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


Photography QnA: Digital Cameras

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

Category: Best Photographic Equipment to Buy : Digital Cameras and Accessories : Digital Cameras

Interested in the consumer rating of digital cameras? How about some digital camera comparisons? Check out this Q&A for everything you wanted to know about digital cameras. Also, be sure to check out our cool digital camera calculators and digital camera comparison charts.

Page 3 : 21 -30 of 60 questions

<< Previous 10 skip to page
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ...6
Next 10  >>
     
 
Photography Question 
Bijay Agarwal

member since: 7/5/2004
  21 .  Which Digital Camera Is More Suitable?
I am a professional fashion photographer. Many of my images are used in big hoardings. Which digital camera - a compact with 8 megapixels or an SLR with 6.3 MP - is more suitable for my job?

7/5/2004 6:37:09 AM

  Bijay: I have tested all of the 8MP cameras and 6MP SLRs. The 6MP SLR cameras produce cleaner images that can be enlarged to much larger sizes (in Photoshop) while maintaining excellent image quality. Cheers!

7/5/2004 8:12:32 AM

Thanos Papadopoulos

member since: 6/4/2004
  It depends from the money you can spend... :)

U should try EOS MARK II, 8 MP slr camera, very very fast and if you allreday own an EOS u could use all your lenses. EOS D10 is an also fine choice, D70 is cheaper but the 200ISO in a negative for you I think. Dont buy a compact camera the new SLR's are very very good especially for your kind of job.

7/6/2004 4:20:58 AM

Dave Cross

member since: 4/8/2004
  Hi Bijay.

I agree with Peter and Thanos. EOS 1Dmk2 or a D10 will give the best results.

What format are you using currently? The best digital SLRs give images roughly equivalent to 35mm. If you are using MF you may be disappointed with digital at the magnifications you are contemplating.

Of course you could get a digital back for your MF, get out the $$$$$$$$$$.

Cheers
DC


7/6/2004 4:32:59 AM

Scott Pedersen

member since: 11/18/2001
  Some chip in the digital SLRs is bigger so you can get bigger sharper photos with a smaller megipixal camera than you can with a compact. And of course on a compact you are limited in your capabilities compared to the SLR body. This is why I don't understand the rush for us consumers to go with digital. Your shooting creativity in the foot and creativity done through the lens is a huge part of photography. Look for a digital body that will accept your current lenes. That will be the same brand as you are using now, and you won't have to buy all your equiptment twice.

7/8/2004 4:18:55 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Sharon Morris

member since: 6/15/2004
  22 .  6MP vs. 8MP
I've discovered that I am starting to like the "digital age". My first digital (and auto focus)is a 300D and am looking at replacing it already. (I've actually moved a couple of my 35mm bodies out of my bag to make room for the 300D and Canon Lenses.) I've been shooting with a Nikon F2 and F3 and am not really comfortable with the Canon feel. Now for my question: Should I be looking at the D70 and D100, or should I just wait for Nikon to come out with an 8MP?

6/25/2004 11:30:36 AM

  Shari: Personally, I would buy the D70 - loaded with capabilities, superb image quality, etc. A bargain at the price as well. Who knows when Nikon will release an 8MP SLR?? Cheers!

6/25/2004 12:47:52 PM

  Peter, I'm curious if you could elaborate on your opinion of the comparison of the D70 and the D100 and any key differences. Thanks!

6/25/2004 1:29:55 PM

  KS: An excerpt from my D70 review, not yet published. Peter

"The second digital SLR to break the $1000 price barrier, the Nikon D70 costs $500 less than the D100 and employs the same autofocus module and a similar 6.1 megapixel CCD sensor. That has led some photographers to conclude that the D70 must be a 'stripped down' model. In truth, the newer camera boasts an improved processor and buffer (temporary storage bank) and offers several other advantages. These include 7 extra Program modes, more sophisticated Matrix, much faster flash sync speed, more options for adjusting certain image parameters plus a greater burst depth for capturing long series of images.

Granted, the D100 is more rugged thanks to a metal (vs. mostly polycarbonate) body, and it offers some of its own benefits, including higher ISO levels plus an extra flash metering mode (D-TTL). Still, the D70 is absolutely loaded with capabilities and proved to be exceptionally responsive while I was shooting stock photos in several cities and while documenting a Vietnamese bride on her wedding day. More importantly, the camera generated high resolution images with an outstanding level of detail, excellent sharpness, and minimal digital noise."

6/25/2004 1:34:30 PM

Sharon Morris

member since: 6/15/2004
  Thank you, Peter. You have made my decision. D70 it is. I've borrowed a 10D, D100 and D70. I did really like both the 70 and 100, but wasn't sure if I should wait or not. It looks as if I'll be investing in a D70 soon. (At least I'll still be able to use my lenses, albeit manual.)

6/25/2004 1:43:36 PM

  Shari: The D70 will exceed your expectations in long-term use. What lenses will you use? The metering system disengages if you use manual-focus lenses.

Cheers!

6/25/2004 1:52:08 PM

Sharon Morris

member since: 6/15/2004
  Nikkor AIS and for the older ones, I sent them to Nikkor to have a new A- ring put on for A/P ability.

6/25/2004 2:00:19 PM

  Shari: I did not realize that Nikon still offered that service, but once converted to AI/P, the lenses should be fine - with manual focusing.

Cheers!

6/25/2004 2:06:12 PM

  Thanks, Peter, for the info. I do have the D100, but purchased it just before the D70 came out. I've been happy with it, but thought I'd get some clarification for my dad who is considering the D70. And eventually, I'll get a second body, but that's a ways in the future. I want more lenses first :) I appreciate all the info!

6/25/2004 2:09:14 PM

Sharon Morris

member since: 6/15/2004
  I don't know if they still do, I converted them in the 80's. -Regards Shari

6/25/2004 2:10:18 PM

Charlotte LaBarbera
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 4/21/2004
  An interesting news note concerning the Nikon D-70.

Reuters - June 16th reports that a Nikon managing Director said that Nikon would increase production of the D-70 by 20,000 a month bringing the total to 90,000 per month. He also stated that Nikon is entertaining the idea that they may soon exit the compact film market.

I'm wondering if this increase in production will bring the price down.

6/29/2004 8:20:22 AM

Jenna  

member since: 5/5/2004
  D70-- great choice, I'm glad you're all enjoying it. Someday when my funds are in tact I too will have one. In the mean time, price wise- I wanted to let you know that I work for a camera shop and although I have read Nikon has announced that they will be making more-- I highly doubt this will reduce the price anytime soon. Nikon does not offer any commision on the sales of their D70 (Canon does on the Rebel-- and I'd rather sell the D70)... but Nikon does this because they know its reputation will sell itself and that it definately does. It is in high demand and will continue to be until the next best thing arrives-- in the meantime, buy the D70 and it'll be worth every penny of it.

6/30/2004 4:01:11 PM

Sal 
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 7/27/2004
  I hope no one gets offended by this. I came across a pretty detailed review by Ken Rockwell on the D70 which I found helpful last week. The address is http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d70.htm. He does an in depth comparison between the D100 and the D70 as well as the D70 and 8MP Cameras such as the Olympus 8080. The D70 has also been recommended to me also by my local photo supply store folks.

8/18/2004 5:16:18 PM

  Yes, you simply cannot go wrong with a D70.

Peter

8/18/2004 6:23:16 PM

Wayne Oliver

member since: 3/23/2004
  Take a look at the new Canon D20 8.2mp if you already have the 300d
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10464

8/22/2004 5:42:04 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Bjana C. Hoey

member since: 9/15/2003
  23 .  Choosing A Digital Camera
I have always been a huge fan of Nikon cameras. I have a Nikon N75 SLR. I'm looking into buying a digital camera. I was wondering which is better: the Nikon or the Canon?

6/23/2004 7:37:50 AM

  Bjana: Do you mean the EOS Digital Rebel or Nikon D70? The D70 is absolutely loaded with capabilties, while the Canon is much easier to use because it is not loaded ... still offering the essential capabilities, however. Both produce excellent image quality.

You can find detailed reviews at http://www.imaging-resource.com/DIGCAMA.HTM

Cheers!

6/24/2004 11:51:33 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  Since you probably have some Nikon lenses this should be your choice,and the Nikon D70 blows the Digital Rebel away as far as a digital cameras go!!!

6/29/2004 7:41:57 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Denise Williams

member since: 6/2/2003
  24 .  Anyone Using a Canon EOS 1D Mark II
I'm seriously thinking about buying a Canon EOS 1D Mark II as it seems to have all the features I want (Raw capture, variety of white balance settings, good range of ISO settings, lens conversion OK at 1.3), but I would like to know if anyone else has comments on this camera? I have played around with the 10D but didn't like its indecision when auto-focusing. I live in Australia, and they cost over $8,000 Aust $ here. This equates to over $12,000 US. Yes, a big commitment, thus the enquiry.

6/17/2004 9:44:32 AM

  Denise: Two of my friends own the EOS 1Ds Mk II, and you can find lots of comments and images at http://www.birdsasart.com/bn.html

This camera is so loaded with capabilities (designed for pros such as photojournalists) that it's almost overkill for most photo enthusiasts. I tested the EOS 10D and did not find its autofocus imprecise. It's one of the best on the market. But sure, the Mk II is even better, as Arthur Morris confirms. http://www.birdsasart.com/bn.html

But is it worth that kind of money? ($8000 AU is worth about $5000 US.) Perhaps, if you primarily shoot birds or action subjects and do so very frequently. The features of pro cameras eventually work their way down to the more affordable cameras. If you're not in a rush, why not wait for a while? e.g. The new 35mm camera, EOS ELAN 7NE in North America, includes the same AF system as the pro EOS 1v and the new flash metering system developed for the EOS 1D Mk II. So, perhaps one day, Canon will introduce a more affordable DSLR with some Mk II features.

Cheers! Peter Burian, Contributor, Australian Photography magazine (but live in North America)

6/17/2004 7:40:40 PM

RoxAnne E. Franklin

member since: 6/26/2002
  Hey denise,
you and I are on the same page. I am also looking to buy the great Mark.
I just spoke to another pro photographer yesterday face to face and she gave me excellent advise. apparently, after the huge camera show in NYC, all demo cameras are priced at almost half price. It's in Oct., and she told me that lots of manufactureres will come back and post tons of the latest greatest cameras that were used at the show, on their website. Apparently, that's how she's purchased most of her great cameras and lenses for the past 5 years.
So, wait till OCT. and research some more and then you may be able to purchase what you want at a better price.
The show is always the end of OCT around here. and she's bought all her equipment on line throught the various adverstisements.
So, if you have a camera show there, you might want to check out the deals after the show.

6/22/2004 6:49:58 AM

Greg McCroskery
BetterPhoto Member
imagismphotos.com

member since: 2/27/2003
  Denise,
Obviously, what your looking for is some info regarding possible issues, flaws, etc. before you make such a huge investment -- a wise course of action. One place where a wealth of info is available on most digital cameras is the forum section at www.dpreview.com. Because these forums tend to be posted by brand loyal owners, I believe that any problems, or negative issues will be fairly objective -- there's a lot of info available. You might want to look at various forums before making your decision. One camera that has impressed me in terms of owner satisfaction is the Olympus E-1, I've seen a number of converts raving about the quality and performance of that model. Anyway, I pray that you are happy and successful with whatever system you invest in.
God Bless,
Greg

6/22/2004 7:59:59 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  Again I recommend you go with the 4mp.Kodak 6490 only for now!!! Great camera,great,maybe even fantastic lens that zooms to 380mm.great for wildlife and at a cost of 550 Canadian it really can't be beat, factor the costs of good lenses on top of the Mark2body and you are looking at a huge investment,with digital tech. changing every 6mths.why not go with the Kodak for now!!!

6/22/2004 10:50:02 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  Another alternitive at about half the cost of the Canon would be the Fuji S3,brand new design by Fuji,although the Canon does appear to be a great camera IMHO it is really way way too much money period!!!!

6/25/2004 8:14:26 AM

RoxAnne E. Franklin

member since: 6/26/2002
  Waaaaaaaaaaaay too much money for this wallet.
i'll wait till the next canon wonder comes out and the mark is cut in price. Unless I can pick one up after the show for alot less than the current price.
new technology always has a price tag. :(

6/25/2004 8:31:37 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Fawn S.

member since: 4/28/2004
  25 .  Which Digital Camera to Buy?
Hey, I am looking into getting a really really good digital camera, and I found two (one from Minolta, one from Olympus) that are 8 megapixels, and I was wondering, do I need or want a maga pix that high? Or does it just make the camera better and look more "advanced"?

6/16/2004 1:03:33 PM

Steve McCroskey

member since: 3/20/2004
  Hi Fawn! It depends on what you prefer to use the camera for. Most people can get by with just a 4 or 5 megapixel camera. I suggest you check out the cameras that you are interested in and, if possible, try them out. I presently use a Minolta Maxxum 5 film camera as my camera of choice. I am waiting for the digital Maxxum 7 to be introduced this fall before I make the switch to digital. The lenses and accessories for the Maxxum 5 will be compatible with the digital Maxxum 7!

6/17/2004 8:53:10 AM

  Fawn: That's a tough question and difficult to answer without knowing more about your plans. I recently tested all five 8 megapixel cameras. http://www.edigitalphoto.com/cameras/0407edp_amazing8s/

My best images made for very good 11x15" prints. Do you plan to make prints that large? If not, you may be happy with a 4MP camera.

Cheers!

6/17/2004 7:49:39 PM

Scott Pedersen

member since: 11/18/2001
  If you are currently a SLR user, you will want to stick with the brand you currently use. That way you don't need to replace your lenes and asseories. Also you should keep this in mind. The more megapixils the bigger the file sizes, the bigger computer processor and more memory you will need to move them around. Also you should have some method of storing your work off the computer like a CD burner. there is lots of expenses no one ever bothers to mention with digital.

6/22/2004 4:25:06 AM

Steve Franco

member since: 6/22/2004
  I have the Sony Mavica CD 500 and LOVE IT. With the optional ($70) snap on viewfinder it works like an SLR, and records directly to CD ROMs (very good for weddings or simply shooting alot)

The only problem to date - and I assume it's my error - is getting it to work with the strobes I jsut bought (you will see the post I made in another forum.

6/22/2004 6:38:44 AM

Greg McCroskery
BetterPhoto Member
imagismphotos.com

member since: 2/27/2003
  Fawn,
You might want to check out the camera reviews at www.dpreview.com. These are very in-depth reviews of most digital camera models. The Olympus model you refer to, the model 8080 was just recently reviewed and got very high marks.
God Bless,
Greg

6/22/2004 8:06:39 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  I really recommend the Kodak 6490 4mp. camera great reviews,fantastic lens that zooms to 380mm. all the camera you'll need right now to venture into digital.Why invest in an 8mp point and shoot right now when in the future you will probably want a digital SLR. Oh and the cost is about half what you'd pay for an 8mp.camera today.Like I say great camera!!!!!

6/22/2004 10:28:11 AM

Ken Henry

member since: 9/16/2003
  I went to a very reputable pro camera store to buy a digital camera. Of course he asked me what I am going to use it for. Well the price is not low enough yet to buy the new Kodak 14meg.
Here is what was very interesting. He had me use a 3meg and a 5meg cameras to take a picture of him. Next we used a tripod. With the tripod we began to see the quality difference in the 8 x 10 prints.
Serious and pro photographers use tripods to produce quality images. So the real question should be "what quality of images do you want to produce?"
I bought a Canon A75 3.2meg.
And for now will stay with my Elan7, prime lenses, Velvia and Reala film with tripod for my serious work. Because I sell enlargements up 20 x 30" prints.
Oh, I use my new digital for my test shots. This reduced my film use/cost over 50%.

Ken

6/26/2004 7:13:56 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Seth 

member since: 3/18/2004
  26 .  Buying Digital and Going Nuts
I have been reading the QandA section on the BetterPhoto site for a few months now. I have gained so much valuable information, but I am still stuck with a question. My wife and I want to buy a digital camera - especially to have for the birth of our first child. She would like a point-and-shoot with LCD screen. I am leaning much more towards the Canon Digital Rebel (I currently shoot with a Rebel 2000). I enjoy taking close-up shots of flowers, landscapes, and portraits. Here's my question:

In terms of quality, would I be disappointed with a point-and-shoot? Are certain point-and-shoots better than others? Can you still control the aperture and shutter speed with a point-and-shoot? I have recently bought a close-up lens for my Canon, so I know that I would be able to use that with the Digital Rebel. I'm also concerned that having to look through a digital LCD screen will drive me nuts when taking shots.

I have been driving myself crazy for a number of weeks now. I appreciate any advice you can give!! Thanks in advance.

6/5/2004 7:49:19 AM

  Hi Seth. There are plenty of point-and-shoot cameras with enough manual control to satisfy your creative urges, yet are automatic enough for the ease of one who is maybe not so camera inclined. Check out the Olympus C740-750uz for a great example - the 10x zoom alone is what impressed me. You can control the aperture and shutter speeds (although there is a smaller range than with a DSLR). You still have a viewfinder with this camera, it's just that it's digital - which means that you see exactly what the picture WILL look like, depending on your settings. If you are the primary shooter, then you would probably be pleased with the Rebel, and since you have some accessories already, you would start out ahead dollar-wise. My few cents.

6/5/2004 8:20:05 AM

Damian P. Gadal
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 4/22/2002
  I agree. The Olympus line will do much of what you're talking about, if you can have a salesperson show you a C-750-UZ. The one issue with these is some shutter lag, but they do the trick for much everything else.

6/5/2004 8:29:55 AM

Scott Pedersen

member since: 11/18/2001
  If you currently shoot with a Rebel, its a no brainer. Get a digital Rebel. You can use your current lenes and accessories on it. A point and shoot camera is just that...a point and shoot camera, (don't let people try to tell you different)it would be a huge step down on your part to go to a digital point and shoot. Its too bad the camera manufactures don't make a consumer digital SLR body, That would convice me to switch.

6/8/2004 4:20:52 AM

  I agree with Damian about the shutter lag....it is a bit disconcerting. The manual focus on the 750 is no walk in the park either. But the zoom is fabulous and I like the color from the 750 as well! RoB

6/8/2004 4:22:06 AM

Robin Allard

member since: 3/12/2004
  I recently bought a Nikon Coolpix 4300, making the switch from a Pentax K1000 which is fully manual. I have had some "growing pains". A few disappointments are the lack of adequate flash and difficulty stopping action. On the whole, I think you gain more than you lose by making the switch although I may still use my SLR for some situations.

6/8/2004 5:34:22 AM

Joe 

member since: 2/16/2004
  I went from a K1000 with high quality fixed focal length lenses to a Kodak DX6490. Film processing quality has gone downhill fast and digital point and shoots are a lot smaller. I like the lens and color of the Kodak and chose it over a lot of 4-6 megapixel cameras. I actually had 2 of these cameras. The first one had long shutter lag and took a while to be ready for the next picture. My second one is fast. The photo quality is excellent. I did some direct comparisons with the Panasonic FZ10 and I am keeping the Kodak. It's faster, the lens is better and so is the color. If you want better, you will need to go DSLR but that would be about triple the cost, weight and size. Eventually I will buy one. For now, the DX6490 will suffice. It's $398 at Sam's club too! They also have a great return policy.

6/8/2004 6:54:17 AM

Michael McCullough

member since: 6/11/2002
  Although I don't own digital,I've heard as well that the Kodak 6490 four mega pixel is a great little machine and one of the best in its classs out there,great lens good resolution and a fair price as well about a third of the cost of the Rebel!!!!!Again this camera comes highly recommended by almost everyone!!!!!

6/8/2004 9:13:11 AM

David  Bieda

member since: 6/2/2004
  Seth:

I was interested in a digital SLR as well, however, the price of the Canon 10D prevented me from buying one. I choose the Olympus C-5050 instead. An excellent camera with lots of control. The Canon digital Rebel came out shortly thereafter. I was a bit dissapointed in my timing, however, keep in mind that the digital Rebel does not have any flash compensation. Something to think about as you take pictures of your new child indoors. Eventually when I move up to a digital SLR this will be one of the most important features I look for. The Olympus C-5050 does have a flash compensation feature plus a superbright F1.8 lens. Great for low indoor lighting.

6/8/2004 9:31:03 AM

Joe 

member since: 2/16/2004
  It is a nice camera and I am having a lot of fum with it. So far, I have taken about 1500 photos in less than 4 months. Some day, I would like to get some of the more advanced features of a DSLR.

6/8/2004 9:48:26 AM

Gary Gundy

member since: 3/13/2004
  You can find excellent in-depth digital camera reviews at www.dpreview.com

6/8/2004 6:42:42 PM

Cindy L. McKinney
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/12/2004
  Seth,
I have both the digital rebel and rebel 2000. seeing how you already have the 2000 you would have less learing to do the controls are in basicaly the same place. and if you shot in raw you have with the software that comes with the camera flash compensation. also for your wife the camera can be set on full auto just like the rebel 2ooo
this is just my 2 cents
Cindy

6/9/2004 7:39:13 AM

John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/8/2001
 
 
 
I just read your question in this week's Snapshot, not the website. But, I was facinated by the many answers - none of which seem to address something you need to consider.

What kind of pictures do you want to take? And, will you or your wife take the bulk of these?

If you want "snapshots," the point and shoot [pocket-type] camera may be just the ticket. However, I've seen many folks use the LCD screen as the viewfinder - this is an open invitation to a poorly focused image since the resolution on the screen is insufficient to allow an accurate determination of exactly where the snsing point of the lens is focused.

Cameras like the Olympus 750 are more like rangefinders. You'll need to remember the parallax factor when you compose your shot, particularly as you move in closer.

SLRs, while generally more expensive, allow you to see essentially the whole picture you want to create create. And, you can get interchangeable lenses allowing you greater flexibility. This is very important if you plan to enlarge one or more of your prints.

Since you have a Canon Rebel - if you have $1,000 and you're the primary image maker, the answer is fairly obvious. As someone else said, go for the digital Rebel, but read some of the reviews of this camera at various websites. There's a lot of fuss about the inadequacies of its flash.

If the camera is for your wife, buy a point and shot. They're small, packable [so she can take it everywhere], not too expensive and, with practice, she'll take a good images.

Remember, one additional thing. Your prints will only be as good as your skills with Photoshop or some other manipulation program. Most folks writing articles in the various photo magazines agree that all images must be sharpened before printing.

6/9/2004 10:49:25 AM

John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/8/2001
 
 
 
I just read your question in this week's Snapshot, not the website. But, I was facinated by the many answers - none of which seem to address something you need to consider.

What kind of pictures do you want to take? And, will you or your wife take the bulk of these?

If you want "snapshots," the point and shoot [pocket-type] camera may be just the ticket. However, I've seen many folks use the LCD screen as the viewfinder - this is an open invitation to a poorly focused image since the resolution on the screen is insufficient to allow an accurate determination of exactly where the snsing point of the lens is focused.

Cameras like the Olympus 750 are more like rangefinders. You'll need to remember the parallax factor when you compose your shot, particularly as you move in closer.

SLRs, while generally more expensive, allow you to see essentially the whole picture you want to create create. And, you can get interchangeable lenses allowing you greater flexibility. This is very important if you plan to enlarge one or more of your prints.

Since you have a Canon Rebel - if you have $1,000 and you're the primary image maker, the answer is fairly obvious. As someone else said, go for the digital Rebel, but read some of the reviews of this camera at various websites. There's a lot of fuss about the inadequacies of its flash.

If the camera is for your wife, buy a point and shot. They're small, packable [so she can take it everywhere], not too expensive and, with practice, she'll take a good images.

Remember, one additional thing. Your prints will only be as good as your skills with Photoshop or some other manipulation program. Most folks writing articles in the various photo magazines agree that all images must be sharpened before printing.

6/9/2004 10:58:18 AM

John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/8/2001
 
 
 
I just read your question in this week's Snapshot, not the website. But, I was facinated by the many answers - none of which seem to address something you need to consider.

What kind of pictures do you want to take? And, will you or your wife take the bulk of these?

If you want "snapshots," the point and shoot [pocket-type] camera may be just the ticket. However, I've seen many folks use the LCD screen as the viewfinder - this is an open invitation to a poorly focused image since the resolution on the screen is insufficient to allow an accurate determination of exactly where the snsing point of the lens is focused.

Cameras like the Olympus 750 are more like rangefinders. You'll need to remember the parallax factor when you compose your shot, particularly as you move in closer.

SLRs, while generally more expensive, allow you to see essentially the whole picture you want to create create. And, you can get interchangeable lenses allowing you greater flexibility. This is very important if you plan to enlarge one or more of your prints.

Since you have a Canon Rebel - if you have $1,000 and you're the primary image maker, the answer is fairly obvious. As someone else said, go for the digital Rebel, but read some of the reviews of this camera at various websites. There's a lot of fuss about the inadequacies of its flash.

If the camera is for your wife, buy a point and shot. They're small, packable [so she can take it everywhere], not too expensive and, with practice, she'll take a good images.

Remember, one additional thing. Your prints will only be as good as your skills with Photoshop or some other manipulation program. Most folks writing articles in the various photo magazines agree that all images must be sharpened before printing.

6/9/2004 10:59:32 AM

Brooke Loter

member since: 6/4/2004
  I had a Canon Rebel G and a small 2.1 MP HP digital camera just for snapshots but the rebel was for my photography, I wanted to upgrade to a better digital and I talked my husband into getting me the Digital Rebel because I knew I would be able to use the lenses I had for the other one and I just LOVE LOVE LOVE my digital rebel!!! The pictures are so wonderful and the only thing you really have to learn about is the digital aspect of the camera because it works just like the regular EOS SLR's as far as the switches and stuff. And as far as your wife using it, it has the auto modes and my husband and mom can pick mine up and use it just fine. My mom is mad because she just bought a Minolta Dimage point and shoot digital and she is so dissapointed in it and she loves my pictures so much more.

6/9/2004 11:04:28 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
liz read

member since: 2/20/2003
  27 .  Query Digital EVF = NOT so great?
Clarification please! Dave Cross answered another related query ... and the summation seemed to be that if the SLR had an EVF then its quality would never be as good as a digital SLR using standard mirror/prism etc., even if that camera had lesser MP. So, ultimately, if the rule is "want great pix, avoid all cameras with EVF", then what SLR models do you recommend falling into, say, the $1500 range?

6/1/2004 10:44:44 AM

Dave Cross

member since: 4/8/2004
  Hi Liz. First, please remember that these are my personal opinions. Others may disagree, your mileage may vary. ... You are basically correct in your assertions. EVFs are a pet hate of mine, being a sort of half-way-house between point-n-shoot compacts and "real" DSLRs. NOBODY has yet come up with a sensible advantage of the EVF over the mirror-pentaprism system other than cost of manufacture (open to suggestions here). The only place that an EVF belongs is on a VIDEO camera (and here a black and white CRT display not a colour LCD).

Cut to the chase ... in your price band:

Canon Digtal Rebel (EOS 300D in Europe). Nikon D70. With both of these, you should have a little budget left for a decent lens. Canon EOS 10D (maybe just a little over budget). You many also be able to pick up a used EOS D60 (the camera I use) for a song, a very capable machine (same sensor as the Rebel/10D just slightly older electronics).

You need to go and play with the equipment at you local outlet, buy the camera that FEELS right in your hands (assuming that you don't already have lenses you want to use). I could spout on for hours here ... but there are bound to be others wanting to put their points. Let us know what you decide. Above all ENJOY your camera. Cheers.

6/1/2004 1:45:40 PM

Dave Cross

member since: 4/8/2004
  There's a lively discussion on this thread:-

http://www.betterphoto.com/forms/QnAdetail.asp?threadID=9757

6/1/2004 1:56:05 PM

liz read

member since: 2/20/2003
  Dave - mucho gracias. I bought far too early and thoughtlessly into the digital game (S602Z) and now live in a constant state of snarl! It's an EVF ... it claims it has this ability to turn 3.2 into 6 MP. I never really understood that, or how a camera issued at 3.2 could "claim" 6 mp! I call it Fuji Fudge. It was surely easy to "select" the higher mode ... and feel good. However, was it worth a bean???

And, since I'm stuck with the "Fudge" ... how can I maximise on what it at least MIGHT have? 3.2 or 6 MP? Whatever application, from portraits to scenery. Financially, I have to live with this camera for a while ... and I feel cheated by its promises.

6/1/2004 2:53:34 PM

liz read

member since: 2/20/2003
  Dave: Merci for your answers. Hey, personal is usually RIGHT!
I have gotten so snarly with this camera...it's got all kinds of cute stuff I would NOW demand on a new camera, such as ability to add off camera push button...and porthole to add off camera flash.
Nice features!
SUCH a shame this camera is a wreck waiting to happen to anyone with good intentions.
It's a family camera...which was sold at an excessive price...and as a photographic "unit"...DUH!

6/1/2004 3:03:40 PM

  Yeah, I really do not care for an EVF either. The affordable SLR's with optical finders are the Nikon D70 and Canon Digital Rebel at around $1000, plus lens. Cheers!

6/1/2004 3:08:34 PM

liz read

member since: 2/20/2003
  Now that the UGLY "EVF" has been revealed.

WHY is not a major item with many major reviewers?

The first time I "found" this concept was two days ago.

And actually have some optimism re it being my future choice.

I do know, I LOATHE my EVF.

But there are items some GREAT $1500-2000 cameras, for whatever silly reason, seem to overlook.

* screw on shutter bulb for REALLY still shots
* hot shoe ... or wired connection to first off camera flash

And those silly bits are important.

Comments???

6/1/2004 3:39:17 PM

Tyler B. Sutcliffe

member since: 2/29/2004
  There are some great camera's that are half way between a DSLR and a point and shoot, DEPENDING on your desired usage. I purchases a Sony DSC f-828. Its 8 meg pix, and does a great job for what I need. Others may have different preferences.

6/8/2004 5:57:49 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Tim A. Pierce

member since: 5/28/2004
  28 .  SLR Digital Vs. Point and Shoot Digital
I read somewhere that a 6 megapixel digital SLR camera is better then a 8 megapixel digital camera. How does the "SLR" part of a digital SLR camera make it better then a point and shoot digital camera?

5/28/2004 3:16:06 AM

Dave Cross

member since: 4/8/2004
  Hi Tim. First, let's clarify that a "Digital SLR" has a mirror, a pentaprism and interchangeable lenses just like a film SLR. The "pseudo SLRs" with electronic viewfinders do NOT count :-)

MegaPixels are not everything. Once you get past 4meg or so, the quality of the optical system becomes increasingly important, and the DSLRs use the highly developed, high quality (and often VERY expensive) glass from the film SLR world. What I'm really saying is that a 6 meg DSLR with a decent lens will easily outperform an 8 meg point-n-shoot with a lesser lens. In actual fact, the old EOS D-30 (3 meg) will produce images to rival some of the cheaper 8 meg cameras.

Another factor to consider is that DSLRs, in order to use film lenses, have MUCH larger sensors than the point-n-shoots. It is a fact that the physically larger pixels of these sensors produce less noise than the small sensors of a P-n-S at the same equivalent ISO setting, leading to cleaner images. It is actually easier to get a higher ISO from the bigger pixel because more light falls on it (bigger area) causing more photo-electrons to whizz about. There are few P-n-S cameras that can come anywhere near an equivalent ISO of 1600 (pretty standard for a modern DSLR) with remotely acceptable image noise.

That's the basic argument. Any further questions, ask here. There are a lot of very knowledgeable people on this forum. Listen to them, learn, and above all, enjoy your photography. Cheers.

5/28/2004 4:45:29 AM

Tim A. Pierce

member since: 5/28/2004
  So, a DSLR takes a better picture becuase they have a larger ccd and can have better lens put on them, is that correct?

5/28/2004 4:59:45 AM

Dave Cross

member since: 4/8/2004
  Spot on Tim..... :-)

5/28/2004 5:32:16 AM

Lamont G. Weide
LamontPhotos.com

member since: 5/1/2002
  The DSLR should always provide greater flexibility. However, costs can also run higher. The advantage of the smaller 8 megapixel digitals are that they are smaller and easier to carry, and thus you theoretically have them with you more often. The perfect pocket digital does not yet exist. If you are looking to do any type of professional photos, you probably want a digital that uses RAW. I would suggest looking at the Nikon and Minolta A2 8 megapixels. Also use the Web to look up info and find a store to handle the camera. I was surprised to find the Minolta A2 is light and much smaller than the others. It gets a good rating and can be purchased for under $1000. Remember that these are NOT DSLRs - you cannot change lenses, etc. However, they may well have a place as a lightweight, easy-to-carry second camera. Consider the advantage in backpacking, for example.

6/7/2004 8:30:06 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Leon 

member since: 4/25/2004
  29 .  What Digital Camera to Buy?
I would like to explore the art of taking beautiful and meaningful pictures, but I don't know what digital camera to choose. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of funds for this endeavor until I graduate, but in the meantime I would like to do it. I would like to get a camera that I can use in my daily life just for taking pictures like the average person, BUT also I would like to use it for my artistic photography, close-ups of objects, people, nature. And the problem is that I would like to take those pictures and enlarge them so I can frame them around my apartment. My budget is about $300.00. What would you recommend? Also, once I am able to afford more, what camera should I get then, so if I enlarge my picture to say 40X14 (sorry about the numbers ... I know the ratio must be wrong, but I just took a ruler) they will look good and nice. If this can only be done with film, then what would you recommend?

4/25/2004 10:08:11 PM

Nancy Grace Chen
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/18/2004
  This is purely my opinion ... Based on what I've seen, I think you really can't go wrong with any Canon, Nikon, or Sony camera. I've seen good pictures taken with the other major brands (Olympus, etc.) as well. With $300.00, you can buy a good digital camera that should last you a year or two at least. (By "last," I mean that you can learn on it for a year or two.) I'd recommend a camera that's at least 3 megapixels and has modes where you can control the aperture and shutter speed. You'll be able to learn a lot on that.
Here's my story: I'm definitely no pro now, but I started out on a Canon S30 ... 3.2 megapixels and a lot of options for controls. I learned the basics of camera functions on it and how to compose pics and such. The resolution was good enough to make 8"x10"s and take contest-quality photos. I now use a Canon Digital Rebel, which is a digital SLR. It's great because you can change lenses and have total control.
When you get enough money, I'd recommend getting an SLR. I wouldn't recommend it yet if you don't know a lot about camera control, but once you've learned a bit, you'll almost need it. (:

4/26/2004 1:12:49 AM

Nancy Grace Chen
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/18/2004
  Well, I hope that helps. If you have any other questions, feel free to email me. And anyone else (especially those of you with different brand preferences)... feel free to jump in.

Nancy
nance.c@poboxes.com
nacespace.com/photos Also... dpreview.com is a really great place for unbiased and complete information about every digital camera.

Nancy
nance.c@poboxes.com
nacespace.com/photos

4/26/2004 1:43:17 AM

Scott Pedersen

member since: 11/18/2001
  Pentax optio series is a good camera. But remember now all these digital cameras are point and shoot cameras. Poster size? hmmmm five megapixials perhaps. You know what would work better, would be a film based slr and lens. You can pick up a used one off of ebay or a pawn shop. Look for one that has manual controls or the ability to run auto or manual. You can learn creativity, its great for enlargements. Places like York Photo will process your film really cheap and also put em online for you to download.

Scott

4/27/2004 4:44:31 AM

Lynn M. Garwood

member since: 11/11/2003
  Leon, you have rather ambitious demands for $300, so you might want to look into a used digital, such as a Canon G-2. That was my first digital. It gives somewhat the same controls that you get on a SLR but without the ability to change lenses (although you can add adapters). For the money you can spend, you'll get more value from a used piece of equipment.

Just a thought. With such a camera, you won't be as limited as a new one you could get for the same money.

4/27/2004 1:48:41 PM

  I agree with Lynn about the demands for a digital under $300. : ) My Olympus 4000Z was the perfect "first" digital camera. It has 4mp and even though it's around $350, it is worth it's weight in gold. Most of the comments I get about my images start with "you shot THAT with a 4mp camera??" ... of course the camera is only as good as the photographer so to speak. : ) Good luck!!

4/27/2004 6:53:42 PM

jean ray
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/22/2004
  I think for what you're wanting to do, you really need a digital that has manual control, so I agree that a used G2 or G3 is a better bet that what you could purchase new for $300. If your heart isn't set on digital, you might consider an entry-level film camera, such as the Canon Rebel. I've had the Rebel 2000 for 5 years now and it is a great camera that you can get for about $300 with a lense. You can also pick up some good used lenses on ebay. I recently added the Canon G5 to my gear list and love it. One of the advantages, IMHO, that the compact high end digitals have over the SLR digitals is the rotating LCD screen. This comes in very handy for shooting from awkward angles and often elimimates the need to contort oneself into uncomfortable positions and get your clothes dirty! I'm not sure why none of the SLR's have this; it seems like such a nice option. Anyway, hope this is helpful.

5/1/2004 9:38:56 AM

glen 

member since: 6/20/2003
  You are NOT going to get 40x14's with high quality with a digital camera - yet- maybe in a few years-8x10's -yes. For acceptable quality in that huge size- use a high quality 35mm with 100 ASA, or medium format-645 -for high quality.

5/4/2004 12:30:44 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Cindy Gawlik

member since: 2/23/2004
  30 .  Looking For a Beginner's Digital with Everything
I like the features of both the Olympus Camedia C-750 and Kodak Easyshare DX6490, but wonder if I'm getting in over my head as a first time digital buyer. I'm interested in taking pictures of the birds in my backyard as well as vacation, and family photos. Are either of these good choices? Will I need a tripod for zoom photos? I don't believe the C750 has that capacity.

2/23/2004 10:08:19 AM

Wing Wong
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/8/2004
  Hi Cindy,
The C750 is a great camera with it's long optical zoom. The only problem is that it is not a optically or electronically stabilised lens, so yes, you will need a tripod with the camera.

If you are looking for a stabilized system with a good zoom, you might try the Minolta A1. 7x optical with CCD stabilizer. If you can wait a few months, the A2 is coming out with all the same features as the A1 but with 8MP instead of 5MP.

A good camera I used to use was the C2100 which had optically stabilized 10x lens. But it was only 2MP and had ISO100-400 only.

In bright daylight, you should be able to handhold the 750 to take pictures of birds. The 750 has a very fast lens. But at longer telephoto ranges, you will need to brace against a wall or use a tripod. Sorry. ^_^;

But if you want relatively long focal length and stabilization, try the Minolta A1($600-$800) or the A2 when it comes out.
Good luck!

2/23/2004 1:12:35 PM

Denise N

member since: 4/15/2003
  I own a Kodak Easyshare DX4330 (my first digital camera) and absolutely love it for a first-time digital user. I use it for a variety of shots: sports (action), scenery, and family photos. I use my tripod a lot especially with the zoom (I don't have a steady hand). For the price, you cannot go wrong with a Kodak - especially the Easyshare system which is sooooo easy and fast. I personally only buy Kodak and I don't know why they always seem to be "left out in the cold" by everyone. For their products I think they have the best price for the features. But remember to play, play, play with your camera to get to know the features it has and how they all work under different conditions. I've had mine for almost a year and I'm still having fun learning what it can do. Enjoy! and Good Luck!

2/24/2004 8:53:39 AM

Alisha May Furbish
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 1/5/2003
  I own the DX6490, and I like it very much. Image stabilization or not, I think it never hurts to use a tripod- I put off getting one, but when I did I realized how helpful they are. The DX6490 is easy to use and has a lot of manual and auto features. It produces beautiful images. My only qualm is that for a few hundred more dollars I could've gotten a digital SLR. But, being an advanced amature, I found the Kodak had more than enough options to help me learn, and to produce great pictures.

2/24/2004 4:19:34 PM

Douglas 

member since: 11/28/2003
  I got the Panasonic Lumix FZ10 at Christmas. It is a 4mp camera with 12X OPTICAL zoom (35-420 equiv) and it has optical image stabilization. And it is F2.8 all thru the range.

It is my first digital camera, and I am very pleased with it so far.

2/24/2004 6:56:16 PM

Joe 

member since: 2/16/2004
  I bought a Kodak Easyshare DX6490 after looking at a lot of cameras and photo galleries. (Look at Alisha May's) The lens is awesome. I will even say it is at least as good if not better than a Zeiss. I used to use a Pentax K1000 but it is too large to take along with the camcorder. The Kodak is an excellent alternative and gives me better prints than what I got with my high quality film cameras. (film processing is not as good as it used to be) I will get a digital SLR in the future, but I do not consider that technology "mature" yet. 5+ megapixel cameras are still a bit on the noisy side and there are some other issues that they need to work out. In the mean time, I will "suffer" with a small, lightweight, easy to use camera with a world class lens and color system.

:-)

3/3/2004 8:04:00 AM

Piper Lehman
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 7/20/2001
  Ah..the quintessential request: I want everything, but I don't want to pay for it. :) It has been my observation that you get what you pay for in the camera world. Of course, as a whole, photo equipment is way overpriced. You can pretty much expect that the cheaper a camera is, then the less it has to offer. Features that shoot the price up considerably are resolution, memory card used, optical zoom, image capture formats offered, flash features (red-eye reduction, slow-sync, etc.), white balance options, and manual exposure functions. The more automatic a camera, the cheaper it will be. Just take the little Canon A101 or whatever it's called. It has no zoom at all - just one focal length (I think it's around 35mm). This is the least expensive of the Big 6 brands (Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Pentax, Sony, Olympus). You can grab one for $150. It probably takes/makes better images than, say, the Olympus D-360, which DOES have a zoom lens and higher resolution.

Choosing a digital camera isn't easy, nor is it universal. You need to make a list of your priorities - even if you don't know what the function is called, list what you want to be able to do with your camera, and then go play with the cameras at your local Best Buy or even WalMart. These store usually have a ton of demos tied to the counter for customers to play with. Even if you've done all your homework on the web, you will find that holding a super light plastic camera in your hand can really change your mind quick about the relative quality of a particular camera. To me, this just screams "cheap!" Also, although most of the big 6 have been trying to get their cameras as small as possible, I find the smaller they are, the simpler the design and the less they offer.
If you're still confused, get the most expensive camera you can afford and you can't be too disappointed. Sad, but true.

3/23/2004 6:59:39 AM

Piper Lehman
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 7/20/2001
  Addendum: RE the aforementioned Canon 'A101'. THis is the exception to the rule. Optical zoom, for instance, isn't going to make a damn bit of difference in the 'quality' of the image, but most people will gladly sacrifice this for some zoom power. If there were only two cameras in the world to choose from, I would go for the zoom model, but this is a personal choice. REmember, everyone values each option differently. The trick is finding the "perfect" camera that offers all your favorite options in one package. Camera manufacturers deliberately add or leave out options on certain cameras in order to push you toward the next most expensive or higher end camera. YOu might not want all the bells and whistles that a certain camera offers, but if it's the least pricey model with your one desirable feature, then you are forced to pay for all the others as well.

Don't worry too much about making the "wrong" decision. ONce you make your choice and become comfortable using your new camera, you won't remember Jack about what the others might've offered. Frankly, you can make great images with any camera. Pick the best you can afford and then just shoot, shoot, shoot, and you can't go wrong with that.

3/23/2004 7:12:01 AM

Joe 

member since: 2/16/2004
  I agree with Piper, It will be hard to make a really wrong decision. My decision was based on 4 requirements; price, size, image quality and useability. Although the Kodak DX6490 has a 10X optical zoom, it was not a factor. In reality, you will mostly use the wide to medium zoom range and rarely use the full 10X. a 3 - 4X is usually sufficient. Do not use digital zoom. Most large zooms are not as good optically as shorter zooms. The real good German designed lens out there are exceptions. (Zeis and Schneider Kreuznach)
A good thing to do would be to write down what you would like the camera to do, go look in the stores and hold the different cameras to determine which ones are too big or small, read some online reviews by experts, re-evaluate your criteria and make a decision. You will love a digital camera. I have taken more pictures in the 2 months I have owned mine, than I did all of last year. :-)

3/23/2004 7:58:36 AM

Joe 

member since: 2/16/2004
  I took a look at some reviews of Douglas's camera. The Panasonic Luminix FZ10 looks like a great one. I almost took my Kodak DX6490 back. I would love to have the manual focus, but I have to have the low light operating capabilities of the Kodak. I wish the Panasonic had the AF systems of the Kodak, or the Kodak had the manual focus of the Panasonic.

3/28/2004 6:08:58 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
<< Previous 10 skip to page
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ...6
Next 10  >>

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