can anyone recommend a good camera?
 

I've been browsing around for a new DSLR camera and I need some advice from people who at least know something more about them than me. i was considering the 600-700 dollar range, rebel XT or nikon D40. is it worth it, or should i save up more money for a D50 or XTi or something? or is there any other cameras i should be looking at? i want to do professional quality work but I'm not quite on a professional level budget... just how much better do cameras get with theses steep price increments? i will pay more if i have to.. but if it's only for a tiny little thing, it might not be worth it... also, where's the best place to buy this investment at?


right now my current camera is taking about 3,000 photos a year, some of that is point and shoot, but most of it is trying to take good photographs.



help? if anyone has any comments about cameras, recommendations, questions for me, links to resources, advice for buying, where to buy, how to buy, etc... please speak up! i will greatly appreciate it!

the D50 will give you lots more features, and you should be able to find one in your price range.

I got my Nikon d50 at B&H Photo just a month or so ago, but it must have been one of the last ones as they are now saying it has been discontinued. But they have them used for $399! And they are very reputable with their used equipment. I bought a used lens from them and it is exactly as described and in perfect working order. I think you can trust them. The d50 is an EXCELLENT camera. It captures amazing detail and color. I recommend it very highly.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont....x=0&image.y=0

if the d50 is discontinued, i think i'm going to have some difficulty getting by the time i save up enough to buy one... are there any other good cameras in this range?

Well, unfortunately I'm not familiar with a lot of digital slrs, but I hear this Canon is a great little camera...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

I'm sure more knowledgeable people will come along today and offer you more options.

But check out these sites when you're shopping around. They offer a lot of advice, user reviews and photo samples of the different cameras taken by people who use them.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/

http://www.fredmiranda.com/

Also, check ebay weekly. The camera I now have was discontinued last April when Minolta shut down, but I was able to get it brand new in box just this past January from a clearance warehouse and it was half the price it would have been as a new model.

is it safe to buy something this big on eBay or online? I'm just scared of something going wrong with the thing... I've had many electronics need returned to the store shortly after purchasing them due to defect, and that doesn't seem to work as easy online...



also, i see the rebel XT is 8mega pixel and is just as much as the D40 price wise...


is the rebel XT a good camera for the money? and what are the downsides/ advantages of it... if any!




i'm sorry for all the novice questions, i'm trying hard to learn about these things! i really appreciate everyones help so far!

check their feedback, and pay with paypal. You should be OK, especially if it's new-in-box and not used.




first off, you need to get away from the idea that the higher megapixel cameras are automatically better. Megapixels aren't nearly as important as lens. The camera on the Mars Rover has a 1 megapixel CCD, yet it's returning astonishing pictures -- mainly because the lens costs something like a million bucks. I'd rather see you get a 5mp camera with a really good lens than an 8mp camera with a crappy one. Unless you're planning to blow your pictures up to poster size, you really don't need more than 5.



Yeah, it's pretty good. Canons, especially the DSLR ones, have a reputation for being more susceptible to moisture than Nikons do. For that reason alone I stick with Nikon.



That's what this forum is here for ;)

BTW as far as new vs. used, I'd sooner get a used D50 than a new D40. The D40 is much more of an amateur camera. The D50 is closer to prosumer.

The warranty is good; I'd suppose I'd have to send it to Sony for repairs(Sony took over Minolta last April).
You really have to shop around because prices are really all over the map. I've seen the lens I bought(28-200mm) in a range covering over $40 in difference. The camera I got, the range was about $100. I wouldn't buy from an individual at any rate nor would I buy a 'refurbished'.
I've heard great things about the Rebel; one thing you have to kind of push aside is the 'mp' numbers-they're a selling point only nowadays as you can get a pocket pointnshoot camera listed at 10mp-doesn't make it good. Best way to buy a camera is read reviews, check them out at stores and then find a price that's agreeable(after decided what features you want or need).
They change so quickly that they're 'outdated' faster than computers now-you could buy the best this month and next, a 'better' version comes out.

I've been looking.. what i really enjoy the larger display of the nikon cameras over the canon rebels... the nikon D40 takes good pictures, but the downside of that over the slightly more expensive rebel is that it has less auto focus points...


how much nicer is it to have more auto-focus points?

don't trust the lcd displays on cameras for exposure levels or color balance. while a correct exposure is ideal, you won't know that it's correct until you can see it on a calibrated monitor. (and if your monitor isn't calibrated, then you will never know it's correct until you print it out.)

learn to read the histogram.

Now that I have a DSLR, I can attest that dust bothers me more than anything else. Look for cameras that have good dust control technology. I believe the Canon XTi and I think it's Olympus that has models that self clean.

Otherwise, you're going to end up looking for ways to clean that imaging sensor on your own.

As for the D50, besides cleaning the sensor, I have just one gripe, the top LCD control screen is not backlit so you can't read it in the dark. Oh... and there is no depth of field preview.

Or just keep the lens on the body at all times, and don't change lenses in dusty environments ;)


Good point, although all that info is echoed in the viewfinder, so it doesn't matter quite so much.

Doesn't quite work out when you have more than one lens. ;)

Not entirely. There's quite a bit of information on top that doesn't show up in the view... ISO, White balance, quality, to name just a few.

I really enjoy my D50 =)

Don't get me wrong... I'm having a blast with the D50. :)

A can of compressed air will go a long way. Any time you have to open your camera, one or two spritzes is extremely helpful--for film and digital. I am guilty of really dusty negatives (I can't tell you how much it sucks to hand-spot dust in a color print), but now that I've started using compressed air things are a million times better.

Just be sure that if you spray inside a camera body that it's not facing up (make it sideways or lens opening pointed down) to allow for dust to escape or else you're just moving stuff around. And when you do lens changing, try to avoid the opening of the body to face up in general otherwise it's essentially a bowl gathering dust.

And for those who shoot film, periodically spritz the film back/film loading area as well.

The jury is still out on compressed air for a DSLR. Plenty of people recommend it, and just as many saying you should NEVER use canned air.

I use a Giotto Rocket and it works reasonably well, but occasionally there is dust that simply refuses to come off. Then I go in with Pecpads and Eclipse... something I really hate doing.

I'd reccomend looking at used cameras and ones off ebay and such. You can probably find something better than what you're looking for but for the same price. At least this is how I go about looking for lenses.

I am also an avid Nikon fan so of course I am going to say the D50 is better. I just like the way they work. Realistically the thing about the auto focus points shouldn't matter if you are trying to become a photographer because you should be using manual modes more often. Nikon also makes very high quality lenses. Which I can attest to since I use different brands of lenses.

Keep in mind, the kit lens for the D50 is really meant for auto-focus. Yeah, it has a manual focus ring, but there's not a lot of control with it. I think you get about a quarter turn from end to end of the focus.

i'm still kind of lost on the subject.



what exactly are the features that will be worth getting a camera such as a d50 over a d40?

Alright, a camera thread I can jump into. I'm also looking to pick up a nice DSLR as soon as my refund gets here... I've read a bunch of reviews and websites and I think I'm set on the Digital Rebel XTi from Cannon. From what I've read the dust thing is a big deal and it's supposed to be a great just "point and shoot" camera, not that I want to rely on that too much but it's nice to have.

I've bought several things, including video cards, hard drives and motherboards from newegg.com, so I can vouch for their legitimacy. They offer the XTi for $700 for the body only (without any lenses) and $760 new in the retail box with a lens.

When my refund gets here I'm definitely picking one up. What I'm trying to decide now is if I want to just get the body and invest in some good lenses or get the kit and buy different lenses later.

Hmmm... AFAIK, the D50's have been discontinued.

Here's my mistake with the D50... I bought the body with the kit lens (18-55) and then added a 55-200 also. What I really should have looked for was something like an 18-135 or more... It might have been a little more, but it would have been convenient.

I bought my d50, body only, and purchased a 28-105mm Sigma lens used and a 50mm Nikon prime lens new. For the money I had to spend (about $1000) it was the best deal and I'm really happy with them. I'd like to get more lenses eventually, but these are fine for now.

From what I know about them, the d50 and the d40 are two different things. The d40 is designed to be a point and shoot type camera (not meant for as serious photography as the d50). The d50 is designed as a more affordable version of the d70 (my camera, which I love) so it has a little lower quality and less features (ie wireless remote and flash). If you're trying to become or you are a pretty serious photographer you'll be frustrated with the d40 since it's not designed for that and so it doesn't have some of the features that you might want.

There's a decent review here that compares the two, the same website has a review of the d50 that compares it to the d70. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/

Edit: if you're wondering about lenses, a good beginner lens is somewhere between 50-150. Less than 50 is more of a normal lens length but if you try to take portraits with something short like that you'll notice distortion. I find a lot of beginners like lenses in this area. You can branch out from there.

Just buy yourself a 35 f2. Absolutely stunning glass, and in digi speak, it'll put you at around 52mm. Learn how to compose with something like that before you run all over the place zooming in and out.

He's got a point. :)

damn right I do, sandman. that's why I wear a hat.....:lol:

I anxiously await my tax refund, staying up 'til 4 am looking at different cameras online. I'm rethinking my Rebel XTI... It's just a little small for my hands... I'm now leaning towards the EOS 20D or 30D, depending on what kind of price I can get one for. That, plus a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens, which I've read is an awesome lens for the price (~$450). I guess 30mm or 35mm on a DSLR with a 1.6 conversion is roughly the same as a 50mm on a 35mm SLR.

one thing i want from the camera i to beable to do HDR with ease and it appears the easiest way to do it quickly is to use bracketing shooting, where it shoots at a range of levels...


right now i'm aiming a bit higher, D80. the d70 is also off the nikon home page, i don't think it's being produced anymore either? the cameras currently listed for under alot of money are the d40, d40x and d80.


only one problem, the D80 just a tad bit more...

The D50 brackets also. :)

Oh... and if you want to do HDR, you can also do it with any camera that shoots in RAW. Simply copy the image, adjust the EV and then combine.

ah :thumbsup: that slightly reopens the D40 into the picture, if it works well with the RAW images...



the nikon d80 is $1,000 without a lens.. plus I'm going to need memory cards...


paying taxes smashed whatever dream i did have for the moment :shakehead:

Plus, it has the added advantage of maintaining the exact same composition so you don't have to worry that you moved slightly during the bracketing shots.

I think if you go with the D40, you'll be very happy with the results. It's a great camera, but you also might be able to find a good used D70.

AquaFox,

Check this out. It's a used D70 at B&H photo. I buy almost everything from them. You can't beat their prices and their customer service is outstanding.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...yUsed&Q=381568

Weird, I would have thought that setting the ISO on you camera higher or lower would make a difference in your range that couldn't be obtained by just manipulating the same raw image.

Just curious, can you also take a shot that was seriously underexposed and run it through a filter that does the same thing as taking the picture on a lot higher ISO setting?

thank you everyone for the continuing advice


by any chance, does someone have a good example of a RAW image that i could play with?


also, i know most people use light room for editing raw images, i have tons of software, but i don't have that.... PS CS2 doesn't have the ability to do the ISO adjustments, does it? if it does, i haven't stumbled on it.



i

I should have some RAW images, but you're going to have difficulty reading them. Nikon files (*.NEF) are a proprietary format. You need the Nikon software.

You can but only to a certain extent if you want the image to have good quality.

As for B+H, they are good and their prices are good. Calumet is also good. Just remember with these two that you need to watch their shipping dates because they end up with things on back ordered often.

A used d70 would be a good camera for you, a new d80 is more expensive but also good.

By the way, I find bracketing doesn't always work for HDR because it's not always different enough. You'd be better off shooting in raw or metering and shooting the same image twice.

There is a difference between shooting different ISOs and just outputting raw file as different ISOs. Namely that outputting different ISOs via RAW is not an option, different EVs however, is.

Nikon RAW, *.NEF, can be opened in Photoshop CS2 and CS3.

Outputting a raw file as bracketed EVs, then combining them as layers is not the same as HDR nor will it create the same effect.

True enough, but sometimes it can achieve favorable results.

http://www.vanilladays.com/hdr-guide/#onevsthree
http://www.flickr.com/groups/raw2hdr...7594116099616/
http://www.i-marco.nl/weblog/archive...dr_photography
http://hdr101.com/2007/02/24/hdr-ima...-a-single-raw/

I toyed with PhotoMatix for a bit, but quickly lost interest in HDR (or even fake HDR). I used to go out and shoot images just so I could play around with them on PhotoMatix. Now... no real interest. Not in shooting them or even viewing them. YMMV.

I only said it will not create the same effect. I did not qualify that statement with whether or not I thought it was good or bad. Just clarified the misuse of terms.