PDA

View Full Version : Digital SLR Cameras


Greg W
15-05-2005, 15:01:31
Hmm. Not sure if I should put this in technoglow. Nah, probably not geeky enough. :p

I'm thinking about getting me a digital SLR camera to replace my old Canon EOS SLR, which my ex is going to keep. Any suggestions on what features I should be looking for? Ignore the actual lens for now, just interested in the features of the camera itself. Stuff like megapixels, digital zoom, image processing, anything really. Haven't even really begun to look, just after some initial advice, pointers to guides, etc...

Cruddy
15-05-2005, 15:16:49
:confused:

By digital SLR, do you mean a digital camera that shoves a new memory stick up its arse every now and then?

Or a digital camera that LOOK like an SLR but isn't?

JM^3
15-05-2005, 15:59:01
my housemate just got one

it looks cool
JM

JM^3
15-05-2005, 16:00:06
I think she got something like this

http://www.ritzocamera.com/view_product.php?product=2

JM

The Mad Monk
15-05-2005, 18:09:55
Get the Canon Digital Rebel. I bought one two years ago and have never regretted it. Since you already have a Canon SLR, all your old glass will fit

Greg W
16-05-2005, 01:20:45
Originally posted by Cruddy
:confused:

By digital SLR, do you mean a digital camera that shoves a new memory stick up its arse every now and then?

Or a digital camera that LOOK like an SLR but isn't? No, I mean a Digital SLR camera (http://www.canon.com.au/products/cameras/digital_slr.html) like I stated.

Oh, and TMM, we only appear to have the Canon EOS brand down under. EOS 350D, EOS 30D or EOS 1D. I'd probably be limited to the 350D as I'm not sure I want to spend 3k just on a body. Also, the ex is keeping the old camera, so no keeping the lens (it's only got a 18-55 anyway).

Greg W
16-05-2005, 01:24:53
HAving a look at JM's link, just noticed the 300D is a Digital Rebel. Heck of a lot cheaper there than the 350D is in Australia too.

The Mad Monk
16-05-2005, 01:26:01
I'll double check, but I think the 350D is the Digital Rebel (or a later model, the one I have is a 300D in all but nameplate.

The Mad Monk
16-05-2005, 01:27:02
xposts away!

The Mad Monk
16-05-2005, 01:28:28
If you can get the 300D, whatever the nameplate, do so.

Greg W
16-05-2005, 01:35:38
Out of interest, how much research did you do in terms of comparing other brands, and all that? I was quite happy with my old Canon SLR, however, if there's better value cameras out there, I'd be mad not to look into it. And not knowing a lot about digital photography, I'm not sure what's important to look for.

The Mad Monk
16-05-2005, 01:35:45
http://www.dcresource.com/

Lots of good reviews there, and forums.

Greg W
16-05-2005, 01:36:24
Cool, thanks, I'll check that out. :)

The Mad Monk
16-05-2005, 01:40:35
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/

The 350D is the next generation Rebel.

I did about two weeks' worth of research on several sites, and changed my mind several times. I wasn't even going in for a digital SLR when I started, and cost was a factor.

It's been two years, so I'm sure the market has changed.

Oerdin
16-05-2005, 02:12:02
If she didn't get all of the lenses then you should stick with Cannon just so you can still use them. Other wise I'd switch to Nikon.

Greg W
16-05-2005, 09:28:45
And why would you switch to Nikon?

Beta1
16-05-2005, 09:50:24
Because of the D70 - looks a bit clunky but its a very very good camera. Keeps winning awards in the camera magazines over here. I was going to get one but didnt have the money and had to settle for a Fuiji S7000 (still a great camera but not a SLR-style digital not a true SLR)

Greg W
16-05-2005, 14:21:02
The Canon D20 looks pretty much as good, and better ins ome respects, though more expensive. Then again the Canon 350D is cheaper. Depends on just what features I want I think...

Oerdin
16-05-2005, 22:14:12
Originally posted by Greg W
And why would you switch to Nikon?

There are two main parts to an SLR; the body and the lens. In my mind the lens is the more important of the two since that is actually what creates the shot and if you're going to spend money in one of those two items then it almost always is better to buy a cheaper body and a better lens.

Cannon and Nikon are the two big brands which nearly all proffessional photographers use and it is widely held that Cannon makes the best camera bodies while Nikon makes the best lenses. Thus if lenses aren't an issue (as the ex now has those) then I'd jump to Nikon since this would be a fresh start.

Oerdin
16-05-2005, 22:16:51
I may be a bit biased though since I have around $1000 in Nikkor lenses in my camera bag. ;)

Oerdin
16-05-2005, 22:35:09
Also I'd stick with 35mm in an SLR and use the digital as just an inexpensivepoint and shot camera. The reason is a 35mm film is the equivalent to 16-20 megapixel camera while even the best digital cameras on the market are still only 6-8 megapixels.

In another 2-3 years the digital SLRs will be as good as film but not yet. Thus I recomend a nice point and shoot like the Canon S500 and for a point in shoot I'd go for something like the N85 unless I was REALLY going to shoot a lot of film all the time then I might step up to an F series.

I own a Canon digital point and shoot, a Yashica 35mm point and shoot, and a Nikon SLR. I can't remember the last time I've used the film point and shoot while I use the digital point and shoot all the time while I use the SLR mainly for landscape photos and artistic type stuff I like to play around with. The Canon S400 digital point and shoot which has been pretty good though I did have one problem with the digital screen which was fixed under warrenty plus I own a N80 which I've had for four years now and it works great without ever a single problem. It does go through batteries a bit faster then I'd like though. I figure I'll hold on to the N80 until a good Nikon 16 megapixel SLR comes out then I'll sell my film camera.

Funko
17-05-2005, 09:01:08
I got a camera on my phone.

mr.G
17-05-2005, 09:03:10
i have several cameras on the highway,
at least i think they are mine because i pay a lot for those flashes.

Aredhran
17-05-2005, 11:45:10
I just recently bought a Konika-Minolta Dynax 7D (called Maxxum in US). I did quite an extensive comparison, between KM, Nikon and Canon.

The Canon 350 was probably the best choice, but since I had a Minolta before with quite a big investment in lenses, I chose the 7D so I can reuse it all. Being familiar with Minolta also reduces the learning curve.

The Minolta has one very nice feature, which is image stabilization built into the body of the camera. It basically makes you gain 2-3 f-stops in most circumstances, and while not a perfect system, it reduces the risk of bad shots due to handshake. You can get similar result with Canon or Nikon, but the stabilization system is in the lens. This is a better technique, but it comes with a heavy price tag... you'll pay nearly double the for the same focal length.

www.dpreviews.com has good in-depth comparisons.

Greg W
17-05-2005, 11:53:56
Yeah, a mate got the Konika 7D. I'm almost leaning towards waiting for the Nikon 50D (or D50 or whatever it is) is called to come out, so I can see whaat it's like. It's just a cut-down 70D, but I'm not 100% sure atm that I want to go up a step to the Canon 20D/Nikon 70D, or stick with a 350D rnage camera...

Oerdin
17-05-2005, 11:57:05
My last post was surprisingly coherent given home much I drank last night.

zmama
17-05-2005, 12:11:24
more coherent than the one today :D

Oerdin
17-05-2005, 12:21:30
There is a typo in that sentence, isn't there?

MDA
17-05-2005, 12:23:07
Originally posted by Funko
I got a camera on my phone.

:lol:

Beta1
17-05-2005, 14:30:26
Originally posted by Oerdin
Also I'd stick with 35mm in an SLR and use the digital as just an inexpensivepoint and shot camera. The reason is a 35mm film is the equivalent to 16-20 megapixel camera while even the best digital cameras on the market are still only 6-8 megapixels.

In another 2-3 years the digital SLRs will be as good as film but not yet. Thus I recomend a nice point and shoot like the Canon S500 and for a point in shoot I'd go for something like the N85 unless I was REALLY going to shoot a lot of film all the time then I might step up to an F series.

I own a Canon digital point and shoot, a Yashica 35mm point and shoot, and a Nikon SLR. I can't remember the last time I've used the film point and shoot while I use the digital point and shoot all the time while I use the SLR mainly for landscape photos and artistic type stuff I like to play around with. The Canon S400 digital point and shoot which has been pretty good though I did have one problem with the digital screen which was fixed under warrenty plus I own a N80 which I've had for four years now and it works great without ever a single problem. It does go through batteries a bit faster then I'd like though. I figure I'll hold on to the N80 until a good Nikon 16 megapixel SLR comes out then I'll sell my film camera.

If your going for a point and shoot then go for one of the prosumer SLR-style ones rather than the tiny tiny ones. The fuji series are really good -my s7000 is a fantastic but I think they have stopped making it and theres a new s20 or something. Definately go for one with full manual mode so you can still play around with the settings like on a SLR. The high end fujis have full manual focus, shutter and aperture control + long optical zooms and the excellent super-CCDs. They use hexagonal detectors rather than square so their pixels per inch isn't exactly comparable to a normal one. They claim the raw output on a s7000 is 12 million pixels (which in terms of resolution it is) but its probably closer in quality to 8-9 million. Its output at the standard 6 million setting is excellent though, it looks much better than the canon/minolta 6 million cameras that I've seen