|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
Personally, I do a lot of low light level shooting and the noise signature of the Nikon D-50 is much better than the Olympus E-500. The D-50 also has a wider selection of Nikon and thord party lenses.
MT |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
|
![]()
Hi Elger,
I think all DSLRs will take good pictures. I myself have a KM5D. IMHO, the 2 major points against the E500 are the noisy high ISO performance and the limited and pricy choice in lenses. The other brands have better high ISO performance and offer cheap f1,7 50mm primes, very useful to shoot low light indoors (as in a theatre). So the E500 is not a good choice for your intended purpose. I should point out that getting a cheap 50mm Minolta or Pentax 50mm prime is increasingly difficult and mostly a 2nd hand affair (I got my Minolta 50mm on eBay). |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 287
|
![]()
I think it is very easy to decide.
Camera body isonly a part of the DSLR. You will need lenses. Canon and Nikon are the only companies that have many lenses for you to choose from.With Olympusyou will have trouble looking for lenses to meet your exact requirements. I think you should forget Olympus. Canon 350D and Nikon D50 should be ok for your requirement. You will not sorry for decided on any of the two. D50 is a newer model and hence has more new technologies. Unless Canon reduce the price to below that of the D50 there is no reason to choose Canon. I suggest you should spend your times choosing the lenses for your D50. My suggestion is valid only as of today. I am sure Canon will launch a new model that will be equal or better than D50 soon. If Iwere you I shall not wait. The D50 is a very good and very reasonably priced DSLR. Attached picture was taken withmy D50 and MacroNikkor 60mm. The D50 will take any type of picture you will ever want. I now also have a D200 but still keep and use my D50. I love it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7
|
![]()
one of the few things that's keeping the olympus still at the number 1 position, is the fact that it can take black and white pictures. the people at the store thought this was silly of me, but I like taking black and white pictures, and not adding the black and white effect later (it kind of forces me to think, if that makes any sense). the big drawback of the d50 to me now is that it doesn't seem to have this function - as far as I can tell. am I correct?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
|
![]()
ruchai wrote:
Quote:
Did you know that Olympus has more lenses specifically designed for digital than any other manufacturer? Does this make their lens selection "superior"? Not necessarily, no, but sheer numbers of lenses in any format doesn't mean much, either. Everyone has his/her own needs and requirements, and the 4/3 format has the ranges covered pretty well. Also, adapters are available to allow the use of an incredibly wide range of legacy lens from other manufacturers on 4/3 cameras when manual focus is used. That makes a wide range of lenses indeed. Remember also that five of Sigma's top lenses will come on the market in 4/3 format within a few months. People may want to go to other manufacturers for any number of reasons, but sheer number of lenses shouldn't be one of them. Remember, too, that only Olympus has an effective countermeasure against sensor dust, and in-camera pixel mapping. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
|
![]()
For low noise at high ISO check out the Pentax DS2 or DL as it has lower noise than anything mentioned including the D50.
Tom |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
|
![]()
Elger wrote:
Quote:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...lack-white.htm While on film you would have to decide which filter to use beforehand, in digital you can play with the 3 channels till you get the desired effect. Note that you don't need Photoshop's channel mixer for this. You can achieve a similar effect in your raw converter by setting the saturation to zero and playing with the color balance. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 287
|
![]()
Elger wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7
|
![]()
alright, making it even more difficult now, and I might be about to say something horrible, but a good friend of mine who is a photographer recommended a fuji finepix s9500 (s9000z) as opposed to an entry level slr... opinions?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|