| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/27/2005 03:27:35 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by Thousands_Fall:
I dont feel like researching all these cameras again, I did it two years ago, but I know the d50 doesnt shoot RAW. Great camera, but it doesnt, which will probably come in handy. Especially if your willing to fork that much over for a camera.
Im sure you got lots of good advice from other people, but look into the availability to shoot RAW. |
Actually the D50 does shoot in RAW its just uncompressed, you can read about it HERE I think the D50 is a great little camera, as is the canon XT they are smaller and lighter than D70/300D and at the risk of sounding sexist I would say more suited for the womans smaller hands (not all women have smaller hands i know).
Anyway on to my point... I think the D50 has a great lens with it but would not choose the 70-200 4.5-5.6 I would rather buy better glass secondhand.. buy a Body only then get some nice glass from a decent secondhand retailer. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 05:54:59 AM · #27 |
buy D50 or D70.
Lens 18-70 (the D70 kit lens)
and buy SB800 or SB600.
Then save money for longer soom!
This is perfect package
or wait until 1.novemer and get the new D200 with the new 18-200 ED VR lens. Have heard the price $2000. This will be the perfect camera at least for me |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 05:58:17 AM · #28 |
| I would definitely second the Minolta 5D. I'm staggered it wasn't amongst your initial list. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 06:14:14 AM · #29 |
The Oly E-500 is a great camera and gets a "Highly Recomended" rating from dpreview. Canon and Nikon make great cameras but there is nothing like Oly color and don't listen to what they say about the lenses. Oly has a good number of lenses and more coming out this year and they are all top notch. Just read the reviews on them.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:03:41 AM · #30 |
I didn't read all the posts so if someone said something similar then
I'm just reinforcing what they said!
I would only consider Nikon and Canon. Sorry oly and minolta users!
Reason being they simply have better lens support! Albeit, minolta is not bad, nikon and canon are just better(as far as lenses available) |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:23:49 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by gr8dane:
If it were me, I'd get the 350D (Rebel XT) for the same price if you drop one of those lenses for now. The chip in it does not just have more megapixels, but the biggest difference is the noise improvement. For example, the XT Rebel at ISO 1600 is about the same quality as the regular Rebel at 400. I know cause I just sold my Rebel (300D). You can always buy better lenses that are worth keeping as time goes on. |
If you can afford the XT...I'd go for it. I do not like using my Rebel at anything more than ISO 200 because of the noise. ISO 400 is not TERRIBLE, but I still have to run it through Noise Ninja to get it to my liking.
I agree with what some of the others touched on. Go with Canon or Nikon. You see the lenses I have...I have only used the kit lens maybe twice and I've had the Rebel 1.5yrs and have taken 12000+ shots. The 50mm 1.8 does work great as a portrait lens. I also used it for a low-light wedding reception a couple months ago. Noise was still an issue even though i was using the lens wide open.
I am getting the 20D really soon because the Rebel's sloooow write speed can't keep up with me when I am shooting children. The noise needs improved, and I want more AF points. The one think I do not like about the XT is it's size. It is a bit smaller than the 300d.
BUT, if you were to get the 300d and a couple good lenses, you could upgrade the body in a year or two without having to repurchase lenses. Overall, it is a great camera and great for the serious hobbiest. It's even great for landscape photographers. However, if you are into rapid fire shots......I would seriously consider the XT or 20d. The 28-135mm IS is a great all around lens, if you can swing it.
Jenn
Just some thoughts bouncing around in my head...LOL |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:32:07 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by superdave_909:
I didn't read all the posts so if someone said something similar then
I'm just reinforcing what they said!
I would only consider Nikon and Canon. Sorry oly and minolta users!
Reason being they simply have better lens support! Albeit, minolta is not bad, nikon and canon are just better(as far as lenses available) |
Oh really? Show me an image stabilised 12-24mm lens, or an image stabilised 50mm f1.4 lens. Very useful if you shoot at gigs/festivals and can't use tripods. And if you're on a budget, it's very useful to have a 70-200mm f2.8 lens WITH stabilisation that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:41:08 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
And if you're on a budget, it's very useful to have a 70-200mm f2.8 lens WITH stabilisation that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. |
Oh come on! I have 2 legs and an arm left...I can still buy my Canon 70-200 2.8 IS and have a limb left for a 2 gig memory card ;) |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:41:56 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by somebody:
Olympus E-300 with 2 lens kit: $749.00
14-45 f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko EZ Zoom
40-150 f/3.5-4.5 Zuiko EZ Zoom
Nikon D50 with 2 lenses: $849.85
Nikor 70-300 f/4-5.6 G
Nikor 28-80 f/3.3-5.6 G
Memory Card
Pentax *ist DL with 2 lenses: $855.80
Pentax 28-80 f/3.5-5.6
Pentax 100-300 f/4.7-5.8
Memory Card
Canon 300D with 2 lenses: $873.90
Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6
Canon EF 35-80 f/4.0-5.6 III
Olympus E-500 with 2 lens kit: $899.99
14-45 f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko EZ Zoom
40-150 f/3.5-4.5 Zuiko EZ Zoom
|
With those lense choices, you are going to be dissappointed with Canon or Nikon. Don't be cheap on the glass. And you have virutally no wideangle. (And hardly normal on the Canon). You would be better off buying single 17-xx mm kit lens than 2 lenses.
And you should really consider the Minolta's too, having anti-shake in camera is something that I envy Minolta users a bit over. (And it delivers good images)
And (if you can), go to your local store and handle the cameras, It is amazing how much it matters.
The best bang for the buck is the E-500. It even has a spot meter! :P
Message edited by author 2005-10-27 08:42:26.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:43:28 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I would definitely second the Minolta 5D. I'm staggered it wasn't amongst your initial list. |
Sorry but I would not go with Minolta these days...They completely pulled out of Canada, so if you need service you'll need to go through third parties....
I'd stick with Nikon or Canon, play with the different bodies and see which one you like best. But keep in mind that if you want to upgrade to a full frame 35 mm sensor one day, Canon is the only player so far.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:44:32 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by superdave_909:
... I would only consider Nikon and Canon. Sorry oly and minolta users!
Reason being they simply have better lens support! Albeit, minolta is not bad, nikon and canon are just better(as far as lenses available) |
Lens support? Do you mean tripods and monopods?
If you are trying to say that Canon and Nikon make better lenses than Olympus, Minolta, etc., I don't think that is true. The big two have a wider range of lenses available, and their top of the line models are great. But the new models coming out for DSLR from Oly and K-M are every bit as good as their counterparts (when you can find a match) in the Canon-Nikon lines. And they have some very high quality lenses that Canon can't match, example -- Olympus 35-100mm f/2.0 ED Zuiko Digital Zoom. Has Canon or Nikon got anything with that much zoom range with that fast and constant aperture?
It would really improve this site a lot if people would try to put their brand loyalties aside when giving advice to the less experienced photographers. Blind loyalty makes for an exploitable consumer.
Message edited by author 2005-10-27 09:18:21.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 08:58:28 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
... Sorry but I would not go with Minolta these days...They completely pulled out of Canada, so if you need service you'll need to go through third parties....
I'd stick with Nikon or Canon, play with the different bodies and see which one you like best. But keep in mind that if you want to upgrade to a full frame 35 mm sensor one day, Canon is the only player so far. |
If you want companies like Konica-Minola to maintain a presence in your country maybe you ought to stop pimping for Canon, and consider being a little more open-minded in your reccommendations.
Only a very small portion of photographers are destined for a full frame DSLR. If that were a legitimate consideration nobody should ever buy the Canon 18-55mm kit lens, but Canon just brought out a new version of it with the USM motor.
Anyway, the OP is in Illinois, so she doesn't have to worry about that.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:01:21 AM · #38 |
Simple and to the point - nice post Shannon.
bold emphasis added
Originally posted by scalvert:
I would avoid the older Canon 300D and Olympus E-300 in favor of newer models. Keep your eyes on DealMac and DealCam for bargains. This week alone I've seen the Olympus E-500 for $633 and the Canon 350D for $664 (both WITH kit lenses). I've also seen the Nikon D50 for $696 and Minolta 5D for $780- also with kit lenses (both still available). IMO, these are the four best "inexpensive" models out there, and each has its strengths and weaknesses.
Canon and Nikon have the best lens selections (the D50 is a slightly better camera, with a more comfortable grip)
The Olympus gives you a "self-cleaning" sensor and a huge LCD
The Minolta also has a big LCD, and image stabilization built into the camera
As others have suggested, go to a camera store and hold all four before you decide. |
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:09:30 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by ladyhawk22:
Now if I can just find stores within an hour of where I live that CARRY all of these options :-) It seems that not to many places in the middle of Illinois have the Olympus or the Pentax in store :-(
Anybody who owns one wanna come sleep on my couch for a night so I can try it out?? I make AWESOME beef stroganoff!!! I'm just saying...... ;-) |
Calumet Photography has a store in Chicago which is within a day trip drive. You could call ahead and see what brands are in stock.Calumet Photo in Chicago
I would guess there are other large photo stores in Chicago and St. Louis for you to look at cameras.
If you find a camera that has the features you want and feels good to hold, check online for pricing.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:09:42 AM · #40 |
personally, i got the minolta 5D. I like it a lot, but it's the only dSLR i've ever owned, so I really have nothing to compare it with. The only issue i have with it is that I can't find a fast prime. i have the 50mm f1.7, but 50mm is really a little too long for shooting indoors (for me). a wider prime, faster than f/2.8 and less than $500 is the only thing i really wish i had that i don't.
I don't plan to make a career of this, and the way i figure, as long as i can get the 3 lenses I want, the rest of the lens system doesn't really matter to me.
in summary, 50mm is a little too long to replace the kit lens (good for portraits though, i think), and the KM 5D is a good camera. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:11:40 AM · #41 |
I am on my 3rd digital camera, an Olympus E-300. Something always seems to come out "better" or cheaper after I spend my money. The E-500 excites me now, though my wife will make me use my E-300 a year or 2 before I can buy another camera:)... I owned a Minolta A-1 with image stabilization, was not overly impressed with it, especially in low light (sunrise photos, not night time or anything drastic) and emails to Minolta tech-support concerning out of focus and grainy results were answered with check your camera settings. So I went back to Olympus and am overjoyed with my new camera. (The Olympus 3 megapixel C-3030 was my first camera). I considered all dSLR's below $1000, and last August, the 2 lens kit from Olympus was the best bang for my buck. The Olympus felt heavier and sturdier, but unless you can actually take some photos under the conditions you normally shoot, you will never know for sure which one you like better. I will support Olympus because I like the concept of designing a camera AND lens system from the ground up to be digital. I like the open specifications available for other companies to make compatible lenses and fourthirds cameras too... Wouldn't it be nice to buy a camera body from one company, and a lens from another, and a flash from someone else. To see a web site of dedicated fourthirds camera photographers and see some samples of the E-1 & E-300 visit us here //www.myfourthirds.com/
You will hopefully enjoy whatever choice you make, they are all good and have their own advantages/disadvantages.... but remember, there are more than 2 choices...
Message edited by author 2005-10-27 09:23:41.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:18:06 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by feetstink:
personally, i got the minolta 5D. I like it a lot, but it's the only dSLR i've ever owned, so I really have nothing to compare it with. The only issue i have with it is that I can't find a fast prime. i have the 50mm f1.7, but 50mm is really a little too long for shooting indoors (for me). a wider prime, faster than f/2.8 and less than $500 is the only thing i really wish i had that i don't.
I don't plan to make a career of this, and the way i figure, as long as i can get the 3 lenses I want, the rest of the lens system doesn't really matter to me.
in summary, 50mm is a little too long to replace the kit lens (good for portraits though, i think), and the KM 5D is a good camera. |
What about Sigma 20mm F1.8 EX DG or
24mm F1.8 EX DG or
28mm F1.8 EX DG? |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:19:35 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I would definitely second the Minolta 5D. I'm staggered it wasn't amongst your initial list. |
Sorry but I would not go with Minolta these days...They completely pulled out of Canada, so if you need service you'll need to go through third parties....
I'd stick with Nikon or Canon, play with the different bodies and see which one you like best. But keep in mind that if you want to upgrade to a full frame 35 mm sensor one day, Canon is the only player so far. |
Yeah, I'd think twice if I was in Canada.
A full sensor camera will be out very shortly (Mid 2006?), made possible by Minolta's merge with Sony. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:24:12 AM · #44 |
I'll throw in my $0.02 by repeating the advice I followed when I chose the E-500 2 lens kit. I did my spec comparison, and then I held the XT, D50 and the E-500 in my hand. Played with the controls and then made my choice.
It's needs to feel good in your hands. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:27:41 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by rasdub:
Originally posted by jpeters:
I've heard bad news about the Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 G |
I haven't had any problems with this lens at all. I actually like it for the cheap price that I got it for. I'm sure some others might feel differently, but this has been a great starter zoom lens for me. |
Here is what I was told by ursula:
The one lens you should definitely stay away from is the G version of the 70-300 (zoom telephoto 70-300 f4-5.6 G). It's cheap (in all meanings of cheap). I got it with my D70 originally because they told me it was a good "starter" telephoto, but it just doesn't work well. Get a better lens if you can afford it.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 09:27:47 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
I've given up trying to be intelligent about recommending cameras on this site. You really do just have to go with what feels right to you after you hold and try each camera.
I do have to say, though, that listening to people that *only* recommend either Nikon or Canon will be closing your eyes to some fantastic camera systems. |
Glen, I'm with you on both points. Go to the store, play with the cameras. Keep your mind open to alternatives. It's not Canon, Nikon or nothing. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 10:02:04 AM · #47 |
Hey everyone, how about a used body?
Some great deals can be had on a Nikon D100 or Canon D60.
Or are the Nikon D50 and Canon Rebel better values as new bodies?
Whatever you do, get a nice lens..maybe just one for now like a nice 28-105 mm. I probably spend 95% of my shooting in this range. |
|
|
|
10/27/2005 11:36:31 AM · #48 |
Hmm, after posting this I am seriously thinking of the 5D as a travel camera rather than buying a new P&S (I was looking at the Lumix line).
FWIW: at Buydig.com, the Maxxum 5d is $747 with a 18-70mm lens. I don't know how good that is, but of course, unlike other kit lenses, it has IS implicitly!
//www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=MIMAX5D1870
or $660 without the lens. Then add the Sigma for $368 = $1028 for a nice carry around SLR with IS and no need to be changing lenses! (But of course, the option!)
A bit more than I wanted to spend for yet another digital camera (I've bought three in the past year), but it's something I am going to keep in mind!
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 11:56:34 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I would definitely second the Minolta 5D. I'm staggered it wasn't amongst your initial list. |
Sorry but I would not go with Minolta these days...They completely pulled out of Canada, so if you need service you'll need to go through third parties....
I'd stick with Nikon or Canon, play with the different bodies and see which one you like best. But keep in mind that if you want to upgrade to a full frame 35 mm sensor one day, Canon is the only player so far. |
Yeah, I'd think twice if I was in Canada.
A full sensor camera will be out very shortly (Mid 2006?), made possible by Minolta's merge with Sony. |
This is kinda my point, minolta has advantages! no doubt! but, things like canada issue and glass options makes me question longevity.
that said, I'm jealous that you have IS in your camera and not in lenses.
I wish canon would do the same but, can't have your cake and eat it too!
|
|
|
|
10/27/2005 12:12:31 PM · #50 |
Ok :-) Wow! You all have given me a lot more to think about....and to think, my husband's been laughing at the amount of research I've already done.....ah, if only he knew.
Later today (to gather my thoughts) I may post a revised list with blank spaces for the lenses you all said were not worth it. So if anyone has any suggestions that fits the bill for those not-good lenses, let me know. That way I can get accurate price comparisons.
And thanks for the suggestion of Minolta! I don't know what I was thinking, leaving them out. |
|
