posted
So. We found out just a few minutes ago that Fahim's visa is ready, so we actually can go to Dubai on Wednesday, which we apparently are still doing. So, now it's time for me to get serious about digital camera shopping.
We're shopping for a new digital camera for me since the old one is about 4 years old and the battery is seriously dying.
Considerations. I'm looking for something with around an 8x optical zoom and I need to take publishable quality photos. Budget - ideally, around $500-ish or less. We'll spring for more if absolutely necessary, but would like to avoid doing so if we can get decent enough for less than that. I also need it to take decent macros.
Please, get all geeky on me and give me your recommendations.
posted
I bought the Panasonic Lumix FZ-20, which at the time was a SUBURB camera. Lower Megapixels than some of the competition, but an enormous lens on the sucker, with a lot of manual control options.
I believe the FZ-30 is out now and is also getting some good press. And probably in your price range.
I'd go for a better lens over higher MP any day of the week.
posted
Troubs, thanks! It looks like quite the camera with a lot of features I'm looking for. Actually, I can't think of anything it can't do that I'm looking for with the sole exception of SLR, but that's out of the budget, so...
It also looks like I'd pretty much have no choice but to read the manual on this one. But then, I do that anyway...
I'm going to explore this further, and yeah, this is the type of thing I'm looking for.
And I hear ya about the photos...
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Canon has been good to me and my family. Certain versions of the Powershot series are especially nice for the price tag.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Some interesting articles -- at a very good camera review site which actually explains things for the naive customer -- on the FZ20, the FZ30, and the FZ7. I included the FZ7 as as a lower-priced alternative especially to point out that there can often be a LARGE difference between the manufacturor's recommended price (US$399), the "average street price" (US$371), and the easily available purchase price (US$275). When Panasonic's new FZ50 sells for US$550, the FZ30 should be findable at around US$450.
BTW: You probably know this considering SriLankan import taxes, but I think that shopping at Dubai Duty Free will allow considerable savings on your camera purchase.
posted
I will heartily second everything positive that has been said and written about the Panasonic Lumix FZ20 and above models. You will not regret getting this camera. If my own FZ20 hadn't been stolen (at a French camera store, of all places) I would still be happily taking photos with its incredible zoom lens and photo clarity. I hear the FZ30 and 50 models are even more impressive.
Posts: 786 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm, um, now looking at SLR cameras. I didn't think any were available for under $1000, but the Nikon D50... Well, with a lens, granted only an 18-55mm one, is sitting at $700. *drool*
Oh. Thriftiness now appears to be out the window. Uh. Yeah.
I'm considering Nikon because, well, to be blunt, Minolta pissed me off. I have a 35mm Minolta camera, and I loved it, but... From manual focus to autofocus bodies, they changed the lens format. From autofocus 35mm to digital bodies, they changed the lens format again. Nikon didn't. Nikon scores points in that regards. You know, not screwing existing customers thing. Either Canon or Pentax did the same thing as Minolta - I don't remember which. Plus Nikon has (had?) an excellent reputation regarding lens quality. So, now I'm seriously reconsidering.
Plus I can ask for additional lenses for birthdays, anniversaries...
ETA: I don't know if the lens that comes with it can do macro or not. Still trying to find out. If it can, then, um, *drool*
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Get a Nikon Coolpix 5700 (5mp, can probably acquire for $200) or 8700 (8mp, can probably acquire for $450). Built-in 8x optical zoom, rotating screen arm and digital viewfinder, making it a camera with no real need for SLR.
It's thriftiness, except you still get essentially all the pro photography capacity you would get with a 'professional SLR,' for half the price.
They're hardy, too. I have a 5700 which I dropped off a roof, and it still works.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
aspectre, thanks for linking to the earlier discussion. I'm absorbing information from that thread, as well. And the threads it links to as well.
Side note on the Dubai Duty Free shop - Fahim's shopped there - granted, six years ago - and his comment is that it's great for jewellery and such, but lousy on electronics. Has it changed? *shrugs* We might just find out...
Thanks for the recommendations, Earandil, Brian, and Samprimary.
Personally, if we can swing it, I'm still leaning towards an SLR. It gives me the best flexibility for what I really want to do and potentially will need to do.
Also, does anyone hang out at any digital photography type forums? Any recommendations?
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Try the Canon S3 IS. It has 12X optical zoom (36-432 mm equivalent) with image stabilization. If you get one with a hight optical zoom, image stabilization is a must-have.
For SLR's the Canon Digital Rebel XTi is my choice.
Though these entry level SLRs are relatively inexpensive, good lenses really ratchet up the price. Stevesdigicam.com is a great site for info and reviews of digital cameras. Here's their selection of the best cameras onthe market. http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.htmlPosts: 407 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I own a Nikon D70 and love it. Currently I'm also drooling over the new D80, but I'll have to wait awhile before I can afford any upgrades.
Personally I don't think you can go wrong with a Nikon. I've never used a D50, and like you said, even that is slightly more than you planned on spending, but I don't think you'll regret it. I was a long-term Canon film camera user, but don't have any experience with Canon digital.
Best advice, find a friend if possible who has a camera you're sort of looking at or for. Get a feel for it.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Best advice, find a friend if possible who has a camera you're sort of looking at or for. Get a feel for it.
Would that I could, Dark as night, would that I could. Digital cameras here are not common to start with, and I know of only one person who has a digital SLR. Digital SLRs are not available for sale here, near as I can tell, and only the very low end range of digital cameras are available for sale. Nothing over $400 is available, and certainly nothing with any features I'm looking for.
Welcome to Sri Lanka.
I appreciate the feedback on the Nikon D70. It's good to hear from satisfied owners.
Thanks to Mig's suggestion of the Canon EOS Rebel XTi, I now want that even more than the Nikon. *drool*
More research to do...
As a side note, we leave for the airport in 16 hours. We think. We still don't have our tickets - the travel agent still hasn't issued them. Hopefully this morning? Anyway, with no tickets, we also don't know the exact time our flight is leaving (is it midnight? 2am? 3am? We think 3am... But we're really not sure...) The travel agent hasn't been able to tell us. Good ol' Sri Lankan customer service at work.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quit drooling, quid, I'm afraid you're gonna make a mess on my keyboard!!
Seriously, though, I used to be a camera geek but I don't know nuttin' no more. My old manual SLR just sits in a bag and my little point and shoot digital is all I use now, and not especially well. So I envy you your new purchase. I'm going to have to get back into photography someday. Have fun! And I hope your travel agent figures out what time your flight leaves in time for you to get there! Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, can't help the drooling. Really. Especially since Fahim's mom made rulang this morning. Rulang being a sweet made with, um, semolina, coconut milk, and jaggery, and it's really really really good. She plans to bring it on the plane. Along with a whole buttload of dried fish, coffee, tea, and some cooked beef. Are they gonna allow it all? I have no idea! Oh, and probably the rest of my brownies.
And I still haven't made a final decision. Too much stuff to do to get ready to go! Ack!
But I'm still leaning towards the Canon EOS Rebel XT. Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If this will help you make your decision, remember to prioritize shutter lag times. Don't even look at cameras that aren't going to give you a nigh instantaneous picture taking time if you're going all-out for the SLR.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep, Samprimary, I agree that's completely important. It ranks right up there as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for reminding me to put it on my list of features. Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd go for the Powershot from Canon. It takes really nice photos. You won't find an SLR for under $500, sadly. You may find a 350D on sale somewhere for around $800 if you're really lucky, but I doubt that would include the lens. If you aren't familiar with using an SLR, it's not really worth the money anyway, especially right before you go on an exciting vacation and want to take a whole lot of pictures but don't necessarily have time to learn all the tricks of the camera!
My recommendation's for the Powershot, but similar models from other manufacturers would do you well, too. I happen to have a Konika Minolta dImage Z10 that's my "crummy vacation camera." I don't risk any of my professional cameras when I'm traveling for fun, so I take my beater little Konika. Aside from the fact that it's decided to stick itself on 1600 ISO and refuses to change to any other ISO, it's been fantastic. Easy to use, good digital zoom, makes decent prints for a beater camera. Well, it did make decent prints, before the 1600 ISO episode, which is probably my fault for being so hard on it. I got it at Target for under $300.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
This wasn't addressed to me, but I'll answer anyway, because I love my cameras! :lol:
I do have a Rebel (350D) that I do a lot of my shooting with. It's minorly limited in some of its functions compared to the other bodies, but it's lightweight, which is nice, because it saves fatigue and pain in my neuritis-inflicted wrists. I don't like its teeny-tiny view screen, which makes it practically impossible to discard bad photos on the fly, if I don't have the time to sit down and zoom in on them to see if I like them. Blech. It's the camera I choose for long wedding receptions, especially outdoors, where the light is already great and I don't have to rely on any camera settings to take great photos.
All in all, it's a nice camera. I didn't think I'd end up using mine as often as I do, but who knew? I've ended up using the heavier 1D body more for a backup and for portraits and detail/moody photos, as well as for my tripod-mounted stuff (low light, etc.) where I want a little more control and an easier time seeing the results when it comes time to pare down my selections on-camera to free up some space on my cards (I use 256-MB flash cards, by the way, because of my particular profession, so space is a big consideration for me, especially because I shoot RAW most of the time).
The drawbacks to the Rebel, in my opinion, are pretty few. It's a very good "prosumer" camera. I notice that it's just a hair slower than the 1D on autofocus, even on my best lenses, but by the time I'm using the Rebel, I usually am at a point where I can use zone focus or a prime lens anyway, so it's no big deal. Other than that, the plastic body worries me a tad sometimes - if it really gets banged around, who knows what might happen? The "higher" Canon bodies are metal-reinforced (hence the extra weight). Otherwise, I have no complaints. I expected it to be my personal "fun" camera, but it's worked itself into my professional gear seamlessly!
However, I am saving up for the new 5D bodies. I want at least two of 'em. Mmmmm...delicious 5D. Pretty much irresistible to a wedding photographer! I swear, I'll NEVER get my student loans paid off at this rate. Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've had my eye on the Canon Rebel for a long time, but haven't been able to justify the expense. (It's been in my Amazon cart for a long time.) Pros: Price, wide range of Canon lenses, awesome reviews. I have a Canon digital camera so I'm familiar with the controls. Plus I like the size of the XTi. I have smallish hands and the smaller size of the Rebel is attractive to me. Also, based on earlier reviews, be sure you look at the the improved and newer XTi not the XT. My problem with the XT, also noted on some of the reviews, is that in bright situations the memu readout was hard to read. That is no longer a problem with the XTi. (Note that in some markets its called the EOS 400D) Here is a great review (the writer says that its not a review, but it reads like a review to me) and some lenses from my favorite photography site: http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/rebel%20xti.shtml
Again, if I didn't buy the SLR, I'd buy the Canon S3 SI, with the image stablilized 12X opitcal zoom. I belive that the S3 is part of the Powershot family of Canon cameras.
But non-SLR digicams have two distinct disadvantages relative to the SLRs. 1) Non-SLRs are slow. Lag time is not much of an issue with SLR's, provided you get good lenses. 2) Noise levels at night or low light situations are terrible because of the small sensors on most digicams. For example, I made a NYC trip and took what I thought were some great night shots of the city with my old Canon Powershot S50 and when I got home saw that the noise level was so bad that the pictures were a total waste. The S50 takes great pictures, but forget taking any night shots. You won't have that problem with an SLR.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just bought my Daughter a Pentax K100D. She already has a sack of lenses with the Pentax mount system so it made sense. The camara will use all the lenses that Pentax ever made. It is still new, but she loves it. She often uses a big Canon at work and says that the new Pentax compares well.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am also shopping for a new digital SLR camera and the one that has me most impressed is the Olympus E-400. Unfortunately, its only available in Europe (at least right now), so I may have to wait until next summer or have my SIL in Germany ship it to me.
I've been trying to find out why Olympus is only marketing this in Europe but can't get any info.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, the XTi is really nice. If not for the 5D and the professional advantages that ME WANTEE in my next camera, I'd probably get an XTi in spite of the fact that the LCD screen is still a little bit small for my tastes.
Oh, the other thing I dislike about the Rebel line is that I have big honkin' schnozz and I'm always bumping the time-delay button with my nose by the end of a long wedding reception, which really gets obnoxious. On the larger bodies, it's in a Libbie-nose-safe zone. Otherwise, though, it really is a great camera!
And I LOVE luminous-landscape.com!
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I bought myself the Pentax *st DL earlier this year (there are newer models available). It's my first DSLR. So far, I really like it. It's incredibly durable (survived two months of backpacking). It has the auto/preset features that I, as a newbie, really appreciate and use as shortcuts. And it has the manual features that I like to play with and learn on. My only problem so far is that the rubber eye cup has a tendency to fall off in the bag. I generally just shoot without it.
Posts: 2149 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doesn't the Pentax use alkaline batteries? If I remember correctly, that was our main reason to avoid it.
We have the Canon Rebel XT with a sigma 19-200mm lens (also the cheap Canon 50mm f1.8) and we love it.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Olympus official line is that their E300 and E330 cameras are doing quite well in the US, and that the E400 would detract from the market share those two hold. I suspect: It has more to do with Olympus' strategic alliance with Panasonic, what with Panasonic being its major partner in developing and promoting the 4/3rdsOpenStandard for camera lenses and other parts&accessories. Panasonic has just introduced its first SLR, the L1 which shares the same optical subsystem, LiveMOS sensor, etc with the E330. So Olympus is marketing the E400 only in Europe to allow Panasonic some running room to gain market traction for its SLR in the US. It doesn't pay for Olympus to engage in cutthroat competion with Panasonic's only SLR when a successful launch of the L1 would strongly increase Panasonic's incentive to pump money into the 4/3rds program.
posted
The Pentax SLRs (with the apparent exception of the newest one) use either AAs or a specialized kind of battery that I can't remember the name of (CRV-something?). That was a high point for me, as I bought this for a long backpacking trip and wanted the flexibility. I've only used AAs in it, and I've found that good rechargables do quite well. My main point of comparison, though, is with my Canon S50, a non-SLR that relies a lot more on the viewscreen. So it's hard to tell.
Edit: I found the name of the other batteries, CR-V3 Lithium.
Posts: 2149 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep, and many battery*grips can also use either AA or proprietary lithium batteries. With those proprietary batteries often lacking interchangeability between different cameras and with them being individually very expensive to buy as spares and with stores carrying them being few and far between, having a camera which has the capability of using AA batteries that can be purchased in most stores as spares is a plus for the owner when the need to take an unexpected number of photos arises.
* Essentially an extra battery pack which hooks up with the camera to increase the number of pictures one can take before having to take a break from shooting.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
If the Canon 350D (aka XT) were available at US prices, we would have bought it, or the 400D, the bigger badder more grown up version. But, unfortunately, the prices are 30-60% higher than MSRP, which threw all SLRs out of the budget. Same as the Panasonic that Troubs first mentioned - now too expensive.
I ended up getting a Nikon Coolpix S10 which I now love. It doesn't have everything I want, but it has enough for now. We'll get me a DSLR when our budget has more flexibility for larger expenses, and we'll fly somewhere with lower price tags on cameras.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a bit late to the party, I meant to respond sooner but the thread dropped off my radar.
I've owned both the Rebel and I now own the Rebel XT. I also drool over the 5D. *drool* One day, I'll pick it up. One day...
I use it for my pro stuff since I can't afford a better body. My lenses are Canon (hence a Canon body). I've got one Sigma that I use primarily for my sports shooting. Since I shoot a lot of sports, I've got large CF cards (1 4G and 2 2G and a couple 1G), and I shoot in RAW.
I'm actually really happy with the XT. I switched from the original Rebel because of the writing to CF card lag time on the Rebel was hugely improved on the XT. I'd shoot a burst and then have to wait an intolerable number of seconds for the shots to write to the card, and in fencing, a few seconds in a looooong time. This one would take up to ten seconds. That's FOREVER.
RAW also gives you more leeway than taking any compressed shots, it's basically the digital version of a negative. So you have more latitude to play with while processing, meaning I can push-process an underexposed fencing shot in the RAW editing program.
Anyway... with DSLR the market now pretty much exploding, there are many, many good options. Canon and Nikon are pretty much on par with one another and for many folks, it really depends on whose lenses you've already invested in (I chose Canon because I have Canon lenses, no other reason). Sony bought out Minolta and their cameras will work with Minolta gear (so I last read). Sony's new DSLR is currenty getting rave reviews.
So really, once you can swing a DSLR, look for the features you want in camera bodies with lenses you already own (if you're happy with said lenses, that is). Also check out the ISO noise ratios depending on the type of shooting you do. I know that the original Rebel's and the XT's 1600 ISO ratings aren't great but other models have improved on that.
posted
RAW is absolutely amazing. It practically doubles the color intensification range you get without noise, among other nice things. It's even great for B&W, because it will avoid chunky gradients.
Here's some stuff I did with the aforementioned 5700 in RAW:
posted
And for those of you following this thread who have no idea what shooting in RAW means (like me):
quote: Unlike JPEG and TIFF, RAW is not an abbreviation but literally means "raw" as in "unprocessed". A RAW file contains the original image information as it comes off the sensor before in-camera processing so you can do that processing afterwards on your PC with special software.
ETA: I know mack explained it a bit, but I guess I was still looking to have the acronym defined so the above was helpful to me.
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I miss them too, and the random hallucinations and epileptic fits that they triggered. Oh, how I loved those darkroom chemicals, I spent a lot of time hovering over that stop bath ha ha hwee hoo eee hoo hoo HA hoo hee i hope there was no permanent damage
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In regards to RAW and control over the processing, I'd taken my SLR and 50mm/f1.8 lens with me on a trip up to see my sister. The sun set as we were driving back and had set when we happened on a bit of lake that offered a glass-like surface, the remaining fading pink/purple clouds, and the last few bits of dry/colored fall leaves.
I wanted the shot, but I didn't have at tripod with me. I didn't want camera shake and I wasn't willing to bump the ISO from 400 to 800 because of the grain/noise factor. Since I had a fixed focal length and aperature, I already had as full of an exposure as I'd get. Exposing the shot perfectly would result in camera shake. So I deliberately under-exposed knowing that if it were film (learning how to develop and print in a darkroom is fantastic experience, imho), I could bump it up a stop to get the right exposure.
Anyway, I ended up bracketing a few shots with different shutter speeds. I processed the RAW photo up a half-stop, then cropped in photoshop. (I work in photoshop using only techniques that I could also reproduce in a darkroom unless I'm experimenting).
Shot with a Canon Digital Rebel XT, Canon 50mm lens, f.18, shutter speed 1/30, ISO 400—
quote:Your pictures are wonderful, by the way. Do you have a website? Are you a pro?
Thanks!
No website, no prodom -- I'm waiting until I have a very large assembly of book-printing-worthy pictures before I portfolio and publish. I'm 60% there.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
But then, I do that anyway...![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Good ol' Sri Lankan customer service at work.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Are they gonna allow it all? I have no idea! Oh, and probably the rest of my brownies. ![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
