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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 23, 2008, 12:11 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

I'm getting a lot of emails back from Photographer saying to go with Canon because "I'll be dissapointed with anything else" I dont know if I believe that. Well here's a question . . . . . if you had $5K what camera would you choose?
Pdotcantu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2008, 1:17 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

If I had that much money, I'd get the Canon 5D, which is FF. Otherwise, I'd go with either Sony or Nikon. Make sure the opinions you are getting are not coming from a Canon forum. Forums from brand tend to be biased toward that particular brand (e.g. people participating on Nikon forums are mostly nikonians and will trash just about anything that is not Nikon. I work with a couple of those people. The same applies to Canon, Oly, Sony, etc. It's called brand loyalty!). Some people really love Canons while others love Nikon. Then you have those who are more open minded and try the Oly, Sony, Minolta (in the old days). The bottom line? There is no perfect camera. Theyall have goods and bads, strengths and weaknesses. You buya Sony and you'd wish you boughta Nikon. You buy a Nikon and you'd wish you boughta Canon. Just get on with it. Look at the features each camera has to offer. For me, in-camera IS is a must.I don't want to pay for IS every time I buy a lens and since I believe in IS, have it in camera is, likeI said, a must. You should do the same exercise. Write down the features you want your camera to have and then find thebrand/model that incorporates them.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2008, 2:32 PM   #33
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Pdotcantu wrote:
Quote:
Do you experience noise often in your A700? Is it capable of being competetive with Professional studio cameras? did you use any lenses in your pictures posted?
You're asking a lot of questions that I would not expect from someone looking at the type of cameras you are considering.

Almost any camera is going to have more noise and/or loss of detail from noise reduction as you increase ISO speeds, and you have to use a lens with a DSLR. ;-)

Those were taken using a Minolta 100mm f/2 Autofocus Lens. I use a Minolta 28mm f/2, 50mm f/1.7, 100mm f/2, 135mm f/2.8, 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5, 35-70mm f/4 Macro; Konica Minolta 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6; Tamron 20-40mm f/2.7-3.5, Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8; and Vivitar 70-210mm f/2.8-4. All Autofocus (and all are stabilized on my Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D and Sony DSLR-A700).

But, you may want totally different lenses for the types of photos you want to take more often. For example, my lenses are not well suited for subjects like sports and wildlife.

The dSLR models you are considering all have interchangeable lenses, and there are tradeoffs between lens choices (size, weight, cost, ergonomics, focus speed, focal range, brightness, minimum focus distance, flare resistance, distortion, chromatic aberrations, sharpness at available apertures and focal lengths, contrast, color and more).

The body is only one part of the equation. You'll want to make sure you have lenses to match the conditions and subjects you plan to shoot more often, with acceptable image quality for the viewing and print sizes needed (taking things like size, weight and flexibility into consideration, too).

The cost of a single lens can exceed the cost of a camera body, depending on what you want to shoot, the conditions you plan to shoot in, and your desired image quality.

You also seem to be giving a lot of weight to the higher resolution A350 model. More megapixels is not always better. When you stuff more megapixels into a given sensor size, that means the photosites have to be smaller (so that you can fit that many in), which means that each photosite will have a smaller surface area for gathering light.

So, they'll generate a weaker signal (which may not be as high above the noise floor of the electronics as needed -- i.e., lower signal to noise ratio), requiring more amplification for equivalent ISO sensitivity.

This amplification can add noise, sort of like turning up the volume on a radio tuned to a weak station, only instead of static, hiss and hum, you get image noise.

You'll need to compare each model on a case by case basis in areas like this, because of advances in sensor design, image processing and more. But, all things being equal (and they never are), larger photosites can mean higher image quality, depending on the conditions you want to shoot in. The quality of the pixels can be more important than the quantity of the pixels.

I'd give more information on what you plan to shoot more often to get better feedback. So far, I've only seen a couple of examples. The photographer's knowledge of the equipment being used and skill at the type of shooting being done is gong to be most important factor in capturing good images.

I'd also give more information on what the images are going to be used for.

For action shots (like the samples you posted), if budget permits (making sure to factor in lens costs), I'd lean towards the EOS-40D and Sony A700 out of the models you've mentioned so far in this thread. They're going to have better AF systems and faster frame rates compared to the entry level bodies.

Also, mention a desired budget for better responses from more members. Depending on how you want to use a camera, you may spend far more on lenses compared to the camera body.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2008, 4:16 AM   #34
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

Jim C. thanks for the reply. I didn't realize that the Olympus E-510 was the best rated DSLR of 2007. It's the ONLY camera with image stabilization in the body and the lens and live view built into one camera. I was looking at other models tonight and I saw the images the Nikon D3 was shooting and I thought they were superior. I want a camera that can shoot as good as that.

I realized that the Sony A700 seems to have the bigger and better of everything than in the Canon EOS 40D except for frames per second. I was even considering the Canon EOS 5d, but many people agree that the EOS 40d is to similar to it and don't want to make the jump for the price.

My friend has been buying a few DLSR's himself and he already has the Olympus E-510 and says it's great as Tullio has said. He says he wouldn't want any better to be honest. I was quite amazed. However, he did order the Sony A350 which HE believes is going to be better than the Sony 700. I don't know if I agree with that but he says the new technology that is being built into the A350 is going to make is marvelous. It's going to have 2 image sensors in it and have 14 MP, plus automatic eye focus when you put your up to the optical viewfinder. He says that in a few months all of these other brands are going to be copying it.

My price range is going to around maybe 2K and below?
Let me know what you think. Thanks again.
Pdotcantu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2008, 6:11 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

I've been watching this conversation for some time, and it seems to me that you started with a very specific question and as the thread has progressed, your choices have actually increased. That's not how this is supposed to go.

It seems to me that, for whatever reason, 'Live View' is important to you. Olympus' version of 'Live View' displays a stabilized image on the LCD display, but the camera can't autofocus during 'Live view'. Sony's version of 'Live View' can autofocus but doesn't display a stabilized image.

'Live View' is a compromise, and if you want it, you have to decide which compromise you can accept.

Olympus has some fine lenses, but the selection is limited and they get very expensive very quickly. Sony also has some very fine lenses, some are the best of their type, but they also get very expensive very quickly. But Sony dSLRs are better supported by third part lens manufacturers and by a large number of available used Minolta Maxxumlenses.

Ultimately, the camera can be a small part of your photographic system, but when you buy a camera, you're committing to a system. I think you need to set aside your camera prejudices, and pick a system that will best serve your photographic needs.

And maybe your friend should do the same.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2008, 10:51 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Pdot, we are on page 2 of this thread already and a lot of opinions, suggestions and recommendations have been expressed. I feel weare providing comparative analysis between this camera vs. that camera and in the meantime, you keep adding new models to the mix. The D3 does not belong in this conversation. It is Nikon top of the line and you can not possibly compare it with the E510 or A530 or any other model discussed here. Besides, it's way out of your price range.I feel you need to do some serious homework. Pick ALL camera brands you are considering (Canon, Nikon, Sony and Olympus are the ones you've mentioned so far...do I hear Panasonic???) and within these brands, select every SLR model within your price range. Then, list the features important to you, side-by-side, in order of relevance. And the winner is...whatever camera has more check marks. They are all very good cameras so you can't go wrong with whatever brand/model you choose. As it's been said many many times here, it's all a matter of compromise. One camera may have a better live view implementation while another may have better handle of highISO while another may have faster shutter speed. Not one model out there has it all. Your budget is a decent one. With $2K you can either pick an expensive body with a kit lens (A700, E3, D300, 40D) or acheaper body (E510, A350, A300, or even the E410 if you really want to save money on the body) and then use the left over $$to get yourself some extra lenses and a flash, which appears to be important to you. So, that's your assignment for now!
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2008, 10:55 AM   #37
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Pdotcantu wrote:
Quote:
However, he did order the Sony A350 which HE believes is going to be better than the Sony 700. I don't know if I agree with that but he says the new technology that is being built into the A350 is going to make is marvelous. It's going to have 2 image sensors in it and have 14 MP, plus automatic eye focus when you put your up to the optical viewfinder. He says that in a few months all of these other brands are going to be copying it.
I wouldn't believe everything you hear. ;-)

I think the Live View system Sony is using in the new A300 and A350 is a more innovative solution, without some of the drawbacks you see from the Live View systems in other DSLR models with this feature.

That's because the AF Sensor Assembly and separate Live View Sensor see the image coming through the lens at the same time. So, you don't have the problems associated with a Contrast Detection method, and you don't have the delays associated with switching in and out of live view in order to use the camera's main AF sensors. Sony's solution of sending the same image to the main AF sensors and the Live View sensor at the same makes that type of system more appealing from my perspective.

It's still not going to be a perfect solution for all types of shooting compared to an Optical Viewfinder, as live feeds have problems with inherent refresh delay (and refresh speed will be slower in low light) and more.

As for Eye Start AF, all of the new Sony models have it (A200, A300, A350, A700). Only the A300 and A350 have Live View, if that's an important feature to you.

Quote:
My price range is going to around maybe 2K and below?
Let me know what you think.
I still haven't heard anything that suggests how you'll want to use a camera (for example, types of subjects, conditions, use for images).

I get the feeling that you are probably pretty new to cameras. Please correct me if that's wrong.

So, you may not know what you need yet. It's easy to spend a lot of money on camera gear.

So, I'd probably lean towards getting a better feel for what you need first, setting some money aside for things like different lenses, after you've had a chance to use a camera for a while and get a better understanding of where your gear is holding you back.

IOW, go with one of the lower priced kits for the body you select and use the included kit lens for a while. Then, you'll have a better feel for where to spend the remaining money set aside for photography (i.e., lenses better suited for the conditions you want to shoot in, etc.). Again, if you plan on shooting at higher ISO speeds often (i.e., above ISO 800), I'd probably go with one of the lower resolution models versus the 14MP A350 for better image quality.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2008, 12:24 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
As for Eye Start AF, all of the new Sony models have it (A200, A300, A350, A700). Only the A300 and A350 have Live View, if that's an important feature to you.
Sony's 1st dSLR (the A100) also has this feature. From a quick check at the store, I think it would annoy the heck out of me because the camera would keep trying to focus every time something got close to the viewfinder (like your body if you have the camera hanging down your neck). It would drain the battery a lot faster as well. Now, that's not to say that it would be better not to have the feature altogether. As long as you are allowed to deactivateit (which you are), it's nice to have the functionality.

I also agree with Jim as far as a cheaper system being a better choice. Actually, I don't consider myself a beginner (I'm far from being a PRO also) but I find it hard to justify spending thousands of dollars on a camera body for my hobby. I rather buy a decent body (not top of the line) and invest on lenses instead.So, to me, the most important thing is to choose the brand because of the investment you'll make on lenses. You can always upgrade the body if you feel the needssince you already have the lenses.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2008, 4:16 PM   #39
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Tullio wrote:
Quote:
JimC wrote:
Quote:
As for Eye Start AF, all of the new Sony models have it (A200, A300, A350, A700). Only the A300 and A350 have Live View, if that's an important feature to you.
Sony's 1st dSLR (the A100) also has this feature. From a quick check at the store, I think it would annoy the heck out of me because the camera would keep trying to focus every time something got close to the viewfinder (like your body if you have the camera hanging down your neck). It would drain the battery a lot faster as well.
Actually, I've gotten some of my best battery life using Continuous AF with Eye Start Autofocus On. I took over 800 photos in one day a while back with the A700, with it still showing around 50% remaining (and that was shooting raw + jpeg with over 1600 images saved since you have two for each shot taken).

But, that's with the A700's grip sensor. It works in concert with the eye start sensor so that it doesn't come on unless you're holding the camera. ;-)

The European models don't get this feature (grip sensor). That's because of the EU regulations regarding nickel content in consumer products now.

It looks like Sony omitted it from newer A200 model (probably so they don't need more than one body design for multiple regions, increasing costs). But, I'm seeing reports that the A300 and A350 get it (but, not European models because of nickel restrictions). My A700 has one.

You can still disable Eye Start Autofocus on models with or without a grip sensor if you don't want to use it.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 5:36 PM   #40
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

I'm borrowing my friends Olympus E510 and am trying to find out how to set it to do continuous shooting (sequential shooting) anyone who has this model know how to?
Pdotcantu 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 5:01 PM.