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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 17, 2010, 12:23 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
Shoturtle-

Your 90% versus 95% is just the area sighted through the viewfinder. Your remarks previously were about the actual physical size of the viewfinder. That is an entirely different measurement, as far as I know, and for the record, the viewfinder on the A-230 is substantially larger in physical size than the view finder on the A-380 you were referring to previously, because of the need to accommodate the Live View mechanism.

Sarah Joyce
I can see where my wording would have added to the confusion. I was referring to the viewing area. my bad.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 12:28 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Here is a link that explains crop factors better then I can.

http://digital-photography-school.co...ctor-explained
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 12:32 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

my1hd-

I have plenty of sample photos. Please just tell me from what camera and what lens, please. I actually own and use the cameras we are discussing, and have real hands-on experience.

Because a DSLR camera has an imager that is at least 15X larger than your point and shoot camera, they can use much higher ISO settings with ease and with virtually no noise. Sometimes, noiseware is required to control noise. However, that is usually the exception.

The Olympus 70-300mm lens mentioned previously, in 35mm terms, effectively becomes a 140-600mm when used on an Olympus camera because, the Oly has a 2.0X multiplier. The Canon 55-250mmIS lens when used on a Canon APS-C imager equipped Canon DSLR camera becomes an 88 to 400mmIS lens, because Canon has a 1.6X multiplier. Sorry for the confusion, it is hard to keep track of all this stuff at times.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 12:53 AM   #34
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 31
Default

I would love to see some comparison shots of the Olympus and the Sony you said you had. Those two are still in my running. Right now its between sony a230, cannon something... xs xsi?? lol, the Pentax kx, and the Olympus. I'm not ready to toss the Olympus out yet because it is cheap and I might not really use a super high ISO, or just work around it like i do now...
my1hd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 12:53 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biro View Post
my1hd... just take a deep breath and take it easy. It is very easy to get oneself all lathered up by over-researching on the Internet. You need to go to a camera shop and try out some of these cameras and see how they "fit." Take your husband with you. The world won't end if it takes you another few weeks or a month to decide. Better that you be happy with your purchase. Don't put yourself under a lot of pressure - this is supposed to be fun.

The good news is... almost all of the cameras I suggested are rather small in relation to a lot of other DSLRs. Olympus has a reputation for making small cameras and their E-620 is no larger (in fact, just a bit smaller) than the E-520. It is also a significant step up from the E-520 in terms of features and image quality. If you decide you love Olympuses, I'd recommend the E-620 over the E-520.

Right now, if you pushed me to a wall and put a gun to my head and demanded direct recommendations, I would have the go with the Pentax K-x. It's the newest of all the cameras listed and is quite compact. Pentax's kit lenses have a good reputation but they also have some truly wonderful lenses to offer if you decide to upgrade. And you can use up to ISO 6400 with confidence. Right now, Amazon.com has a great two-lens deal for $648, but that second lens is a 55-300mm, not a 50-200mm - which is a good thing:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...g=533643271-20

Full disclosure: As a Pentax owner myself, I am a bit biased. But no one on these boards will call the K-x a bad camera.

But I'll also say this... the Sony A230 is a solid camera - even if a bit older. And that two-lens kit for well under $600 represents cracking value. As Hards80 says, there's the A330 if you must have live view, but that reduces the size of the viewfinder considerably. Between the two, I'd go for the A230 myself.

If you find you'd feel better with a Canon, I say opt for the slightly more-expensive XSi over the XS.

And - oh, yes - The Pentax, Sony and Olympus all offer image stabilization in the body (it can be turned on and off). That means ALL lenses you use will be stabilized. The Canon and Nikon offer stabilization in many (but not all) of their lenses. But I'm pretty sure both the Canon and Nikon's kit lenses are stabilized. Some people say because Canon and Nikon put the stabilization in the lens it means any extra lenses you buy down the road will be more expensive. I'm not 100% sure that's the case most of the time.

Hope this helps.
actually you can go to 12800iso with the k-x
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 12:58 AM   #36
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 31
Default

ok one more? When choose a DSLR camera are you buying what your buying for the camera or for the lenes? Like say Iwant to upgrade in a few yrs what would be the best camera in that case? If I go with something other then Nikon or Cannon, is there a lot of lens choices and body upgrades? Say I buy the sony a230(this is an older body right?) and a end up with a couple lenses there are better bodies i can up grade to right?
my1hd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 1:02 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

All the lenses you have will be able to be uses on the upgraded body. When buy a dslr you are buying a system. I have a canon eos back in the days 1992 to be exact, and when I finally switch to digital, all the lens work on my canon eos t1i.

So what you buy now, if you do get lenses for it. May effect what you upgrade to, so you can reuse the lenses.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 1:10 AM   #38
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by my1hd View Post
ok one more? When choose a DSLR camera are you buying what your buying for the camera or for the lenes? Like say Iwant to upgrade in a few yrs what would be the best camera in that case? If I go with something other then Nikon or Cannon, is there a lot of lens choices and body upgrades? Say I buy the sony a230(this is an older body right?) and a end up with a couple lenses there are better bodies i can up grade to right?
there are good upgrade paths for every system. especially for general use photography, the only real stipulation is if you venture into the sports shooting realm, which is canon and nikon territory.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 1:18 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

another consideration of the upgrade path. The olympus has the most cost effective lenses for upgrade. For example the marco lens for the olympus system starts at 180 dollars for the 35mm lens, while the sony start at 470 and aftermarket for the sony starts at 300 dollar for the 50mm.

So you may want to look at where you want to develop you photo skills, and since price is always a concern to people. See which system will be the most cost effective for you wishes.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2010, 1:28 AM   #40
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 31
Default

As far has upgrading, I really do need cost effective. I am not a professional so i can not justify thousands and thousands of dollars. Thats what originally drew me to the Sony and Olympus. This is getting comlicated, maybe I should just stick with a point and shoot.....Are any DSLR's with a kit lens better then a point and shoot? Is it going to be faster, have less noise, and better image quality?
my1hd 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 3:46 PM.