Support NeoGAF

[BlueTsunami]

Same. I tried out my friends Canon EOS rebel and loved it, now I have to get a good camera. Anything else in that line that's less expensive?

That's the entry level DSLR line (Digital Rebel). If want to find an even better bargain, I suggest using Craigslist. You may be able to find a Rebel XT (which is the DSLR I use) for around $400 to $500 (with or without the kit lens). I've seen a Canon 30D (which is the line of DSLRs above the Digital Rebels) for the same amount.

So I've been thinking about getting into the world of DSLR cameras!

And I think I'm going to buy the Pentax K-x. It just seems to do everything I want for not so much!

I don't know much about the Pentax line (I believe there are one or two Pentax GAF shooters, I believe one is Captive?) but what I do know about Pentax is that they make very high quality lenses (some are second to none).

 

[mrkgoo]

Same. I tried out my friends Canon EOS rebel and loved it, now I have to get a good camera. Anything else in that line that's less expensive?

For Canon, the line is basically this:

1000D (Xs) (US$4-500?): Introduced within the last year I think, and inserted below even the entry level, forging itself as the new entry level. It was basically an Xti (400D).

300D (Rebel), 350D (XT), 400D (XTi), 450D (XSi), 500D (XT1i) ($8-900?): While still regarded as an entry level I'd say, the features on the newest ones of these surpass the older prosumer line.

10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D (US$11-1200?): Prosumer/enthusiast. Very similar to the XXXD series in brain, but in practice offers a few higher-end features that are largely preferential or operational in nature, such as faster frame rate, metal-body, second LCD, and better viewfinder, AF and shutter mechanism.

7D (US$1700): Newly introduced, completely new AF system, viewfinder and sensor. I would probably say this is high enthusiast, or even pro.

5D, 5DmkII (US$2700): Very high end enthusiast/pro. Full frame camera.

1D, 1DS series: professional.


As the years go by, features in the early higher levels had trickled into ever newer lower end models. For example, spot-metering, a staple in everything XXD and above, was only introduced into the XXXD line on the 400D.

YOu basically choose your poison at what level you can afford. I can nearly guarantee you that any dSLR has more than enough power and room to grow for a beginner. OFc oruse, if you are the type to buy the next new thing after a year or less, it MIGHT make sense to go to an XXD. Anything over that is just overkill for a newbie - it's better to learn on something else and then upgrade to the next latest and greatest in a couple years.

 

[mrkgoo]

That's the entry level DSLR line (Digital Rebel). If want to find an even better bargain, I suggest using Craigslist. You may be able to find a Rebel XT (which is the DSLR I use) for around $400 to $500 (with or without the kit lens). I've seen a Canon 30D (which is the line of DSLRs above the Digital Rebels) for the same amount.



I don't know much about the Pentax line (I believe there are one or two Pentax GAF shooters, I believe one is Captive?) but what I do know about Pentax is that they make very high quality lenses (some are second to none).

You have an XT? I always figured you had something a bit more recent, like a Ti or Si or something. I hate the US naming. It's confusing.

That said, I may soon have a spare 40D....

 

[BlueTsunami]

You have an XT? I always figured you had something a bit more recent, like a Ti or Si or something. I hate the US naming. It's confusing.

That said, I may soon have a spare 40D....

Yep, I've been shooting with it for a little over two years now. If I end up building up enough funds, I'll probably look into getting a second hand Canon 5D. Having gained a huge interest in alternative lenses (mainly Manual Focus lenses) one of the biggest things I'm looking for in a camera body now is the viewfinder.

 

[nitewulf]

So I'm getting my first DSLR soon and I'll probably head out on Saturday to get the 7D. Can anyone recommend a good, versatile lens that also suits filming. I've been looking at the Tamron 17-50. Is it good? How does it compare to the twice as expensive Canon EF-S 17-55?

the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 is a very well rated lens. That said, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 is my normal everyday lens, its an all rounder. A very large, heavy beast of a lens. Tamron is much smaller and lighter. The canon takes excellent pictures, once learned.

Now, if you are just getting into it, make your decision depending on whether you wanna lug around heavy gear and take shots, or want more comfort? Having gear is good, but to learn the camera itself will take you a while, and that lens is a very good lens, its not an amateur level device. It likes to be taken care of, its very heavy, large, in fact fully extended it'll cast a shadow w/ the pop-up flash turned on. It'll take time to take good shots with such pro level gear. Some models suck in dust. You wanna get a nice UV cap to protect the front element, and a lens hood for shooting in bright light.

I just dont know, sometimes I just wish for a light, compact body and a 35mm prime.

 

[captive]

I don't know much about the Pentax line (I believe there are one or two Pentax GAF shooters, I believe one is Captive?) but what I do know about Pentax is that they make very high quality lenses (some are second to none).

No i'm 4/3rds, Olympus and their very nice Zuiko Lenses.
I've heard Pentax has tons of primes that are very good quality.

 

[Rentahamster]

Can anyone recommend me the best lens for a Nikon in the $250-$300 range with built-in AF motor and VR?

I'm thinking about selling my kit lens and 55-200mm zoom lens for a really nice prime or wide angle lens if possible.

There is also a website that shows user photos of specific lenses but I can't recall it if anyone knows what I'm talking about?

The Nikon wide angle lenses like the DX 12-24 and the FX 14-24 don't have VR.

The only primes to have VR are the ones that are 105mm or longer. They won't fit your budget, either.

The 35mm f1.8 prime lens should fit your budget.

 

[mrkgoo]

the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 is a very well rated lens. That said, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 is my normal everyday lens, its an all rounder. A very large, heavy beast of a lens. Tamron is much smaller and lighter. The canon takes excellent pictures, once learned.

Now, if you are just getting into it, make your decision depending on whether you wanna lug around heavy gear and take shots, or want more comfort? Having gear is good, but to learn the camera itself will take you a while, and that lens is a very good lens, its not an amateur level device. It likes to be taken care of, its very heavy, large, in fact fully extended it'll cast a shadow w/ the pop-up flash turned on. It'll take time to take good shots with such pro level gear. Some models suck in dust. You wanna get a nice UV cap to protect the front element, and a lens hood for shooting in bright light.

I just dont know, sometimes I just wish for a light, compact body and a 35mm prime.

Yup, I have the 17-55 is. It's the lens I hate to love or love to hate. Great versatility, but really large and not built like a premium lens despite the premium price.

I like it, but this is the kind of lens that may turn off beginners from expensive gear, because the advantages may not be immediately apparent.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

So I'm thinking of trading my D40 for a Sony Alpha DSLR.

What's a good upgrade that is within $600 for a body only?

How do Sony's or Minolta Lenses compare to Nikon?

 

[mrkgoo]

7D iso6400, baby:


EF-50mmf/1.8, f/2.0, 1/60s, iso6400


EF-50mmf/1.8, f/2.0, 1/60s, iso6400

This camera is letting me do stuff that simply wasn't possible before. The top shot is basically a single 30-40watt bulb.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

amazing results!

 

[mrkgoo]

amazing results!

thanks!

Sorry, can't help on the non-canon front

Have you checked out this site, though?

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/overview

 

[BlueTsunami]

Geeze, the image is still fairly contrasty. That's f'n amazing!

 

[mrkgoo]

Geeze, the image is still fairly contrasty. That's f'n amazing!

Now that I think about lighting conditions were perhaps slightly better than a 30-40 watt bulb. Nevertheless, a non-photographer friend commented, wondering how I was taking images like it was bright.

The contrast kept is pretty good considering that it's also the JPEG straight from camera - I can only imagine what this is capable of with someone who is good with the camera and a good RAW workflow. This is of course resized, so that hides the noise somewhat, and the in-camera NR is working away.

Also, the EF 50mm f/1.8 mkII is not the best used wide open (or even at f/2.0). What you can't see from these shots is that it's missing that critical sharpness - but mostly because the lens isn't so great at this aperture. I'll definitely try high iso shots with a different lens that is more capable, say the 85mm.

The 50mm is also not that great at lowlight focussing, but the 7D managed like a champ. I even used the 50mm to record some HD video - hearing that little motor focus is funny. Of note, I think the live view focussing is actually pretty good too (for stills and movies). Slow, but it does get there.

 

[Lucky Forward]

Congrats on your purchase, mrkgoo! That low-light performance is incredible, I've never gone beyond ISO 800 with my 20D, even that was fairly noisy. When in burst mode, how many frames-per-second does the 7D shoot?

 

[mrkgoo]

Congrats on your purchase, mrkgoo! That low-light performance is incredible, I've never gone beyond ISO 800 with my 20D, even that was fairly noisy. When in burst mode, how many frames-per-second does the 7D shoot?

8fps! It's a machine gun ...

 

[nitewulf]

is there a 40D/D300 like mode, which evenly distributes tones? i think canon calls it Highlight Tone Priority and Nikon calls it Active D Lighting, i thought the feature worked specially well on the D300.

 

[mrkgoo]

is there a 40D/D300 like mode, which evenly distributes tones? i think canon calls it Highlight Tone Priority and Nikon calls it Active D Lighting, i thought the feature worked specially well on the D300.

You mean the 7D?

Yeah, it has highlight priority. What that does essentially is, I think, something like exposeon one iso slower, but boost or something to prevent highlight clipping. I'm not entirely sure - All I knew was that it limited the lowest iso to 200 (assuming it's actually a 100 exposing to the right or some such).

In addition to this, the 7D has something called Auto Light optimization, which I think is something to do with JPEG processing, like a levels or curve correction, and has three levels, as well as disabled. I turn this off, because the manual says it can affect your images when you want to deliberately under or over expose.

 

[mrkgoo]

8fps -yeah!

 

[Alucrid]

For Canon, the line is basically this:

1000D (Xs) (US$4-500?): Introduced within the last year I think, and inserted below even the entry level, forging itself as the new entry level. It was basically an Xti (400D).

300D (Rebel), 350D (XT), 400D (XTi), 450D (XSi), 500D (XT1i) ($8-900?): While still regarded as an entry level I'd say, the features on the newest ones of these surpass the older prosumer line.

10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D (US$11-1200?): Prosumer/enthusiast. Very similar to the XXXD series in brain, but in practice offers a few higher-end features that are largely preferential or operational in nature, such as faster frame rate, metal-body, second LCD, and better viewfinder, AF and shutter mechanism.

7D (US$1700): Newly introduced, completely new AF system, viewfinder and sensor. I would probably say this is high enthusiast, or even pro.

5D, 5DmkII (US$2700): Very high end enthusiast/pro. Full frame camera.

1D, 1DS series: professional.


As the years go by, features in the early higher levels had trickled into ever newer lower end models. For example, spot-metering, a staple in everything XXD and above, was only introduced into the XXXD line on the 400D.

YOu basically choose your poison at what level you can afford. I can nearly guarantee you that any dSLR has more than enough power and room to grow for a beginner. OFc oruse, if you are the type to buy the next new thing after a year or less, it MIGHT make sense to go to an XXD. Anything over that is just overkill for a newbie - it's better to learn on something else and then upgrade to the next latest and greatest in a couple years.

Thanks for this post, awesome info. I think that for my needs the 1000D XS seems like the best one of them all. I'll probably scope some out on ebay / craigslist and see if I can nab some for cheap. Thanks again...I might be back for lens info.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

8fps -yeah!

damn that is insane

 

[hEist]

8fps -yeah!

:O

 

[BlueTsunami]

Who needs a stinkin' 1DMKIII and its 10FPS for $7000, just get a 7D

 

[nitewulf]

if it was a full frame, i'd think about it...as it is, i aint buying anymore crop cameras. i'll keep my 40D w/ the awesome EF-S lenses, but my next body is definitely gonna be a full frame. i hope there's a lower end FF from canon w/ the swank new AF system.

 

[Rentahamster]

if it was a full frame, i'd think about it...as it is, i aint buying anymore crop cameras. i'll keep my 40D w/ the awesome EF-S lenses, but my next body is definitely gonna be a full frame. i hope there's a lower end FF from canon w/ the swank new AF system.

If you want full frame so bad, you could still buy a used or refurbished 5D1. The original 5D is still my most frequently used camera right after the D700. Still takes great pics.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

if it was a full frame, i'd think about it...as it is, i aint buying anymore crop cameras. i'll keep my 40D w/ the awesome EF-S lenses, but my next body is definitely gonna be a full frame. i hope there's a lower end FF from canon w/ the swank new AF system.

What exactly is the crop effect from non FF cameras?

 

[BlueTsunami]

If your into using fast lenses and touching up focusing manually, the 5D and a super precision matte screen (sold by Canon) is a match made in Heaven. Add a viewfinder magnifier and its on nom nom.

 

[captive]

What exactly is the crop effect from non FF cameras?

basically the crop means a 50mm lens on a 2x crop camera like an 4/3rds has field of view of a 100mm lens on a 35mm or "full frame" camera.
so the cannon and nikon 1.5 and 1.6 crop cameras have the math of 50mm x 1.5 or 1.6 to get the field of view of a 35mm camera.

Depth of field is slightly different as well. f2.0 lets in the same amount of light on all bodies, but on a 2x crop camera the depth of field is f4.0 on a 35mm body.

 

[Rentahamster]

What exactly is the crop effect from non FF cameras?

Non FF cameras have a smaller sensor, so they see less of the image circle of the lens.

Standing in the same spot, you would be able to see a greater field of view with the FF camera compared to the crop sensor camera.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/dslr-mag.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor
http://www.millhouse.nl/digitalcropfactorframe.html

 

[teiresias]

God, this whole dance I'm doing between the D90 and the D5000 is driving me insane. I've already decided to ditch getting a kit and get the body only and pair it with the 35mm f/1.8 prime and save up for a better zoom than the kit (or maybe just buy only primes), but I just cannot decide between the two bodies.

I go and hold them and play with them at Best Buy and I get such contradictory feelings:

1) The D5000 feels slightly better in my hand and lighter, but the bracket they've got both of the cameras mounted to in the store is larger on the D90, so I'm not sure how much of this has to do with the camera versus the larger store security mount - I need to find somewhere to hold them sans mounts.

2) The again I'm really liking the D90 viewfinder better, seems brighter and, of course, it's larger. Pentaprism vs pentamirror I suppose.

3) Yet, I'm not sure how useful to me the extra LCD and the extra button the D90 will actually be. I suppose I need to just peruse their respective manuals, but I didn't really find myself losing alot of time on the D5000 vs the D90 in changing options (granted I wasn't 100% sure how to do anything on either of them). I'm coming from a Canon G9 which had ISO on a dedicated dial, so I am used to easily switching between ISO settings though.

Ugh, so annoying. :lol

Then I just get to do the whole "Aperture or Lightroom" thing immediately after that. :lol

 

[mrkgoo]

Man, the more I shoot with the 7D, the more it becomes apparent that this is the real deal. Who needs full-frame?

On initial impressions, this thing delivers on all fronts. It has exceptional focus, metering and colour-rendition. It has features that even higher end dSLRS struggle to achieve (like a great HD video mode, 8fps, 100% coverage viewfinder), but also delivers on the high iso front and resolution. In fact, it's nearly like I have new lenses. It's nearly like I'm shooting macro with non-macro lenses! (well, maybe I exaggerate, but the resolution is good).

AND it has a viewfinder and LCD to kill for. Man, hands down my favourite feature of this thing is the 100% viewfinder. No more having to 'guess' at the crop. Only one thing is missing to make this a near perfect camera - GPS.

Yeah, I know GPS sucks batteries, but I just thought of a great implementation to make it worthy. YOu would have the option to have it on continuous (but draining power), with a switch to turn it on or off as well as the option to tag all photos with the 'last checked location', and a quick button to update it. Yeah, it's nice to want things.

That said, the only fault I could find with the 7D so far is that the angle of polarisation for the LCD means that when wearing polarised sunglasses, I cannot see the screen in portrait view. (my 40D and iPhone have it at 45 degrees, so both orientations are viewable. This, of course, hardly ever matters, as it's in frequent I'd be using the camera in portrait orientation regarding the LCD. Oh, it could do with a 720p 24-30fps mode too.

Click to got thru to larger:

 

[Forsete]

Congrats in the lens, forsete. Is that camera a full frame? I really like the 24-x wide aperture zooms, but on a crop I think they are slightly not wide enough.

Thanks, yes its a Full Frame, 24.6MP. The weather has been horrendous this weekend, pure white skies and rain. I am very disappointed, I wanted to go out with the lens.. we'll see if things improve today.

You really seem to love that camera, so congrats again. It sure looks like a monster, ISO6400 looked really nice up there and so does the new sample shots.

Regarding GPS, its very easy to carry along a stand alone GPS in one of your pockets. I got one from Garmin (Garmin Etrex Legend HCx) that works really well, all you basically need to do besides carry it with you is syncing your camera clock to your GPS.. Just take a photograph of the GPS display when the time is showing, check the EXIF of the shot to see what time was registered and adjust the time of the camera if its off by more than a minute, or just adjust it afterwards on the computer.

My Garmin GPS spits out a format called GPX which most software is able to use. I use the software GeoSetter ( http://www.geosetter.de/en/ ) to tag my images, no hassle at all. Navigate to a folder where the images you want to geotag are stored, then load the GPX file into GeoSetter and the software will tag the GPS data into the EXIF, which Flickr then will read and automatically mark out the position of your shots onto the Flickr Map.

 

[Rentahamster]

The weather has been horrendous this weekend, pure white skies and rain.

Aw, that's not so bad. It's a good time for outdoor still life shots and portraits.

Although you probably want to take pics of the landscape and stuff that includes the sky with the 24-70, huh?

I guess you could always try exposure bracketing for a dark, moody, cloudy sky.

 

[Why would you do that?]

Hmm... This may not be a great place to ask, but I've been looking for a new digital camera for 200-300 dollars, more preferably in the middle. I know nothing about digital cameras (specifically which brands are good or not), so you might laugh at my choice, but...

I was looking at the Fujifilm FinePix S2000HD. The shots aren't as high of quality as I want (it probably has equal or lesser quality day shots as my old camera, but is better with night shots), but it has the added bonus of being able to record pretty good quality 720p video while using the zoom lens (which happens to be 15x), something I've never seen any camera do. It received pretty nice reviews, though.

However... maybe I'd find a better recommendation here? I used to have a cheaper Sony camera which took nice shots in the daytime, but took horrible indoor shots and had a lack of manual control. Bonuses for me include good indoor/night shots, 640x480 video recording with sound, some manual control (at least changing focus), usage of only 2 batteries, and maybe a superzoom lens.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

Canon A1000/2000 is a good one.

 

[mrkgoo]

Hmm... This may not be a great place to ask, but I've been looking for a new digital camera for 200-300 dollars, more preferably in the middle. I know nothing about digital cameras (specifically which brands are good or not), so you might laugh at my choice, but...

I was looking at the Fujifilm FinePix S2000HD. The shots aren't as high of quality as I want (it probably has equal or lesser quality day shots as my old camera, but is better with night shots), but it has the added bonus of being able to record pretty good quality 720p video while using the zoom lens (which happens to be 15x), something I've never seen any camera do. It received pretty nice reviews, though.

However... maybe I'd find a better recommendation here? I used to have a cheaper Sony camera which took nice shots in the daytime, but took horrible indoor shots and had a lack of manual control. Bonuses for me include good indoor/night shots, 640x480 video recording with sound, some manual control (at least changing focus), usage of only 2 batteries, and maybe a superzoom lens.

This is the perfect thread to ask such a question.

I don't keep up with cameras as much as I used to (when in the market myself), but you basically describe every P&S camera.

I like to think of it as tiers. Pretty much all cameras have reached a kind plateau regarding quality between different brands at the same price tier (keeping note that some brands will have a price slightly higher for the brand recognition). The quality is pretty much as you say -good at day time, not so good indoors or at night time. Night and indoor shots have improved dramatically since a few years ago, however, mostly due to image stabilisation tech (the cameras have higher and higher iso capability, but I haven't seen huge leaps in actual quality at those isos). For day shots, nearly any P&S will do fine, and can even compare with SLRS - point is, day shots are always going to be great, so just because a newer camera doesn't have much improved day shot vs your older camera doesn't say much.

That's why camera manufacturer's have resorted to trying to separate cameras by additional features, such as GPS, wireless, face recognition, extra LCDs, etc etc. If you have a set price, you can pretty much pick nearly any camera that has a feature set that matches you and nearly ignore image quality - it'll be what you pay for.

I'm not saying image quality is the same for all the cameras, just that if you have specific needs, such as ultraportability, or waterproofness, then you've already decided the major factor and tier you want your camera to be in. Basically, I'm saying, for P&S, choose the camera that has the features you want, be it battery, LCD, lens focal lengths, manual exposure controls and so on.

All in all, I've only tried Casio, Sony and Canon cameras. I've been very pleasantly surprised by Sony cams, and the Canons are nearly always solid shooters. A good place to begin, I think is the A-series Canons, but I don't know where they are at at the moment (these tend to be cheaper, and sacrifice size a little for good performance).

I'm also keen to look at Panasonic cameras - their newest range have great features, and they are making huge leaps in technology (canon used to be way ahead, but I guess innovation has stagnated a little, so everyone is catching up).

 

[nitewulf]

the new lens that was introduced w/ the 7D looks pretty awesome as well.

 

[mrkgoo]

Thanks, yes its a Full Frame, 24.6MP. The weather has been horrendous this weekend, pure white skies and rain. I am very disappointed, I wanted to go out with the lens.. we'll see if things improve today.

You really seem to love that camera, so congrats again. It sure looks like a monster, ISO6400 looked really nice up there and so does the new sample shots.

Regarding GPS, its very easy to carry along a stand alone GPS in one of your pockets. I got one from Garmin (Garmin Etrex Legend HCx) that works really well, all you basically need to do besides carry it with you is syncing your camera clock to your GPS.. Just take a photograph of the GPS display when the time is showing, check the EXIF of the shot to see what time was registered and adjust the time of the camera if its off by more than a minute, or just adjust it afterwards on the computer.

My Garmin GPS spits out a format called GPX which most software is able to use. I use the software GeoSetter ( http://www.geosetter.de/en/ ) to tag my images, no hassle at all. Navigate to a folder where the images you want to geotag are stored, then load the GPX file into GeoSetter and the software will tag the GPS data into the EXIF, which Flickr then will read and automatically mark out the position of your shots onto the Flickr Map.

Yeah, I think I know about the GPS tagging, but I'd like something to embed automatically, or via iPhoto, since I use that to import. At the moment, I kind of just tag images by taking a photo with my iPhone. Ideally, I would be able to use my iPhone (maybe even wirelessly) connected to the camera so it happens as images are captured. Maybe I need to look into this stuff more to see what is available.

Yeah, I was looking at Sony SLRS yesterday. Looks like some great stuff. I might go read some reviews and things. For similar price as the 7D (well, a few hundred dollars more), I could've bought a sony full-frame!

 

[LizardKing]

the 7d shall be mine! gonna upgrade from the xti. just wondering when to pull the trigger. do you guys think it will come down in price a little sometime fairly soon (like next 6 months)? maybe 1600 w/kit lens? that would be gravy. don't really know how camera prices react after launch.

edit: Also, wouldn't a low focal length make up for the fact a cam isn't full frame. for example, wouldn't a 10mm focal length on a crop (canon) be equivalent to a 16mm full frame in field of view.

 

[mrkgoo]

the 7d shall be mine! gonna upgrade from the xti. just wondering when to pull the trigger. do you guys think it will come down in price a little sometime fairly soon (like next 6 months)? maybe 1600 w/kit lens? that would be gravy. don't really know how camera prices react after launch.

edit: Also, wouldn't a low focal length make up for the fact a cam isn't full frame. for example, wouldn't a 10mm focal length on a crop (canon) be equivalent to a 16mm full frame in field of view.

I think that depends. Cameras definitely do drop in price over time, but I'm not sure when. I believe it has to do with the update timeline. P&S are practically coming out every 6 months, so they drop rapidly. SLRs are closer to a 12-18 month timeline.

It also has to depend with the demand of the model. The 5DmkII, for example, has been out about a year, and hasn't budged in price at all. I think what happens is that RRP holds for a while with retailers not offering anything at first, but then the retailers start offering incentives to compete.

Not sure though.

And yes, if you're not an absolute DOF junky, or require the high iso advantage, you can cover the ultra wide angle with 10-22mm lenses. The only thing is you have less selection for ultrawide. All the EF lenses at ultrawide are basically a moderate wide on the 1.6 croppers.

Not that big an issue, however.

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

So I have a Canon G2 (Black Edition) I picked up for $100. It was NIB when I got it and so far I love it. RAW mode is absolutely amazing.

However, I'm new to taking pics and don't know much about lenses and all that. What kind of stuff is available for my camera for cheap than can help me get better pics?

Also, if I were to upgrade and didn't want to spend over $100 on a new camera would I have any options that can also do RAW? I know that G5's are still around $200, which is something I had thought of getting but, I'm not sure it's even much of an upgrade.

 

[Futureman]

Parts of the SNL opening sequence and some skits recently have been filmed on a Canon 5D2 and a 7D.

Pretty EFFING cool if you ask me.

 

[nitewulf]

1) no chance.

2) you shouldn't look at it that way, its not about making up for what isn't there, rather a full frame sensor is physically bigger in size, therefore will produce less noise, and will have a bigger dynamic range. plus designing super-wide lenses isnt that easy, that's why they tend to be very expensive.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Yeah, I think I know about the GPS tagging, but I'd like something to embed automatically, or via iPhoto, since I use that to import. At the moment, I kind of just tag images by taking a photo with my iPhone. Ideally, I would be able to use my iPhone (maybe even wirelessly) connected to the camera so it happens as images are captured. Maybe I need to look into this stuff more to see what is available.!

I wonder how the addon GPS for the 7D works. All I've read is that you need the grip and some GPS item tethered to it. I've personally been tagging my images on Flickr by eye (via the map and the general location I've shot). It is extremely fulfilling seeing each and every area I've shot my images.

Edit: Apparently the 7D needs the WFT-E5A Wireless Transmitter and it costs fricken $700. That's just ridiculous.

 

[teiresias]

Does anyone care to comment on my following purchasing plan? I've pretty much decided on the Nikon D90, but was trying to figure out whether to go with the 18-105mm kit or just get a body.

I think I've decided to sort of build my own kit by just getting the D90 body and the 18-55mm VR lens (I think this is usually included with the D40?). This will save about $100 or so off the 18-105mm D90 kit, but that's not really my prime reasoning. The 18-55mm a bit lighter of a lens and what I tend to shoot won't really require the zoom of the 18-105mm but it still provides me with the same wide-angle lens play (which is what I tend to use more).

I'd probably immediately pair this with the 35mm f/1.8 lens for indoor and lower-light situations.

How does this sound to people, or am I making some ridiculous mistake by passing up the D90 kit lens in this manner?

 

[mrkgoo]

Does anyone care to comment on my following purchasing plan? I've pretty much decided on the Nikon D90, but was trying to figure out whether to go with the 18-105mm kit or just get a body.

I think I've decided to sort of build my own kit by just getting the D90 body and the 18-55mm VR lens (I think this is usually included with the D40?). This will save about $100 or so off the 18-105mm D90 kit, but that's not really my prime reasoning. The 18-55mm a bit lighter of a lens and what I tend to shoot won't really require the zoom of the 18-105mm but it still provides me with the same wide-angle lens play (which is what I tend to use more).

I'd probably immediately pair this with the 35mm f/1.8 lens for indoor and lower-light situations.

How does this sound to people, or am I making some ridiculous mistake by passing up the D90 kit lens in this manner?

DAMMIT! second 500 error made me lose my post twice.

ANYWAY, I'm not familiar with Nikon lenses, but I see no harm in getting a lens you want over one you don't need that costs more. The 18-55 is more likely to be less of a compromise than the 18-105 as well. That said, there are other things to consider between the two lenses. Are they both designed for crop cameras? What are the optical quality differences? What are the max aperture ranges? Does the 18-105 have VR?


On the other hand, I see body+lens kits to be pretty decent value for money, often shaving off several hundred dollars - extra handy considering that lens prices are currently going up. I've seen people selling of gear from years ago for a profit in the current market. Perhaps you could sell a kit lens? Need to know the demand for it.

In other news, I've been drooling over the new Canon 100mm Macro L. I guess I just need something new to lust over after the 135mm dropped down on my want list a bit after getting another crop camera (135mm would've been great for a full frame).

*cmd+C*

 

[teiresias]

The 18-55mm is a DX lens and has VR - looked it up again and it's the one also included with the D5000 so that makes sense for the Nikon lineup I suppose. The viewfinder on the D90 just won me over compared to the D5000, I figure one doesn't want to skimp on the viewfinder in a camera on which one is rarely going to use liveview.

 

[mrkgoo]

The 18-55mm is a DX lens and has VR - looked it up again and it's the one also included with the D5000 so that makes sense for the Nikon lineup I suppose. The viewfinder on the D90 just won me over compared to the D5000, I figure one doesn't want to skimp on the viewfinder in a camera on which one is rarely going to use liveview.

I was more wondering if the 18-105 was a DX and had VR(chances are it is DX, but if it doesn't have VR, then more the reason to get the 18-55).

I understand Nikon models are sort of in between Canon models - I assume this camera is below the XXD Canon, but above their XXXD? What kind of viewfinder does it have?

It's nice to have a good viewfinder. I kind of enjoyed going from the pentamirror to a pent prism, it let me know what I was upgrading to Just brief over view of the D90 - it looks like an awesome camera.

 

[teiresias]

I was more wondering if the 18-105 was a DX and had VR(chances are it is DX, but if it doesn't have VR, then more the reason to get the 18-55).

I understand Nikon models are sort of in between Canon models - I assume this camera is below the XXD Canon, but above their XXXD? What kind of viewfinder does it have?

It's nice to have a good viewfinder. I kind of enjoyed going from the pentamirror to a pent prism, it let me know what I was upgrading to Just brief over view of the D90 - it looks like an awesome camera.

Yeah, the D90 kit lens is DX and has VR too. I was debating between the D5000 (pentamirror) and the D90 (pentaprism). The D5000 is a tad smaller which appeals to me, but the minute I looked through both of them the viewfinder on the D90 just felt way better to me (particularly since I was looking through them with late-in-the-day dry contact eyes, :lol )

 

[Why would you do that?]

Canon A1000/2000 is a good one.

Thanks. These cameras look pretty nice and have pretty good quality, but I wish it had a little more features and a little more manual control...

Large and informative post

Thanks for your input. After searching around, I noted that the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7 was pretty interesting. It is very feature filled while offering an aceptable image quality.

I was also looking at the Ricoh CX1, which has a Dynamic Range double shot feature that I really like, as well as other features specifically for image quality, but with not as many misc features... so I'll probably not go with this one.