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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 3, 2006, 3:46 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

Yes you are right. I'm glad you guys knew which one I was talking about.
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 5:33 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

I've been reading a bit more on the Sony a100. Looks good but low light isnt all that great, but with the image stabilzation, it may not need a high iso.

My problem is (and I've owned alot of sony cameras) is I alwyas considered Sony a very consumer camera. lots of features but nothing great. I dont have it in the same class in my head as the dslr from canon and nikon althought both of those companies also make consumer cameras.
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2006, 10:33 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

OK, I think I'm leaning to the Canon XTi with the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Zoom Lens. What do you think?

Not enough of a wide-angle? The stock lens should handle that right? And if I turn on the Stablization, I should be able to take better indoor shots with it?




starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2006, 11:09 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 150
Default

Ok, so you want:

- DSLR. That makes Nikon D50, D80, Canon 350D, 400D, Pentax K100D, Sony a100;

- More than 8 MP (you're marketing victim, mate, those megapixels won't make any difference for you): that leaves us Nikon D80, Canon 400D and Sony a100; Nikon D50 and Pentax K100D are 6mpix, Canon 350D is 8Mpix;

- good low light: that leaves us with Nikon D80 and Canon 400D -- Sony a100 is disappointing at high ISOs.

- built in flash: all have it;

- Some sort of antishake: that leaves us with Nikon D80 and Canon 400D with lense antishake.

Out of those two I would get Nikon D80 body (it's kit lense is without antishake) + VR lenses. Well, this will make very expensive set-up. Not sure how you'll fit into $2000.



Edvinas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2006, 11:23 PM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

No, I'm not into the marketing bliz on MP. I need it because I do crops and I want as much info as possible. I thought the 828 did that well, but turned out not so much.

>Out of those two I would get Nikon D80 body (it's kit lense is without antishake) + >VR lenses. Well, this will make very expensive set-up. Not sure how you'll fit into >$2000.

It wont if you factor in extra lenses, but if I can get close, then its not too bad. The XTi is ony about $999+the antishake lens I mentioned can be had for abour $400.

Btw, what made you choose the D80? Just the body design or features? If features, what on it do you like?
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2006, 11:54 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 150
Default

D80 is superior in ergonomics: ISO, WB, exposure modes, AF modes changing without going into menus. LCD screen on top of the camera. All Rebels are simply awkward to hold for me, Nikons just fit my hand perfectly (I'm not Canon or Nikon owner BTW).

D80 has large pentaprism viewfinder (0,94x) (you'll love it!), 400D has much smaller pentamirror viewfinder (0,8x). 400D doesn't have spot metering. Finally 400D uses CF memory (that's a minus for me).
Edvinas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2006, 12:27 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

Thanks for making this hard again.
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2006, 2:18 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

Hmm was thinking about it. Those are good things you pointed out. Only thing junk for me anyways is the D80 uses a new type of memory which means another couple hundred to buy memory. Granted if the D80 turns out to be that much better of a camera, I wouls shoot myself for not buying it becuase I needed new memory for it.
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 10, 2006, 1:48 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

The high ISO performance of the Canon EOS 400D is looking better IMO.

I actually noticed it myself earlier by studying the test shots. TheNikon D80 images are all NR infected, you can literally see the signs of NR and the edges are noise beaten and rough too; unlike the EOS 400D.

I also noticed some watercolor effects on the ISO 1600 shots of the Nikon. Something you just don't see on the EOS 400D.

I suggest you go to imaging resource and compare the test shots there. Dpreview forums is already filled with the discussions with the EOS 400D looking very good.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 10, 2006, 2:27 AM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

Yup saw it. Kind of a toss up. The 1600 shots looked to be the best I've seen on any webisites. And either would be good.
starstreak 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 1:35 AM.