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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 17, 2006, 2:46 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27
Default

I recently lost my KonicaMinolta A200 to a heartbreaking water accident and am now looking to enter into the realm of DSLR. I enjoy shooting everything, from portraits, to landscape, and so on, so I want a well rounded camera that is very capable. Image quality is above all important to me.

With that said, I am trying to narrow my choice. Being a previous KM owner, I like the idea of having built in image stabilization (5D) but my question is, would theIS be worth getting at 6.2 mp over the non stabilized XT at 8 mp?

I know there are IS lenses, but they are also pricey. I would like to wait for A100, but that's a little over my budget.

Any and all suggestions would be appreciated.
kuulaaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 17, 2006, 4:54 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

The way I see it, it all comes down to what environments you mainly shoot in. If you shoot in low lighting conditions mainly and use high ISOs a lot, then go for the XT because of the CMOS' better lower noise levels. If not, and you shoot primarily outdoors then by all means go for the 5D. The thing is that with the in-camera stabilization, you are more likely to get low noise levels as well for the 5D as well, allthough not as good as in the XT, I reckon.
Second, you'd better handle the two before commiting to either. The Canon is somewhat small and plasticky and some might enjoy that less than others. Then, you have a lot of good lenses for bargain prices to use on the K-M. That is a fact and it will considerably help you when you decide to (ex)change your future lense(s) for other ones and, of course, they would be all stabilized.
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2006, 1:56 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27
Default

Should I let the lower resolution of the KM be a major factor? I am leaning towards the 5D because of the IS, and the better body build, but I hesitate because of the 6mp resolution. I do crop, not always majorly, but I don't want to be limited in my cropping because of lower res. Is there really, and applicably a major difference btwn the 6 and 8mp?

Are there other IS DSLR's that I should be looking into other than the Sony A100 that have worthy image quality?
kuulaaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2006, 2:25 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I wouldn't let the mp difference between the two be a deciding factor. In the end, other factors are much more important.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2006, 2:36 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I wouldn't hesitate to get a 6 MP camera -I have one and don't feelany need formorepixels at all (yes, I do crop quite a bit).

I'd be looking for other reasons to buy one over the other - try holding both of the cameras and see which one feels more comfortable in your hands. Are you looking for something light that you can carry all day, or does that matter? I'm a hiker, so weight is a very big concern for me. I opted for the Pentax DS, a 6 mp camera,because it is the smallest and lightest of all the budget dSLR cameras - for me a very big plus.

Do you own now or have easy access to either KM or Canon lenses? That can make a difference in your overall cost.

Either camera will give you excellent pictures, I wouldn't hesitate to get either one.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2006, 7:05 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
Default

Hi,
I agree with the previous comments and would like to add, as a KM5D owner, that besides the AS the KM 5D has another nice feature: wireless flash capability, useful for portrait flash photography:
http://www.friedmanarchives.com/flash.htm
With the XT, you would have to purchase either a 2nd flash or a special wireless controller.
As said, not much of a difference between 6 and 8 MP; lens quality is far more important.
jnrob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2006, 10:18 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

Go out to pbase.com and do a search on cameras and review which images you like: either the KM 5D or the XT.

To me, the ultimate proof is the images themselves.

Also, take a look at images taken at various iso's, from ISO100 up to ISO1600.
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2006, 12:22 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27
Default

Thanks for all the advice. You guys are awsome!

I don't have any lenses, so I'll be starting from scratch. Would you guys recommend I buy either XT or 5D with the kit lense or body only?
kuulaaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2006, 1:16 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 143
Default

The KM kit lens is not bad, I've heard it's better than Canon's kit and it goes to 70mm instead of 55. With that you could pick up a used Minolta 70-210 f4 lens (which can be found in excellent shape under $200, also called the 'beercan') and you will have a good setup to start. The 70-210 is a very highly regarded lens and the canon equal is at least twice the price, about 4 times that for the IS version. Those two lenses would give you 28-315mm in 35mm terms. I chose the KM 5D for the inexpensive high quality used glass on the market as my budget is tight. I have several very good lenses that are older but I found for a steal. However I wouldn't wait too long because prices are starting to rise a bit as demand is up with the new Sony starting to ship. And the KM's high ISO performance is quite good, maybe not as good as Canon's but darn close. There are several factors that are nice on the KM you don't often here about like: the large viewfinder view, the Canon seems like peeking through a hole in comparison, cheap but awesome wireless flash systems (although flashes are proprietary, can't use non-Minolta units except for a couple). All in all the 5D is a steal for what you get.
gipper51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2006, 7:38 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

You don't pay a lot extra for a kit lens, so view it as a functional lens cap, in essence.

Before you make your decision on the KM 5D versus the Rebel XT, compare images between the two at ISO1600, which is really a test of how clean (ie digital noise) the sensor delivers.

If you decide to take any pictures in low light, where you have to crank up the ISO, you will notice the difference between a sensor that delivers clean images versus noisy images.

Even at ISO400 and ISO800, some images start displaying noise.

Also, check out a comparisoin of responsiveness (ie shutter lag) between the two digicams.

Nobody like using a slow DSLR.

-- Terry

-- Terry


terry@softreq.com 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 6:16 PM.