Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 29, 2006, 12:33 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

First sorry for the english.. i'm venezolano..
a few years a go i bought a cyber shot them a minolta z1 and them a minolta z3, the last normal camera but not so much for night picture, and for general too, hight iso very poor image.. i read a lot a about camera and photo i'm still learning, reading a lot, if you know some web site where i can read learn more, about lens how it work kind of lens i really apreciate... My last 2 cameras was super zoom cameras 10x and 12x the cameras say 135mm i'm still learning the meaning and the aplication of this numbers..
so i like take picture wildlife landscape i do a lot super macro, like flower and very litle animals, and night picture too, well more or less is personality what i like....
After some time taking picture i thnk i'm ready to buy a DSLR, with my budget 800$ what camera with what lens to star them well i'll buy more.... i'm looking for good zoom, and general use for now...i saw the nikon d50, d40, or K100d... tell me what is the way for become in good photographer... and thank for the help...
TICK is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 29, 2006, 1:31 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 226
Default

D40, D50 & K100D are all nice cameras - though be aware, the D40 is limited as to what lenses you can use, so this may mean that cheaper 3rd party lenses may not be available to you.

The D50 has VERY fast auto focus, the K100D is a superb all rounder and has a stablised body. Both can be recommended.

If you do buy a DSLR kit, you might find it chaeper to buy the 2nd lens (55-200mm) at the same time as bundles often do the second lens at around half price.

HOWEVER - it looks like you like doing macro stuff and on a DSLR, you will need a special macro lens to do macro work and these can be around £300.

You might want to consider the Fuji 9100 (also called 9600), the image quality is not as good as DSLR but the built in lens has a range of 28mm - 300mm and hs a macro function.
norm smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2006, 3:33 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

i checked the fuji seems to be good but still the image is not good, maybe the best is invest in DSLR, and enjoy a good quality of picture for some years and worry about buy new lens in the future...
can anybody tell me about what lens for super macro can i buy, or how can i know when a lens is for super macro, and where i can find information about lens..
TICK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2006, 5:03 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

You can get some information on lenses here:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/2

I think one of the best deals for entry level DSLRs right now is on the Canon 350D Rebel XT. I don't care much for the kit lens, but I see some body only factory refurbished models for only $399. New models bosy only under $500.

http://steves-digicams.pgpartner.com...sterid=7139450

The 50mm 1.8 lens is a bargain for only about $80:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/150/cat/10

And I would go with the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 DG Macro APO for a zoom:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/230/cat/31

It's not what some would call a "true macro" as it's only 1:2. But I'd suggest it mainly because it will do a good job for the price for your long telephoto wildlife shots. It does get a bit soft after 250mm.

That's just under $800 total if you go new, but that's without the kit lens. If you want to get a cheap 18-50mm normal zoom to hold you over until you can do better, you could go for the kit. But even at that price I'd probably opt instead for the Sigma 18-50 f3.5-5.6 instead for about the same price. Better would be if you can afford the 18-50 f2.8 or 17-70 f2.8-4.5 (both of which also have some Macro ability).

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2007, 8:21 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

so... between nikon d50 , d40 and canon Xti.... wich one? looking reviews i can see better image quality from canon Xti plus the cleaning system. should i go with canon ? o there is something that i shouldknow before go with canon..

thanks
TICK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2007, 2:23 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

I think the Canon may be best in image quality, but they're all close. Some users are reporting that the XT was a bit better at high ISO quality than the XTi, however, especially for shooting in RAW mode.

The biggest compaint about the Canon seems to be some don't like the ergonomics. It's smaller than some of the others, and some don't like the grip. Also changes in some common settings like ISO or white balance don't show in the viewfinder, you have to look at the LCD, which can be less convenient if you want to do change quickly in the fly while shooting. And it's not quite as customizable as some others.

Another is that the kit lens is one of the worst, to the point you might be better not getting the kit and buying another lens.

And, IS on both Canon and Nikon is in the lens, and there aren't that many lenses available with it, and most that have it tend to be expensive (they also can be heavier). So in some cases you'll end up doing without it (though it's really only needed on a DSLR with handheld long zooms).

Also, there have been some complaints about metering, mainly a tendency to underexpose a bit.

D40 and D50 are only 6MP, so you may notice some difference in resolution.

The D40 lacks AF motor, so it will only autofocus with a limited selection of lenses. It also has no dedicated buttons for setting a number of common settings, like ISO, white balance, metering mode, shooting mode, and image qaulity, so you have to go through the menu system to make changes, which is less convenient than on most DSLRs. It also has less available image parameter adjustments than some. You also have to pay additional for acceptable softare for converting RAW images if you shoot in RAW, as the supplied software is inadequate. It also has only 3 AF points.

The D50 is a bit older, but image quality is at least close to the newer models, and the camera itself is in some ways more fully featured.

You may want to consider the Sony Alpha as well. It's a 10MP model which has the dust cleaning, as well as in camera stabilization, and is more fully featured than most of the the other models at this price. It's available for under $700 with a kit lens.

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2007, 1:53 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

on canon xti you can´t see the image on the lcd to take photo ...? you have to use de viewfinder ...... does any dslr camera can use the lcd to see the image for then take the photo?
TICK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2007, 2:20 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

TICK wrote:
Quote:
on canon xti you can´t see the image on the lcd to take photo ...? you have to use de viewfinder ...... does any dslr camera can use the lcd to see the image for then take the photo?
No, with the Canon you cannot use the LCD to compose your shot like with a digicam, you have to use the optical viewfinder. There are only two DSLR's where you can preview the image before it is taken with the LCD, the Olympus E-330 and the Pansaonic L1, both of which are above your financial limits, and I would not hold my breath expecting Canon, Nikon or anyone else to follow Olympus and offer it. People who want that "feature" buthavelimited fundsjust need to buy a digicam.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2007, 3:34 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Thanks for the info Greg.
Well i need to get use to that... but i'm still looking for my first dslr.. now i'm between Sony 100 and canon xti, sony for the anti shake system, and canon for image quality and low noise..
i found some old lens minolta and canon from a uncle but how can i know if those lens fit on canon or minolta(sony) recent cameras like sony 100 and canon xti... can anyone help me?
TICK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2007, 3:36 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

Actually the E-330 has come down in price to where it's now less than the XTi.

About $700 body only at Beach or Buydig.com.

The biggest drawback is it's not as good as the others at high ISO. ISO 1600 really isn't as good as most others. The JPEGs suffer at that point form not very effective noise reduction. But in shooting RAW it should still be useable. Detail retention isn't bad in the RAW file, and it's apparently like some of the Canon models, about a third stop more sensitive than labeled, so that what's labeled ISO 1600 is really equivalent to 2000.

At ISO 400 and below, image quality will compare well to any of them. And the Olympus cameras are among the most complete models in that price range in features and controls.

The live view makes this one of the best macro cameras out there though, as you can hit a button to zoom in 10x on the screen in live view B mode and get a very accurate close focus.

Check out this users pbase dragonflies gallery for some macro samples with the Olympus 50mm f2.0.

http://www.pbase.com/billyd

If you plan to do mostly macro, landscape, and other still shots, this might be your best bet. Though it might fall a bit short of Canon or Nikon in areas like sports, action, or lowlight shooting.

The other big complaints are the viewfinder is a bit dark (due in part to the image being split to send part to the LCD), and the lens selection is a bit les than some other models.

So you might check to see if the right lenses available for what you want to do. There are currently still a limited number of macro lenses, as well as a limited number of affordable long telephotos which you might want for wildlife. Be aware that it has a 2x EFL (equivalent focal length) factor, so a 50mm macro has a 100mm equivalent field of view, and a 200mm lens would have a 400mm equivalent FOV.

And be sure to personally handle any models you consider buying so you can judge for yourself ergonomic factors like the viewfinder and camera handling.

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 AM.