|
Camera buffs (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| hangover |
I'm also looking for a camera for quality indoor shots (galleries mainly) in the $300-400 range. So far the top one in my list is the A95. Lots of manual options an 5mp for a low price...
I just hope the quality is as good as their S-series |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
I am very happy that I bought into the canon eos system some years ago because the choice of lenses available is quite plentiful and the quality is high.
However you can't really go wrong with either the Canon or Nikon systems.
I wish Canon had Nikon's flash technology for example...
Right now I'm still shooting slides, but I want to get a DSLR soon as it would be much more convenient. |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
you have to spend around $1,000 to get a digital slr with interchangeable lenses (the one you're looking at doesn't) canon entry level slr is the rebel. but if your not a semi-professional the size and expense don't make sense for the average consumer who wants a pocket sized, point and shoot camera. even if you could afford a digital slr would you really want to lug around a camera bag at a party? |
I've seen the digital rebel for $899 US at some places around town; an eminently affordable price.
It's tempting, but I just don't know if I should save for a 10D or 20D… |
|
|
| kamil |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis86
Yep, thats the whole reason I want it. And 8MP... :p
Then I need a 15mm 2.8 :wtf: |
wow. what a waste. a total of 2 extra megapixels for basically 2X the money.
all ure geting is like 40dpi extra resolution when printing 8x10, which, i doubt you do anyways, and if so, once ina blue moon.
i did a gymnastics shoot with my 6mp 300D and they turned out flawless at 8x10 (70-200mm f/2.8 IS L). And even 4mp from the 1D came out nice (200mm f/1.8)......you DONT NEED 8MP.
waste, WASTE.
the REAL reason youd want a 20D is cuz of faster framerate (IF you do sports photography) and MUCH less noise at 1600ISO (actually useable). |
|
|
| kamil |
| quote: | Originally posted by DaveSZ
I am very happy that I bought into the canon eos system some years ago because the choice of lenses available is quite plentiful and the quality is high.
However you can't really go wrong with either the Canon or Nikon systems.
I wish Canon had Nikon's flash technology for example...
Right now I'm still shooting slides, but I want to get a DSLR soon as it would be much more convenient. |
there are some 4000dpi film scanners that do a better job of scans than a konica or fuji 200 thousand dollar scanner/prining machine (like ones u see in photolabs).....they cost around 3-500 bucks. quality is almost as good as digital SLR. (slight noise is visible as well as other artifacts) |
|
|
| robin |
i'll probably pick up a fuji e510 later this week
here
just click on the e510 and you get the specs (price, 240 euro's)
and last words to that? |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by kamil
wow. what a waste. a total of 2 extra megapixels for basically 2X the money...the REAL reason youd want a 20D is cuz of faster framerate and MUCH less noise at 1600ISO (actually useable). |
very true noise and speed are the only "real" improvements of the 20d. it took me while to overcome my more pixels is better mindset. Both the 10d and 20d share the the same size ccd sensor and in this case size does matter. The other thing you have to stomach with the high end cameras is that their resale value plummets when the next model comes out. For example, the 10d cost $1,500 when it came out a year ago now you can get one for $900. The 20d cost $1,500 I wonder how much it will fall to a year from now... |
|
|
| kamil |
^actually, the CCD sensor in the 20D isnt the same, its one of the reasons why noise levels are lower at higher ISOs. Yet, they are (like u said) the same size, thus, creating the same crop factor: 1.6X
Its a wicked feature to have, 1.6X extra zoom, its too bad that you cant really do REAL wide angle shooting (unless uve got a rebel or 20D and u buy the new 10-24mm lens, i think thats the zoom length on it.......its EF-S anyways)
Yah, im a canon and camera whore ;) |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
| quote: | Originally posted by kamil
^actually, the CCD sensor in the 20D isnt the same, its one of the reasons why noise levels are lower at higher ISOs. Yet, they are (like u said) the same size, thus, creating the same crop factor: 1.6X
Its a wicked feature to have, 1.6X extra zoom, its too bad that you cant really do REAL wide angle shooting (unless uve got a rebel or 20D and u buy the new 10-24mm lens, i think thats the zoom length on it.......its EF-S anyways)
Yah, im a canon and camera whore ;) |
I notice most of us are canon whores. :D
The 1.6X factor is very appealing for tele work because I don't have thousands to spend on a fast 500 or 600mm lens, and believe me you'll want one of those bastids before long if you are at all an outdoor/wildlife photographer.
Even if you are shooting models and want that "flat look," you might want to go 300mm + and talk to your model with a walkie-talkie.
That's pretty extreme though.
On a 10 D (or any other APS-C camera) you can just slap a 300 on there and it becomes a 480mm .
Then buy a 1.4X teleconverter, and you have a 672mm. Slap on a 2X teleconverter and you have a 960mm for less than the cost (including camera, 300 mm f/4 IS lens, and teleconverter) of a 400mm f/4 IS.
You'll lose image quality and two full stops of light however, and I don't know that an effective f/8 is a very usable lens. F/5.6 is about as dark as you can still focus and compose in many conditions.
Image stabilization doesn’t make up for that either.
For affordable wide-angle work keep your film body handy.
:D
| quote: | Originally posted by kamil
wow. what a waste. a total of 2 extra megapixels for basically 2X the money.
all ure geting is like 40dpi extra resolution when printing 8x10, which, i doubt you do anyways, and if so, once ina blue moon.
i did a gymnastics shoot with my 6mp 300D and they turned out flawless at 8x10 (70-200mm f/2.8 IS L). And even 4mp from the 1D came out nice (200mm f/1.8)......you DONT NEED 8MP.
waste, WASTE.
the REAL reason youd want a 20D is cuz of faster framerate (IF you do sports photography) and MUCH less noise at 1600ISO (actually useable). |
So you have the 300D (digital rebel)?
I'm *this* close to buying one grrrr.
Do you miss anything on it since it's a bit bare bones?
| quote: | Originally posted by kamil
there are some 4000dpi film scanners that do a better job of scans than a konica or fuji 200 thousand dollar scanner/prining machine (like ones u see in photolabs).....they cost around 3-500 bucks. quality is almost as good as digital SLR. (slight noise is visible as well as other artifacts) |
I've used the Nikon LS 4000 at school and was quite happy with the results.
I'm not sure that they even make that model any longer and if so how much it costs, but yeah buying an affordable film scanner is an option too I suppose.
One thing I'm not really sure about is the permanence and sustainability of digital prints - like chromira and other high-end stuff for example. We’re not even talking home inkjet, which is usually .
Will they fade or lose their brilliance after a few years?
That's teh question I have. |
|
|
| kamil |
your better off just buying a straight dSLR. screw the scanner..why?
-film
-fixed ISO when shooting (changeable at any time on digital)
-film costs
-costs to develop
-time
-hassle
do i regret getting a rebel and not the 10D? Well...ive had mine for almost a year, and really, the ONLY thing id like is lower ISO noise.
I never really use 3fps, when i did, i was shooting with a 1D (those things are ing FAST!!! i think up to 8FPS!!!)
You only need three things on a camera: manual shutter, aperture, and ISO, along with manual focus. the rest are basically "gimmicks" (tho they do come in handy) which wont make u a better photographer, theyll just allow you to do some things a little bit easier, but when your starting out, u wont need them, and i dont. Take a look at my deviantart gallery (click on my sig) and check out some pics......
right now ive got a sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 (kinna soft wide open, but very good lens since i paid only 200 US) |
|
|
| Clovis86 |
I don't want a 20D for 8MP...that was a joke (note the " :p " )
What I do want it for, is high ISO with less noise, faster AF with a larger working range, and a bigger buffer.
I'm still considering the 1D mkII...but its just a hell of an investment, but would probably hold value longer than a 20D.
Also, you can get used Canon DSLR's for way under 1000$ now...I bought my D30 for 600$ from a friend, and I'm seeing them on ebay almost new for as little as 400$...and D60s are going for 6-700. They're still great cameras...
I agree with you kamil, the real value lies in having a lens that can produce images of upmost quality so that they can be used to their fullest... 8MP with a cheap lens that is consistently soft is really useless...
-Clovis |
|
|
|
|
