Entry Level SLR Camera Help!

[Sean Malone]

Ok, I've had it! I bought a $300 Olympus pocket point and shoot (Stylus 1010) a few weeks ago in preparation for my daughters graduation. 10mpx with a 7x optical zoom. Sweet little pocket camera.

The pictures suck. Period. End of story.



So, I was at BB looking at entry level SLR's. Sony has the Alpha for $499 plus $240 for the telephoto lense. Olympus and Canon have 10mpx for $600.

Someone tell me what camera to buy.

THX!

[RusH]

Stick to Canon and Nikon...whatever floats your boat.
I`m a Canon guy so I bought a an EOS last year with a better Sigma lens.
The Nikon D-40 gets good reviews too for entry level.

[cameraman]

Unless you plan on buying an array of lenses getting an SLR is silly. If you want a good camera then buy a good camera that is not an SLR. Granted I am a Canon fanboy but I can guarantee you that the Powershot S5 IS will make you every bit as happy as any intro SLR.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons5is/

What the camera does not have is raw mode. A big deal if you spend a lot of time working on your photographs on a computer. So ask yourself are you going to sit down with Photoshop/Aperture/Lightroom and mess with your pictures? If so get a camera with raw file support otherwise get the S5.

If you do want the raw file support get the Canon G9.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/

Either way, the cameras are capable of excellent photographs.

[Sean Malone]

Unless you plan on buying an array of lenses getting an SLR is silly. If you want a good camera then buy a good camera that is not an SLR. Granted I am a Canon fanboy but I can guarantee you that the Powershot S5 IS will make you every bit as happy as any intro SLR.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons5is/

What the camera does not have is raw mode. A big deal if you spend a lot of time working on your photographs on a computer. So ask yourself are you going to sit down with Photoshop/Aperture/Lightroom and mess with your pictures? If so get a camera with raw file support otherwise get the S5.

If you do want the raw file support get the Canon G9.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/

Either way, the cameras are capable of excellent photographs.

Of course I'm an amateur photog but I consider myself a professional photoshopper. More often than not I find myself saying "I'll fix it in PS" and I usually can but I want better source photos.

I bought an Olympus C4040 (4mpx, 3x op) when they first came out (and paid $900 for it) that supports RAW but 4mp just ain't cuttin' it these days. Plus it only supports an obsolete media (SmartMedia) that only goes up to 128mb which is nothing, especially in RAW mode. It kinda sux a $900 point and shoot is obsolete in less than 5 years.

I wanted to go with an SLR because I'm getting to the point where I 'think' I need a telephoto lense.

[cameraman]

It kinda sux a $900 point and shoot is obsolete in less than 5 years. Well a 5 year old $6000 SLR is equally if not more obsolete.

[Sean Malone]

Well a 5 year old $6000 SLR is equally if not more obsolete.

That S5is is pretty nice. Would that be better than an entry SLR with a big honkin' telephoto lense?

[dando]

I took my first foray into dSLR country last Fall, and I bought a Rebel XTi and love it. The price$ started dropping in December ahead of the XSi introduction @ CES. The XSi added several nice features, but is a few hundred $$$ more than the now discounted XTi (~$500). I'm now looking for a longer lens, as I've come to find I need more length to get closer to the kids' activies. I also considered the Nikon D40.

-Kevin

[cameraman]

Here is my problem with the Rebels and Nikon d40s of the world. The kits come with not so great lenses. A Rebel XSi runs about $800 for the body alone. But even the better "kit" lenses are not all that special. Take the $500 Canon EF-S 17-85mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM for example.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_17-85_4-5p6_is_usm_c16/

So if you are serious about things then get a body and better glass. The problem with better glass is cost and weight.

An EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM is 2.1 lbs
An EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM is 3.1 lbs
An EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM is 1.4 lbs
An Extender EF 1.4x II is half a pound

Doesn't sound like much until you start hauling it all around a track and $4300 is kind of heavy too. Quite frankly with that set of lenses you'd be far better served by an EOS-40D which is $1000- although given how much better the EOS-40D is the $200 dollar difference would be the best money you could spend.

[Andrew Longman]

Trevor is a camera buff and takes some really nice stuff (a lot of rail fan stuff but landscapes too)

He researched and bought an Canon S3 Powershot last year and it has been great. I think the S5 is the replacement for it.

It has all the advantages of an SLR in that what you see is what you shoot. Also has lots of flexibility and control, but without the mechanical complexity and cost of an SLR

Concurring with cameraman here I think

[Sean Malone]

But when does one get to the point where they can tell the difference in glass quality. I mean, me, being purely a pocket camera user going to an entry SLR with a kit lense will probably not be able to tell the diff, right? Or are the differences obvious?

So if I'm reading this right, entry SLR's will quickly show their limitations and in order to make them better you need to drop a bunch more cash.

I just want a camera that is going to be head and shoulders above in quality over a pocket camera and can zoom in.

[SteveH]

I've got the original Canon Digital Rebel. For the most part, even that nearly obsolete camera is sufficient for my needs. However, I wish I had all new glass for it. I've got three lenses and only one of them I am happy with. L series glass from Canon is my goal. But that will have to come in increments. Bad glass can create all kinds of issues that you'll never be able to Photoshop out of the picture. Pincushioning, for one. At least by investing in quality glass, that investment is portable. As you upgrade bodies over the next several years, and you will, the glass (in theory) should work as long as you stay Canon.

[Methanolandbrats]

Complicated subject. What's the budget and what's the largest camera you're willing to carry? What will you be shooting?

[Insomniac]

Wouldn't the key be to be sure the body can accept a variety of lenses? You're talking thousands for high quality lenses. The nice thing about an SLR is you can change lenses. So maybe you are tossing a few hundred bucks down the drain for not so great lenses, but if you move to thousand dollar lenses, you probably won't mind selling them for a couple hundred later.

[dando]

But when does one get to the point where they can tell the difference in glass quality. I mean, me, being purely a pocket camera user going to an entry SLR with a kit lense will probably not be able to tell the diff, right? Or are the differences obvious?

So if I'm reading this right, entry SLR's will quickly show their limitations and in order to make them better you need to drop a bunch more cash.

I just want a camera that is going to be head and shoulders above in quality over a pocket camera and can zoom in.

It's all about trade offs and of course your budget. The S series that has been mentioned (I call them SLR wannabes) are nice and a step up from pocket shooters, but if you read reviews, they are limited as well. They also don't do RAW if that's necessary for ya. IMO, there is a significant difference b/w the pocket shooter we have (Canon SD700) vs. the XTi. Would a pro know the diff b/w the images taken by stock vs. high-end glass? Yep. Would you initially? Prolly not. You should also read some of the lens reviews to understand the limitations. I found this one (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-200_3p5-5p6_vr_afs_n15/) interesting, as I'm looking to get a similar length lens, but a different. Think about what you are going to shoot primarily. For me a lens like that allows me flexibility, and not lugging around cameraman's list of dream glass. Someday I'll get to the point where I'll need better stuff, but not to start out. Once, Reunite was good red wine to me. Now, not so much. :)

-Kevin

[Sean Malone]

Complicated subject. What's the budget and what's the largest camera you're willing to carry? What will you be shooting?

I was 'hoping' for a $500 to $700 body and a $500 lens. $1000 to $1200 max combined.
I don't mind carrying the gear if I know I will be using it.

50% portraits, 50% wildlife i.e. birds.

[dando]

Complicated subject. What's the budget and what's the largest camera you're willing to carry? What will you be shooting?

Yes it is. Can we discuss religion instead? ;)

-Kevin

[dando]

I was 'hoping' for a $500 to $700 body and a $500 lens. $1000 to $1200 max combined.
I don't mind carrying the gear if I know I will be using it.

50% portraits, 50% wildlife i.e. birds.

BTW, a professional photog friend pointed me here (http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx) for good used glass. He said it was the best place for used glass other than photo BBs.

I'm looking for a Tamron or Sigma zoom (18-200 range) and a smaller 17-50 for close up work. Not the best, but much better than stock.

-Kevin

[Methanolandbrats]

I was 'hoping' for a $500 to $700 body and a $500 lens. $1000 to $1200 max combined.
I don't mind carrying the gear if I know I will be using it.

50% portraits, 50% wildlife i.e. birds.

Ya need very long, fast glass for birds and it is expensive. Impossible to find a single do-it-all lens for general usage and birds. And yes, KEH is the place for used lenses.

17-50 2.8 Tamron is a nice sharp f2.8 lens that would serve you nicely for portraits (shallow depth of field) and general shooting. Nikon and Canon make kit lenses in the same general range, but they are not as fast. A nice kit would be the Tamron and a 70-300 from either Nikon or Canon. That would give you some reach for birds in good light, motorsports, etc... With those two lenses you're up to $900, but you have about 27-450mm film equivelent covered. Nikon's least expensive body is the D40 which is fine, but does not have a focus motor built in, so older non AFS nikkor lenses won't work on it. D80 would be a better choice. I don't know anything about Canon bodies, but they have a larger selection of bodies under $1000. I also don't see anyway you'll do this for less than at least $1600.

[cameraman]

Yes it is. Can we discuss religion instead? ;)

-Kevin

That would be Nikon vs Canon:eek::eek::eek:

[Methanolandbrats]

One other thing, check http://www.photozone.de/ for lens tests. Pay special attention to chromatic aberation results. High CA kills picture quality at wide aperatures, especially in the corners.

An almost on budget solution for you would be one of Canon's cheapest bodies, their sharpest short zoom kit lens and their inexpensive 70-300.

[cameraman]

An almost on budget solution for you would be one of Canon's cheapest bodies, their sharpest short zoom kit lens and their inexpensive 70-300.

What he said.

[Indy]

Agreed with the two above, except for this: the S5 is freaking awesome, IF you are not relying on the shutter response speed of an SLR. Taking racing pictures with it, for example, will be disappointing. If your subjects will be still, I think the S5 may just be perfect for you.

One other alternative you may want to consider: film. Because of digital, film equipment is dirt cheap. Believe me, I own it, and I still shoot it, and it still works like it used to, and the thought of selling it for pennies on the dollar means that situation will not change. :cry:

[cameraman]

One other alternative you may want to consider: film. Because of digital, film equipment is dirt cheap. Believe me, I own it, and I still shoot it, and it still works like it used to, and the thought of selling it for pennies on the dollar means that situation will not change. :cry:

I have a Canon EOS-3. Every time I dust it off I am shocked by how much lighter it is, how much better its focus system works and what an absolute joy it is to use. Then I get the film/developing bill and I remember why I so rarely use it.:cry:

[Indy]

I have a Canon EOS-3. Every time I dust it off I am shocked by how much lighter it is, how much better its focus system works and what an absolute joy it is to use. Then I get the film/developing bill and I remember why I so rarely use it.:cry:

Yeah, there is that, too. :yuck:

I still get more enjoyment out of shooting film. There is something about knowing there is a cost to composition that gives me satisfaction in doing it right. I have gone back to Nikon FE2's (mid-80's manual focus), and I love them.

[dando]

An almost on budget solution for you would be one of Canon's cheapest bodies, their sharpest short zoom kit lens and their inexpensive 70-300.

IYHO, is the Canon EF-S 18-55 IS and EF-S 55-250 IS a better solution than something like a Tamron 18-250?

-Kevin

[dando]

I still get more enjoyment out of shooting film. There is something about knowing there is a cost to composition that gives me satisfaction in doing it right.

That and developing your own film and maing your own prints. I never got do color, but B&W was fun as heck in HS and college. :thumbup:

-Kevin

[RusH]

Yeah, there is that, too. :yuck:

I still get more enjoyment out of shooting film. There is something about knowing there is a cost to composition that gives me satisfaction in doing it right. I have gone back to Nikon FE2's (mid-80's manual focus), and I love them.

My "Film Effect" is not actually taking the shots when I want to.....it`s from the early days when every shot cost much more money.....now it`s costing me in good pictures.

whatever :gomer:

[Methanolandbrats]

IYHO, is the Canon EF-S 18-55 IS and EF-S 55-250 IS a better solution than something like a Tamron 18-250?

-Kevin Probably, check the numbers on those lenses. I've been a Nikon shooter since the early 70s and my travel kit is 16-85, one D300 body and the 70-300 AF-S. Canon has similar stuff.

[Methanolandbrats]

That and developing your own film and maing your own prints. I never got do color, but B&W was fun as heck in HS and college. :thumbup:

-Kevin Having spent decades in the dark inhaling poisonous chemicals and watching my hands rot away from contact dermatitus I must say I do not miss the wet darkroom at all. Cibachrome chemistry was brutal, too big a hit of that and it caused nosebleeds :eek:

[Sean Malone]

Thank you all for your time and expertise in this matter. I knew I would get excellent advice!

Indy, I have thought about film and even priced some units. I used to LOVE developing film in the darkrooms at school and it was always a dream of mine to have a dark room of my own. I'm too much of a digital geek these day however.

I have had a few Canon and Nikon point and shoot camera and like them both, although I've always like Olympus for some reason, weird. I have a Canon digital camcorder that I really like.

Just another reason why OffCamber is the best. Thanks guys! :thumbup:

Oh, one more question though, how many megapixels equal the resolution of 35mm film? I thought I remember someone telling me back when 4 megapixel cameras hit the market that 9 or maybe 12 was what was equal to film. I see some of the true professional equipment is up in the 20's now.

If I get a 10mp now will it be too little next year? I mean, even the point and shooters are easing into the 12mp range.

[Methanolandbrats]

Thank you all for your time and expertise in this matter. I knew I would get excellent advice!

Indy, I have thought about film and even priced some units. I used to LOVE developing film in the darkrooms at school and it was always a dream of mine to have a dark room of my own. I'm too much of a digital geek these day however.

I have had a few Canon and Nikon point and shoot camera and like them both, although I've always like Olympus for some reason, weird. I have a Canon digital camcorder that I really like.

Just another reason why OffCamber is the best. Thanks guys! :thumbup:

Oh, one more question though, how many megapixels equal the resolution of 35mm film? I thought I remember someone telling me back when 4 megapixel cameras hit the market that 9 or maybe 12 was what was equal to film. I see some of the true professional equipment is up in the 20's now.

If I get a 10mp now will it be too little next year? I mean, even the point and shooters are easing into the 12mp range.

Hard to say, but a properly handled 12mp DSLR file is the equal of 35mm Velvia, the standard for color transparency film. A 12mp body is plenty for most everything unless you are getting into studio or landscape work. For that, even Canon's 20mp body does not come close to med format film or the Hasselblad digital backs. The type and physical size of the chip is as important as the number of megapixals. CMOS chips are less noisy than CCD chips and the larger the chip the better it will do at high ISO because the pixals are bigger. That is why a little 12mp point and shoot produces noisy, useless files at ISO 800...all the pixals are crammed on a tiny chip while the 12mp 5d full frame Canon produces noiseless images at ISO 800.

[dando]

Oh, one more question though, how many megapixels equal the resolution of 35mm film? I thought I remember someone telling me back when 4 megapixel cameras hit the market that 9 or maybe 12 was what was equal to film. I see some of the true professional equipment is up in the 20's now.

If I get a 10mp now will it be too little next year? I mean, even the point and shooters are easing into the 12mp range.

Here's an article (http://news.cnet.com/Nikon-answers-Canon-with-full-frame-SLR/2100-1041_3-6204252.html?tag=item) on the subject.

-Kevin

[Methanolandbrats]

As far as 35mm film vs digi resolution goes, Bjorn has an excellent analysis of it in his D2X review http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html He also has an excellent discussion of crop sensor vs full frame in his D3 and D300 reviews.

[Indy]

Regarding the MP v. 35mm issue, is that not comparing apples to oranges? To me there is an intangible something that makes prints from film more compelling. It may be the warmth of an "analog" medium vs. the starkness of digital. Yet intellectually I know that color film is itself a sophisticated approximation of reality, and theoretically improved hardware and software should make digital superior in all ways.

[Methanolandbrats]

Regarding the MP v. 35mm issue, is that not comparing apples to oranges? To me there is an intangible something that makes prints from film more compelling. It may be the warmth of an "analog" medium vs. the starkness of digital. Yet intellectually I know that color film is itself a sophisticated approximation of reality, and theoretically improved hardware and software should make digital superior in all ways. Very,very good point and I agree. I made many 16x20 black and white silver prints shot on a Plaubel 6x7 camera and Hasselblad equipment. Those are still my favorite photographs.I have yet to match the "feel" of those prints using digital equipment and printers. I think it has to do with the random nature of silver halide "pixels" vs the geometric precision of digital "pixels".

[oddlycalm]

Great advice. A lot of people are experiencing what Sean has, crappy pictures from nice new point and shoot cameras. The megapixel wars have been great for marketing, not so much for the image quality.

Trying to stuff twice the pixels onto the same size chip hasn't gone well. The result has been lots of noise at anything but really slow ISO speeds and often clipping of the highlights as well. Combine that with the built-in limitations of the small size format and you often get more frustration instead of good quality images.

It's not just the pocket cameras either. Successive generations of the larger cameras like the Canon G and S series boast higher and higher megapixels and suffer accordingly. Canon is not alone of course.

I carry a little Canon SD pocket camera at times and I intentionally hunted around to find an older version 6MP model, the SD700IS, to avoid the megapixel overload. It takes really great pictures within it's limits. A friend has a newer version that has 10MP and he hates the images and fights the camera. As sometimes happens, more can be less.

oc

[cameraman]

If you want to have some fun and create some really interesting photographs find yourself a Widelux F7 or F8.

http://www.johnmccarthyphoto.com/images/alta_w0004.jpg

http://www.johnmccarthyphoto.com/images/silvlakebg_fieldshow.jpg

[Audi_A4]

I bought a Canon SD-850 Digital Elph and love it. Camera is easy to use and shoots great pics.

[Methanolandbrats]

Another thing to consider when moving to a DSLR is your growth as a photographer. You don't want to buy a body you'll outgrow in a short time. Along those lines, anyone considering this move should think long and hard about a Nikon D300. It's the best crop sensor DSLR, period. It's a camera you can grow with for a very long time. At the same time it can be used as a "point and shoot". Set it on aperature priority, auto ISO, JPEGs with in-camera sharpening cranked up to six and auto white balance. Just shoot away and you can print the files right out of the camera. That's what I do for youth sports, it saves hours of post processing time. The D300 also produces very clean files at ISO 2500-3200, I cannot believe the files I get shooting basketball in badly lit gyms. The matrix metering is dead on in all but the worst backlit situations. AWB even under tungsten requires only a bit of a hue adjustment. The autofocus system is the best ever with a high keeper rate under any conditions.

[oddlycalm]

The D300 also produces very clean files at ISO 2500-3200, I cannot believe the files I get shooting basketball in badly lit gyms.
That is seriously impressive. Not all noise reduction systems are created equal, so Nikon must have come up with one that looks very film-like.

oc

[dando]

I carry a little Canon SD pocket camera at times and I intentionally hunted around to find an older version 6MP model, the SD700IS, to avoid the megapixel overload. It takes really great pictures within it's limits.

Got the same camera for my wife last year. The SD900 had just come out, but after reading the reviews on the two newer models, I did got the 700 instead and saved some jack as well as getting a better camera. :thumbup:

-Kevin

[dando]

Sean, I did some digging around yesterday and today, and if you go Canon, I suggest that you get a Rebel XTi body (~$500 body only), an EF-S 18-55 IS lens and an EF-S 55-250 IS lens. The reviews and stats on these are respectable. I'm going to go this route on the lenses. Taking the next step up means $800+ for a lens. I also took a serous look @ the Tamron 18-250, but its stats don't compare well with the Canons, and it has some issues on the low end (18mm). The Canon lenses can be had for ~$400 ($150 and $275 were the best prices I spotted after some price checking. The 12 MP XSi is very nice, but +$250 on the XTi.

The Nikon D40 is comparable in price to the XTi in the Nikon arena but has fewer MPs. The Nikon D80 is the equivalent to the XTi in features, but runs +$200 in price (~$700 body only). :( I saw a deal last December for a refurb D80 w/len for ~$600 through Tiger Direct, but it's rare to find a refurb Nikon camera (prolly a good sign). I don't know anything about Nikon lenses since I have a Canon. In general the reviews put the D80 ahead of the XTi by a nose, but you do pay more.

$ony is supposedly doing some good things after they bought out Minolta a few years ago, but I won't touch anything $ony other than a PSX.

I also found one of these (http://www.avalive.com/KATA/KT-DR-467/41003/productDetail.php) camera backpacks, which also fits in a laptop. :thumbup:

-Kevin

[Indy]

That is one seriously cool backpack.

[cameraman]

I've got one of these and I love it

http://www.tamrac.com/images/5549_open_lg.jpg

Tamrac 5549 Adventure 9

[dando]

I've got one of these and I love it


Tamrac 5549 Adventure 9

Yeah, but I get the Kata for <$70. :thumbup:

-Kevin

[cameraman]

I've got one of these and I love it.
Tamrac 5549 Adventure 9

Pawn shop. ~$40.00:D

[dando]

I caught this on Techbargains today:

http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/productDetail.do?oid=205977&cm_ven=COMPARISON%20SHOPPING&cm_cat=PRICEGRABBER&cm_pla=DATAFEED-%3EPRODUCTS&cm_ite=1%20PRODUCT&cm_keycode=67&om_keycode=67


Rebel XSi for 8 bills, including the EF-S 18-55 IS lens. :eek: Beats the heck outta my $600 XTi w/the std. EF-S 18-55 lens. :irked:

-Kevin

[Sean Malone]

Sean, I did some digging around yesterday and today, and if you go Canon, I suggest that you get a Rebel XTi body (~$500 body only), an EF-S 18-55 IS lens and an EF-S 55-250 IS lens. The reviews and stats on these are respectable. I'm going to go this route on the lenses. Taking the next step up means $800+ for a lens. I also took a serous look @ the Tamron 18-250, but its stats don't compare well with the Canons, and it has some issues on the low end (18mm). The Canon lenses can be had for ~$400 ($150 and $275 were the best prices I spotted after some price checking. The 12 MP XSi is very nice, but +$250 on the XTi.

The Nikon D40 is comparable in price to the XTi in the Nikon arena but has fewer MPs. The Nikon D80 is the equivalent to the XTi in features, but runs +$200 in price (~$700 body only). :( I saw a deal last December for a refurb D80 w/len for ~$600 through Tiger Direct, but it's rare to find a refurb Nikon camera (prolly a good sign). I don't know anything about Nikon lenses since I have a Canon. In general the reviews put the D80 ahead of the XTi by a nose, but you do pay more.

$ony is supposedly doing some good things after they bought out Minolta a few years ago, but I won't touch anything $ony other than a PSX.

I also found one of these (http://www.avalive.com/KATA/KT-DR-467/41003/productDetail.php) camera backpacks, which also fits in a laptop. :thumbup:

-Kevin

Fantastic info dando. I'll put it to good use! I'm anti-Sony but for some reason I ended buying a Sony HDTV and a Sony laptop, both receive the Sony Memory Sticks. It's nice to be able to take the Memory stick right out of the camera and plug it into the TV. Not nice enough for me to buy a Sony camera though. :)

[Methanolandbrats]

KInda off topic, but if you're a AAA member you can usually find a coupon for another 10% off at CC. AAA RV plus membership is a little over $100/year and you get five tows of up to 100 miles FREE plus 10% discount at NAPA, CC, florists, bookstores, hotels, etc.........real handy for wrench twirlers or people who drive racecars to the track or old cars. Easily pays for itself each year. :thumbup:

[dando]

Nikon D60 deal for $630:

http://www.techbargains.com/jump.cfm?id=580&afsrc=1&u=125712-n-1&arg=http%3A%2F%2Ftechbargains%2Epricegrabber%2Ecom %2Frd%2Ephp%2Fpg%3Dp%7E%7E1%2Fr%3D26%2Fm%3D6160860 7%2Fq%3Dn%2Fmt%3D3%7E22%7E754%2E00%7E614%2E99%7E67 0%2E97%7E0%2E95%7E3%7E%7EY%7E629%2E99%2Fk%3Dd688a9 bd0c61cd45ad99137c2353c266%2Fsearch%3Dd60%2Favail% 3DIn%2520Stock%2Fsearch%5Fid%3Df41026e893c0caeab1e cc8324259d8b9%2Fset%3D1214254739%2Fst%3Dsort

-Kevin

[dando]

Fantastic info dando. I'll put it to good use! I'm anti-Sony but for some reason I ended buying a Sony HDTV and a Sony laptop, both receive the Sony Memory Sticks. It's nice to be able to take the Memory stick right out of the camera and plug it into the TV. Not nice enough for me to buy a Sony camera though. :)

BTW, I'm still researching (I'm darn frugal these daze)...the 17-85 Canon lens is horrific @ the wide end (see 'brats linkage to the review site). I'm now looking into a 24-85 lens for now and a longer lens (likely 55-250) for later. The backpack is a must.

-Kevin

[cameraman]

I keep telling you....

An EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM:D

[dando]

I keep telling you....

An EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM:D

Dooder, if yer buyin' I'm all ears. :p

-Kevin

[dando]

Picked up one of these on eBay for $180 (-10% off coupon from eBay):

http://i21.ebayimg.com/02/c/05/1a/54/4e_8.JPG

EF 24-85 USM

List is ~$300.

-Kevin

[eiregosod]

bought a nice point n chute for €150 today.

[Gangrel]

Hard to say, but a properly handled 12mp DSLR file is the equal of 35mm Velvia, the standard for color transparency film. A 12mp body is plenty for most everything unless you are getting into studio or landscape work. For that, even Canon's 20mp body does not come close to med format film or the Hasselblad digital backs. The type and physical size of the chip is as important as the number of megapixals. CMOS chips are less noisy than CCD chips and the larger the chip the better it will do at high ISO because the pixals are bigger. That is why a little 12mp point and shoot produces noisy, useless files at ISO 800...all the pixals are crammed on a tiny chip while the 12mp 5d full frame Canon produces noiseless images at ISO 800.

There's another reason the 12MP point-and-clicks producte useless files at ISO 800. Half of the pixels on that 12MP chip are dedicated solely to producing the display image on the LCD prior to snapping the shot. I find it amusing every time I hand my D70 to someone to take a picture of us, and the first thing they do is hold the camera 2 ft in front of their face waiting for the viewfinder to show up on the LCD. Sometimes they don't get what I mean when I tell them they have to look through the viewfinder. For some things, multitasking is not the best way to go. :D

[eiregosod]

The thing I hate about the SLR/DSLR is that there's hundreds of useless acessories that Mr slick salesman tries to push . prices from $499 but could spend another $500 on lenses that one one only uses once :yuck:

[cameraman]

The thing I hate about the SLR/DSLR is that there's hundreds of useless acessories that Mr slick salesman tries to push . prices from $499 but could spend another $15000 on lenses that one one only uses once :yuck:

Fixed that for you...

[Dirty Sanchez]

for those looking for a point and shoot (with a lot of the functionality you would find on a DSLr) I'm very, very impressed with the Canon G9.

http://www.formulafoto.com/misc/sailing_001.jpg

[cameraman]

That most assuredly proves my point.:eek:


If you do want the raw file support get the Canon G9.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/

Either way, the cameras are capable of excellent photographs.

[Sean Malone]

That's a damn nice picture. :thumbup:

[eiregosod]

Fixed that for you...

I know nothing forgive me I'm from Barcelona


point n chute is good enuffff 4 me.

[Insomniac]

I tried to find it with Google, but no luck. There was a pretty good article on how to get a lot more quality out of a point and shoot camera. The guy showed regular shots, then ones using some of the adjustments on a mid level point and shoot and ones he took from a more expensive DSLR. He didn't proclaim the point and shoot better, and I'm not saying that, but that you could get pretty good pictures from a point and shoot if you know what you're doing (like Dirty Sanchez).

[Sean Malone]

I tried to find it with Google, but no luck. There was a pretty good article on how to get a lot more quality out of a point and shoot camera. The guy showed regular shots, then ones using some of the adjustments on a mid level point and shoot and ones he took from a more expensive DSLR. He didn't proclaim the point and shoot better, and I'm not saying that, but that you could get pretty good pictures from a point and shoot if you know what you're doing (like Dirty Sanchez).

"Know what you are doing?" LOL. It's a point and shoot!:shakehead

...If the p&s gives you the capabilities to make adjustments. Anymore most p&s camera's are made with soccer moms in mind and the only adjustments are to set it on the "party" setting, or the "fireplace romance" setting, or the "baby takes a step" setting.

After looking at the specs of the Canon G9, it's more than just your 'soccer mom' camera. (no offense to soccer moms).

[Methanolandbrats]

G9 is a fine camera, but don't confuse it with the higher ISO capabilities of mid-range DSLR. By the ISO 800 the files are so noisy, they are unusable.

[Insomniac]

"Know what you are doing?" LOL. It's a point and shoot!:shakehead

...If the p&s gives you the capabilities to make adjustments. Anymore most p&s camera's are made with soccer moms in mind and the only adjustments are to set it on the "party" setting, or the "fireplace romance" setting, or the "baby takes a step" setting.

After looking at the specs of the Canon G9, it's more than just your 'soccer mom' camera. (no offense to soccer moms).

I don't know about your camera, but mine has a bunch of settings (a 3 or so year old Canon Powershot A540). Yes, it is designed to literally point and shoot with as little help from the user as possible, but it also has many other settings. I don't think you can expect the average person to know what each setting does, when they should be used and the implication of changing each one. Again, I'm not saying it is superior to a DSLR, and I wish I could find the article, but you can get better pictures out of one.

[cameraman]

G9 is a fine camera, but don't confuse it with the higher ISO capabilities of mid-range DSLR. By the ISO 800 the files are so noisy, they are unusable.

Again it all depends on your usage. As D.S. demonstrated you can get very good photographs out of a G9. Would you want one if you spent your days covering basketball games? Absolutely not. Then again I rarely if ever raise my ISO above 200 because most of what I photograph is brightly lit so a G9 would be fine. Probably half the people who buy a Rebel never take it off of point and shoot mode and would be just as well served by the G9 at 60% the cost.

If you are looking to take high end pictures, point and shoot but with the ability to tweek them as raw files then save yourself a ton of money and get a G9.

[Methanolandbrats]

Again it all depends on your usage. As D.S. demonstrated you can get very good photographs out of a G9. Would you want one if you spent your days covering basketball games? Absolutely not. Then again I rarely if ever raise my ISO above 200 because most of what I photograph is brightly lit so a G9 would be fine. Probably half the people who buy a Rebel never take it off of point and shoot mode and would be just as well served by the G9 at 60% the cost.

If you are looking to take high end pictures, point and shoot but with the ability to tweek them as raw files then save yourself a ton of money and get a G9. I know that, I just wanted to point out that if you buy this to shoot both low light and bright light you will be very, very pissed. People have to know these things before buying and many do not.

[eiregosod]

slr = waist of money

[SurfaceUnits]

The two largest detectors are essentially huge digital cameras, each weighing thousands of tons, capable of taking millions of snapshots a second.

Each year the detectors will generate 15 petabytes of data, the equivalent of a stack of CDs 12 miles tall. The data will require a high speed global network of computers for analysis.

[eiregosod]

The two largest detectors are essentially huge digital cameras, each weighing thousands of tons, capable of taking millions of snapshots a second.

Each year the detectors will generate 15 petabytes of data, the equivalent of a stack of CDs 12 miles tall. The data will require a high speed global network of computers for analysis.

the detectors are just charged coupled devices.

dont think they'll be using the fisheyes with those bad boys.

[TravelGal]

Small update. Given the previous discussions and my way overdue need to purchase a new camera, I am, as of yesterday, the proud owner of a new Canon G9. It works about twice as fast as my Sony Cybershot (except for the flash which recycles about half as fast) but the better features and pictures will have to make up for that.

My purchase process was to read as much as I could absorb, which is quite a bit for member of the general public and light years below most of you guys, read Off Camber, go to a local photo store that is used and recommended by a friend who makes his living in nature photography, and buy the camera. Once in the store, it was quick. Everyone's face lit up when when I pointed to the picture in the ad Canon was kind enough to send a couple of weeks ago.

The icing on the cake was the discussion about the speed of frames per second. I said, "I was a fan of Champ Car but that's gone now so...." My voice trailed off. He said, "Yes." And shook his head. I said, "You know Champ Car?" He said, "Oh yes, but what I really miss is the old Riverside Raceway." WOW! Now, *there's* a guy you can trust! LOL!

[dando]

Found this on Techbargains today:


Slated for August release. RitzCamera has the Canon EOS Rebel XS Digital SLR Camera w/ Canon EF-S 18-55mm Image Stabilized Kit Lens for pre-order for a low $699.99 Free Shipping. No tax.

Differences between this XS model and the very popular XSI model:
(1) XS 10.10 megapixels, XSI 12.40 megapixels
(2) XS 3.0 fps continuous shooting, XSI 3.5 fps
(3) XS 2.5" LCD, XSI 3.0" LCD

That's just plain silly. The XSi was released 6 months ago, and street prices are already <$8 bills. Silly.

-Kevin

[TravelGal]

Definitely faster than the G9 with more doodads (lenses) but I paid just over $400. In fact, the store quoted me $5 LESS than their online store while I avoided the nearly $20 shipping, and I got to talk to a nice race fan. :)

Mine is enough of an improvement over what I had that I'll be happy for a while, that's for sure.

[dando]

Definitely faster than the G9 with more doodads (lenses) but I paid just over $400. In fact, the store quoted me $5 LESS than their online store while I avoided the nearly $20 shipping, and I got to talk to a nice race fan. :)

Mine is enough of an improvement over what I had that I'll be happy for a while, that's for sure.

Definitely a nice rig. I considered the G series, but I want to get back into more action photography like I did back in my photo j days (long time ago). Now if I could just revisit MO back in 98/99 with a SuperPhoto Pass and my new dSLR. :-(

-Kevin

[Sean Malone]

Update: I got what I think was a decent deal from the highly regarded and recommended B&H Photo in the Canon Rebel EOS XSi. It was a B&H kit sale with the XSi body, Canon 18 – 55mm IS kit lens and the Canon 55-250mm IS tele. I just picked the highly touted budget ‘nifty fifty’ lens (Canon 50mm 1.8) from the local Circuit City that is clearing their shelves. Got it for $20 cheaper than I found it on Ebay.

The ‘point and shoot’ modes get you snapping pictures right out of the box and the quality is immediately apparent versus my wife’s decent point and shoot 10mp Oly 1010. The p&s modes are ‘locked’ down though, so in order to really start to stretch the camera and lenses legs you need to dive into priority modes. Unfortunately I’ve been reading more about shooting than actually shooting which I obviously hope to change but it seems like as soon as I think I understand one aspect by the time I get the camera in my hands I forget. I need cheat sheets to carry with me for various settings/situations. LOL!!!

I’m not ready to post samples yet because I’ve just been familiarizing myself with using it by shooting things around the house like the dog etc. I picked up that Tamrac back-pack at Circuit City for $57 so now I’m almost ready to venture outside.

[Lux Interior]

Sean - I have a Canon 30D with some of the better lenses. Here's some shots I took at Mid Ohio last summer. Shooting racecars is a blast!


http://picasaweb.google.com/biffymalibu/2008MidOhioPart1Biff?feat=directlink

[Sean Malone]

Sean - I have a Canon 30D with some of the better lenses. Here's some shots I took at Mid Ohio last summer. Shooting racecars is a blast!


http://picasaweb.google.com/biffymalibu/2008MidOhioPart1Biff?feat=directlink

they look fantastic! I will probably do a back flip after my first successful action panned shot.

[dando]

Update: I got what I think was a decent deal from the highly regarded and recommended B&H Photo in the Canon Rebel EOS XSi. It was a B&H kit sale with the XSi body, Canon 18 – 55mm IS kit lens and the Canon 55-250mm IS tele. I just picked the highly touted budget ‘nifty fifty’ lens (Canon 50mm 1.8) from the local Circuit City that is clearing their shelves. Got it for $20 cheaper than I found it on Ebay.

The ‘point and shoot’ modes get you snapping pictures right out of the box and the quality is immediately apparent versus my wife’s decent point and shoot 10mp Oly 1010. The p&s modes are ‘locked’ down though, so in order to really start to stretch the camera and lenses legs you need to dive into priority modes. Unfortunately I’ve been reading more about shooting than actually shooting which I obviously hope to change but it seems like as soon as I think I understand one aspect by the time I get the camera in my hands I forget. I need cheat sheets to carry with me for various settings/situations. LOL!!!

I’m not ready to post samples yet because I’ve just been familiarizing myself with using it by shooting things around the house like the dog etc. I picked up that Tamrac back-pack at Circuit City for $57 so now I’m almost ready to venture outside.

Nice setup. :thumbup: XSi is now less than the XTi I bought last year. :( I get the config remembering issues. When we went to WDW last month, I was struggling to get the camera setup for certain shots (and get the kids/subject to behave @ the same time). Couldn't for the life of me turn off the flash for a night shot I was attempting of Cindy's castle. Oy.

-Kevin

[Lux Interior]

they look fantastic! I will probably do a back flip after my first successful action panned shot.

It's not so hard once you get the hang of it. You need to set for shutter priority, then set your shutter speed between 1/60 and 1/250. Depends on how fast the car is going and how close you are. I've probably spend 7 track days at mid o to be able to get to the level of these shots. Need to go and practice!

Thanks for the compliments!