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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 24, 2010, 11:00 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 43
Default

i don't do any macro photography these days. I used to back in the days when I was assembling and repairing computers and laptops of different makes and needed to figure out where which screw went or to assess the severity of say a cracked chassis or burnt circuit board for the boss. If i was to do macro, i'd use a lightweight point and shoot because I can actually hold the object with one hand and the camera in the other.
stevo1210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2010, 11:02 AM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tclune View Post
The biggest problem with no Live View is if you are interested in macro photography. Live View is the most reliable way to manually focus a macro shot, where the question of what is in focus is a persistent one. The easiest way to accomplish what you want is to zoom the live view as far as you can and optimize the focus on the point of interest. I don't know whether the D3000 supports RangeFinder mode in its viewfinder or not. If so, this is the easiest way to manually focus anything other than macro shots on those occasions that you need manual focus, so I at least would not miss Live View except for macro photography. FWIW
I've checked the net and it says the rangefinder feature is supported by the D3000.

As quoted on another source:

"Lenses without a built-in motor can be manually focused. Like its entry-level brethren, the D3000 has an electronic rangefinder that acts as a guide that helps you determine whether you are rotating the lens' focusing ring in the right direction or not. The electronic rangefinder can be used if the lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster."
stevo1210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2010, 11:42 AM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 43
Default

The Canon EOS 1000D has a CMOS sensor whereas the others use a CCD sensor. What benefits will I gain with a CMOS sensor?
Currently the Nikon D3000 is $540, the Canon EOS 1000D is $570, but it has no IS lens. An IS lens is an extra $100 or so. What is the benefit of an IS lens?

Last edited by stevo1210; Nov 24, 2010 at 11:47 AM.
stevo1210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2010, 12:09 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo1210 View Post
As quoted on another source:

"Lenses without a built-in motor can be manually focused. Like its entry-level brethren, the D3000 has an electronic rangefinder that acts as a guide that helps you determine whether you are rotating the lens' focusing ring in the right direction or not. The electronic rangefinder can be used if the lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster."
Yes, but the problem with this in macro photography is that you don't get to decide what the focal point is. You can use single-point mode, where you say that you want a particular box in the viewfinder to be the region used for focusing, but the camera will focus something in that box. For normal photography, that is good enough. But macro has really narrow depth of field and you are often focusing on a particular aspect of a very crowded field of view. That makes being able to see precisely what is in focus a very valuable thing. In this one case, not having live view will be a handicap. I'm not suggesting that this should be a deal-breaker, only that there is a particular usage that the D3000 will be at a disadvantage. How much you care about that usage is your business.
tclune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2010, 12:46 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 233
Default

Hi Stevo, I am a novice in this field but may I suggest Pentax k-x. It would fit your budget hopefully and is prob the best entry level DSLR. It's v well reviewed and highly recommended on this forum.
Fayyaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2010, 1:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The pentax k-x is a much better camera then the ones listed. Not that much more either
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2010, 12:07 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
DVC Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5
Default

Take a look at the Nikon D3100.
DVC Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2010, 12:30 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 43
Default

I went down to my local camera store and physically held and used both the canon eos1000d and the nikon d3000. the canon felt light and plasticky, the screen is also a bit small for my liking. Though the viewfinder was large and clear.
The Nikon D3000 was heavier and solidly built and is only $500, compared to $700 for the Canon. I like the feel and design of the Nikon and the features in every way, the viewfinder is just a tad off the canon, but nonetheless it's still comfortable to use.

I think I'll go with the Nikon D3000 camera when my pay check comes in next week. (Y)
stevo1210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2010, 12:37 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Just know that you are only going to be able to AF-s or AF-i lenses or 3rd party lens with built in motors. The d3000, d3100 and d5000 camera's do not have a in body motor. So regular AF series lenses will not focus on them.

As long as it feels right in your hand, that is very important more so then features.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 6:59 AM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 43
Default

Heres something that struck me today when I was reading on dpreview...

Nikon D3000: 2.7MP/cm square

Canon EOS 1000D: 3.1MP/cm square

Is this meant to be a good or bad thing for the Nikon? I think the sensor in the Nikon is also larger by a fraction?
stevo1210 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 6:49 AM.