I've been out of the photo loop for a while, and I'm looking to get back into things and buy a DSLR
I've been a doing a lot of research online and I'm trying to decide between the new Nikon D80 (which goes on sale in Oct) and the Canon 30D
I know the body is an important decision because I don't plan on carrying over any of my old lenses. So I was trying to get some neutral opinions on either. Funny that the Nikon and Cannon forums give the predictable answer
Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!
I will be ready to upgrade to a digital SLR sometime next year and am facing the same Nikon/Canon dilemma, but am leaning towards Nikon right now.
My first digital, a Konica Minolta A2 is really a great camera, 8 mp, image stabilization, easy to use, but I want the flexibility of extra lenses you get with the SLR. And truthfully, I want to "look" like a photographer when I whip it out! That's the REAL reason for the Nikon-leaning. Egotistical, unfortunately. Otherwise I'd probably stick with this camera for a while, which I've had about a year and paid $600. Konica Minolta is ceasing production of digital cameras, though, and that would worry me for repairs.
Sarah
__________________ "Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." - Mark Twain
DINKS, 38 and 46, plan for his ER at 50, mine few yrs later.
I've been out of the photo loop for a while, and I'm looking to get back into things and buy a DSLR
You might want to read Philip Greenspun's reviews. It may be more than you want to know but the guy is an extreme ER photo geek with plenty of time to dig into the details.
We're Canon all the way because we use the super long image-stabilized lenses which for many years Canon was superior. Don't know the current situation, but it's mute since we already own all the lenses.
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,051
What's the point of a digital SLR?*
With a film camera, you can't look through the same lens that the film uses unless you have a reflex camera (mirror flips to let light go to the film).
With a digital camera, you can look at the digitized image itself.* That is, the light goes onto the imaging plate, it's digitized, and you can look at the exact image with an LCD screen or with a viewfinder that looks at that image.* My old mavica let me look at the image itself through the viewfinder.
I may be missing something, but it seems that a digital SLR is really silly.* As if people are used to the good cameras being SLR, so they think that a DSLR would be better.* *If I'm missing something, let me know what it is.
I think it's mostly a matter of lens interchangability.* *Most digicams have a fixed lens.* *Some of the better digicams will let you swap a couple of proprietary lenses.* *But I assume the DSLR's will handle a broad range of standard 35mm lenses.
Looking like a photographer is more about attitude than equipment.* I take about 5000 photos a year that end up in calendars, on web sites, on refrigerators, in journals, on posters, etc.* I use an old Sony 8 mpix camera, so I probably don't look like a pro to you Canon and Nikon owners.
So, back to attitude.* Here's what you do.
1. At sports events, always walk on the sidelines like you own the place.* Don't worry about police or security ... you're a pro!* Remember that!
2. Always joke with the other photographers.* You can say, "Hey, my other camera is a Nikon, but with all this sand around here ... I didn't want to use it."
3. Make sure you congratulate the coaches about how well their team is coached.* *Do this even if the team got clobbered.
4. Make sure you introduce yourself to the refs before the game and thank them afterwards.* Then they don't mind that you run on the field to get that all important close-up.
5. If you are photographing the same team over and over be sure to give out free prints for a little while.* This is very endearing.
6. When photographing women, be very complimentary and re-take bad shots.* Never let anyone see themselves as they truly are.
7. Offer to take photos with the cameras of others.* This is particular useful because folks think you take great photos because you have a great camera.* You know that you can use any ol' piece of crap and still turn out great work.* So prove it to them.
8. Don't be afraid to pose people ... especially those you don't know.* And don't be afraid to tell the folks hanging around in the background to get out of the picture.* You're a pro, so direct that human traffic!
I may be missing something, but it seems that a digital SLR is really silly.* As if people are used to the good cameras being SLR, so they think that a DSLR would be better.* *If I'm missing something, let me know what it is.
Well an SLR means that you are actually looking through the lens in the viewfinder, not through a separate viewfinder window.* What you see (including focus, stopping down for depth of field preview, framing) is what the camera will actually capture.* *That's why an SLR is better - whether digital or not.* I know on my little digital point and shoot I am often frustrated by the fact that it is not SLR, because I can't seen the LCD screen that well (usually because the sun is behind me, which Duhhh! is where you want the sun to be most of the time!), and when I look through the viewfinder it only shows about 80% of the image that the camera will take.*
It's pretty critical to look at what you are shooting through the optics (not just at the LCD image) to ensure tack sharp focus.* Any image on a camera screen even if displayed through the viewfinder is going to be tiny compared to the final high-res image you see on your computer.* I don't know about digital cameras show a high-res enough LCD display to let you do these fine adjustments.* You want minimum interference between the eye and the (expensive) optics.
Besides, the Canon DSLRs don't show you the image in real time - they just show you the image after the fact so that you can evaluate exposure, etc.
For us, the DSLR also replaced our existing film bodies plus gave us an extra 1.3 to 1.6 multiplier in focal length - a real bonus for the wildlife photographer.
Well an SLR means that you are actually looking through the lens in the viewfinder, not through a separate viewfinder window.
FWIW, there are non-DSLR digicams that also have this feature (such as the Canon PowerShot that I use). The only reason I would get a DSLR (I haven't yet) is to get a better telephoto lens, but there are telephoto lenses available for my Canon, so that's probably the route I'll take.
I wanted to buy a Konica Minolta DSLR because I’ve had a Maxxum since the 80’s and already own several good lenses. But, like Sarah pointed out, KM went out of the camera business and I’m not sure what Sony is going to do in regard to supporting the technology or doing repairs on existing equipment.
Canon was appealing because of the full-frame sensor bodies in their line (like the EOS 1D or 5D), the huge variety of lenses available, the fact that they seem to be very aggressively trying to capture the digital market, and the Rebel XT 8 Mp seemed like a high quality camera to start out with. Having owned the Rebel for about five months now I have to say that I’ve been extremely pleased with the camera’s ease of use and its range of functions. The only down side has been weak performance in freezing indoor sport photography in less than ideal lighting. That may be a function of the telephoto zoom lens I went with (middle of the line instead of very good quality) and most reviews of the Rebel admit that it’s not a great low light performer.
Currently I am still playing with the Rebel while I also learn Photoshop Elements. But I am already thinking about which camera I want to buy next because I always considered the Rebel as a starter. I did not originally consider the 30D because it had been on the market a relatively short time. I chose the Rebel over the 20D as a starter mostly on price. If my choices had been between the 20D and the 30D I think the 30 would have won out. Ultimately, I think I will upgrade to a full frame sensor body and the choice will depend on what is available at that time.
__________________ "If everything is under control, you are going too slow." - Mario Andretti
My dad has a sweet nikon that takes awesome pix, but his 6mp sony takes similar quality, which are again similar in quality to his old-school film canon rebel.
I'm going to fedex right now to pic up a new digi i got for my fiance, a cheap canon a530 for 150 bucks. its replacing a 3mp walmart special which is terrible in low light. hope it works out well for her 100 pics/day of our son
It's pretty critical to look at what you are shooting through the optics (not just at the LCD image) to ensure tack sharp focus.
With our presbyopic Boomer vision, how the #$%^ would we know when the camera's in focus? At least with a periscope I could adjust the optics to my prescription or back away from the eyepieces and check the camera focus on a nearby monitor.
The main drawback with our surf-capable digital camera is that I can barely see the image on the 2"x2" LCD, let alone the display info.* I'm just not ready to give in yet and wear a pair of prescription goggles out there...
__________________ *
* For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
Quote:
Linear Mode
