DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Dumb move?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 20 of 20, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/15/2006 06:51:11 AM · #1
While I was shopping to buy my daughter a new iMac I had the chance to try a few of the more "up market" dSLRs. Mistake as I loved them all!

I have begun to realise some of the technical limitations of my Panasonic FZ-20 - e.g. need more ISO and less noise; deeper f-stops; optical and not electronic viewfinder; using it is manual is a major pain; electronic zoom and not manual - and wanted to see how the other guys did their stuff. Sigh!

On the bright side, the major photographic limitation I have is me so there is no need for a new camera just yet. But, boy, I sure liked the Canon D30, Olympus E330 (but maybe wait for the new Panasonic 4/3), and especially loved the Nikon D200.

Anyhow, the reason for this thread is a simple one and I will use Canon as the basis for the question.

What is the most important area of investment in a dSLR system? Instincts are telling me it is the lenses (glass) but...

Here is the example.

Canon EOS 350D + EF-S 17-85mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM lens: £949.99
Canon EOS 30D + EF-S 17-85mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM lens: £1139.99

The difference here is almost £200 and this could be used to buy another USM lens. So, if my logic is correct, I should get the cheaper body, buy two good lenses and then buy another Canon body(or whatever system you are using) with more advanced "features" in the future.

Does this make sense?

Carl
05/15/2006 06:58:26 AM · #2
It appears that every time you go shopping with your daughter you end up with a new camera... Steer clear of car showrooms. :)

The general advise seems to be go with the good glass and the cheap body. You can always upgrade the body later on. And the 350D (or the Nikon D50) are good starting points.
 05/15/2006 07:03:20 AM · #3
That price for the 350D seems awful high to me.

I had been considering the 350D until I looked at the 30D. I liked the 30D's larger body. It feels sturdier. It is sturdier because the body is made out of better material. I like the larger screen on the 30D. I like the controls on the 30D. The 30D has less noise at the higher ISOs.

My recommendation go to a shop that has both cameras in stock, hold them both, and fiddle around with them. Which one feels right? If your current camera uses CF memory, pop your memory card into both cameras, and take a couple of test shots. This is not a small investment. My 30D cost more money than my car did!
 05/15/2006 07:06:12 AM · #4
Well, it really depends on what you shoot. If you shoot a lot of action and a lot of night work go with the 30D. If you shoot landscapes and stock, go with the 350D.

With the 300D I am limited by my buffer speed and size (have to wait for the camera when shooting multiple shots) and by noise. The 350D is a step up from that but its still behind the 20-30Ds.

The other major difference is comfort. Most complain the 350 is too small. Moving from a P&S, you might not notice it so much.

Good luck in choosing!
 05/15/2006 07:13:33 AM · #5
ragamuffingirl pointed out the price of the 350D - Check out Amazon;

350D and 18-55mm lens for £479
//tinyurl.com/ksa5r
05/15/2006 07:14:43 AM · #6
Originally posted by jhonan:
It appears that every time you go shopping with your daughter you end up with a new camera... Steer clear of car showrooms. :)

Did you ever get that one right! She was not with me on either occasion and this time the iMac was bought 50/50. But my mistake was starting to play with the "toys" and then realising how good they felt - ex Minolta SLR man here - and...

Looks like glass first, body second although I think Courtenay is about right re what do I want to shoot. I did like the Nikon D50 too, but the most of you guys are Canon users so pretend I did not say that :-)

Carl
 05/15/2006 07:19:25 AM · #7
Originally posted by obsidian:
Originally posted by jhonan:
It appears that every time you go shopping with your daughter you end up with a new camera... Steer clear of car showrooms. :)

Did you ever get that one right! She was not with me on either occasion and this time the iMac was bought 50/50. But my mistake was starting to play with the "toys" and then realising how good they felt - ex Minolta SLR man here - and...

Looks like glass first, body second although I think Courtenay is about right re what do I want to shoot. I did like the Nikon D50 too, but the most of you guys are Canon users so pretend I did not say that :-)

Carl


I would agree in principle that glass is more important than the particular body, however, if you get the 350, and then decide you like the D200 later, you are still in it with the wrong lenses. It may pay in the future to have an idea now which way you want to go.
 05/15/2006 07:42:12 AM · #8
Originally posted by obsidian:
but the most of you guys are Canon users so pretend I did not say that


Nobody will care what you use to make the image. Get the camera that has the features you want and value. My opinion though between the two would be to get a non-kit 30D and a 50 1.8. Save your money and then add better lenses over time.
 05/15/2006 08:50:55 AM · #9
What do you want to shoot that needs better ISO performance and deeper f-stops? In what way does electronic zoom hinder you?
Like I say often here, I loved my FZ10 and would still be using it if I hadn't wanted to become a professional music photographer. It may be that you don't need to upgrade yet.
Look here for some of my shots with the FZ10:
//www.dpchallenge.com/camera.php?CAMERA_ID=707
 05/15/2006 08:54:37 AM · #10
BobsterLobster, sssshhhhhh! - I've got my eye on his FZ20 :-)
 05/15/2006 09:51:54 AM · #11
Originally posted by jhonan:
BobsterLobster, sssshhhhhh! - I've got my eye on his FZ20 :-)

No way I am going shopping now! :-)

Bobster: At this point in time I am really focused on making my FZ-20 work before making any more changes.

* The ISO thing was a pain at the band shoot I did and required a lot of work to make the images really work for me, especially with the noise levels. However, the band loved them and want me to shoot more. Hmm - not sure I am making a great case here! Also a recent trip to Washington where I was trying to shoot in a fish market as it was heading towards dusk proved the need for me to have a noise-less ISO 800 and a faster lens.
* OVF is better than the EVF on the FZ-20 in bad and nearly-bad lighting conditions. The EVF simply cannot handle anything and nor can the LCD. Happening quite a lot at the moment.
* I just happen to prefer rotating a ring than fiddling with a knob in terms of zoom. There is a finer element of control on the ring than on the knob and somehow it just feels more comfortable.
* Re your pictures: yup! can't fault the darn things at all and this is what I want to get towards before I think about changing cameras. One of the big downsides of a dSLR to me is the amount of lenses you need to cart around and keep changing. With the wide angle converter and the basic FZ-20 lens I have most situations covered with little or no hassle. Provided the light is good:-)

Carl
05/15/2006 09:55:55 AM · #12
The FZ-20 gives you F2.8 through the whole zoom range. Not many P&S cameras offer that. Most dSLR entry-level zoom lenses don't even offer that. It's one of the things that makes the FZ-20 so desirable.

Message edited by author 2006-05-15 09:56:47.
 05/15/2006 10:05:43 AM · #13
Originally posted by jhonan:
The FZ-20 gives you F2.8 through the whole zoom range. Not many P&S cameras offer that. Most dSLR entry-level zoom lenses don't even offer that. It's one of the things that makes the FZ-20 so desirable.

Chuckle - you guys are beginning to remind me why i bought the darn thing in the first place!

Probably best to wait for the new Panasonic 4/3 model... or maybe just shoot some bloody photos instead of getting hung up on a hardware fest. :-)

Carl

PS thanks for all of the feedback, guys - it has helped a lot for sure.
 05/15/2006 10:07:06 AM · #14
Originally posted by obsidian:
... So, if my logic is correct, I should get the cheaper body, buy two good lenses and then buy another Canon body(or whatever system you are using) with more advanced "features" in the future.

Does this make sense?

Carl

Makes good sense to me. You tipped your hand that you understand what you are buying into when you used the word "system". Once you start with one brand it is a very expensive proposition to switch to another. And good glass will last a lot longer than a digital body before it becomes out-dated.

I went with Canon because they had a hot new model with the features I wanted at the time I was ready to make the jump. Don't be in a hurry as the choice you make for your first DSLR will likely determine what system you are tied to for quite some time into the future. A Panasonic 4/3 model sounds interesting. Although they are quite costly some of those Olympus 4/3 lenses are quite attractive at a time when it seems that Canon is going more toward IS and away from fast apertures in their new offerings.
05/16/2006 11:30:11 AM · #15
4/3 systems so far have offered smaller sensors which feature more noise. The Oly 4/3 system has the worst noise of all the DSLR's and therefore needs the strongest noise reduction. Anything over ISO 400 starts to look muddy and lose fine detail.

You are probably better off with an entry level Canon if you want to get nicer lenses later on.

If you are going to be satisfied with a basic lens kit, you might consider the Konica Minolta line which will give you IS on all your lenses and then you can get cheaper lenses like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or 28-75 f/2.8 and laugh at everyone who spends 1200 US on a Canon 17-55 IS USM.

I have a *VERY* strong feeling that Sony is going to WOW us all this summer with a camera that stands up in the neighborhood of the D200 as well as very likely a more entry-level camera that will probably be priced between the 350XT and the D50. Both would use the same lens mount. Both will likely feature Anti-Shake and possibly their 4 color sensor system (Red, Blue, Green, Emerald) which was very well liked by DPReview.

Or they might just follow in the steps of the Maxxum 7D which used the same sensor as the Nikon, but added Anti-Shake to provide a MUCH more cost-effective kit.

Not to mention the fact that they will probably introduce a handful of Zeiss lenses with it...

Maybe the best thing would be to wait until the summer releases start pouring out?

Whatever you do, don't let go of that FZ20 too fast... Sweet machine.

Incidentally, OVF is better than EVF for anything moving, but in the dark, an OVF can be pretty useful... Tough call.
 05/16/2006 11:45:21 AM · #16
Yeah, I'd definitely keep an eye on Sony's new offerings this summer.
Don't let me down, Sony!
 05/16/2006 11:52:16 AM · #17
The thing that feels really good about a dSLR (after growing up with a 35mm SLR) is that you have a camera that makes that big manly click when you press the shutter. I liked my Nikon Coolpix 8700, but it just didn't provide that audible satisfaction.
 05/16/2006 12:34:26 PM · #18
On the other hand, it's a pain in the neck when you're shooting a classical concert.
 05/16/2006 02:58:48 PM · #19
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
On the other hand, it's a pain in the neck when you're shooting a classical concert.


And the looks those long hairs give you when they hear that one little click from the far back of the room, well, it's enough to make you want to not want to walk back to your car alone at the end of the evening.
 05/16/2006 04:05:14 PM · #20
Originally posted by obsidian:
I have begun to realise some of the technical limitations of my Panasonic FZ-20 - e.g. need more ISO and less noise; deeper f-stops; optical and not electronic viewfinder; using it is manual is a major pain; electronic zoom and not manual - and wanted to see how the other guys did their stuff. Sigh!
Carl

Carl every time I look at those dSLR's and compare them to my FZ20 I try to find a lens to go with them that beats what I already have. There isn't one yet.

I agree about the ergonomics, the narrow f-range and the max 8sec shutter - they're annoying. When it comes to the glass, the FZ20 rocks them all. Kari1 went out and got the FZ30 which has all the ergonomics we're missing but our glass is still better. She has manual zoom and focus rings but at the cost of f3.7 at full zoom instead of f2.8 (and that's when I need it most)

Brett
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/31/2025 06:27:00 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/31/2025 06:27:00 PM EST.