Author Topic: Digital Cameras.  (Read 5808 times)

Offline costi

  • Member
  • Posts: 1125
  • [tada.wav]
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2009, 08:28:10 PM »
Quote
you can afford it, 18-200 DX VR is everything you'd ever want.   Mind this as well - longer lenses, like the 18-135/18-200 - will be useless with the built in flash.   You'll get a bit of blackout on around 18-25 due to the lens being long & blocking off part of the flash area.  ( then you need an external flash for full use indoors or at night.  Those external flashes ... expensive!  Ahhhh! )
I never had a problem with the 18-200 and flash... the D40x is smaller, so maybe it's a problem there, but the D300 doesn't suffer from it.

Oh, BTW. the 18-70 has much better optical quality than 18-135, and is built more solidly (metal bayonet). So, unless someone really need the extra focal length, I'd go with the 18-70.
Still, if you can afford the 18-200 VR, buy one. As kyanwan said, you'll use it 95% of the time, it's just fucking awesome. Also, grab the 50/1.8G to go with it - it's dirt cheap and has superb image quality, it's one of the best Nikkor lenses (and almost the cheapest one!). This way, you have the 18-200 for general use and the 50 for portraits and shots where you want to have a small depth of field. It has only one drawback - the 50/1.8 won't autofocus with D40/D40x/D60, because they lack the internal motor - you'll have to focus manually (which isn't always so easy with the small and dark viewfinders of these cameras). But even then, the lens is a bargain.

@Stsin - I'd say they're more-or-less the same. Personally, I wouldn't buy the D40x, because it lacks some feature that I often use (AF motor, Commander mode for the built-in flash, DOF preview button, top LCD with settings), but it's a good camera for it's price. A used D70s is also a good choice, though the sensor in the D40x is better - however, the D70s has all the stuff I mentioned, so it gives a few extra options.
As for Canons - I don't like their entry-level bodies, they're too small and uncomfortable for my taste. I also don't like the menu system of Canons.

Actually, if you have a tight budget, take a look at Pentax and Olympus - both offer suprisingly good stuff for their price (especially Pentax). Another bonus of Pentax is that these cameras have very good support for old, manual, M42-mount lenses. If you don't mond doing some stuff the old-fashioned way, you can buy great lenses for ridiculous prices.

Your best bet would be to go to a store and play around with some cameras - see how they fit your hand, which is better to operate for you. These things are as important (if not more) as sensor quality and built-in features.
Also, seriously consider an external flash unit - it makes a world of difference and is one of the main features DSLRs have to offer.

Quote
If you don't want to look like a fool - don't go over 135/200 for your lens
That's stupid advice - try shooting wild birds or animals, or planes, with a 200mm lens. Good luck. I wouldn't buy a long tele, for example a 70-300VR, as my only lens - that's silly, unless all you do is shoot long-distance photos. However, such lenses have their uses, and saying one looks like a fool with one of these is making a fool of yourself.

Offline sdedalus83

  • Member
  • Posts: 2867
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #21 on: March 27, 2009, 10:54:52 PM »
Get a decent point and shoot now.  Save up for a real full frame Nikon or Canon.  The lens selection, quality, and price amongst the old 35mm lenses is often far better than for DSLRs.  The full frame sensor allows you to use the old lenses without any distortion or cropping.  If the cost is too much, then go with Pentax, Nikon, or Canon and test out the old 35mm lenses you find used to see what works well with your camera.

Offline costi

  • Member
  • Posts: 1125
  • [tada.wav]
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2009, 07:49:25 PM »
Quote
Get a decent point and shoot now.  Save up for a real full frame Nikon or Canon.  The lens selection, quality, and price amongst the old 35mm lenses is often far better than for DSLRs.  The full frame sensor allows you to use the old lenses without any distortion or cropping.  If the cost is too much, then go with Pentax, Nikon, or Canon and test out the old 35mm lenses you find used to see what works well with your camera.
Actually, FX lenses perform better on a DX camera, since you don't use the edges of the lens, where the vignetting and loss of sharpness is most visible.

IMHO it's not worth to go into a full-frame camera. Not only the body costs twice as much as DX, but also FX lenses are much more expensive than their DX counterparts. I'm not even touching the issues of weight and size. For me, the FX advantages (better high-ISO performance, bigger selection of ery-wide-angle lenses, shallower depth of field, bigger viewfinder) do not justify the price tag - these fetures are important to professionals and to people who know exactly what they want (and such people usually don't ask on anime forums for advice ;) ). A regular user is much better off with a decent DX camera and great lenses for half the price. And FX lenses still work perfectly with a DX body, while it's usually not the case the other way round.

Offline Tatsujin

  • Box Fansubs
  • Member
  • Posts: 15632
    • Otakixus
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #23 on: September 30, 2009, 06:25:08 PM »
I came down to these two:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830180200
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120330

I'm purchasing one in couple of hours. My budget is no more than 180 dollars. Unless if you wanna recommend something to me.


¸¸,.-~*'¨¨¨™¤¦ Otakixus ¦¤™¨¨¨'*~-.,¸¸

Offline Malific

  • Member
  • Posts: 269
    • Malific's Script Shop
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2009, 07:19:21 PM »
Take the Cannon, they have overall better quality and a longer life span than the Panasonic's do.

Offline Klocknov

  • Member
  • Posts: 1176
  • 次に魅力を消えます。彼らの左側ですか?
    • Klocknov's Blog!
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #25 on: September 30, 2009, 07:30:31 PM »
Agree with Malific, I have a friend that has already went threw three Pansonics this last year. I had one and it only lasted me about a year. If I were to buy a new camera I would go either Canon or Nikon, otherwise I will be going with a camcorder and that will probably be Sony.
When Cookies become alcoholics the world has issues, oh wait that has already happened!
When I was growing up I wanted to become a queen, now that I did, I have to avoid brats chasing me with bats.
When the charm wears off, what do you have then?

Offline blubart

  • Member
  • Posts: 2349
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #26 on: October 01, 2009, 12:01:46 AM »
canons are definitely the way to go - i got myself an ixus 100IS. makes pretty good images even in subpar light conditions (at least for a compact camera), has one of the fastest reaction times i know of digicams and the workmanship is topnotch.

Offline Tatsujin

  • Box Fansubs
  • Member
  • Posts: 15632
    • Otakixus
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #27 on: October 01, 2009, 12:05:51 AM »
Thanks a lot guys, I had Misa help me with one of the cameras. I picked this one:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120330


¸¸,.-~*'¨¨¨™¤¦ Otakixus ¦¤™¨¨¨'*~-.,¸¸

Offline fohfoh

  • Member
  • Posts: 12031
  • Mod AznV~ We don't call it "Live Action"
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #28 on: October 01, 2009, 12:18:04 AM »
Keep the lens super clean. Otherwise, you'll have artifacts like you're in a snow storm. (Due to the power of having 10MP)
This is your home now. So take advantage of everything here, except me.

Offline Tatsujin

  • Box Fansubs
  • Member
  • Posts: 15632
    • Otakixus
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #29 on: October 01, 2009, 02:36:52 AM »
Keep the lens super clean. Otherwise, you'll have artifacts like you're in a snow storm. (Due to the power of having 10MP)
-takes notes-


¸¸,.-~*'¨¨¨™¤¦ Otakixus ¦¤™¨¨¨'*~-.,¸¸

Offline Klocknov

  • Member
  • Posts: 1176
  • 次に魅力を消えます。彼らの左側ですか?
    • Klocknov's Blog!
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #30 on: October 01, 2009, 02:48:21 AM »
also do not drop while the lens is extended out, it may still work but you may lose the ability for it to go back in. Also warranty is a great ideal with any camera.
When Cookies become alcoholics the world has issues, oh wait that has already happened!
When I was growing up I wanted to become a queen, now that I did, I have to avoid brats chasing me with bats.
When the charm wears off, what do you have then?

Offline fohfoh

  • Member
  • Posts: 12031
  • Mod AznV~ We don't call it "Live Action"
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #31 on: October 01, 2009, 03:16:00 AM »
Make sure you also always have some type of backup power for a lens out camera. I've seen so many people have the thing die at the exact moment where the lens was half in. (Though I use an internal lens Sony T9 so I don't have that issue, but people put fingers on the lens all the time)

Camera case. GET ONE. Don't care how shitty and cheap it is, use it till you get a better one.

Use the strap when taking pictures. I cannot stress this one enough. Light weight cameras have a high tendency of being dropped especially when the thing's weight distro is all screwed up due to the lens being heavier than the actual camera box thing. (Bzzzts out and then it wants to fall over)
This is your home now. So take advantage of everything here, except me.

Offline blubart

  • Member
  • Posts: 2349
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #32 on: October 01, 2009, 09:38:13 PM »
Make sure you also always have some type of backup power for a lens out camera. I've seen so many people have the thing die at the exact moment where the lens was half in. (Though I use an internal lens Sony T9 so I don't have that issue, but people put fingers on the lens all the time)
i'm not sure what kind of camera those "people" where using, but todays digicams (at least canons and casios) retract the lens when the battery runs low and won't let it out of the box before you change the battery. and that happens far before the battery actually dies (which is a bit of a pain in the ass if you just need to take this "one last photo" :D ).

Offline fohfoh

  • Member
  • Posts: 12031
  • Mod AznV~ We don't call it "Live Action"
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #33 on: October 02, 2009, 03:55:54 AM »
Make sure you also always have some type of backup power for a lens out camera. I've seen so many people have the thing die at the exact moment where the lens was half in. (Though I use an internal lens Sony T9 so I don't have that issue, but people put fingers on the lens all the time)
i'm not sure what kind of camera those "people" where using, but todays digicams (at least canons and casios) retract the lens when the battery runs low and won't let it out of the box before you change the battery. and that happens far before the battery actually dies (which is a bit of a pain in the ass if you just need to take this "one last photo" :D ).

I have no idea how they do it... but they do. Dunno if they fixed it... but still something I usually take into account.
This is your home now. So take advantage of everything here, except me.

Offline ASAFan

  • Member
  • Posts: 139
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #34 on: October 03, 2009, 12:58:34 AM »
I am an avid DSLR fan.  I have a Canon EOS 300D (the original Digital Rebel model) with two lenses, an 18-55 and a 75-300.

P&S cameras are good in that they are lightweight and can take decent pictures.  The problem is that their zoom is very limited.  If you get one with digital zoom...well, don't.  Digital zoom tends to make for very grainy shots.  Use the optical zoom (the lens actually moves) instead.  It'll work just fine.

As others have said, don't get caught up on Megapixels.  A 1.3MP camera (my first digital camera) can take good 4x6 pictures.  Most cameras today start at 4-5 times that (mine is a 6.3MP).  The big advantage to a higher MP count is that you can crop or resize the photo more easily.  For just plain printing, don't worry about it.  Your desired features are:

1.  Ease of use
2.  Comfort of use (is it easy to hold)
3.  Reputation of the manufacturer

Most cameras come with several shooting modes.  That's another useless feature.  Most people won't bother trying to figure out what the symbols mean, anyway.  The one exception, if a camera has it, is the no-flash mode (it looks like a lightning bolt with a square and a slash through it).  The camera disables the flash and steps down the shutter speed or turns up the ISO setting to compensate.  If you take dusk pictures, this is your best friend.  You never want to use a flash on something that emits its own light, because you won't see the light.


Let me give you some advice.  DO NOT ORDER ONLINE.  I don't care how inexpensive the camera is online.  Not only will you not be able to get a feel for the camera, there are places (A&M Photoworld is one of them) that are downright criminal in how they operate.  You order from them, forget about ever seeing your camera again.

DSLR photography is a whole different ballgame.  Most low- and mid-range DSLR's are not full-frame.  What you will get is a fraction of the entire lens' viewing mode.  If you want full frame, be prepared to pay for it, and I mean BIG TIME.  Full-frame, professional-grade DSLR's start at about $2500 (not a typo).

In this realm, you have to consider:

1.  The availability of lenses
2.  Is the camera SLR-like or a true DSLR (if it doesn't have interchangeable lenses, it's not a true DSLR).   If you don't care about interchangeable lenses, I don't recommend going the DSLR route.
3.  Ease of use (you're going to need to learn how to use the camera...how to frame shots, etc. and you don't want to make it any more difficult than necessary).
4.  Make sure the ISO rating goes at least to 1600.

The idea here is get a well-known brand, because you really should be using that manufacturer's lenses.

If and when you go that route, you need to get just the kit.  That usually is a camera body with a standard lens (usually 18-55mm).  Don't buy lenses until you are sure you want to keep the camera and stay with the brand.  It's expensive to switch brands once you have lenses for it.

When you are used to the camera, a good telephoto lens is invaluable.  It might seem superficial to stand so far away from the subject, but it isn't always possible to get up close to the subject.  I use a Canon EF 75-300mm telephoto lens for my lighthouse photography, because I can stand on the ground and take pictures of the Fresnel lens (see http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=410402946&albumID=251901&imageID=1128472 for a good night shot).  It cost me $250 (not a typo either), but it was worth the cost.  Lenses are not cheap; don't go hog-wild on it.

You'll need a camera bag that will hold your camera body, a few lenses, and the battery charger.  Get room to grow, even if you're sure you won't.  I keep both my sunglasses and regular glasses in mine when I am away from my car. 

Offline morrefule

  • Member
  • Posts: 1099
  • I have only these words
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #35 on: October 03, 2009, 01:09:41 AM »
@ASAFan

I'd agree for the most part on your recommended accessories list, but I would add in a couple of fliters to protect those lenses.  I don't know what I would do if my EF 70-300mm IS or EF 28-135mm IS got scratched.  They are both $600 lenses and I'd be kickin myself.  A filter is what, 30 bucks at most.  No brainer there, and they help you take better pictures.

Second I would add - High Speed Compact Flash or SD card to the list.  Not the cheap ones you can get for 4 gigs for 10 bucks but something like an extream III or Ultra II
I have typed these words and you have been forced to read them.  Now you can go cry in the corner if you like :)

Offline fohfoh

  • Member
  • Posts: 12031
  • Mod AznV~ We don't call it "Live Action"
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2009, 02:24:23 AM »
I honestly don't see much of a difference from Extreme 3 to Ultra 2. Seriously. Both take multishot on my D90 at 5 frames at about the same speed and write.

I haven't tested HD video yet, but for pics alone, there's no difference.
This is your home now. So take advantage of everything here, except me.

Offline morrefule

  • Member
  • Posts: 1099
  • I have only these words
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2009, 09:22:46 AM »
I honestly don't see much of a difference from Extreme 3 to Ultra 2. Seriously. Both take multishot on my D90 at 5 frames at about the same speed and write.

I haven't tested HD video yet, but for pics alone, there's no difference.

This is very true, but they have a huge difference over a standard SD or CF card.
I have typed these words and you have been forced to read them.  Now you can go cry in the corner if you like :)

Offline Klocknov

  • Member
  • Posts: 1176
  • 次に魅力を消えます。彼らの左側ですか?
    • Klocknov's Blog!
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #38 on: October 03, 2009, 11:23:39 AM »
E3 or U2 definitely are a worthy buy over a the basic card.
When Cookies become alcoholics the world has issues, oh wait that has already happened!
When I was growing up I wanted to become a queen, now that I did, I have to avoid brats chasing me with bats.
When the charm wears off, what do you have then?

Offline ASAFan

  • Member
  • Posts: 139
Re: Digital Cameras.
« Reply #39 on: October 03, 2009, 11:32:18 AM »
@ASAFan

I'd agree for the most part on your recommended accessories list, but I would add in a couple of fliters to protect those lenses.  I don't know what I would do if my EF 70-300mm IS or EF 28-135mm IS got scratched.  They are both $600 lenses and I'd be kickin myself.  A filter is what, 30 bucks at most.  No brainer there, and they help you take better pictures.

Second I would add - High Speed Compact Flash or SD card to the list.  Not the cheap ones you can get for 4 gigs for 10 bucks but something like an extream III or Ultra II

FILTERS...ah, crud, I knew I was forgetting something.  I have UV filters on both lenses, but I also use a polarizing filter on my telephoto lens from time to time, especially if I am taking pictures through my windshield on a sunny day.  Yes, morrefule is right, it's an inexpensive accessory that protects an expensive lens.  In fact, I don't think the UV filters are even that much; the polarizing one was about $20-30, and it prevents glare from washing out the picture (for those who don't know what this thing does, it is constructed so that light passes through the filter in only one direction, so that sunlight bouncing off the dashboard doesn't overexpose the picture, and it is invaluable for outdoor shots)

I have 3 1GB cards (I thought I had lost one so I bought two at a grocery store...almost sure that's not what you're talking about, but at midnight before a big photography day, I had no choice)

Say, which Canon camera do you have (I ask because I noticed you said EF)?