View Single Post
Old Aug 4, 2007, 1:05 PM   #3
mtngal
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,088
Default

The first question you need to answer for yourself is whether you want to deal with a dSLR or not. They are heavier, larger, and will end up costing you a whole lot more money than the superzoom. You get better pictures, but at a big price both in time spent learning how to use the camera properly and processing the pictures when you get back home.

Look at the features you get with all three cameras. Are you going to use the features that are on the more expensive ones? It sounds neat to have all these things, but will you actually USE them? I have the ability to take amulti-exposure picture on my camera and have never used it.

Then look at what focal length you are getting with the 3 camera/lens combinationsand what you might want. The 18-200 is supposed to be outstanding, is stabilized (a plus) but have heard that it's hard to find in-stock (B&H has them listed as out of stock at the moment). The 18-70 kit lens isn't as long - are you going to miss the range between 70-200? There's no universal right or wrong answer to that question - some people shoot mostly wide angle while I'd rather have the extra length.

If I weren't convinced that I would like carrying a slingpack with all sorts of extra stuff with me, I'd get the super-zoom. Just a FYI - I have a Pentax dSLR, and have no trouble carrying all kinds ofSTUFF around with me all the time. But you might not find that fun at all.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote