BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Questions

Photography Question 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
 

Best SLR Digital Camera w most MP


I need a fast camera for shooting action; I need clarity, I need to blow the pictures up to a fairly large size. Which is best SLR digital camera. Right now am using a Nikon Coolpix 8700.


To love this question, log in above
8/19/2004 2:12:20 PM

 
Pamela K
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/21/2004
  I've been researching DSLRs for wildlife photography, which also requires fast action.

The best I've seen (and often had recommended to me) is the Canon D1 Mark II. This camera is designed for speed and has printing capabilities shown to be 95% the quality of 35mm film. The Cannon 1Ds and one of the Nikon's have more megapixels and resolution that surpasses that of 35mm film, but neither has the speed of the Mark II. It can take 20-40 pictures in bursts of 8.5 frames/second (the actual # depends on if you shoot JPEG vs. RAW). There is virtually no shutter delay.

Steven Chaitoff wrote a pretty good review/recommendation of the Mark II on the following thread:

http://www.betterphoto.com/forms/qnaDetail.asp?threadID=11012

I have some other sites bookmarked on my home computer. I can get them to you tonight if you're interested.

Hope this helps.

Pam


To love this comment, log in above
8/19/2004 3:06:11 PM

 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
  I would be interested in those other sites. I don't know why but am pretty hooked on Nikons. Is Canon better? In what ways?


To love this comment, log in above
8/19/2004 3:25:59 PM

 
Pamela K
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/21/2004
  A lot of people say to stick with what you're familiar with. This would seem like if you're familiar with Nikon then you should stick with Nikon. I think this is probably very important when you have put a lot of money into lenses for a film-based camera and want to use them with your digital. For going from a point-and-shoot to an SLR, it seems like it would be less important to stick with the same company.

I recommend the Mark II over the Nikon SLRs for a few reasons:

1) SPEED. For action shots, you'll really need a fast camera. Nothing that I've seen comes close to the Mark II.

2) 20-40 frame storage ON CAMERA. This means you can take 20 pictures without the camera needing to download to your card. These are taken at an amazing 8.5 frames per second. Great for action sequences.

3) 8 MEGAPIXELS. You said you wanted to have a lot of megapixels. The Mark II has more than any of the Nikons (at 6 MP) and a larger sensor resulting in a slightly larger pitch (less noise) despite the extra megapixels.

I initially looked into Canon because their video and SLR cameras can use the same lenses and my boyfriend does a lot of video so we were planning to split the cost on some good lenses. However, the more I've looked at other cameras, the more I really like the Mark II and all its capabilities. As far as I know, there isn't another camera in its class for action capabilities.

Here are the other sites:

A review of the Mark II:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6451-6636

The official Canon site:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=9808

A general review of digital SLRs and how they compare to film cameras (see especially the chart toward the bottom):
http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html

Kodak and Canon are the two that have managed to surpass the quality of 35mm film with large 13 and 11 mp sensors respectively. However these are very heavy cameras, very expensive, and not as fast as the Mark II.

Hope this helps. I'm sure there are a bunch of Nikon lovers on this site who can tell you more about the Nikon SLRs.

Pam


To love this comment, log in above
8/19/2004 5:13:38 PM

 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
  Pam! You are terrific. What a thoughtful response. I am going to look into the Mark II right away. You think the lenses are as good as the Nikon lenses as well?


To love this comment, log in above
8/20/2004 12:50:16 PM

 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
  Pam! You are terrific. What a thoughtful response. I am going to look into the Mark II right away. You think the lenses are as good as the Nikon lenses as well?


To love this comment, log in above
8/20/2004 12:50:28 PM

 
Pamela K
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/21/2004
  From what I've heard Nikon and Canon lenses are about equal. Everything I've seen on this site seems to indicate that you should choose based on what feels most comfortable to you and which has the options you want. I know several professional photographers that use Canon and don't have a problem.

For wildlife, I was told that the Canon 100-400 zoom with image stabilizer was a great lens to get. I hear it has a really fast autofocus and that the image stabilizer works really well. I'm not sure if you'll need this sort of zoom with action shots or not, but it sounds pretty good to me. Also, check out the L-series lenses which are super high quality (and REALLY expensive....).

I think you're best off if you actually get Canon lenses, though there are also Sigma lenses that are made to fit the Canon. These are cheaper, but sometimes have problems with autofocus and metering from what I've heard. My dad's an astronomer and knows a lot about optics and he seemed to think that Canon and Nikon were about equal in the optics department anyway.

I recommend going through the "photos shot by this camera" and then contacting the people that use it through their member galleries. (You can do this for any camera you're interested in, but I've listed the site for the Mark II below.)

http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGall2.asp?camID=5431

I actually have a Pentax film camera as my SLR at the moment, but I'm not going with a Pentax digital because I don't feel they're in the same leaque as the Mark II and because I don't have that much invested in lenses. Your best bet for finding out more about the Canon vs. Nikon lenses is to ask people who've used both or start another Q&A thread on that specific question.

Hope this helps.

Pam


To love this comment, log in above
8/20/2004 2:02:30 PM

 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
  I think I need to do as you say, and start asking questions from people with Nikon SLRs. My Dad used a Nikon F with several lenses. Since my Dad only recently died I was into digital photography before I inherited his camera and equipment. I really have no idea of the value of the lenses in his case; further I don't know if it would be possible (or recommended) to sell them and go with another type of camera intirely (i.e. the Mark II). Forgive me, Pam, but I was trained as an artist and have only recently become addicted to photography so all of the jargon is new and unfamiliar to me. For example, the Canon 100-400 zoom w image stablizer you mentioned... does this lens fit the Mark II? Please do forgive me if this is a dumb question!

I am also new to this site. I would love to see some of your photographs. I did not see your name mentioned in the gallery list. Are you allowed to contact me outside of this site? my email is ambergamoo@rcn.com.

If not, thank you very much for your extremely thoughtful responses. You are really very kind.

Blair


To love this comment, log in above
8/21/2004 8:33:43 AM

 
Pamela K
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/21/2004
  The Canon lens I mentioned will fit the Mark II. You can find the line of lenses for Canon cameras here:

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=111

If you already have Nikon lenses, however, it may be cheaper to continue using them and to get a Nikon DSLR. It really depends on how old the lenses are and how much control you want to have. Older lenses often don't have autofocus capabilities and may not work with the other automatic systems of your camera. You'll have to ask a Nikon person if your current lenses will be compatible with a digital Nikon.

I don't like to post my email online because it's a university address, but I'll email you and give it to you.

I have listed links to all of my photos on a Q&A thread that I started (links show up starting around the middle of the thread):

http://www.betterphoto.com/forms/QnAdetail.asp?threadID=10623

All of the photos I have posted were shot using an Olympus C-2100 Ultra Zoom camera. This is a great camera and I love it, but it only has 2.1 megapixels. I'm looking to upgrade and have been researching the Mark II (as you can see).

I haven't gotten a gallery yet because I just discovered this site recently myself. I'll probably get one next month sometime.

Good luck finding Nikon people to ask. I recommend starting a Q&A titled: "Nikon DSLRs: pros and cons" or something like that. You'll probably get more responses with a more specific question and putting Nikon in the title will attract people who know more about Nikon.

Pam


To love this comment, log in above
8/21/2004 9:10:57 AM

 
Wayne Oliver   Take a look at the new Canon D20 8.2mp
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10464


To love this comment, log in above
8/21/2004 7:32:35 PM

 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
  Thank you, Wayne. I will do that.


To love this comment, log in above
8/22/2004 2:37:37 PM

 
Steven Chaitoff
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/22/2004
  Ooooohh, yeh the D20 looks good. Brand new, good price, but it may be on backorder for a while. So I'd preoder now if your really ready to commit or just wait for a while. Listen Blair, as far as Nikon vs. Canon lenses, It seems to me that Canon just has a more developed array of lenses. Both companys manufacture the lenses excellently, but Canon just has a nice big selection and a lot of freedom when if you want to build a nice set of lenese yourself.


To love this comment, log in above
8/22/2004 3:39:19 PM

 
Pamela K
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/21/2004
  The D20 looks good, but it doesn't look as fast as the Mark II. Do you guys know what the price difference is? I couldn't find anything on the D20's price....

Pam


To love this comment, log in above
8/24/2004 2:19:10 PM

 
Karma Wilson
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/27/2004
  An article I read said it's going to be around $1500--Oh man am I drooling!

Karma


To love this comment, log in above
8/24/2004 4:30:05 PM

 
Steven Chaitoff
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/22/2004
  Yes the price is quite low in comparison to your garden variety Canon Pro SLR. It's not as fast. Still only 9 AF points compared to 45.


To love this comment, log in above
8/24/2004 8:07:20 PM

 
William Koplitz   you should check out dpreview.com and do a side by side comparison.


To love this comment, log in above
8/26/2004 6:53:20 AM

 
Blair Boudreau
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/19/2004
  You are all terrific -- very helpful. I'm definitely looking into a Canon.


To love this comment, log in above
9/1/2004 7:11:48 AM

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.