BetterPhoto.com - Become a better photographer today!
EMAIL:
PASSWORD:
remember me:     
     


Photography QnA: What Is a Digital SLR Camera?

Browse by Category | All New Questions | All New Responses | Q&A Home

Category: Best Photographic Equipment to Buy : Digital Cameras and Accessories : What Is a Digital SLR Camera?

Are you asking yourself, what is a digital SLR camera? Take a look at this Q&A for some answers.

Page 1 : 1 -10 of 19 questions

  Next 9  >>
     
 
Photography Question 
Rebecca C. Barnini
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 1/15/2007
  1 .  Portrait Photography
I was asked to do some headshots for a Realtor for his business cards (in addition to photographing his home). I will have a Nikon D100 and an SB-80 Speedlight. Should I bring along my tripod? How can I avoid shadows if I photograph him against a wall? What settings should I use? help!! :)

2/22/2008 2:16:02 PM

Pete H
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/9/2005
  Hello Rebecca,
"How can I avoid shadows if I photograph him against a wall?"
Answer: Don't photograph him against a wall. If there's enough light, shoot the pic without flash. Meter directly from his skin tone, set camera on manual, back up, re-compose and shoot.
Unless you are shooting slow shutter speeds for the house (you didn't say interior or exterior), you don't need a tripod.
All the best,
Pete

2/22/2008 6:56:15 PM

Tareq M. Alhamrani
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 6/26/2006
  If you can be more smart then, use widest aperture to eliminate the background including shadows or whatever.
or, place your model or subject little further away from the wall or background so you don't see shadows, if you place your light from above the shadows will be down, and if you really can't avoid shadows on walls or backgrounds then the best way to get rid of those shadows is to light the wall itself with another source of light if possible.

2/26/2008 4:10:43 AM

Dale M. Garvey

member since: 3/13/2006
  I often shoot my head shots outside with a background such as a tree that I can knock out of focus. I use a 80-200 mm lens wide open. For the ladies I look for a place that the sun can highlight their hair. A little fill flash is also nice. If you shoot raw you can correct many errors in photoshop.

2/26/2008 5:41:27 AM

Devon McCarroll
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 7/13/2005
  Hi Rebecca,
I've done headshots for a realtor, and for their business cards they generally need a solid background to look good. I have a portable black backdrop, but you could also tack a solid colored sheet (or any solid fabric) against a wall. Just be sure to position him about four feet or so from the background to help eliminate shadows.
For light, I use my speedlight on the "wireless" mode and shoot into an umbrella with a reflector on the other side. If you can't do this, you may have to do some editing in Photoshop to adjust the light, so shooting in RAW would be a good idea.
Alternatively, use window light on one side with a reflector on the other side. If you don't have a reflector, a white foam core board or even a white sheet will work.
Hope this helps!

2/26/2008 8:31:09 AM

Ken Kerruish

member since: 5/22/2007
  Hi Rebecca,

While I'm not familiar with Nikon products, you should be able to tilt the head of the flash unit so it is facing straight up. Depending on the height of the ceiling, it should bounce the light, and avoid the harsh shadows you are concerned with, or at least change the angle of the shadow so that it is not directly behind your subject.

If the ceiling is too high to get an effective bounce, you can tape a 3x5 index card to the back of the flash (with about 3-4" sticking out past the edge of the flash, and the reflection off the card will provide a nice, soft fill while letting the rest of the light bounce from the ceiling.

You may want to look at a 10-15$ 'Omnibounce' head to diffuse the light.

One last thing - take a few test shots, and if it looks like he's being too washed out by the flash, look at changing your flash's exposure compensation (either via the flash, or on the camera itself). It's an option on many flashes/cameras and reduces the amount of power used to generate the flash.

The above methods have been used for years, and most times can eliminate the need for an umbrella, stand, etc.

The suggestions regarding using available light to help fill one side of the subject are excellent - but be careful of harsh shadows on the other side of the person's face, or discoloration due to tinting or objects near the window...

Good luck, and enjoy!

2/26/2008 8:56:01 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Veronica V. Perez

member since: 10/7/2004
  2 .  What Kind of Digital Camera to Buy?
I am just starting my own photography studio, and I want to purchase a digital camera. Any help on what kind of camera, would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

10/7/2004 12:15:57 PM

Doug  Elliott
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 9/18/2004
  The one you can best afford. If you can afford the Canon 1Ds and two to three lens, or you can go with a Nikon, or Kodak. I use a Fuji S2. I like the Nikon system of lens. I have been shooting Nikons for many years.
Hope this info helps.

10/7/2004 6:24:13 PM

Diane Dupuis-Kallos
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 12/27/2003
  How much money do you have to spend? Do you have basic photography knowledge? If you do, you should have an idea as to what features you are looking for in the camera. There are many online camera comparison and review sites that will help you decide which camera to pick.

Editor's note: In fact, there are digital camera reviews right here at Betterphoto: http://www.betterphoto.com/reviewsTOCDynoSub.asp?catID=5

You can contact fellow BP'ers and ask them directly what they like and don't like about their cameras. When your list is narrowed down to a few, go into a camera store and try them out! Does it feel right? Don't let the salesperson push you one way or the other - they often don't know what they are talking about...
Good luck - it is a tough decision - but I know that I'm very happy with mine!

10/8/2004 4:43:25 AM

Scott Pedersen

member since: 11/18/2001
  Pentax IST-D looks good. They use K-mount lenses and I have always been happy with my film cameras.

10/12/2004 3:51:14 AM

Haley  Crites

member since: 3/23/2001
  I am taking a portrait class right now and my professor has a Nikon D100. He said that the Nikon D70 is the newer model of this and a little less expensive. They both looked really nice and had many features. You can buy the Nikon D70 on ebay new for about $800-1000.00.

10/12/2004 6:17:03 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Sue Carter

member since: 12/26/2003
  3 .  Which Camera to Buy?
Help! I was all set to buy the Rebel D and went to a photo store and was told that the new Nikon D70 was much better. I was a bit unsure how much of what the employee told me was true but basically he said it was faster, clearer, had many more options and the photos could be enlarged much larger. I currently use the Rebel 2000 and have several lenses although none that were too expensive. Was this guy just trying to sell me the camera of the day or was he right?

Thanks!

3/6/2004 6:53:16 PM

Wing Wong
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/8/2004
  Hi Sue,

Well, the Nikon D70 will have more resolution and various other improvements which were not present in the Canon Digital Rebel. So the employee wasn't trying to sell you the camera of the day.

The thing is, several new cameras are coming out recently which have better resolution and such.

Since you have Canon lenses, you would be better served getting the Rebel and then selling it and upgrading to the newer Canon digital body. That way, you get to make use of your existing set of lenses.

3/7/2004 12:15:27 AM

Esther Mishkowitz

member since: 5/14/2000
  is there a canon camera out there that is comparable to the d70?
thanks

12/14/2004 7:40:59 PM

Tom N. King

member since: 11/15/2004
  Yes. If you are looking to stay with the canon EOS lineup, there the EOS 20D for about $1500 or the older EOS 10D for about $1100-$1200.
To switch brand now would mean that you might have to start collecting lens to that brand as well, and more money wasted. When it come to buying an SLR, chose the brand that offer a good combination of cameras and lens.
you can't have nikon today and pentax so on the bext day. Well unless money is no object. But than again the time to learn new system. I for one don't like to sit there and read a new system, i'd rather go shooting.
be safe, be happy, go shooting.
tom

12/14/2004 9:21:05 PM

John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/8/2001
  Pop Phot recently rated the nikon D70 as 2004 Camera of the Year. you should check out the December and January issues - in the section on Gear, Pop Photo notes great things about the Canon 20D and several problems with the D70. It's interesting that the camera of the Year Rating was given based on the comments in Gear.

In the January issue, the 20D is reviewed and really given a lot of praise. Again, I don't get the COTY rating.

Since you're using Canon equipment, Canon is probably the better choice. You won't have to get all new lenses.

Remember something, the Rebel D is the lower level digital SLR offered by Canon.. Thus, it's inappropriate to compare it to either the D70 or 20D.

12/15/2004 8:02:41 AM

  A tough choice between a superb + camera (D70), a superb camera (10D) and a really superb ++ camera (20D).

You cannot go wrong with any of these three, but if you own Canon lenses, it does not make sense to buy a Nikon camera.

If your budget allows, the 8 megapixel EOS 20D(versus the 6 megapixel models) is probably the best camera in the consumer level D SLR market.

Cheers! Peter

12/31/2004 11:25:59 AM

Nacoma D. Hayden
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 12/27/2004
  Stick with the Canon. You already have the equiptment and its a waste of money to get a new system. Evenmore "Canon" is the best name in photography. (No I'm not getting paid to make this statement)

1/9/2005 2:39:01 PM

Derek Holyhead

member since: 12/26/2003
  Hi Sue,
Buy the Nikon and then send all your Canon lenses to me for use on my digital rebel, just joking. I have the Digital Rebel and have no real complaints with it and unless you need more features than your current Rebel 2000 it should be a good choice for you. I previously used a EOS 600 (630 in the USA) and the only thing I miss is the option to choose the AF mode myself and for this I wish I had chosen the 10D, the 20D wasn't available 12 months ago when I bought my Digital Rebel. As Nacoma said, Canon is the best name in photography, I have been using them since 1973. Stick with Canon and keep your lenses, if not refer to the my first line! Good luck.
Regards,
Del

1/9/2005 4:32:56 PM

Andres  Llopart
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 1/13/2005
  The D70, 10D and Digital Rebel are all great camera bodies. If you are looking for sharper images and better quality you should invest more on lenses rather than the body. Saying that the Digital Rebel comes with a great price that allows you to spend some money in a better lens. Lenses don’t depreciate as much as the cameras bodies, and last much longer. If you have a budget go for the Digital Rebel (bought mine under $700) and get better lens, in the future you can upgrade to better bodies when the prices come down….

1/13/2005 11:55:45 AM

Sue Carter

member since: 12/26/2003
  Hi Guys-

Thanks for all of your input. I asked this question the 6th of March last year and lately it is getting a bunch of activity. In May I bought the Digital Rebel. I love it. My lenses work with it (plus all the new lenses I have bought since). It never gives me any trouble and the pic's are great. If I was buying today I would probably step up to one of the newer canon's and probably will eventually but for now this camera does everything I need it to do.

Sue

1/17/2005 1:33:58 PM

Grant Davenport

member since: 9/12/2004
 

Sue,

Hi there and thanks for my chance to respond to this question.

I don't know how many times these sort of questions have been asked on this website....

I remember a saying someone in a camera shop said to me once "Canon are nice to touch, and nice to hold, but if it were a Nikon consider it sold"...boom boom lol
No but seriously :
It's like asking "how long is a piece of string" or "how tall's a china man" or "do you like sweet & sour chicken or sweet & sour pork"
It comes down to the individual. It's there personal choice as to what camera they pick up, feel, like to hold and ultimately what they buy. The consumer is the only person who can make this choice.

Yes, the D70 is a great camera at a very good price. It has alot of the better features and functions of the more expensive D100 and you do have the ability to use 99% of the older Nikon lenses that you may already own. Nikon have always been of very good quality and hopefully will continue this tradition of reliabilty and decent prices.
As for "is Canon better than Nikon", that again comes down to the individual. I love my Nikon equipment and wouldn't part with it for the world
however if I was to ever have to replace all my equipment for some strange reason, I would definately consider Canon gear as it too is excellent photographic equip' and some of the functions/features on Canon aren't available on Nikon so it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

Best of luck with your choice and remember, forget what camera you use but remember get out there and start shooting.

Grant
anyoccasionphotography

2/3/2005 5:24:11 PM

Grant Davenport

member since: 9/12/2004
 
Sue,

Hi there and thanks for my chance to respond to this question.

I don't know how many times these sort of questions have been asked on this website....

I remember a saying someone in a camera shop said to me once "Canon are nice to touch, and nice to hold, but if it were a Nikon consider it sold"...boom boom lol
No but seriously :
It's like asking "how long is a piece of string" or "how tall's a china man" or "do you like sweet & sour chicken or sweet & sour pork"
It comes down to the individual. It's there personal choice as to what camera they pick up, feel, like to hold and ultimately what they buy. The consumer is the only person who can make this choice.

Yes, the D70 is a great camera at a very good price. It has alot of the better features and functions of the more expensive D100 and you do have the ability to use 99% of the older Nikon lenses that you may already own. Nikon have always been of very good quality and hopefully will continue this tradition of reliabilty and decent prices.
As for "is Canon better than Nikon", that again comes down to the individual. I love my Nikon equipment and wouldn't part with it for the world
however if I was to ever have to replace all my equipment for some strange reason, I would definately consider Canon gear as it too is excellent photographic equip' and some of the functions/features on Canon aren't available on Nikon so it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

Best of luck with your choice and remember, forget what camera you use but remember get out there and start shooting.

Grant
anyoccasionphotography

2/3/2005 5:25:45 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Sean R. O'Connor

member since: 1/12/2004
  4 .  Differences Between Nikon DSLR's
I was wondering if anyone could explain to me the differences between the D1H, D1X, D2H, and D100? I understand that they have different specs, but I have heard that each one is specifically geared towards a certain style of photography. Any info would be great! Thanks.

2/26/2004 7:24:52 AM

Roy Breslawski

member since: 2/5/2004
  There is a lot of information on the Nikon USA site about the differences. You might want to check www.nikonusa.com. For a quick, simple run down here are the basic differences.

D1h and D2h are aimed at the same market. The D2h is the replacement model just recently introduced. Although the resolution is the lowest, it offers exremely high image quality. Most importantly though is the speed. It is ready to shoot as soon as it is turned on, it has the shortest shutter lag and fastest autofocus available in a SLR, and it can shoot continuously at 8fps for up to 40 jpegs or 25 RAW images before having to empty the buffer. It also has wireless communications built in for instant transfer of image files to another computer. Primary market is photojournalists and other markets that require extremely fast operation.

The D1x is getting a little long in the teeth. It is the rugged, high end system for pros. Although the resolution is not as high as the D100, many feel it creates a little better image (I don't agree). It is based on the F5 body, which is to say it is about the most rugged SLR you can buy. For people who take a lot of pictures and have constant handling it offers a reliable package.

The D100 is the mainstream advanced amateur system. It offers very high image quality at a reasonable price (in the DSLR world anyway). Its autofocus is not as fast as the pro bodies, and it is not as ruggedly built. For normal, everyday use it is a good system.

Coming in March is the D70. It offers less than the D100 in the way of accessories (e.g. no vertical grip), but it appears to have higher image quality, better metering and instant turn on. It is also under $1000 for the body. This will be the mainstream, high volume Nikon DSLR for the near future.

Hope I helped more than confused.

2/26/2004 4:52:43 PM

Sean R. O'Connor

member since: 1/12/2004
  Thanks for your response Roy, it did help. I don't understand how the d2h can have a lower resolution but higher image quality... but I do get the rest. Thank you again.

2/27/2004 7:11:11 AM

Roy Breslawski

member since: 2/5/2004
  Resolution is a big part of image quality, but it is only one factor. Also important are noise at a particular ISO, color response and accuracy, bit depth to name a few. Just the same as film. The smallest grained films are not neccessarily the highest quality for a particular image.

2/27/2004 4:47:15 PM

Robert Bridges

member since: 5/12/2003
  Don't quote me on this but I believe the Dh2 actually has higher resolution then its predecssor the Dh1. In which case, along with the enhanced buffer, the wireless,
the ruggedness, the speed, and the market for which the D2h is aimed at - e.g.,
sports and photo journalists its image resolution is more then adequate. Lastly, I believe that both the D1x and the D2h are built with the F5's color matrix meter which neither the D100 or the D70 have.

3/2/2004 9:09:22 PM

Gene 

member since: 2/10/2004
  am a little confused here, robert, according to dpreview on the d70, it has 3d color matrix metering with 1,005-pixel rgb sensor.

3/14/2004 8:52:38 PM

Roy Breslawski

member since: 2/5/2004
  Yes, the D70 also has the color matrix meter. From my many years of experience with the F5, this meter really is much better than all the others. Hopefully the successor to the D100 will also have the color meter.

3/15/2004 5:20:55 AM

Gene 

member since: 2/10/2004
  isn't the D70 the successor to the D100? and also with the color meter?

3/15/2004 7:22:52 AM

Roy Breslawski

member since: 2/5/2004
  The D70 lacks a couple of features expected of a higher end camera. First, it has no vertical grip option. For many types of photography that is a real drawback. The other noticeable difference is the body construction. The D100 has a cast metal body and the D70 is completely plastic. While the D70 is probably pretty tough, like most Nikon products, it is not going to be as rugged as the D100. Those two differences contribute to the ability to price it lower than the D100.
Roy
www.lighttimephoto.com

3/15/2004 7:04:47 PM

Matt S. Raspanti

member since: 6/12/2004
  what the d70 lacks in build. It makes up for in speed and color/tone. The d100's fastest shutter is 1/4000 the d70's is 1/8000. The new 3D color matrixing system is much better than d100's and is the same one used in the D2H.

11/30/2004 8:03:52 AM

  I Curently Use A D1X And A D70, For The Best Image Quality The D1X Is Where Its At Hands Down! The D100 Cant Hold A Light To The D1X Or The D70 For That Matter.The D70 Is A Great Back Up Camera,Frankly Its To Small Is My Only Real Fault With The Camera Other Than 200 Iso Min.

12/13/2004 7:03:48 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Dan 

member since: 2/22/2004
  5 .  My First Digital Camera
I am a seasoned photographer but a newcomer to the digtal photography world. Most of my experience has been in medium format and 35mm. What camera should I get? I love film, but I won a job that requires digital use. I need help. Any suggestions are welcome.

2/22/2004 3:30:15 PM

Wing Wong
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/8/2004
  Hi Dan,

Question: What is the requirement of the digital images from your job? What MP or filesizes will they need?

Quick rundown:

<$2000, you have the 6MP digital cameras from Canon, Fuji, Olympus, Nikon, Pentax, etc.

$2000-$8000, you have the "pro" level digital cameras which will give you 8MP-14MP. Think Canon 1Ds, Kodack 14N.

$8000+, you have the digital backs for medium format cameras which will give you 10-40MP digital image files. Think Kodak, Leaf, PhaseOne, etc.

If you MF gear is modern enough, you can probably add a digital MF back to it for your shots. That way, you can make use of existing MF gear by adding a back to it. Or you could go with the Hasselblad H1 or Mamiya 645 MF SLR bodies and get a digital back for them. The price for the back+body+access will easily top $20,000 though.

If the requirements are not staggering and you have a healthy budget, I would go with the Canon 300D or 10D, the Fuji S2pro, the Nikon D2H, the Olympus E1, or the Pentax *ist-D.

2/22/2004 10:54:42 PM

Michael Kaplan

member since: 5/27/2003
  What may help you decide is if you already have 35mm lenses. If you currently have a Canon EF 35mm camera then sticking with a Canon D-SLR would save you from having to re-buy your lens collection. Same thing with Nikon where you can purchase a Nikon or Fuji D-SLR if you have the current Nikon lenses. If you don't have any lenses or they are too old like what happened in my case (I had Canon FD lenses from the 70's) you can buy whatever camera but you should look at the lenses you want and let that help decide which series to buy. The manufacturers will keep leap-frogging each other in features available in their D-SLR cameras but the lenses tend to not change too much and are really the more important thing to getting good quality pics and where most of your money will go. You can change bodies anytime but the lenses tend to remain.

In my case I went Canon (10D) because of the large range of glass available, the lower costs and yet high quality of the lenses and the models available with IS (Image Stabilization).
Michael Kaplan
Canon EOS-10D
http://www.pbase.com/mkaplan

2/24/2004 5:09:34 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  The new Nikon D70 looks good and I believe better overall performance than the Canon offers,the Fuji S2 also has a good following and supposibly better picture quality than the Nikons in the same price range,Fuji also has an S3 model coming out or might already be on the market,that would be my choice,but like I've said it might not be out yet,Why don't you just rent digital for the job at hand and wait for the Fuji S3??

2/24/2004 7:46:39 AM

Stan 

member since: 11/5/2003
  What you already own is important. If you own Nikon lenses look at the Nikon D-100. If you own Canon lenses shop Canon. I too am a professional photographer and am going through the same thing right now. My choice is Nikon D-100. I spent the last 5 years using Sony amateur cameras to get the hang of digital. I think I aged 10 years until I "got it". Going digital isn't something I'd want to do twice. Hopefully you have a lot of experienced friends who can teach you the ropes.

2/24/2004 8:48:46 AM

Robert Bridges

member since: 5/12/2003
  Michael M said what I would say: If you just need a digital for one job then rent one
and charge the expense to the client unless of course you told them you owned a digital. Another option....shoot it in film, scan it and give the client a CD. I guess
it would be wise to find out why the client expressly needs digitally produced images?

2/24/2004 8:59:20 AM

Wing Wong
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/8/2004
  *grins* If the price is fixed, ie you won the bid due to a better price, then your other chance might be to "borrow" a camera from a friend and work with that if the requirements for the job are not too high.

If you don'tmind the asking, but what kind of job is it that would require digital? Does it require only digital delivery(image file)? Or just fast turnaround via digital?

2/24/2004 3:30:51 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Amanda J. Hubbard

member since: 1/25/2004
  6 .  Canon or Fuji Digital SLR's
I'm debating whether to purchase the Canon 10D or the Fuji FinePix S2 Pro, 12.1 Megapixel Digital Camera. They are the same price, but different mega pixels. When I researched the Fuji, it said the number of effective pixels is 6.17 though. So would I be better off to get the Canon? (I love Canon cameras very much!) Is the Fuji a good camera?

1/25/2004 10:10:11 AM

Shawn I.O. Yon

member since: 1/25/2004
  My advise is to visit your local camera shop and bring your memory card and test both cameras. If they don't let you take test photos, then consider renting them.

They are both good cameras and you can't go wrong with either one. I was in your situation and chose the 10D because Canon lens are less expensive than Nikon lens. Also, if there are any new camera body designs, I would not be sure if the Nikon lens system would be compatable in the longterm.

Hope this helps.

1/25/2004 4:44:49 PM

Reid S. Mason

member since: 1/6/2004
  Amanda, As a long time Canon user I confess I'm a bit biased BUT when it was time to move to digital I did check out the other stuff out there. What I found was that though there are a lot of really nice Digi SLRs out there, I wouldn't say one in particular is better than another when considering bodies at the same price point. That being the case I picked the 10D for two reasons. One, it works just like my Canon film cameras - pretty much the same controls, layout etc. And two, Canon lenses are especially good. Though the body is very important, it really is the glass that makes it all come together. I'd recommend the 28 - 135 Image Stabelizer as your main lens, I keep it on my camera about 80 percent of the time.

Good luck in making up your mind - I know it's difficult but the end result is you'll have an entirely new way to communicate your art!

1/26/2004 8:01:23 PM

Robert Bridges

member since: 5/12/2003
  Hi Amanda, I thought I would add my two cents worth to your question and this discussion coming from the film only world and moving away from Canon. Like you and many others, I too have done extensive research on various digital cameras e.g, Canon, Fuji, Nikon, Kodak. Were I in your shoes at this point there is no question that I would go with the Fuji. Its built on the Nikon N80 camera and uses Nikon glass. Contrary to some, I have not found Nikon lenses to be more expensive then the Canon but simply more honest then the Canon. Canon markets two classes of lenses - the decent and cheap, and the expensive and great. Nikon markets just the reasonable and the great. Personally I prefer the latter.

I tend to be a purist I suppose in that I would suggest that if you go with the Canon that instead of getting an image stabilizer lens that you buy a good tripod instead. Technology is fine - but hard work will, in the long run produce better images. Now what I would seriously recommend is that you wait till this summer and take a good hard look at the new Nikon digital which has not yet been introduced to the general public but will be coming out to compete price wise with the Canon Rebel Digital. It's not just about the number of mexapixals that determines image quality. Leaving aside the human factor things such as filtering, noise, moire filters, body quality, capture software, etc which are also extremely important. Unless you must have that camera today - I'd wait a few months and see what both Fuji and Nikon have in store.

Hope this was not too critical and I agree with Reid M in his advice to play with both. However I do disagree with the assumption that digital is an entirely new way to communicate your art, it's simply a different way.

1/28/2004 8:43:43 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  I have talked casually with a portrait photographer in regards to his Fuji S2 and he did mention that the colours were at times oversaturated and he was allways reworking his images in photoshop,any ways both appear to be OK cameras,but did you know that Nikon is coming out with a brand new D70 which is supposed to be under a 1000 dollars and looks to be very nice.

1/28/2004 9:46:55 AM

Beth Espinoza

member since: 1/21/2004
  Hi Amanda!
While I LOVE the Canons, especially the EOS 1/10Ds, I found a very good deal on the Fuji Finepix S1 Pro (The 6.17 eff. mPix). While I am something of a novice, I have been EXTREMELY HAPPY with the performance of this camera! (It has the Nikon lense F-mount, for the Nikon/Nikkormat(?) lenses.)
Are you sure that maybe you didn't get the S2 Pro and S1 Pro mixed up while researching? A 6 mPix loss seems unusually large. The way that I learned how much mPix a photographer needs is dependant upon the largest size prints that you anticipate producing, figured at 300 dpi for the LxH of the picture.(This is the "rule of thumb" widely used for print-quality photo resolution, similar to print resolution from non-digital pix.) A 3-ish mPix camera will give you a 300 dpi resolution for a print photo equal to about an 8x10, while a 12 mPix I guess would give you something about 4 times those dimensions. I hope this isn't going over what you already know, but you'd be surprised how many people aren't aware of it. (I'm with you, though, if you can afford it--GO FOR IT!)
Trying the cameras out is EXCELLENT ADVICE! I think that no matter which you choose, you're going to be happy with chioce, as they are both fine cameras.
Best of luck to you!

1/28/2004 12:20:34 PM

Gregg Vieregge

member since: 11/10/2000
  I have been shooting professionally for 3 years with the Fuji S2 and I have been very satisfies. I use Tamron lenses. They work great. I have never shot with a canon so I have no advice there. I have heard the new Rebel is alot of camera for the $$$. I am waiting for the new Fuji S3 to cone out this spring and I'm sure I'll purchase it. The 6.12 effective pixels will keep my files in JPEG for faster editing. I have great success in this range.

2/10/2004 5:41:05 AM

Rafael Funes

member since: 1/3/2004
 
 
  Joy
Joy
Taken with Canon 28-135 IS and processed with C1 LE 1.3
 
 
I am a Canon fan. Lenses are great and well worth the price. Though you can use Sigma lenses too, they are fine and less expensive. When moving to digital, the body is as important as the lens, since the lens produces the image and the body (sensor-processor) records it. I have tried several digital bodies from different manufacturers and I chose the Canon 10D. I agree that IS lenses are great, so great that Nikon is working hard to release a few when Canon has had them available for quite some time. I am convinced that nowadays Canon is clearly superior to Nikon and offers better options beforehand. A great additional tool is Capture One LE 1.3 raw image processing software.

My two cents.

2/10/2004 7:36:34 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  Oh,just something I heard going around that the performance of the Canon Digital Rebels in coldweather conditions leaves alot to be desired,the problem has been with the Rebel lineup begining in there film based cameras!!!

2/10/2004 12:04:40 PM

Gregg Vieregge

member since: 11/10/2000
  YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK OUT THE EARLY SPECS. ON THE FUJI S3. THE REVIEWS CLAIM THAT THE NEW SENSORS PRODUCE FILM QAULITY IMAGES.

2/10/2004 12:32:11 PM

Dave Kone

member since: 2/4/2004
  S2 Pro can Canon 10d same price? Fuji S2 pro is $1950 or there abouts and the 10d is $1350

What do you get for the extra $600?

Dave Kone

2/10/2004 6:55:46 PM

Gregg Vieregge

member since: 11/10/2000
  Dave K.

Your wrong. The S2 can be purchased for $1049. Search the net. I would really suggest looking ay the S3!

2/10/2004 7:20:32 PM

Dave Kone

member since: 2/4/2004
  Please send me a link where you can get the Fugi S2 Pro for $1049 new.

I looked on B&H, Adorama, pricegrabber.

Even on Ebay one is about to end in a few hours and its already at $1700. I saw a used body go for $1200 on ebay.

I bought a second 10d used with a 50mm 1.4 lens and 2 256 meg lexar cards for $1250.

So instead of blurting out Your wrong, can you be a little nicer when you reply and put some supporting links in to help us out.

After all we are just photographers trying to help each other out.

Dave Kone

2/11/2004 5:07:32 AM

Rafael Funes

member since: 1/3/2004
  Let's focus. Fuji makes great products, also Nikon and Canon. It's interesting all three are Japanese companies, isn't it? They satisfy their customers and we customers have preferences. As I stated before, I am a Canon fan, but I have a couple of fellow photographers totally engaged with Nikon. Amanda likes Canon and both the 10D and Canon lenses are amongst the finest available.

Rafael.

2/11/2004 11:47:59 AM

Wing Wong
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/8/2004
  Hi Amanda,

Canon and Fuji does their cameras differently. If I had to choose, I would go with the Fuji S2pro for 3 reasons:
- much lower noise levels in pictures
- better auto-focus speed/reliability
- 12MP downsample to 6MP

The S2Pro takes pictures with a 6MP sensor oriented at 45 degrees and gets resampled up to 12MP. From there, it gets downsampled to 6MP as it's stanfard resolution.

The end result is that you have a true resolving power of 6MP with the S2Pro and a much lower noise and artifact issue when shooting at 6MP.

Check out www.dpreview.com for detailed reviews. :)

2/14/2004 9:10:46 PM

amirhoushank farhoudimoghaddam

member since: 1/12/2004
  whats ytopur ida lave?

2/15/2004 11:22:16 PM

Dave Kone

member since: 2/4/2004
  Amanda, Just curious as to what your final decision is?

I know after a while of looking and getting advice you get enough good answers to go either way, and leaves you still confused!

David

2/16/2004 3:57:00 AM

Amanda J. Hubbard

member since: 1/25/2004
  David,
I am leaning towards the Canon, but I have been continuing my research on other cameras as well.

-Amanda

2/17/2004 8:14:54 PM

Dave Kone

member since: 2/4/2004
  Good idea. Keep looking. Dont get caught up in Pixels, there is a lot more to a camera than that! And sometimes a camera with less pixels will produce a better picture due to the size of each pixel sensor.

Dont know if I mentioned it before but www.imaging-resource.com has great reviews on both cameras.

Let us know what you decide! THEN you have to pick a lens! AHHH it never ends.

David

2/18/2004 4:50:38 AM

Gene 

member since: 2/10/2004
  Amanda - have just finished going through the same endless process of making a digital camera choice, went with the 10D.
go to www.dpreview.com, this is one of the best review sites on the web, here you can compare the two camera's, etc. hope this will help you with your decision.
btw, depreview rates the 10D a little above the S2 - Gene

2/18/2004 6:10:33 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Thomas 

member since: 8/26/2003
  7 .  Buying Lenses
I have the Canon Digital r=Rebel w/ the EF-S 18-55mm lens. I'm looking to get another lens to do mostly headshots. After christmas however, I'm a little low on cash so I'm not looking to spend a whole lot. I would like a lens that is a little bit flexible so I wont have to get a billion different lenses to do different shots. I came across the Sigma - 28-105mm F2.8-4 Aspherical lens for Canon AF on ritzcamera.com I know that Sigma lenses aren't high on quality but its price ($199) is tempting. Does anyone have any opinions on this lens? Or a suggestion of a different lens? I'm not looking to spend over $300. Thanks.

1/13/2004 1:06:47 PM

Chris L. Hurtt

member since: 3/10/2003
  I bought a Canon in 1997 with Sigma lenses (much like the one you mentioned) and used it until last year. At the time I couldn't even afford to buy that, but I did anyway. These lenses were good (and affordable) for learning. If you look at my gallery at the pictures towards the bottom they were all taken with the Canon/Sigma setup.

Having said that I would add something I wish I had done. Since you do have a good camera and lens (and you don't have to buy film), I would put away the $300 you have saved and add as much as you can while you shoot like crazy with what you already have. After a couple of months you will have a better idea of what it is you really want. Canon makes a 28-135 zoom with IS that is $400 at B&H and things go up from there.

As everybody here will tell you...you will NEVER have everything you need as far as photography equipment! It is an addiction. Good luck.

1/13/2004 6:20:25 PM

Reid S. Mason

member since: 1/6/2004
  Thomas, wait until you have the another 100 bucks and get the 28-135 Image Stabilizer. You won't be sorry.

1/17/2004 10:59:20 PM

Davin Edridge

member since: 2/22/2003
  Hello all, My advice: I have done this on the occassion myself - and find it quiet helpful. Go to a camera shop that sells both lenses, take your camera with you. Inform the staff that you wish to try both lenses on your camera - shoot a few shots of the same subjects with both lenses - inside and try shooting outside via a door or window. Go home and study the results. Make your own decision based on your own experience. Once you have made up your mind - shop around for the best price you can for the lens you want. If you are not happy with the results first time around - go back to the same camera shop or a different one and take some more test shots (ideally take shots that you want to use the lens for).
www.davin-photography.com

1/17/2004 11:13:09 PM

Nick Milton
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/25/2003
  I have the Canon Rebel also and the 28-55mm lense,I was in same dillema, but I'm happy with the set up I went with. I just purchased a Canon ef90-300mm usm. Absolutely superb for the money, $399.00 Australian. These 2 lenses cover most everything,from sports to portraits. Add a 420 ex flash too(worth every cent).

1/20/2004 2:40:00 AM

Dennis Creaghan

member since: 10/21/2002
  I bought the Sigma 28-105 during the Summer on the advice of a salesman, when I was looking for the Canon 28-135.
I did a comparison test with my cheapie Canon 28-80 and was disappointed with the results.Save your money and go for the 28-135. You really do get what you pay for

1/21/2004 8:32:49 AM

Jody Cushing

member since: 10/19/2003
  I'm in exactly the same situation. I bought my Canon Rebel a few months ago and have been looking for the perfect lens to add to my system. I ordered the Sigma 28-105 from Amazon.com and received it last week. I wasn't happy with it at all. It was slow to autofocus and just didn't seem very well made. I returned it and bought the Canon 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM Telephoto Lens for about the same price. This is the product description ; "Super-compact and light, this lens is compatible with all EOS cameras and ideal for digital SLRs–when used on the EOS Digital Rebel, it’s equivalent to an approx. 90-320mm lens. The 13-element design’s new optical coatings are optimized for digital cameras. It focuses down to under 4 feet (1.2m), and its Micro USM-powered AF is faster than ever, due to new electronics within the lens."

I'm hoping I'll be happier with the Canon.

1/21/2004 2:49:33 PM

Reid S. Mason

member since: 1/6/2004
  As a long time canon EOS shooter, I've always preferred Canon lenses for my Canon bodies. In particular, the Image Stabelizer models (2) are fantastic, and the legendary L series needs no further introduction. I have both the 75-300 USM IS and the 28-135 USM IS and have never been sorry I bought them. I will say this, though - I needed a wide angle lens for my EOS 10D, (the 28-135 would qualify as a wide angle were it not for the X1.6 multiplier that we 10D and Digital Rebel shooters have to deal with) and I bought a Sigma 17-35 HSM. I am quite pleased with it! It focuses as fast as my Canon lenses, and to my eyes is every bit as sharp. AND, at 1/2 the price of the similar Canon lens, it's a steal - under $300 on Ebay!

1/21/2004 6:07:16 PM

Michael F. Millay

member since: 3/8/2003
  Hey Thomas - I have been buying Photo & Video Equipment (while Livung in 4 Diff. States) for OVER 30 Years. Let me offer you This :

Regardless of WHAT Type - or How Much of ANY
Photo Equip. you want to Get - I only Have TWO Words for RITZ Camera :
> PUH LEEEZE <

IF U Had 20 - TEN Dollar Bills to Spend, Would U Place 3 of them in your TOILET ? If yes - go to RITZ. If NO - Go ONLY to B & H Photo in New York - By 800 Phone - or WebSite. NO Sales Tax to U in Most States. And DO NOT TRY to beat their Price compared to the ADS in the back of
Popular Photography magazine - U Won't - but U may get RIPPED!

P.S. Be SURE to CALCULATE your NEW Focal Length Range - according to the "Lens Conversion Factor" OF The Digi Rebel BEFORE U Buy!

... Sharpshooter

1/21/2004 7:28:24 PM

Eric m. Beaubien

member since: 10/13/2003
  I also am in the same situation. I recently purchased a digital rebel with the 420 ex flash and the extra battery grip. I am a little dissapointed in the 18-55 lens. I did a lot of research and am saving up for the Canon 28-135 IS.

1/22/2004 7:56:49 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Cassandra L. Griffith

member since: 6/25/2003
  8 .  Going Digital
I am seriously thinking about going digital for obvious reasons of convenience and the overall money saving aspects. I currently own a Canon Rebel 2000, and I am very happy with it. I was wondering if there is anyone out there who has the new Canon digital SLR, and if so, how is it? Is it worth it? Are the pictures comperable to film SLRs? Maybe a few different suggestions in the same price range(under $1000),and with at least 5 megapixels. Thanks!

12/31/2003 12:20:05 AM

Richard Kowalski

member since: 12/31/2003
  I just got a digital rebel for myself for Xmas... Not sure yet about the quality of photos, but I love the feels of the camera and the way it takes the pictures. I had other digital cameras before, but this one tops them all in the ease of operation.

12/31/2003 4:55:45 AM

doug Nelson
DougNelsonPhoto.com

member since: 6/14/2001
  On "going digital", plan for a bit more of a financial layout, if you want to use that very capable camera for something other than a digital point'n shoot. You will see imagine quality equal to or surpassing film, if you use the Rebel digital to its full potential. You will need high capacity memory cards to store image files of any size, especially if you shoot in the raw mode (highly recommended). Don't forget the imaging program you will need to "work" these images. Raw mode gives you high bit color, a highly desirable feature, but one not addressed with Elements 2. You'll need the current version of Photoshop, a $600 expenditure. Also, budget the the time and effort to learn Photoshop. The courses and help you need are right here at betterphoto.

Of course, you can always shoot low-res JPEGs and enjoy the camera as it is, kinda like driving a Porsche to the grocery store. I love the idea of having a real viewfinder and seeing my image through the lens, unlike holding the camera at arm's length to sight through a silly screen.

1/2/2004 6:14:39 AM

Patty 

member since: 1/4/2004
  I have the digital Rebel, and so far I love it. I am still trying to learn it's features and how to put the pictures in files on the computer.Challenging!!! It's just the same as the Rebel film camera in every way. Does anyone know if you can take a black & white photo with this camera?

1/5/2004 3:20:59 AM

Lynn M. Garwood

member since: 11/11/2003
  I got the Canon 10D rather than the Rebel, because it has a few features that make it more of a pro camera. A friend has the Rebel and absolutely loves it. You should read a review about the camera to see if it fits your needs (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/digital-rebel.shtml). Images from the Rebel are extraordinarily good, depending on your method of output, of course. Since you probably have lenses from your regular Canon, it makes sense for you to go the Canon route. Using digital frees you from worrying about film costs when trying creative ideas. I rarely use my film cameras anymore.

As for B&W photos, take them as color, then manipulate them in Photoshop or Elements to get the B&W. Check manuals or articles for the best techniques for doing this; changing to grayscale will not give the best results.

1/5/2004 9:11:16 AM

  I highly recommend the Digital rebel, there are very few differences between it and the Canon 10D (obviously the price!). And you can use the same lenses as you would with your Rebel 2000, a real bonus! The camera itself does not have a B&W setting but comes with the software (PS Elements) to easily do it yourself. It is better to shoot color so you can have the option of B&W because it is a whole lot harder if you want to get color after shooting B&W. I keep my Rebel Ti handy for when I want to shoot specifically B&W.
Ebay is where I found the best deals for the camera and accessories. It is advisable to get an extra battery and large card (1 GB), Ebay has some super deals. GetDigital is the company I bought from and they were excellent.
Have fun!

1/5/2004 9:12:14 AM

MillenniumSea 

member since: 6/16/2003
  Dear Cassandra and Doug,

"You will see imagine quality equal to or surpassing film, if you use the Rebel digital to its full potential."

This statement by Doug is not exactly true. In practice, the Rebel Ti Digital will give you results as good as - probably - you have been getting on film. And this is what matters, so don't be afraid of going digital. In Cassandra's case, yes, she might get better pics with digital that she would wioth film.
In reallity though, photos made with most digital cameras will still not exceed the quality of photos on film made with *ideal* settings and equipment. Basically, the theory is: if the absolutely perfect quiality photo is 100, you can get 90 easily with digital and even go up to 98. But the remaining 2 is the "analog quiality" that will be missing, always. 99.9% of photographers don't need, don't even see/sense that extra warmth of film. With film, it`s much more difficult to get 90 quatlity no to mention 100. But, IF you and your equipment are very good AND the situation is ideal, you *CAN* get 100, not just 98 - (which again, is prbably more that Cassandra or most of us will ever need).

Regards,

M~

1/5/2004 9:54:07 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  Unless you invest in a Canon D1s or Kodak 13 mega pixel camera you will not be able to match film period!!!that is very clear,truly I believe the photographer plays a huge role on what makes a good image!!!!6 mega pixels and film not really a large difference,to me though digital has a plastic look,lack of grain and is still just to expensive of a not developed technoligy to invest in at this point in time IMHO anyways!!

1/5/2004 11:25:19 AM

  All that matters here is the real purpose of going digital, for what reason? I went digital so that I can specialize in photo enhancements and touch-ups. I want to offer a specialized service that film just can't handle. Cassandra will have her own reasons for going digital and our purpose here is help her realize that you don't need the most expensive equipment to get great results. For my purposes 6 mega pixels works great and the Digital Rebel is my camera of choice. The 10D offers very little to justify the price jump and 13 mega pixel D1 is just plain overkill for most photographers.

Hope this all helps you out Cassandra!

1/5/2004 11:56:16 AM


BetterPhoto Member

member since: 10/28/2003
  Going digital can be compelling and there might be good reasons for doing so. In order for digital to match film, it must get to 200 mega pixels, at least.

That isn't to say that to the eye, you can tell a difference. Sometimes I can immediately, and sometimes I can't tell. For the most part, a photog who knows his/her stuff could fool me.

The difference is in the explosion. I've explained this before, so I wont go into detail. But, if you take the top-o-the-line digital camera today, which I'm sure is debatable, but lets take the top mega pixel camera (I thought it was Canon, but I just learned here that Kodak has a 13...WOW!) If you have 2 identical photos of the same thing, and you massively blow up the digital image, then massively blow up the film, counting grain and all, the film will be more clear.

This, in most cases, is totally meaningless to the eye. The reason is that it's so minute that you can't even see it. But, it is a serious discussion on the technical level about "is digital as good as film?"

Is this good enough for your clients? Are your clients looking for museum quality?

I decided to not go digital because I feel it is still too early. I will wait until the technology matures. I can put all my stuff on CD's I can scan, I can do many things that is equivilant to digital, from a clients perspective.

The one thing I cannot do, which is the reason that I am going to purchase a digital camera soon, is I cannot shoot endlessly for free. Digital allows this. I could shoot all day long and not spend a dime. So, for experimentation purposes, I would really like to purchase some digital equipment.

I am open-minded, and if it turns out that for my shooting, digital is the way to go, I'll change.

Sometimes, as photogs, we are too picky for our own good. Our clients just want nice photographs, they don't really care about all the this and that.

But, I often think that if someday, my work winds up as a candidate for a wall in a museum, that I have the ability to produce it from old photos, and I wont regret having some of my best work taken with a 6 mega pixel camera, when by then the standard might be 8,000 mega pixels.

Jerry

1/5/2004 12:23:58 PM

doug Nelson
DougNelsonPhoto.com

member since: 6/14/2001
  MilleniumSea and Mike are quite right in bringing me to task on my remark about film. I should have said that digital of this quality will give better results than MOST film. I was thinking of the tonal and color correction possible in Photoshop by importing an image in the raw mode, in high bit. It makes a lot of difference in tonal and color correction. Only after doing Levels and/or curves do you go down the 8-bit color.
I would still rather shoot Provia 100 and T-Max B&W for things I really care about.
That said, I think that color film processors have brought the eclipse of film down on us by not giving quality tonal and color correction for years to the general public. Color film makers are doing an axe job on their own products. The Kodak Supra line is gone, with some silly super saturated 400 film in its place that gives garish blues and yellows. I don't know how many times I have gotten terrible prints, only to find that the information is in the negative, and I make a better print from a scan with an inexpensive film scanner.
I, too, sometimes don't like the funny paper colors of some digital captures. But I have also been blown away by the true color I have seen from some digital cameras. If the digital Rebel has the same CMOS as the Canon 10D, it has a lot of potential.

1/6/2004 5:58:19 AM

Derek Holyhead

member since: 12/26/2003
 
 
 
Hi All,
I have a Digital Rebel, great camera, as easy or as difficult to use as you want to amke it, my wife shot the rollercoaster using the full program mode and she would never use any of my my Canon 35mm's! As for all the doubters still using film you should read this http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml it is in 5 parts so read all 5 pages. So, Cassandra go out and get that Digital Rebel and enjoy!
Del

1/13/2004 6:05:09 PM

Derek Holyhead

member since: 12/26/2003
  Hi All,
I have a Digital Rebel, great camera, as easy or as difficult to use as you want to make it. As for all the doubters still using film you should read this http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml it is in 5 parts so read all 5 pages. So, Cassandra go out and get that Digital Rebel and enjoy!
Del

1/13/2004 6:16:04 PM

Derek Holyhead

member since: 12/26/2003
  Sorry the Rollercoaster didn't load and I didn't realise the post had loaded without! New to this forum.
Del

1/13/2004 6:18:37 PM

Cassandra L. Griffith

member since: 6/25/2003
  Thanks everybody for your great advise! I am going to go out and get my new digital camera this weekend!
Cassandra

2/24/2004 8:38:43 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Stacy 

member since: 11/23/2003
  9 .  Wondering What Equipment To Buy To Go Professional
I have recently stepped over into the "semi professional" realm and am looking to buy new equipment. Currently have the Canon EOS Elan II and am looking into the Canon Elan 7 or 7E. Is this a good choice? (My camera has the eye controlled focus function and I never use it, so don't really need it in my next camera.) I'm just doing freelance work, mostly portraits... nothing too fancy. And what about the Canon EOS 1V or EOS 3? Such a huge jump in price... but is it worth it? By the way, I really don't want to go digital yet! Am just really confused at this point and wanting to make a quality purchase! Thanks for your help!

11/23/2003 6:08:32 PM


BetterPhoto Member

member since: 10/28/2003
  I'm doing the same thing and just invested in Canon EOS 1V's. I have been using the Canon EOS system for 12 years and used to drool over the EOS 1. So, my dream is coming true :)
You should get a varied response.

I used to be a muscian (well, technically, I still am). When I taught guitar, my students used to ask me questions like what kind of guitar they should get. I used to say Pete Twonsend uses one kind, Jimmy Page another, Jimi Hendrix used a Strat, and many other great musicians use other brands too.

It always depended on what you were trying to accomplish; and the sound you wanted, as well as what you can afford. My students also use to look at my guitar and say, "boy, if I could only have one like yours". So, I used to ask them if I could play theirs for a minute. They would always oblige, and I would play what they were unable to play on their own instrument; and it would sound like it did when I was playing it on my guitar.

The point is, it ain't the equipment. And, as far as anyone telling you what to get, you'll get opinions until you are so confused you don't know what to do.

The best advice I hear is to just shoot and let the art lead you. When you get to a point where your photos are not up to par with your ability, then maybe your equipment is lacking. So, you start looking for something new. Eventually though, I do believe, you will find that new equipment will not make your pictures any better.

One really spectaular shot I took once was from a little plastic camera I bought in Mexico. I would show it here, but I'd have to scan it and it's framed and all and haging on our wall. I'd have to contend with my wife about why I'm taking the picture apart, and I'd rather not.

In my search for why I wanted to upgrade my equipment I had to screen out all the noise.

In something like what you are going through, there is a period of noise. That's where you learn about everything that is available to you. Then, you should have a period of quiet reflection, where you cut out the noise and deeply evaluate your needs. It is unnecessary to spend money if it will not make a difference for you.

I agonized this way about Medium format equipment. But, once I cut the noise, I realized that I didn't need it. The reason is that I am not familiar with it, and right now is not the time to learn a new format. I need to perfect my current 35mm shooting. That's where I want to concentrate.

My wife gave me a great idea, and that is to rent medium format equipment every once in a while just to get my feet wet and learn how to use it! Great idea. It saves me money and time. And I will get to use many different cameras (Hasselblad, Contax, Pentax, Mamyia) and decide which I like better; which feels better.

Anyway, I hope I've helped a little. I do not think there is a straight forward answer to your question, but I do understand the torment.

11/23/2003 7:43:11 PM

Jon Close
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/18/2000
  There isn't enough functional difference between the Elan II and 7 to justify a replacing one for the other. But it's a good choice if you are adding a 2nd body as the controls are the same.

The extra cost of the 3 and 1v is as much due to the more rugged/weather-proofed build as to the extended feature set.

For your stated use (freelance/portrait) I think you'd get more return from $1000+ spent on lighting/stands/umbrellas/reflectors/backdrops and/or pro-level lenses than on another body.

11/24/2003 4:53:35 AM

Ronal Jeffries

member since: 11/15/2003
  I have sold many picture with the equipment that I already have. Every opinion written on each camera I have people state this camera is a good starter. Well I have made some good money with all these starter cameras. No one has ever stated that a photo that I have taken would have looked better if I had shot it with a new expensve camera.

Your ability will dictate what equipment you need. I get bored with studio work so all I do is Family on holidays and they don't spend money, I have some fun, the photo hangs on the wall.

If you want to see starter cameras go to my galleri and check it out.

Good luck
Good Shooting

11/26/2003 4:44:00 AM

Carey Yazeed

member since: 7/25/2003
  It is not the camera that makes you a professional, but the person holding the camera. You have what I call the new camera itch! I agree with everyone else, rent or borrow equipment that you are interested in purchasing and see if it is what you really need. Personally, I went through the same dilemma that you are having, purchased a bunch of "professional stuff" and in the end went back to my starter camera and doing environmental portraits and sold everything else. I still get the new camera itch sometimes. Good luck!

11/26/2003 3:19:54 PM

howard kolus

member since: 3/25/2000
  Jerry Frazier's response is one of the clearist and most helpful I've read here. He is so right. U can spend a lot of money and end up buying the wrong stuff if don't know where ure going. As others have said, and Jerry illustrated with his guitar example, it's the player not the instrument that creates the art.

11/26/2003 4:43:29 PM

Ray 

member since: 11/17/2003
  I just did the same thing. I bought a used 1N in like new condition with the Power Booster and a new flash unit for about $300 more than the 7E body. It shoots like a dream, is as rugged as a 1V and can do almost everthing the 1V does. Face it, when your are just getting started having equipment that just screams professional can get you the gig.

12/1/2003 6:17:28 AM

Mark Kononczuk

member since: 10/22/2007
  I am in exactly the same place. I have always only used slide, however this is becoming increasingly difficult to sell. So, I need to go digital and was afraid of buying gear that will be too low in MP in a year or two. I was tempted by medium format some years ago but quickly went to large format which I found incredible but utterly useless for documentary/travel photography which is what I do.Still, some of the best stuff I have ever done is in large format, so in a sense, for me, different equipment really made the difference.

10/23/2007 1:50:52 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Doyle Kelly

member since: 9/11/2003
  10 .  Best for Beginners
What digital SLR camera would be best for a beginner who enjoys shooting family as well as landscapes and nature in both close up and distant situations.
A camera to both learn and grow with for someone on a limited budget under $1,000. Also, what two lenses would you start with? Thanks.

9/11/2003 8:28:04 AM

doug Nelson
DougNelsonPhoto.com

member since: 6/14/2001
  In that price range, there are good new digital cameras, but not many SLR's. To me, a good digital camera allows the full (TIF or raw mode) shot, every pixel, with JPEG compression only when I'd want it. If you must have an SLR, look at the Olympus E20 (used), or an E-10. Or, in a compact camera, look at the Canon G3, or G4. You are limited to the lenses that come on the camera with these, BUT, the zoom lenses are made for the digital format and should be reasonably good. Also, be sure to budget for the 128 or 256 Megabyte storage cards you would need when shooting full resolution.
Y'know, you could shoot film, and then scan the results.

9/11/2003 9:38:28 AM

  Right now there is only one digital SLR with interchangeable lenses for under $1000. Canon has announced a digital version of it's popular Rebel camera. Go to Canon's website to check it out. It will be available in the next few weeks, although all dealers will tell you they are already heavily back ordered. This will be a very popular item.

9/15/2003 7:44:51 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
  Next 9  >>

Copyright © 1996-2014 BetterPhoto.com, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.