Digital Cameras

[hatchRus]

I notice many of the TST members enjoy taking quality pics.
I was wondering if you could help me out. I am looking to buy a
decent digital camera. For those of you that thrive to capture that moment,
could you post the following:

What type of camera you use and any specs
Price
Pros and cons of your camera.

Thanks TST

[vwcorradokid]

many of the people whose photos you see are using a DSLR. I'm not sure how much you're looking to spend, but a fairly simple DSLR is going to cost you at least $800 when all is said and done. You may find one for cheaper, but generally that's just the body, then you need to tack on a lense )provided you only want 1 of them), possibly a spare battery, a memory card or 2, etc, etc, etc...If you want a decent point a shoot camera, my brother just bought the Casio Exilim. It's a 7.2megapixel P&S camera and it was around $260.

I personally shoot with a Nikon D50 with an option of 3 lenses for now. I have a 50mm f/1.4, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, and 55-200mm f/4-5.6. I also have the Nikon SB-800 speedlight, 2 spare batteries, 2-1GB 60X cards, 1-2GB 150X card, 2-2X teleconverters, 2-52mm UV Filters, and 2-52mm Polarizer filters.

Grand total - I lost track(and I haven't even started building my arsenal of equipment yet)
Pros - ease of use for a digital SLR
Cons - limited on some functions.

The D50 is quickly going to become my back-up camera when I get my new body.

[dt98gsr]

I agree with alot of what vw corradokid had to say.

I personally have just been using a Canon SD450 P & S camera for about a year and it has worked great for me. Now Canon has a bunch of new P & S cameras out that are probably even better than mine for the same price I paid a year ago.

Pros: Small, portable, great do everything camera

Cons: Lacks interchangeable lenses, Lacks a lot of adjustable settings (alot of settings are automatically chosen by the camera on P & S cameras), quality of pictures (is great for a 5 mp P & S, but matched up to a DSLR it just doesn't compare)

Can't wait for my D80, I think the two will compliment eachother very well.

[04BlueSRT4]

I spent a few years shooting with my Fuji Finepix s5100. It worked great. It was kind of in the middle between a simple P&S and a DSLR. It was 4 mp and had alot of manual settings including apeture, shutter, exposure compensation etc....It really taught me alot about photography. I think the newer model is around $300.00. Eventually though I got to the point where I needed to upgrade, so I went a got a Nikon D50...and love it.

It's already been said before but the P&S cameras, even the ones with manual settings are limited by the lens. I believe most are 55mm. Where as the SLR's can have the lenses interchanged for all types of photo situations, but they are very pricey.

[hatchRus]

Hey guys thanks for your input. I stopped by the camera store
in the Exton Mall the other day and the guy there recommended the
Nikon D50. I think it was 599 there for the kit. I notice a lot of people on TST speak very highly of the D50, so I think that’s going to be the one. That will be my Income Tax Return gift to myself.:mrgreen:


Thanks

[vwcorradokid]

Hey guys thanks for your input. I stopped by the camera store
in the Exton Mall the other day and the guy there recommended the
Nikon D50. I think it was 599 there for the kit. I notice a lot of people on TST speak very highly of the D50, so I think that’s going to be the one. That will be my Income Tax Return gift to myself.:mrgreen:


Thanks

it's a good beginner DSLR. What's all included in the package?

[Chris_PA]

35mm Film SLR

people shouldnt be allowed to touch a digi cam until they've used these

[vwcorradokid]

35mm Film SLR

people shouldnt be allowed to touch a digi cam until they've used these

I agree, but a film SLR can really push people away. I used to use my dad's old Canon AE-1 and I loved that thing...for a few days, then I realized that I keep screwing up pictures and it's costing a lot of money to buy the film and get them developed. I got my D50 and I've been getting better and better with that and am ready to jump into something a little more technical now.

There are pros and cons with everything and in the case of a film SLR, I think the cons (for a beginner) outweigh the pros. It may force someone to really think a little more about the settings that they have on the camera when they press the shutter release, but I also don't think many people will actually remember the settings that correspond to each specific image in order to learn from their mistakes.

[grimm]

I use the canon rebel xt. It's a good basic DSLR camera. The kit came with a "decent" lens. I had a canon powershot g5 before this. I loved the G5, and I'm very happy with the xt. It's a bit smaller and lighter then the nikon d50 (which is probably the closest DSLR comparison) I think both the nikon and the canon are exceptional beginner DSLR cameras.

I Highly suggest going to www.dpreview.com and researching and comparing a few.

[ibepressin]

35mm Film SLR

people shouldnt be allowed to touch a digi cam until they've used these

You sound like an old man saying "I used to walk to school uphill in a snowstom everyday to and from school."
From a learning perspective you can not go wrong with a digital slr. Aside from the fact that you get instant feedback as to how the adjustments that you make to the camera effect the photo. You will waste no money on the first 100 rolls of film that you will basically burn aside from maybe 1 or 2 so so shots per roll. Take the money you would have burned on the film and take a class at your local camera shop or community college.

[sisforsurfing]

You sound like an old man saying "I used to walk to school uphill in a snowstom everyday to and from school."
From a learning perspective you can not go wrong with a digital slr. Aside from the fact that you get instant feedback as to how the adjustments that you make to the camera effect the photo. You will waste no money on the first 100 rolls of film that you will basically burn aside from maybe 1 or 2 so so shots per roll. Take the money you would have burned on the film and take a class at your local camera shop or community college.

At that class they'll have you take hundred of shots on film. Film is really valuable to learn on because you have to take time to notice things lots of things people with digitals can overlook. It also makes you concentrate more on your composition and lighting because there isn't as much tweaking that can take place after the fact.

I think a quality point and shoot like the Canon A530 (http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/a530.htm) is a great starter. It's only $150 and will do lots of the things more expensive SLR's will. If you're really into all manual, full adjustability cameras, you'll need an SLR, but in order to know how to use those things you need to learn the basics. Plus, dropping $500 on a D-SLR is a way bigger commitment than $150 on a camera you can use all the time, in case you find out you don't have as much interest (or time) for photo as a hobby.

[Chris_PA]

At that class they'll have you take hundred of shots on film. Film is really valuable to learn on because you have to take time to notice things lots of things people with digitals can overlook. It also makes you concentrate more on your composition and lighting because there isn't as much tweaking that can take place after the fact.

I think a quality point and shoot like the Canon A530 (http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/a530.htm) is a great starter. It's only $150 and will do lots of the things more expensive SLR's will. If you're really into all manual, full adjustability cameras, you'll need an SLR, but in order to know how to use those things you need to learn the basics. Plus, dropping $500 on a D-SLR is a way bigger commitment than $150 on a camera you can use all the time, in case you find out you don't have as much interest (or time) for photo as a hobby.

at least someone gets it

[ibepressin]

At that class they'll have you take hundred of shots on film. Film is really valuable to learn on because you have to take time to notice things lots of things people with digitals can overlook. It also makes you concentrate more on your composition and lighting because there isn't as much tweaking that can take place after the fact.



I'm sorry taking hundreds of shots on film then attempting to remember "days later" your aperture/shutter/dof/lighting conditions is virtually impossible. Oh yea "I forgot" after each shot you can take the time to write it all down. Then a day later when you get your photos back you can sit down with them and go over what each photos settings were and how when you changed your shutter speed and aperture how those changes affected the photo/photos, all the time wasting money on film. Aside from the 75% of photos that will be horrible and worthless. When you can do all of that and concentrate more on your composition and lighting with the dslr because you don't have to deal with the cost of film or any of the above listed problems associated with film. Your right I REALLY don't get it. :wiggle:

Back on topic to the thread starter don't for a single second think of getting a film slr to learn photography. The last photography class I took there were 4 or 5 die hard film guys in it and by the end of the 8 week course they were all ready to buy digital slr's.

[grimm]

in any art you need to know the roots. Before you can master the current technology you need to know and understand the previous. The learning curve of a DSLR is far better then on a SLR. But nothing out there now will replace analog, and what you can learn from it.

[sisforsurfing]

Just so you know, before I post this, I'm not trying to get at all argumentative. I appreciate what you're saying, I just have a different point of view.

To me, when I was shooting film predominantly (I still shoot a lot), I had bad habits. So whenever I shot what I thought would be a great roll, I would develop my negatives and see what I kept doing wrong, and then change it. Rinse and repeat. With digitals, you don't take your time in the learning process and just start shuttering away.
Ask any professional; you're lucky to get one respectable shot out of each roll (36 exposures) of film. Same goes for any photography.

And lastly, I'm not preaching film to be the only way to do photography; I love my D-SLR. I am saying that for hatchRus a D-SLR will be overkill. Lots of people are jumping on the SLR wagon because it's getting very cheap, which is awesome, but there are lots of fundamentals to learn before stepping up with the big boys.

hatchRus- It's not so much the camera as the photographer. Get a camera that you feel comfortable holding and taking pictures with and go out and start shooting. Good luck!

[thewake]

in any art you need to know the roots. Before you can master the current technology you need to know and understand the previous. The learning curve of a DSLR is far better then on a SLR. But nothing out there now will replace analog, and what you can learn from it.

Knowing the roots is one thing, but I don't think you are suggesting we should all go back to view cameras and glass plates to learn. What exactly can you not learn by only using digital cameras? The only thing I know of is the development and printing process for film, and with digital you don't need it.

[den9]

if anything id borrow a film slr, that way u have money for a dslr, id go with a digital slr though