When I got into SLR photography Nikon was head and shoulders above the rest in the TTL flash metering and IMO still is. That was what swayed me to their products. I am not "die hard" Nikon loyalist. I have an old Vivitar 220/ SL screw mount that I use quite often. It is quite fun to get out the old manual glass and shoot a few rolls. I have lenses for that thing all the way up to 2,400mm That will bring a full moon right up and fill the frame.

Nikon is very bad with the grips. Each one has it's own and at $50- nearly $200 a pop it gets quite expensive. They don't even make one for the D70 though, but I think the consumer market it was made for will most likely not see a need for one. They are pretty good about the remotes though. Since the introduction of the electronic shutter release there has been two different styles. One was a 2 pin and the other a 10 pin some of the newer bodies use a wireless remote that kinda sucks if you are standing behind the camera, but it fits quite a few different models. Nikon is still even making bodies that you can screw in and old manual cable release wich is a nice feature now and again.Hot shoe flash is pretty much a standard. I can use flashes that were mabe back in the 80's on the newest bodies. You just don't get some of the options. When they went digital is when things changed. You can use digital flash on a film body but a film flash won't function properly on a digital body.

 

Well since it's been almost a week and no more replies to this thread, I figured I could post my question , without getting the ol' "nice hijack Brew"

Ive looked at all the recent camera threads and still cant figure out what to do. I have a basic Fuji Finepix 3500 right now, which is a pretty good camera for the everyday use and what not. I'm at the point where I want to upgrade and get more into photography. Ive been holding off spending the money to see if it was just a "phase" but its been a few months and the bug is still with me. My question is this...what would be a good "entry level, or better" digital camera for me to get started with? I know I want an SLR, I know I want to be able to have a good lense to start with and then be able to change lenses later on. I want something that has a quick shutter speed so I can take pictures fast at soccer games and the like. I do not need one that does video. I'm just not sure Im ready to spend $1000 right now. I'm not a profesional nor do I plan to be. I just like photography and want to take my hobby to the next level..


BREW

 

I dont know if you will beable to find a digital SLR for less than $1000, much less a good one.

My personal preferance
Canon, Sony, or Nikon.
In that order.

I wouldn't get anything else.
For the $500-800 range you'll be looking at high ened Point and Shoot. Unless you buy used then you might find an SLR in that range.

Go here, order a catalog, browse the used or refurbished section, etc.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com

They are a repetable profesional photography business. Every profesional knows and or uses them.

 

So for what I want it for, do you think I need an SLR or should I get one thats not and still be able to do what I want to do? My main concern is that I want it to be fast. Right now, I take a picture and it takes at least 3 to 5 seconds to recover before I can take another one.

I'm so confused


BREW

 

An SLR will let you snap pics almost as fast as you can push the button. Canon markets on thier speed. High end Point and Shoots ussually have what they call an action feature. Ussually something like 3 burst with one push. But the flash does not pop in that mode and it's harder to get settings right for quality pics in that mode too. Or atleast the ones I've had have been for me.

A high end P&S will give you the other features that you want. Like lenses, filters, an external flash boot, etc, etc, with out the initial cost, but there is a delay while saving file. That delay depends on image quality settings and the cameras processor speed etc, etc.

It really just depends on how imprtant being able to snap one pic after another is for you. Are you willing to give up some file save time for couple hundred bucks? If so then a High end P&S wll work for you. If not then you'll have to step up to an SLR.

My Sony DSC-F505V P&S is older and inferior to modern Dcameras with the faster processors. Keep in mind older is less than 2 years. Back in the day it was an $800 camera new. It's only 2.6 Effective megapixels (3.3 megapixels) But I can't ask for better image color, and quality that is gives for a P&S. It's still far better than modern cheap P&S cameras from wal-mart. I tribute most of that with the factory Carl Zeiss lens. I can still get a large variety of
lenses and filter for it, and it works well with alot of flashes.
As far as speed from the time that I push the shutter it takes exactly 2.3 seconds to take the pic and save the file at 2240x1680 before it is ready to shoot again. "I timed several pics with a stop watch." I DO NOT use Auto Focus on it I always keep it on manual focus. If I use auto focus then there is a 1+ second delay from the time I push the shutter until it actually snaps.

I hope this helps in your decision.

Here is an untouched sample pic from it.
This would have been better if I had a macro flash ring.. but it still came out semi satisfactory.

http://www.pss-mag.com/misc/DSC00010.JPG

 

Canon Digital Rebel XT (350D) body only-$790

50mm f/1.8 Mark II prime lens--$80

Lexar 4x 1gb CF card--$75

this is an outstanding setup for $950. 50 f/1.8 II prime is one of the finest lenses you can buy for the price. Any camera, especially a DSLR is only as good as the lens. I don't have time now, but I will dig up some QUALITY yet fairly inexpensive Tele's for you.

 

Dayum! Cool pic Matt. I only had to scroll over to Houston to see it all. Wild mtn rose should make that her sig 'cept she's on dial-up. It would probably take her to Christmas to download it!

 

You will not find a P&S camera that will give you the performance of an SLR. It just isn't going to happen. If you want good glass you need an SLR. If all you are looking for is to be a snapshooter then a P&S will do the job. If you want to get creatine then you could go for one of the high end P&S, but then you are getting into the $1000 price range and you might as well go for the SLR so you can open up your creative thoughts and let them run wild. You can not get interchangable lenses in a P&S camera. Most of them limit you to about three stops on aperture choices. If you get an SLR and a fast lens you can open it up to sometimes f/1.8 and stop all the way down to f/22. This gives you great control of depth of field.

IMO don't waste the money on a P&S if you want to be creative. A good camera is an investment. You may as well do it right the first time.

My first choice for the serious consumer would be the Nikon D70s kit. It comes with an amazing lens with a good range.

If you feel you must get a Canon then go with the Rebel XT body only. If you get the canon do NOT get the kit. The kit lenses that Canon sends out with the bodies are a complete joke. Canon makes some of the best glass in the world. They just refuse to put any of that good stuff in with the kit.

If you love having the same feeling as when you buy a computer, buy the Canon. You camera will be replaced with a newer model before you get home from the store.
If you don't like that feeling then go with the Nikon. It won't be replaced for a couple of years.

 

I guess I really need to decide what I want in a camera and how I'm going to use it. I deff. dont want to go cheap and regret it next year. Like I said, this is something I've considered getting more into over the past year and moreso in the last few months. I'm thinking the Nikon D50 or D70...or the Canon XT Rebel. I seen someone post theres not much difference between the D50 and D70, is that true? Is there something I will miss on the cheaper of the two?

I realize to do this and do it right I just need to bite the bullit and cough up the grand and do it right. Thats just a lot of beans right now with Xmas right around the corner..Now if I can just learn and master this Pinnacle Studio I just got, i'll be doing good


BREW

 

Photog95, If you can get somebody to buy any P&S for $1000. Just let me know what they want and I will get it for them even if I have to go to Best Buy to buy them if I sell them at that price..... I'll make a freaking killing!

I do agree that aperature control is limited on any P&S.

but the "You can not get interchangable lenses in a P&S camera." is false.
I can still get a variety of factory and even more aftermarket lenses, filters, and flashes for my Sony Cyber Shot DSC-F505V and it is a P&S.

Am I saying P&S's are as good as SLR's? Definatly not! SLR's are a lot more versatile if you know how to use them. If you don't or while you are learning then you likely wont get a decent pic out of them.
Quality of prints wise... One it's only as good as your developers printer. Two until you get larger than 20"x30" prints then the amature still won't beable to tell the difference even if they are side by side. Small 4"x5" or even 8"x10" prints then a trained eye has a hard time if they even could.

I know what you mean about the Canons. ALL the Rebels are such an outdated and totally un-upgradeable camera. (note: FYI Tom that is sarcastic. The Canon Rebel will never be out dated in our life times. That is Canons Flag ship known and recognized world wide by ametures and profesionals alike. You will always beable to update it.) Point and shoots are more disposable. 5-10 years from now if they tear up.. Then you would probably replace them.

 

Nah, not Christmas, just midnight!!

That is an awesome picture Matt!!

 

These prices come right off the B&H web site.

P&S cameras as follows:
Panasonic Lumiix DMC-LC1 $1,599 (no interchangable lens)

Sony Cybershot DSC-R1 $999 (no interchangable lens)


DSLR cameras as follows:
Canon digital Rebel $659 (body only)

Canon digital Rebel XT $789 (body only)

Nikon D100 $999 (body only)

Nikon D50 $649 (body only)

Nikon D70 $749 (body only)

Nikon D70s $899 (body only)

Add another $100 to these for a 50mm f/1.8 and you will have a great camera in any of them with most of them still being under $1000

I didn't say anywhere that the Canon Rebel was un-upgrabable. In fact it is the other way around. The Rebel has been upgraded more times than any other canera on the market. I said the one he buys would be outdated before he got home from the store. That is because they will come out with a newer version of it before he gets to use it. There are so many Canon Rebels on the market that it is confusing as to which one does what.

I challenge you to remove the lens from your Sony and replace it with another. If you can I will stand corrected and bow at your feet . You may be able to buy aux. lenses to get more wide angle or tele but you are not going to replace the lens that is built into the camera. Adding aux. lenses and filters to the front of your lens is also adding more elements to the front which will slightly degrade picture quality. My main filters are grad ND, and circular polarizers. Other than that I don't use them unless it is for special effects.

As far as prints go...yesy, you are right. the average person is not going to see a difference until you get up to large prints.

One last thought. The Rebel is not Canon's flagship. If it were the company would be in serious trouble. The EOS-1Ds MarkII is the flagship this week. A few months ago it was the EOS-1D MarkII. Give it a couple months and it will be the EOS-1D MarkIII

 

WOW!!! Obviosly I am happy with the images my older "out of date" camera still gives me, so I haven't been shopping for a camera in a few years....
I can't belive they have gotten that high for P&S's.. My question is why??? Seems like they are shooting themselfs in the foot. When you can get advanced D cameras or a Single lens Reflex for the same price or cheaper.
It is the begining, of the end of photography being a skilled art.

It had my curesostiy up so I decided I should browse and see wha tthey have now. So I found this while browsing around the camera section at http://www.bhphotovideo.com

It does not have a mirror so it's not an SLR, it's not a point and shoot so it's an advanced digital camera. It elimenates the blur caused by mirror movement common in SLR's when the MLU malfunctions or the user forgets to activate the MLU. Yet all the options of a profesional grade camera above an SLR.
For the price then an ameture photographer (IE some one not making money with thier pics) Then it had better give 3D images!


Epson R-D1, 6.0 Megapixel, Interchangeable Lens, Rangefinder, Digital Camera

Price: $ 2,999.95

The lens is not included so you start with the cheapest


Rollei Normal 40mm f/2.8 Sonnar HFT Manual Focus Lens for 35 RF Camera - Black USA

Our Price: $ 649.95

All can be found here B & H Photo & Video

That is just insane! LOL




I am not pro canon or anti canon either way, I do love thier lenses, they do have some of the best glass money can get, as Photog95 stated before. But the rest is just a camera. I do find it odd that you feel to purchase a Canon that it will be outdated before he gets to use it..??? That's like saying that a good image today is a bad image once they come out with something else? Also saying that everyone or anyone else's D cameras are an instant classic and wont be out done.

I peronally appreciate the Research and Development that Canon is putting into Digital Photography. Digital Photography is still inferior to Analog for color, sharpness, and dynamic range. But the ease of media transfer and out of pocket savings is to appealing for us ametures and lower profesional photograhers alike. That are not photgraphing super models for few million dollars a year using $50,000 large format film cameras for thier abilities to capture percise skin tone and sharpness. But same D camera vs same Film camera, yea the rest of us will over look the short falls. LOL

They are just now to the threshhold where digital sensors can rival a high-resolution scan of a quality slide. Where they fail they make up for in time. As well as starting to accomplish an acceptable Dynamic range captured by digital media vs Analog film. But Digital photography still has a long way to go before the general public will get a Digital camera that we can afford and that will be a true rival to analog as far as image. With the Research and development that Canon is putting into it we could see it from them with in the next 3-5 years or less and everyone else will take another year or two after that to catch up. Everyone is researching trying to compete in the digital photography field. Canon is just doing a better job and spending alot more money on the quest to get it to us asap.

With that in mind Brew, I would suggest to continue with your plan to decide what you are going to be using the camera for, find one with the features you want, and has the image quality that you like in the price range that you want. Get it and it will deliver the same quality picture today as it will 5 years from now. Don't get caught up in the status of owning the latest and greatest. If it gives a nice looking image now, then it will give you a nice looking image tomarrow and the next day or next year or the year after that, etc, etc. The quality will not drop.

 

Keep in mind 2 years ago 6MP was a top of the line DSLR, today it's 11 MP and the bottom of the line P&S from walmart is almost 6 MP. So a $1000 DSLR camera from 2 Years ago from anybody is outdated so to speak becasue todays standards are now twice what was available then. 2 years from now the cheaper DSLR standard is likely to be 20 MP and our 11 MP cameras we have today will be out dated so to speak. So if keeping up is a concern then don't go digital. When is it going to stop? I don't know. Probably when the public stops wanting more MP. The industry has marketed on more Megapixels is better for so long, it's going to be hard for the public to accept that the developer can not print the quality that the camera is capturing. So I see MP advancements for atleast the next 10 years. At which time we could concieveably be to 50 MP. Yea we'll all be proad of a little 11 MP SLR that we would buy today then... LOL

So buying a DSLR of any brand now and saying that your doing it right that you will never have to buy another camera, it's a classic.. I can't say that to anybody myself. Knowing that what we have today will be miniture to what we will have in a couple of years. So my suggestion is that if a DSLR has the features that you want and you can not get the same features any cheaper, then get the DSLR. But don't get a DSLR thinking it will always be a classic.. Because it dosen't matter what you get, it will be out done soon and no brand is exempt from technolgical advancemnts being made in this field at this time.

Best advise I can give for purchasing a D camera in today's world... Get what you need to take the pictures that you want, as cheap as you can get away with.

 

I totally understand that technology will keep getting better, day by day. Thats why I want to get the best one for my needs at this point in time. My camera now, is a great little P&S and has been for the 3 years ive owned it. And like you said..the pictures I took 3 years ago are as good as the ones I took today. I just want a better camera with more features and all.

I guess the bottom line (again) is figure out what I want and need in a camera for "ME" then make my decision. Reguardless, which one I go with...im under the impression from here and what I have read so far, that the Canon XT, Nikon D50 or D70 will all be a great choice.

With that said, I have one more question. The Canon is an 8.0mp and the Nikons are 6.1, at this level, should this be a major concern??


BREW