Entry Level Question. Which Camera

[AShearer]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered, but I can't find any reference by searching the site, or forums. So,

I am currently using a point and shoot Sony DSC 70 3 mgp. It's no longer adequate and I am looking to take higher quality, higher resolution shots. I would like to stay around $1,000 initially. I know more lenses will always be down the road. I used to have a 35mm film SLR and didn't use it as much as I thought I would because of the bulk and weight. Traveling with it was a pain. But, then I also had two little ones in tow. No longer the case.

I have read about the Canon Ditial Rebel, the Olympus 300 kits and the Nikon., I think it's a D50?

It seems a lot of folks like the Canon more than any other. What are your thoughts? I will never be a pro, just a hobbyist with a desire to do things well.

[agesilaus]

I am a Canon user and quite happy with it, but I have to say the Nikon D50 is fine too. Just decide carefully since you are buying into a system and once you start getting lenses and other accessories you'll be locked into one or the other.

Try both out at a store and decide which one feels best in your hands. I think Canon has the edge but you'll be happy with either one.

Olympus, IMO, is a dead end. They regressed on sensor size, have a very limited assortment of lenses and don't have good third party software support. Stick with the big two.

BK

[cox]

I also think Canon has a bit of an edge (mostly on noise levels), but my Nikon friends take good pictures too. 'It's not the camera, it's the photographer', it the common refrain. I think the advice of trying hands-on is always good, whether it's a camera body or a tripod. If you want to go lighter, there are high quality non SLR prosumer cameras available like the canon powershot pro1, which a couple of my friends have bought and like. Whatever you choose, have fun with it. :)

[swartzphotography]

the nikon d-50 also uses sd memory instead of compact flash. and the camera i believe is roughly the same price as the canon xt. i think the canon is better with the price of lenses being a lot less on the canon versus the same lenses on a nikon. at least thats what i noticed when i first got my canon 35 mm the lenses being cheaper is what made me go with canon. and the price of the rebel xt is now under 900 dollars. and the original digital rebel is now under 600 dollars. if you wanna go even cheaper and still get a decent quality pic thats the camera i use anyway.

[steffit]

I'd second the idea of trying the cameras out in store. I'm originally from the Nikon camp, hefted the Canon Rebel XT in store and then tried to fit the Nikon D70s in my (small) hands and failed - no use buying it for me. I could have saved a lot of time reading and comparing reviews!

Depending on your photography style, noise levels may be very important or not at all. I do a lot of evening or low light, use high ISO for handheld shots etc. My Rebel XT does better than my father's D70 under those circumstances and from what I've seen in tests, Canon still has the edge compared to the much newer Nikon D50. But my father shoots mostly during the day, with tripod or with flash, so it's unimportant for him.

The prosumer cameras are great these days, but an SLR is still superior if you plan on doing a lot of post-processing (and then printing). I had the prosumer Nikon Coolpix 5700 before my current Canon, and I personally never thought it would make quite as much of a difference as it did! It's not just the extra pixels, but color gradients are so much smoother and withstand heavy manipulation. Of course, today's prosumers are much better than the 5700. Still, noise levels at high ISO (see above...)

BUT - yes, ultimately it depends on you composing and making a good photo. You can take stunning photos with a lot of the modern cameras.

Stefanie

[MatsP]

I think if you look a the market-share, Canon has the biggest... So statistically, more users here would have Canon than other brands, but I'm not sure how much bigger than the other brands - I still think there's more Canon here than statistically "should be". I can't explain that one... ;-)

I choose Canon some twenty-odd years ago, when I moved from Manual Focur to Autofocus - and since I had a significant investment in lenses when I got to choose a Digital SLR, it would have taken MUCH MORE than a few small differences to convince me to go elsewhere...

I think the quality of images from Nikon D50, Olympus E300 and Canon Digital Rebel (XT) is pretty much the same.

Canon has a slightly wider selection of lenses, which makes a difference - because the "only" choice of some focal length(s) isn't the "expensive" model or the "budget" model, you can choose whether you want good quality or spending less on the lens. And even the less expensive lenses seem to be pretty good in my opinion - but you do get what you pay for, roughly... ;-)

I wrote a summary on different "low end" models of cameras in this (http://www.dphoto.us/forum/showthread.php?t=5108) thread. Prices may be a bit out of date, but I think the ideas still remain.

--
Mats

[AShearer]

Wow; What a nice group of friendly, helpful people!! I'm sure you've all experienced, as I have the "internet meanies"; that populate some groups.

This is good sound advice. The advice on Olympus, saves me a great deal of time and effort. I wil discount that brand.

It's not the camera, it's the photographer. Very true in my other passion; guitars. But, then there are guitars that sound bad, even in the best of hands.

I do need to go and handle these candidates. If I'm not mistaken, I read on this board that Canon lenses from a 35mm Eos will fit on current Canon digital slr's . If that's the case, it makes Canon an easier decision, since I have an older Eos Rebel G with a nice 35-80 lense.

I think the advice on lenses and accessories is spot on. I know the body is only the beginning.

Thanks all again.

[MatsP]

I wouldn't put a 35-80 as a valuable lens on digital SLR, as the sensor is smaller than the 35mm film, which makes the lens "seem" 1.6x longer, which makes the 35-80 behave like a 55-130 mm lens, which is a pretty much normal to short-tele range - not the most useful lens. The stock lens that you get with either Canon or Nikon is a 18-55 or similar (can't say exactly what kits Nikon do, but I think it's similar), which converts to around 28-88 when you have multiplied by 1.6.

So if you haven't got any more lenses, I'd keep the 35-80 to go with the Rebel G. Either keep that camera with it's lens, or sell the kit (you'll have much better luck selling a camera with a lens than without, if you're selling it on e-bay or in the local "free-ads" paper).

--
Mats

[Kevin Sadler]

great advice as always from the others. you can't go wrong with either canon or nikon at that price point. one is going to "feel" better and the controls will make more sense on one or the other.

oh.. please buy the best glass you can afford!!! your camera bodies will come and go but your lens stay with you.

good luck. later, kevin

[AShearer]

I wouldn't put a 35-80 as a valuable lens on digital SLR, as the sensor is smaller than the 35mm film, which makes the lens "seem" 1.6x longer, which makes the 35-80 behave like a 55-130 mm lens, which is a pretty much normal to short-tele range - not the most useful lens. The stock lens that you get with either Canon or Nikon is a 18-55 or similar (can't say exactly what kits Nikon do, but I think it's similar), which converts to around 28-88 when you have multiplied by 1.6.

Makes good sense. I understand and thanks.

So if you haven't got any more lenses, I'd keep the 35-80 to go with the Rebel G. Either keep that camera with it's lens, or sell the kit (you'll have much better luck selling a camera with a lens than without, if you're selling it on e-bay or in the local "free-ads" paper).

--
Mats

Good point. It's easier to sell a camera with lens. Although, I guess they don't fetch much anymore. Thanks again.

[AShearer]

Thanks Kevin. Budget is probably going to drive the "package" lens as a beginner. It seems like people who have the included Canon lens are reasonably happy with it. Any other lenses I buy in the future, I'll hold out for quality.

[Puncher]

The kit lens of the Nikon D70s (the 18-70) is of a much higher quality than the ones of the Canon 350 or Nikon D50.

[AShearer]

Well FWIW, I pulled the trigger and got the D70s with 18-70 lens. I like the feel and weight of the Nikon. I like the kit lens.

Thanks to all again for the advice. I'm sure I'm going to be very happy with my new camera.

And, just think! Now I have an excuse to start lusting after a D200 some day. :D

[El Hacko]

Asherer...First, a belated welcome to Dphoto.com
2nd..Best wishes and congrats on your new toy! Can't wait to see some shots :-)

[AShearer]

Asherer...First, a belated welcome to Dphoto.com
2nd..Best wishes and congrats on your new toy! Can't wait to see some shots :-)

Hey thanks. I'm already enjoying.

[AShearer]

Here's the first shot I was able to get outdoors. It has been pouring rain since I got home with my new camera. I literally just ran out and shot a few lillys in my front beds.

I just want to see if I'm even close :)

http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/medium/lilly.jpg

[jliechty]

Watch your histogram and blinking highlights indicators carefully... a few of the petals seem to have blown out in the shot. This is a case where I would have used a diffuser (pretty much nothing more than a big white sheet, though the commercial models are a bit more convenient) to even out the light and avoid hot spots which are hard to keep within the range of the camera without darkening the shadows too much.

Other than that, great job for the first try. Enjoy getting out and shooting; I wish I could, but I'm studying for exams (can't wait for a week and a half from now, when my last final is over!).

[AShearer]

Thanks. Once I figure what that means, I'll do it :) Best of luck with exams.

[jliechty]

I'm sorry; I frequently start speaking geek without realizing that my audience may not have the background to understand the jargon. This article is a great introduction to histograms:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml

If you see that your histogram looks like the ones he shows for overexposed images, you can use exposure compensation. Press the +/- button next to the shutter release and rotate the appropriate command dial - I think it's the rear one - until you get see a negative number in the status LCD. You'll learn with experience how much compensation you have to apply to fix different degrees of overexposure. Exposure compensation is basically a way of telling the camera that it needs to let in more or less light than it thinks it really needs to - in other words, it's your way of overriding the automatically chosen settings picked by the camera's light metering system.

[AShearer]

Fantastic. Thanks for the pointer to the resource.

You gotta love this forum.