nikon d50 vs olympus e-500 vs canon 350d (vs nikon d70?)

[ruchai]

I think your good friend was right. I do not know the Fuji 9500 but from what I read about the camera I think it should suit your purpose more than the D50. And you will not have to worry about lenses. See: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05...000zs9500z.asp

[woof72]

Elger,

I still have my Fuji S602z and I have enjoyed it immensely over the last few years. However, I have reached a point where I have exhausted most of the creative possibilities with a point-and-shoot. I have been playing around with a mate's D70 and it is clear to me what I need next - BTW, I'm still searching for a dslr. The point I'm making is, if what you want is a jack-of-all-trades such as photo shooting, video recording, etc. then the Fuji would be a good choice but if you want to work on your creative skills then an entry level dslr is the way to go. I reckon you should need not invest a lot on the body but get yourself some decent lens.

[JimC]

Norm in Fujino wrote:

Remember, too, that only Olympus has an effective countermeasure against sensor dust, and in-camera pixel mapping.

Yes... good features.

As for the in camera pixel mapping, an undocumented feature of Konica Minolta DSLR models is an auto remap of bad pixels on a monthly basis.

One way to force it is to set the camera's date up one month, power it down and back up and let it perform a remap, then reset the date back to current date.

Some of it's pretty hard to come by, but software to remap bad pixels is also available for some other camera models (either hacks or the genuine factory service software).

I've got copies of remap software for the Nikon D100; as well as some software developed by a Russian hacker to remap them in some of the older Olympus/Nikon P&S models.

For most newer models, a trip back to the manufacturer is needed to update a bad pixel table in EEPROM if your camera develops any stuck or dead pixels.

I could be wrong... But, if memory serves, the first model that could remap bad pixels without sending the camera back to the manufacturer was the Olympus E-10 (after a firmware upgrade from Olympus).

So, it would be nice if other manufacturers followed Olympus' lead in this area.

[Elger]

ruchai wrote:

I think your good friend was right. I do not know the Fuji 9500 but from what I read about the camera I think it should suit your purpose more than the D50. And you will not have to worry about lenses. See: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05...000zs9500z.asp

this really is the problem. the fuji 9500 would basically do everything I want now, but I don't know whether it would still be satisfactory in 1-2 years.. the possibilities of the 9500 are great, but they are limited.. and yet, the price of an entry level slr is about the same...

[jnrob]

A DSLR with a cheap fast prime (50mm) is a much better choice for low light theatre photography IMHO. The kit lens (usually 18-55) is fine for landscapes & daylight work.
The S9500 might seem cheaper, but upgrading means buying a whole new camera.
With a DSLR, you can expand yor possibilities by simply buying a lens that meets your needs. And when you eventually decide to upgrade the body, your lens investment will not be wasted.

[JimC]

Elger wrote:

this really is the problem. the fuji 9500 would basically do everything I want now, but I don't know whether it would still be satisfactory in 1-2 years.. the possibilities of the 9500 are great, but they are limited.. and yet, the price of an entry level slr is about the same...

There are pros and cons to any solution. One thing to consider is that with a DSLR, your lenses become an investment. So, if you decide to upgrade your body later, you can take your lenses with you within the same manufacturer. With a non-DSLR model, the lens is permanently attached.


Technology will continue to improve. So, chances are, something will come out that is better in the future. Today's cameras are as much computer as they are camera. Will you need or want something better (faster, better dynamic range, better low light performance, better/faster autofocus, etc.)? That all depends on how you'll use the images, and any shortcomings you see versus other models later.

[Gozinta]

Elger wrote:

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?

I too was on the fence and went that route with an FZ30. That lasted a couple of weeks and I returned it and bought a KM 7D. The FZ30 isa great camera and has a Leica lens, but it is no match for a DSLR. Under ideal conditions, it took some great shots, but conditions are not always ideal. With an Ultrzoom, you can forget the theatre shots unless you have plenty of artifical light.