are >> good cameras, but the 18-55 lens that comes as standard leaves much [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > DAVE > http://djmp.co.uk/slr/ Soon SignatureWoody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com >> The EOS350D has long been superseded by the EOS400, both of which are good >> cameras, but the 18-55 lens that comes as standard leaves much to be >> desired. There is now the EOS410 which has live view. > > Is there an EOS410 ? No. SignatureChris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather? - Billy Bragg >> As far as starter DSLRs are concerned, there seem to be 3 main >> contenders, the Nikon D40 (6MP), the Canon EOS 350 (8MP) or the Pentax [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > As for the others, the D40 and D40X are best avoided as they need HSM > lenses which are the moment are a bit rare and expensive. The D40(x) works with older lenses, but you lose autofocus (and metering?). The _AF-S_ lenses that the D40(x) require are neither rare nor expensive. There's a good choice of cheap kit AF-S lenses. There are also expensive AF-S lenses, but they're not rare either. I had no trouble buying two of them a year ago. > The camera > body does not have the motor to operate the iris lever on mechanical > lenses, so the HSM (HyperSonicMotor) lens with the motor in the lens is > mandatory. If you can afford it the D80 is a much better buy and I think You're confusing autofocus and aperture. The D40(x) lacks the screw drive in its lens mount to drive a non-AF-S lens's focus mechanism. 'G' lenses lack an aperture ring, but they still have the lever to operate the iris. The D40(x) has the motor to operate the iris lever. > If you can afford it the D80 is a much better buy and I think > comes with an 18-140 lens or something like that. The D80 comes with any number of lens options, it is indeed a better camera, whether it's a better buy depends on one's requirements and budget. > Nikon do not have an > anti-dust capability. Does anyone? A number of cameras have mechanisms intended to minimise dust adhesion to the AA filter surface, among them the Nikon D300. > The EOS350D has long been superseded by the EOS400, both of which are > good cameras, but the 18-55 lens that comes as standard leaves much to > be desired. There is now the EOS410 which has live view. There is the EOS40D which has live view. No EOS410D that I ever heard of. > Don't overlook the Olympus E410 and E510, the latter especially. It is > small, light, and Olympus lenses have long been regarded as sitting at > the better end of the market. Only catch is that lens mount is plastic > which may wear more quickly than metal. The other only catches are the 4/3 sensor size, terrible noise performance and Olympus's generally lacklustre commitment to the DSLR. I've been helping a friend make the same decision. He's a long-time Pentax user looking to buy a DSLR. After trying my D200, then spending half an hour in Jacobs yesterday afternoon I think he's deliberating between a Pentax K10D and a D80. Canon barely got a look in. The 400D is a flimsy little thing (as is the D40(x))and the 40D was too confusing even for the assistant (a Canon owner) to be able to immediately work out its intricacies. The investment one already has in glass has to be taken into consideration, but try a few cameras in your hand and you may find that the features you gain with a new outfit outweigh your attachment to existing gear. SignatureChris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather? - Billy Bragg > [... deleted ...] Olympus E410 and E510, the latter especially. It >> is small, light, and Olympus lenses have long been regarded as [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > [... deleted ...] That's one view of Olympus - there are others who view them more positively. I bought a Pentax *DL in 2005 and it's absolutely brilliant. Have taken about 20GB of pics with it. I wanted a compact DSLR because of having previously used Olympus OM SLRs which are light and compact; most DSLRs were (and still are) bukly. There are plenty of good reasons, but don't kid yourself that digital cameras have a better dynamic range. They don't. > I bought a Pentax *DL in 2005 and it's absolutely brilliant. Have > taken about 20GB of pics with it. > > I wanted a compact DSLR because of having previously used Olympus OM > SLRs which are light and compact; most DSLRs were (and still are) > bukly. > At present, it seems that going for the Pentax sounds like a good idea, > but I would value the opinion of people on the group as to whether I'm > 'over-rating' the value of the existing lenses. Thanks for the opinions. I went and had a trial at Jessops this afternoon - compared the K100D and the Canon EOS400D. I reckoned I would be happy with either; and it would be useful to have the use of my existing lenses. I thought the flash was more effective on the Pentax - a couple extra on the guide number makes a fair difference. Personally, I like the idea of being able to run off AAs if needed - we have a battery charger in the car, so we won't ever be reliant on mains power to recharge the batteries and we can always keep a pair of CR-V3s handy in the camera bag for emergencies. Thanks again for the opinions >Personally, I like the idea of being able to run off AAs if needed That is an excellent point and has proved to be a huge advantage to my Pentax DL DSLR when going on holiday. For all other cameras etc I have had to buy a second battery, usually at some silly price, and carefully charge up both batteries. > >Personally, I like the idea of being able to run off AAs if needed > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > For all other cameras etc I have had to buy a second battery, usually > at some silly price, and carefully charge up both batteries. Yes, I always think that running on AAs (or AAAs) is a big plus. I have a lot of rechargeable AAs now which run cameras (3), radios (several), toys when children arrive, etc. I have a couple of fast chargers that can, in an emergency, charge NiMh AAs in 30 minutes or so. A camera that uses a dedicated battery is just a nuisance. It may be though that LiIon batteries will take over in the next few years. SignatureChris Green > > >Personally, I like the idea of being able to run off AAs if needed > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > It may be though that LiIon batteries will take over in the next few > years. Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? My E-500 is good for at least 600 shots, on the stock LiIon, even out in colder weather it keeps going. A 2GB card hold 140 RAW images, and I have 5 mixed CF cards (and some xD cards as backups), so I could fill all the cards on a charge. I have a couple of spares, but for an enthusiast this is enough, you should be able to take almost a couple of thousand shots with three batteries in the bag. Some of the newer models are even better, but I can only comment on what I have here. Check for adapters. The E-system also has available a little holder that can take the CR-V3 batteries if needed, I'd be surprised if you couldn't get similar for the others too. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> >Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? > >My E-500 is good for at least 600 shots, on the stock LiIon, even out in >colder weather it keeps going. A 2GB card hold 140 RAW images, and I >have 5 mixed CF cards (and some xD cards as backups), so I could fill >all the cards on a charge. I guess much depends on how much the camera is ON for between shots. Flash also trashes batteries fast. There have been some right scandals with lithium batteries - google on the huge Sony cover-up on their DSC cameras. I got caught by that; one reason I won't buy Sony unless I have to. Nikon, incidentally have crap customer service. I used to have a '5700' camera (a self contained sub-DSLR, or whatever it's called) and it kept switching itself on when being carried in the backpack, and burning out the lens extending motor. Nikon's head of customer service said this is fine and that if you change gears in your car without using the clutch you will break the gearbox so don't expect the camera to be any different. He got quite aggressive. I paid £160 to get it fixed and sold it on Ebay. Won't buy Nikon again. OTOH e.g. Casio are a model of good customer service. I would buy another Pentax DSLR. My DL (6 megapixels) takes great shots and does exactly what it says on the tin. > >Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I guess much depends on how much the camera is ON for between shots. Of course, to some extent. However, I have walked around with mine ON for extended periods, and still get somewhere near the expected level of use. > Flash also trashes batteries fast. Indeed. Mind you, I tend not to do much flash photography anyway, I haven't even got an external flash. If I'm going somewhere where that's likely, such as a a party, I usually take the compact. Even when I did have a full kit back in film days, I hardly ever got the flash out, and usually found batteries failing because of lack of use. > There have been some right scandals with lithium batteries - google on > the huge Sony cover-up on their DSC cameras. I got caught by that; one > reason I won't buy Sony unless I have to. They made the exploding laptop batteries too didn't they. I would never buy Sony anyway, I have a friend in the electronics line, and he hears from various suppliers that Sony have the highest warranty returns of the big names. > Nikon, incidentally have crap customer service. I used to have a > '5700' camera (a self contained sub-DSLR, or whatever it's called) and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > fixed and sold it on Ebay. Won't buy Nikon again. OTOH e.g. Casio are > a model of good customer service. I like Casio stuff, it can look expensive at times, but in general it's well made kit. > I would buy another Pentax DSLR. My DL (6 megapixels) takes great > shots and does exactly what it says on the tin. Aye, that's why I get Olympus, I've used their stuff for 23 years now, and none of it has performed badly. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> >> There have been some right scandals with lithium batteries - google on >> the huge Sony cover-up on their DSC cameras. I got caught by that; one >> reason I won't buy Sony unless I have to. > >They made the exploding laptop batteries too didn't they. Not that; they made batteries which would say they are fully charged when they had about 10% in them, so they were basically useless. They owned up to it, with a statement on their website, but only after all affected cameras were out of warranty. >I would never buy Sony anyway, I have a friend in the electronics line, >and he hears from various suppliers that Sony have the highest warranty >returns of the big names. They do indeed, but their very top stuff is still good. Most 3 digit priced Sony stuff is crap made under contract in China. >> I would buy another Pentax DSLR. My DL (6 megapixels) takes great >> shots and does exactly what it says on the tin. > >Aye, that's why I get Olympus, I've used their stuff for 23 years now, >and none of it has performed badly. I've used OM since the 1970s but last time I looked at DSLRs (2 years ago) they offered nothing light and compact. Maybe this has changed - I haven't looked. > >> There have been some right scandals with lithium batteries - google on > >> the huge Sony cover-up on their DSC cameras. I got caught by that; one [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > owned up to it, with a statement on their website, but only after all > affected cameras were out of warranty. That's becoming such normal practice now though. > >I would never buy Sony anyway, I have a friend in the electronics line, > >and he hears from various suppliers that Sony have the highest warranty > >returns of the big names. > > They do indeed, but their very top stuff is still good. Most 3 digit > priced Sony stuff is crap made under contract in China. Which I guess is a large majority of it. > >> I would buy another Pentax DSLR. My DL (6 megapixels) takes great > >> shots and does exactly what it says on the tin. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > ago) they offered nothing light and compact. Maybe this has changed - > I haven't looked. Blimey, you haven't have you. The E410 is now the smallest and lightest DLSR there is available. For me I like something larger to handle, which is why I got the E500, the EOS350 just didn't fit my hands. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > > >Personally, I like the idea of being able to run off AAs if needed > > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > have 5 mixed CF cards (and some xD cards as backups), so I could fill > all the cards on a charge. Yes, that's why I made the LiIon proviso, they seem to be getting pretty good now. One fully charged and a spare sounds enough. How long do they take to charge? A set of AAs slip in the pocket easily though. SignatureChris Green [..] > > Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > pretty good now. One fully charged and a spare sounds enough. How > long do they take to charge? Mine take about an hour or so usually. But of course with LiIons you can top them up more without suffereing the performance degredation with older rechargeable technologies. > A set of AAs slip in the pocket easily though. Hmmm, four AAs is more space than a LiIon in my E500. Even more so with my Mju500, the battery in that is about the size of a CF card, and lasts about 300 pics. I never got much more than about 100 shots with AA based cameras. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > [..] > > > Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > top them up more without suffereing the performance degredation with > older rechargeable technologies. The 'degradation' you speak of really doesn't exist with NiMh either if you use a good charger (delta V) which are very cheap nowadays. SignatureChris Green > > [..] > > > > Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > The 'degradation' you speak of really doesn't exist with NiMh either > if you use a good charger (delta V) which are very cheap nowadays. Yes, so I've heard, although my own experience with them is not that good. For sure they are *much* better than NiCds, but they still need caring for more than LiIon batteries. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > Yes, so I've heard, although my own experience with them is not that > good. For sure they are *much* better than NiCds, but they still need > caring for more than LiIon batteries. Hmm, the only experience I have of LiIon is with the PDA I bought last year. I decided I'd get a spare battery having found I could get one nearer £10 than the £30 often quoted. And thought I'd swap them around per month. But after a fortnight fallow I put the original one back and was told it had 22% left and took a while to recharge. So a monthly cycle will result in a duff "spare" most of the time... I hadn't heard/remembered anything about LiIon self-discharge rates. Mike. SignatureIf reply address = connectfee, add an r because it is free not fee. > > Yes, so I've heard, although my own experience with them is not that > > good. For sure they are *much* better than NiCds, but they still need [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I hadn't heard/remembered anything about LiIon self-discharge rates. One of the sites I checked showed LiIon batteries to have the worst storage rates of all, although it's 12 months for those, and 24 months for the others (that is with laptop batteries though). I bought a few spares for my Mju, but they are often low on power when I need to use them again. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > > [..] > > > > > Is this such a problem on a DSLR though? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > good. For sure they are *much* better than NiCds, but they still need > caring for more than LiIon batteries. I think they need caring for *differently*. :-) NiCd and NiMh for example don't mind being left discharged for long periods but definitely don't like being overcharged at all. Lead Acid (except deep discharge ones) don't like being fully discharged at all. LiIon I'm not sure but I bet there are some things they don't like. The LiIon batteries in PDAs and such certainly seem to suffer for simple loss of capacity in the long term. SignatureChris Green > > Yes, so I've heard, although my own experience with them is not that > > good. For sure they are *much* better than NiCds, but they still need > > caring for more than LiIon batteries. > > > I think they need caring for *differently*. :-) Indeed :-) > NiCd and NiMh for example don't mind being left discharged for long > periods but definitely don't like being overcharged at all. Lead Acid > (except deep discharge ones) don't like being fully discharged at all. > LiIon I'm not sure but I bet there are some things they don't like. > The LiIon batteries in PDAs and such certainly seem to suffer for > simple loss of capacity in the long term. That's true. General observation seems to show LiIon batteries degrade with age rather than with usage. However, the Apple web site (just a place I knew I could find such info) technical articles suggest they need to be continuously used. Here are some of there pages, OK, they are for laptops and such like, but the general principles should be the same. http://www.apple.com/batteries/notebooks.html http://www.apple.com/batteries/ http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=10571 SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > NiCd and NiMh for example don't mind being left discharged for long > periods but definitely don't like being overcharged at all. Lead Acid > (except deep discharge ones) don't like being fully discharged at all. > LiIon I'm not sure but I bet there are some things they don't like. > The LiIon batteries in PDAs and such certainly seem to suffer for > simple loss of capacity in the long term. We once tried to recharge our LiIon powered Fuji F610 using an in-car inverter. Seemed to do the job, but the battery never really had the same capacity afterwards . I think they're fine (for the couple of years or so) so long as you don't put them near dodgy recharging facilities. And they lose most of their capacity after 3 years anyway, so you need to buy 2 more. |
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
|
©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.