| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/27/2007 02:05:07 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Brad:
I mugged a DPC member, and they happened to have a Canon.
Sometimes you get what you get.
:P |
Can I have my Canon Back please? |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 02:36:35 PM · #52 |
I been taken photos in one form or another since my birthday in 1960. Fast forward to 1976 and I bought myself a Mamiya dsx1000b 35mm slr. Fast forward to 2000 and whilst visiting an electrical wholesale shop my wife asked if I would like a digital camera, so she bought me a Fuji mx2700. It was great, opened up a new world to me and renewed my interest in photography. Whilst on holiday in Egypt In 2003 i noticed its shortcomings so when I came home I bought a fuji finepix s602. This was a big improvement but I still felt limited. So when Canon announced the 300D I bought one in November 2003, its still going strong. I always wanted some Canon gear.
Message edited by author 2007-02-27 14:37:22. |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 02:48:16 PM · #53 |
| m8s dad was a studio photographer before he jacked it in, i played with one of his cameras once, so when it came to choosing a Digital i went with Canon, the controls also felt right when i was holding it.. (300D in Nov 2003) |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 02:50:23 PM · #54 |
My first SLR was an Ashi (pre Pentax named Pentax) screw mount front the late 50s which I found in my garage as a kid, so I stayed with the same brand and built a Pentax K mount system. I became frustrated at Pentax when the shutter broke on my K-1000 on a 10-day hike in Maine's Black Woods. When I got back I went to a camera store, and fell in love with the then new Nikon FM2(n). I've been shooting Nikons since, although I went to Olympus digital briefly to take advantage of my older Nikon glass. But since the D200 came out with Ai support, I'm back to primarily Nikon (the Olympus is still much better at IR than the D200, so I kept it).
I find it funny that anyone would state they went Canon because of more lens choices. Maybe if you count only current lens line-ups, but the Nikon F mount has by far more dedicated lenses that fit than any other current mount (48 years worth). Admittedly full frame has some advantages now, but I think in the future FF will be more of a weakness than an advantage. Look at the quality some of the manufacturers are getting out of 1.7†sensors, let alone DX sized ones.
If I were choosing now I̢۪d still pick Nikon cause decades of lens choices that rank among the best, build quality, flash sophistication, and the conservative nature of the company. My second choice would be Olympus cause of the build quality, vast lens choices via adapters, dust control, aspect ratio, and sensor size (thus camera & lens). Next choice would be Pentax. With the K10D it looks like they are going in the right direction.
High ISO performance is meaningless to me. But if it were important professionally I̢۪d use Canons, and then shoot Nikons for my personal work.
|
|
|
|
02/27/2007 03:02:52 PM · #55 |
This has turned out to be a very interesting thread with many replies that contradict each other. I figure I'll add my .02 cents worth also.
Before digital photography, when I first started taking pictures, I bought a Minolta SLR because it was cheap. That was a huge mistake. Shortly after that, my father bought a Nikon F100 but after a few months of not using it at all, he decided to sell it, so I upgraded to that.
When I first went digital, I went with a "prosumer" model from Nikon, the coolpix 8700. So I sold all of my Nikon SLR equipment to pay for that camera. After realizing that there were many things that I missed about owning an SLR, I decided to sell my coolpix and purchase a D-SLR. I did a little bit of looking, but not much, and ended up purchasing the Nikon D70s. There was no knowledgeable decision behind it, just that I had a history with Nikon.
With all of that being said, however, I am happy to say that within a week I will be the proud owner of a Canon EOS 5D. After having had the Nikon D70s for some time, I realized that there were a few things that I wanted. One of the biggest being a full frame D-SLR. Nikon doesn't offer one. I wasn't too excited about having to look at a Canon, again, because I had a history with Nikon equipment. However, after beginning to look, and realizing that Canon had a few other edges over Nikon, such as lower noise, I decided that it would be worth it to sell out to Canon.
So, the road was long and expensive, with all of the switching, but I believe this is the best decision I have made yet. I actually put some investigative research in to this for once, and feel that my decision is now very educated, and I will be purchasing the camera that is right for me. |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 03:10:00 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
So, if anyone has a Leica M8 with a little scratch or a dent on it, let me know... :-) |
With Leicas, scratches and dents increase the value...
|
|
|
|
02/27/2007 03:16:58 PM · #57 |
I put the cameras in a circle and played duck, duck, goose!
Seriously though, I had a Canon film camera given to me when I was 22, and bought my DSLR when I was 24 "thinking" knew alot of photography and was going to use my "good" lenes on it.
Ahhh, to enjoy the ignorance of being new at something. I have realized I dont know jack when it comes to photography and my lenses were crap also.
Live and Learn,
Rich
|
|
|
|
02/27/2007 03:18:51 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
So, if anyone has a Leica M8 with a little scratch or a dent on it, let me know... :-) |
With Leicas, scratches and dents increase the value... |
One careful owner... |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 04:09:43 PM · #59 |
I purchased my first SLR ten years ago. I have small hands and at the time the Canon felt best to me.
Fortunately once the DSLR's were introduced the lenses I had for my film camera worked with my new Canon 300d and so I'm a Canon Woman.
Never bothered to compare since the beginning - there hasn't been a need.
As I've always said, not better, not worse, just DIFFERENT! |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 04:18:57 PM · #60 |
I started off way back when you used 110 cartridge films in little crappy cameras. Then progressed via Praktica to Olympus OM-10, OM-40, to Canon EOS650, then Pentax(can't remember model) then back to Canon EOS620. At this point I got feed up with processing prices and stopped.
About 6 years ago I bought a Fuji DX10 to see what the fuss was with digital and enjoyed it. Since then it has been, Fujifilm 6900Z, Canon 300D, Fujifilm 9500, Canon 30D and now Pentax K100D.
I chose the Pentax because of the anti-shake, but also the sharpness and colours. I took some photos of my grandson on Wednesday last week and went to sharpen, but it wasn't needed. This is something I hated with my Canon 300D & 30D, I had to adjust brightness and exposure on every shot and sharpen them. With the Pentax, I am amazed at just how crisp and sharp the photos are.
A K10D is on my shopping list for later in the year, but I won't part with the K100D!! |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 05:09:15 PM · #61 |
My last film camera was an Olympus OM-10 that I bought used. I chose it because when I went to the camera store after my (also used) Canon was stolen, it is what the shop had. I continued to use the OM-10 until 2 years ago. Before I went to the camera store to buy the DSLR, I did the obligatory research, and decided the Digital Rebel was the way to go. The guy in the camera store sold me on the D70, mostly because of the sturdier build and better kit lens. I only really considered Nikon and Canon, because the local camera store only rents Nikon and Canon lenses.
I probably would have been as happy with the Canon, but now that I have a pile of Nikon lenses and flashes, I can't forsee a reason why I would move away from Nikon. |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 05:19:45 PM · #62 |
I went Pentax because I had lenses.. old lenses.. and when I found out they'd work on the new Pentax DSLRs.. I didn't hesitate.
Have never regretted it for a moment either. Of course, I probably wouldn't have regretted it no matter which way I would have gone.
Can't offer you anything over that though.. my situtation was pretty much "decision made for me" |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 05:23:53 PM · #63 |
Well I went in for a Canon 400D saw the Nikon that was bigger and better and was like Ill take that!
|
|
|
|
02/27/2007 05:25:24 PM · #64 |
| bought a 300d cause it was in the price range from there I just kept with the canon system. |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 07:03:56 PM · #65 |
My photography hobby started with a Minolta SRT-200 with a 50mm lens. Next came a Nikon Coolpix 2100. Then I need more and picked up a new Coolpix 5700. It was several years old in terms of technology but a better camera than most anything at the time (under $400 anyhow). That was a bad step because it gave me a window to the better things in life and soon I was really wanting a DSLR.
I started my search only looking at Nikon D70 because I like Nikon and that was about my only choice. After reading many reviews, articles, and forums, I made a discovery. Canon makes good stuff too. So I started reading all the other reviews, articles and forums that I had skipped over due to their Canon content and I made another discovery. Canon makes really good stuff and the Nikon D70 was getting a bit dated. It was still a fine camera but the newer 350D was $200 cheaper, has a higher MP count (yeah I know better now), has less noise, has USB 2.0 support and puts me on the totally awesome upgrade path to the FF Canons. Of course when it came down to it, it was the $200 that really swayed me. So I bought the 350D and I have never looked back. |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 08:07:36 PM · #66 |
| My final film SLR was a Minolta SRT-102, bought in 1973. Best Minolta made, IMHO, so I never upgraded. When it came time to buy a DSLR, I only considered Canon and Nikon and chose the Nikon (D70 at the time) only because it felt better and seemed easier to use than the DRebel. |
|
|
|
02/27/2007 09:39:03 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by JBHale:
Go to Ritz Camera. They'll help you out.
|
Just don't let them sell you any of those Quantary lenses. |
They're good for beginners...
And you know what? They're cheap. Granted that is both in price and quality, but for people who can't afford Leicha, or even Nikkor, they're perfect. I wouldn't buy one, but...some people might want to.... |
|
|
|
02/28/2007 09:51:03 AM · #68 |
| To people who replied about the Sony Alpha question, thanks for your replies. I guess the stabilizer is the major difference. Will keep saving for the Canon. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
02/28/2007 10:29:28 AM · #69 |
I chose mine based on past use of Canon 35mm film cameras. Also, I think its important to choose your DSLR based on your needs and budget. I was drawn to the large viewfinder (vision issues) as well as it being Full Frame. Oh, and the high ISO with very little grain was a big plus, because I do alot of natural low light situations. The 5D is amazing for that.
Message edited by author 2007-02-28 10:30:21. |
|
|
|
02/28/2007 10:31:43 AM · #70 |
| I've been shooting with Nikon for almost 15years. For me it was a no brainer. |
|
|
|
02/28/2007 12:17:47 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by canary:
To people who replied about the Sony Alpha question, thanks for your replies. I guess the stabilizer is the major difference. Will keep saving for the Canon. Thanks again. |
Youd consider Sony, but not Pentax? Interesting...
|
|
|
|
02/28/2007 03:03:29 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by canary:
To people who replied about the Sony Alpha question, thanks for your replies. I guess the stabilizer is the major difference. Will keep saving for the Canon. Thanks again. |
I recently read a review in Amateur Photography on the Sony Alpha v the Canon 400D and the Sony came out on top, not by much, so I would not dismiss it. Best way (if its possible) is for you to go to a store and get to grips with them.
mike
|
|
|
|
02/28/2007 03:26:32 PM · #73 |
| I did a lot of research and my research showed that the camera for me was a Canon EOS 350D RebelXt. I was standing there studying the camera that I came into the store to buy for about an hour. I even glanced at the Nikons which I liked also since my first SLR was a Nikon but I kept going back to the Canon. Then this older gentleman (who didn't work in the store) came up to me because he noticed I was studying the DSLRs. He told me all the cameras are good but for the money the Olympus EVolt-500 was a better deal because it came with two lenses that are great for the price they cost. He said he teaches photography and has been into photography for the past 30 years. He too had an Olympus and was quite happy with it. Then he sat there and showed me all the features. I came in the store for the sole purpose of buying a canon and walked out with an Olympus EVolt-500 and I haven't looked back. |
|
|
|
02/28/2007 11:42:05 PM · #74 |
I considered both Nikon and Canon but eventually chose a Konica/Minolta. Although, they all make excellent products, there were two major and one minor thing that swayed me.
The minor item was that I always owned Minoltas before. I was seriously considering a switch, though, if only because the Nikons and Canons were more popular with the pros. Ultimately, it was the two other reasons that kept me in the Minolta camp. One, the menus are laid out so much better (on the Minoltas) and the controls were more like my previous non-digital cameras. It was the second reason which was, by far, the most important to me. Having the stabilization in the body instead of having to pay for it each time I bought a lens was the deal breaker.
Of course, the most important feature is how well they take the photos but, I used the criteria above because (I feel)all three makes can take an excellent pic. |
|
|
|
02/28/2007 11:45:02 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by Augphoto:
I considered both Nikon and Canon but eventually chose a Konica/Minolta. Although, they all make excellent products, there were two major and one minor thing that swayed me.
The minor item was that I always owned Minoltas before. I was seriously considering a switch, though, if only because the Nikons and Canons were more popular with the pros. Ultimately, it was the two other reasons that kept me in the Minolta camp. One, the menus are laid out so much better (on the Minoltas) and the controls were more like my previous non-digital cameras. It was the second reason which was, by far, the most important to me. Having the stabilization in the body instead of having to pay for it each time I bought a lens was the deal breaker.
Of course, the most important feature is how well they take the photos but, I used the criteria above because (I feel)all three makes can take an excellent pic. |
Hate to break this to you.. but the DiMAGE 7i isn't an SLR ;) |
|
