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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 30, 2006, 5:35 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Default

Wow, I am impressed with how many have jumped in on this discussion. I do appreciate reading all of your comments and advice. I hope this helps more than just me!

Thanks JohnG for your thoughts. Yes, I do believe I have it down to either Nikon or Canon.
Quote:
JohnG:30d/20d and D50. Overall picture quality, the Canon 20d, 350d and Nikon d50 and d70 will produce the same quality photos. The difference between 6mp and 8 is trivial and I wouldn't base your decision on which body to buy based on that.
The only thing is that somehow I have overlooked the Canon 350D or Digital Rebel XT as they call it here in the US. I have yet to actually go and see how it feels in my hand. I guess I have a larger hand (I am about 6'2",210lbs) as the one that felt best to me was the 30D. of the Nikon's the D70s felt better than the D50. But I have yet to try the Digital Rebel XT.
Quote:
robbo: Canon 350D? Some people say it's too small for their hands. Some people don't like the build quality. However, image quality wise, I heard it was very close to the 20D. I doesn't have as impressive a burst mode, but ... it's about 400 bucks cheaper now.
I will have to try it robbo.

Now that is just on the feel of it. Regarding the quality or the features that I am looking for. I have been doing some looking at many POTD (Photo of the Day) and other galleries and it seems that the photos that my eyes have been drawn to are majority with Canon cameras. Usually the 20D but also some the 350D. They have been amazing scenics and very sharp stop action sports photos as well as very sharp closeups of wildlife. All areas I enjoy and probably photos I will aim for. Now again not sure if the camera body is what makes it so sharp compared to the lens these photographers are using. The lenses where not often noted.

Quote:
JohnG: But, in my mind buying 1 good lens is a better investment than buying 2 poor lenses.
I also agree with you that and I am realizing that I won't be able to "get it all" with my budget right now. I hope to be able to get a great body and a great lens to start with. I think I will do what you suggest and get a great mid-range zoom. In your opinion what would you suggest the Canon 17-85 IS USM or the Sigma 18-50. As it seems I will have to save up for my long lens to get next year or whenever.

Also thanks to JimC. Thanks for showing me the Best Camera List. I overlooked that one. Also thanks for bringing up the Maxxum 7D. Never even thought of that one. I may take a look see. But I think I am still leaning toward Canon or possibly Nikon.

I hope to go out again today and take a close look at the Dig Rebel XT. Thanks again guys!
dandcp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 2:08 AM   #32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Default

robbo you are correct. I went out yesterday to Ritz and checked out the Digital Rebel XT and yes, it is very small and not comfortable at all in my hands. I was quite sad as I was hoping that might be the one for me. It just won't work for me.

I took a another look at the D50 &D70s and they didn't have the 30D but still the 20D. Of course the Canon 20D felt the best in my hands and I just love how it handles and feels. I also love the super fast focus. The Nikon D70s is next best IMO. Tho the D50 is not bad.

What is the major difference between the CF and SD cards? as I was told that D50 only takes SD and D70s and 20Dtakes CF.

Is there anyone that knows of an amazing deal for a Canon 20D?? I think I am leaning toward the Canons. Also probably would start with a 17-85 lens. Also looking for deals for something similar to that.

Thanks for all your help.

dandcp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 2:37 AM   #33
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

dandcp wrote:
Quote:
Is there anyone that knows of an amazing deal for a Canon 20D?? I think I am leaning toward the Canons. Also probably would start with a 17-85 lens. Also looking for deals for something similar to that.
The best price I see from a reputable dealer for a 20D with a 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS lens is $1,468 from Beach Camera (a.k.a., buydig.com).

Canon EOS-20D with 17-85mm IS lens at Beach Camera

Watch out for their accessory prices (they tend to be quite high on memory cards, etc., compared to some other vendors). But, they usually have pretty good prices on the cameras.

This package is about $1,599at B&H

Canon EOS-20D with 17-85mm IS lens at B&H

B&H has better return policies (7 days with no restocking fee on Digital), with better prices on brand name memory cards and accesories (versus the no name memory cards you see for high prices at some of the vendors using the camera price to lure in customers).

The vendors selling the cameras for less have got to makea profit somewhere. ;-)

Sometimes you see Dell Coupon specials oncameras and lenses. So, if your patient,a deal may pop up (although I try to avoid buying digital stuff from Dell if budget isn't real tight, since their order system can leave something to be desired at times).


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 11:13 AM   #34
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Default

Thanks JohnC..

I forgot to ask about memory cards. Is it usually best to buy all this stuff separately or in a kit? I am thinking I would like to get a 2GB card to start with. Any separate deals on cards? And re cards, does it pay to get those super fast cards. I think they are called Extreme III.

Also is it best to get a kit with body and lens together like you mentioned OR to buy body separately and the lens somewhere else?

regarding the 17-85lens I noticed that it is only f4. are they any similarwith larger aperture like f2 or 2.8? OR is f4 ok?
dandcp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 11:46 AM   #35
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

dandcp wrote:
Quote:
I forgot to ask about memory cards. Is it usually best to buy all this stuff separately or in a kit?
That depends on the vendor. B&H sometimes has some good deals on kits, including good memory cards.

Some of the guys selling cheap cameras sell junk in their kits (that's how they make their profit, since they're selling the cameras for less).

Quote:
I am thinking I would like to get a 2GB card to start with. Any separate deals on cards? And re cards, does it pay to get those super fast cards. I think they are called Extreme III.
A faster card only comes into the equation if the camera's buffer fills up. If you're not shooting sports trying to capture every nuance with a fast frame rate shooting in bursts, you may not need a fast card (since you may not fill the buffer up, and give the camera time to flush it's internal memory to media before you need to take another burst).

If you check out the review conclusion sections for cameras reviewed here, you'll see some information on the number of photos you can take in a burst before a camera slows down (when it's buffer is full). If you shoot in raw, it may be more of a concern shooting events like sports.

You'll also find some tests of some cards in the 20D here, so you can see how fast they can write to media:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/mul...?cid=6007-7303

Quote:
regarding the 17-85lens I noticed that it is only f4. are they any similarwith larger aperture like f2 or 2.8? OR is f4 ok?
It's f/4 on the wide end of the lens. It's f/5.6 on the long end of the lens.

f/2.8 is twice as bright as f/4, and 4 times as bright as f/5.6

For a walk around lens, a lot of people like it. For low light use of non-stationary subjects, it's not going to "cut it" in many low light conditions.

There are always tradeoffs when selecting lenses (for example, focal range, sharpness, brightness, AF speed, ergonomics, size, weight and cost). A brighter lens is going to be larger and heavier for the same focal range. That's why many users have both types.

See my last post in this recent thread for a more thorough discussion of shooting in low light:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=66

Stabilization won't help blur from subject movement if you can't use a flash and light is low.

It's all going to depend on the lighting, the amount of subject movement, and the percentage of keepers you want (as well as what's required from a quality perspective, as enlarging images will make lack of sharpness and other problems like noise from higher ISO speeds more apparent).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2006, 9:12 AM   #36
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 13
Default

After spending many hours online doing camera research, based on the circumstance I'm in, i.e. a newbie to dslr after having owned a few prosumer-type point-and-shoot, I think I'll buy a relatively cheap body (say D50 or an old 300D) but pair it with good midrange lenses. That way, when my photography skills improve, I can replace the average body with a better camera but still retain the good glass.

Fair enough assessment?

I'm inclined to get an old 300D with a 17-85 IS USM lens. Should I also consider fixed focal length lens?
woof72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2006, 12:33 AM   #37
me2
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 58
Default

I did the same thing you are thinking of doing. I bought a D50 with a 18-70 and a 50f/1.8. We've had it for about 6 weeks now. Took it on a 2 week trip over Easter and shot about 600 pictures. Excellent camera. I was surprised how many times we used the 50mm and ISO400-800 in low light conditions and got excellent pictures. Small enough to carry all day. Nikon glass is plentiful and not too expensive. The camera is fast and fairly easy to use.

The jump from a digicam or film DSLR is big. A DSLR just does so many more things or allows you to do so many more things. It takes a while to catch up with the camera. Your picture quality will improve enormously if you are like me.

I'll be buying a D200 as a second body in the future, when the price goes down.
me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2006, 1:08 AM   #38
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 13
Default

I believe I've max-ed out the potential of the point-and-shoot. I really struggled when I tried DOF and background-blurring - it's impossible even with a large aperture.

I've played around with a mate's D70 - got some nice pics and decided that's the way to go. I've gone and tried the feel of D70 vs D50 vs 350D. I must say the 350D suits me fine in terms of size and weight. Now I'm considering a cheaper body so that I can spend more on lenses.
woof72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2006, 6:10 PM   #39
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 48
Default

Main reason I like the 20-30D is controls, love the scroll wheel, tried the d70s in the store felt nice and heavy but the controls had me a bit confused, you have to pressa button to activate the screen, then you have to scroll throught the menu and sub menus to do a simple change, must be me some ppl love the nikon menus, I'll give credit that they include a help button. 20D-30D price is almost same and you get a few upgrades on the 30D.
How bout this 30D kit, $1350, mem card 2gb $100, and a 50mm prime bout $80
An 30D body $1250, a 50mm prime $80 and 2gb stick $100
I would love a D200 but that be pushing the budget a lot $1600 no lens.
350xt, handgrip 2gb, and a nice lens sound like the best balance.
ellover009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2006, 6:17 PM   #40
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 48
Default

Don't even bother with the 300D,or the D100, they have old technology, they technically have no warantee because they are no longer made and brand new they still cost quite a bit. The 300D does not compare to the D50 because it was release ages ago, the D50 compares more the the 350XT, they were released at similar times, they share the newest processors, and on sale you can get em at similar price, and for both companies they are the entry cameras.


woof72 wrote:
Quote:
After spending many hours online doing camera research, based on the circumstance I'm in, i.e. a newbie to dslr after having owned a few prosumer-type point-and-shoot, I think I'll buy a relatively cheap body (say D50 or an old 300D) but pair it with good midrange lenses. That way, when my photography skills improve, I can replace the average body with a better camera but still retain the good glass.

Fair enough assessment?

I'm inclined to get an old 300D with a 17-85 IS USM lens. Should I also consider fixed focal length lens?
ellover009 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 2:37 PM.