Best bang for buck good photography digital...

[dieselcruiserhead]

Subject says it all.. For last few years been using only point and shoot digitals. Some of which (especially the Canons) have been fairly decent. That said, finally looking for a good photography quality digital, something with separate body and lens, something good and tough. Something that will maybe capture the essense of where I was!

I do not mind used if it will hold up. Trying to do it fairly cheaply (maybe the initial body and lens for $500 to start) or something like that.. We'll say for discussion purposes, no more than $1000 total if new.. Without doing all the reviews yet, etc, what would you guys buy or recommend? We have a lot of good photography stores around here, and people buy/selling/trading locally as well on some of the local web sites... I actually got my great point and shoot Canon used off one of these sites...

Also, I have a ton of compact flash cards and I know they at least were professional grade digital photography a few years ago... So I might prefer compact flash.



Also, second question. Though digital is different, I imagine apature, light settings etc are all fairly similar to film, correct? Can digital be a whole lot different RE light settings versus regular old film?

 

[articulate]

That said, finally looking for a good photography quality digital, something with separate body and lens, something good and tough...Trying to do it fairly cheaply (maybe the initial body and lens for $500 to start) or something like that....



Also, second question. Though digital is different, I imagine apature, light settings etc are all fairly similar to film, correct? Can digital be a whole lot different RE light settings versus regular old film?

You're refering to a digital SLR. Just FYI, as that will help you in your searches. Since you're familiar with Canon, the likely candidate is a Digital Rebel, AKA 300D. This would meet your budget and quality criteria (Used. New closer to $1k with accessories). The magic of photography happens in the lenses and with the person behind the viewfinder.


White balance is something you have to be concerned with when using digital. Not so with film. Otherwise, the techniques, f-stops, and shutter speeds are the same.

That might help. Goodtimes (Brian) has a digital Rebel, and he gets some superior shots.

Cheers!
Mark

 

[DaveInDenver]

White balance is something you have to be concerned with when using digital. Not so with film. Otherwise, the techniques, f-stops, and shutter speeds are the same.

Good stuff, Mark, but I would suggest that white balance is still important with film. Not so much white balance like in the digital world, but the color temperature of a film will keep colors right in different light. Most film is balanced for daylight (and flash, which is close to daylight), which gives you a serious yellow tint indoors with incandescent bulbs. If you use a film balanced for tungsten, indoor photos with lightbulbs, colors are correct again.

One thing I might also add is that you don't need an SLR to get great photos. P&S cameras do a fine job, but the fixed lens SLR-like cameras can have fantastic lenses that rival or sometimes are even better than a manufacturer's entry level interchangeable lenses. Plus with a fixed lens camera the weatherproofing can be better than an SLR and there is less problems with dust on the sensor. Just wanted to point that out.

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

If it helps I used manual cameras mostly with standard film, and actually usually prided myself on good pics with standard 35mm film. . I actually have a film Rebel so probably wouldn't be too hard to make the transition...

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

Here is one of my favs from this last weekend... I feel like it really doesn't have the crispness and clarity that a camera with a better lens would offer.. Particularly of the background. There are a lot of factors that could effect this, but basically the point is the camera is the weakness here, there is no physical way this camera could take a better version of this picture I feel like. So, this is sort of what I am after...

I "feel" like I have good camera technique usually

 

[goodtimes]

As Mark indicated, I use one of the original digital Rebels (not the XTi---which I do not like BTW--the body is smaller than mine, and it is harder to hold on to, IMO). You can find a Rebel with a EF 18 - 55mm lens for just over $500. They use the CF cards, and batteries last a long time (I typically get over 300 pictures before recharging mine).

This camera has all the basics...6.3Mp, shoots RAW or JPEG, takes all the canon EF and L lenses, TTL light metering, shutter priority, aperture priority and manual modes (plus the automatic modes), Depth of Field preveiw, exposure compensation, white balance adjustments, blah blah blah.

I was not very impressed with this camera until I spent a day with Mr. Brady who was kind enough to show me a few things. A few months later, you see the results in the post that Mark was kind enough to link to. I'm still learning...and have a long way to go...but this $500 camera will out perform me for a long time....like Mark said, the magic is in the lens and the guy/gal holding the camera.

Of course if you really want to blow your budget....you can get one of these....:sombrero:

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

How is the repeat photo speed of that camera, out of curiosity.. IE can it take a bunch of pictures in a row fairly easily and quickly?

 

[Robthebrit]

I have an original digital rebel, well looked after with an EFS18-55 and an EF 75-300, remote control, HD Batery, CF card etc that I would be willing to sell if you are interested. I don't use it since getting the 5D.

PM me

Rob

 

[goodtimes]

Relatively slow by todays standards (still much faster than I need, YMMV)

IIRC ~2.5 FPS.

Here is Canons sales pitch.

FYI, there have been several changes over the last couple years (dRebel-->dRebel XT-->dRebel XTi), all with resolution increases and other minor tweaks, then of course the 10d, 20d, 30d....and of course the 5d, 1d (all increasing price as you go)....but once again, the nice thing with the Canon cameras is that the lenses all work with your next "upgrade". So all you have to replace is the body if you decide to step it up a notch. This makes a used lower end body all the more attractive if you don't think you want all the latest and greatest gear (and the price tag that goes with it).

 

[articulate]

One thing I might also add is that you don't need an SLR to get great photos. P&S cameras do a fine job, but the fixed lens SLR-like cameras can have fantastic lenses that rival or sometimes are even better than a manufacturer's entry level interchangeable lenses. Plus with a fixed lens camera the weatherproofing can be better than an SLR and there is less problems with dust on the sensor. Just wanted to point that out.

Excellent. And I would like to point out that getting great photos with a P&S requires some knowledge of how to adjust exposure and depth of field, which I wouldn't have learned if it wasn't for my SLR. Odd.

It's kind of a cycle: We thought we needed a spectacularly big and expensive camera to make nice photos, only to find out that great photos come from simple settings and sweetass light (direct quote from the F'n Guide to Magic Boxes that Make Pictures).

Lens quality is another issue, yes, but many consumers are sharing photos via email and the web where anything wider than 1000 pix is obnoxious to view anyway - superior lenses are moot, but nice nevertheless . . . in my opinion of course. Talk about a tangent . . .

Anyway, what mega pix are the Digi Rebels handling now? I could probably click that link, but I'm in edit mode. That's my excuse.

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

Rob thanks I am PMing you now...

Dumb questions and I should probably know, but what does SLR even stand for? I started perusing this site as well.
http://www.ritzcamera.com/slr-digit...t=t13031003;cidigital-cameras-and-accessories

Don't have the extra funds to act now but would prefer to research well, use the P&S for the shot and projects.. Oddly quality on it seems to be going down.. But nothing lasts too long with dust and abuse in the shop...

 

[goodtimes]

SLR = Single Lens Reflex

 

[Scott Brady]

There are some nice compacts too.

I am going to buy one of these soon:
RAW capability
10 MP
208" Display
Leica lens quality
$600
Specs

We need a smaller camera for shooting locals and on treks, etc. I am not suggesting this is a better option than a DSLR with L lenses, but with the right photo techniques can produce professional images.

 

[7wt]

I am still sorting out my D40, there is a lot to it. The pictures it takes are spectacular. I love this thing but that won't mean a whole lot, I am a full on newb with this photo stuff. I did a lot of research and pretty much everyone said to do the D40 for an entry DSLR.

 

[paulj]

I moved from manual SLR (Pentax before built in lightmeters) to P&S film to P&S digital and back to digital SLR (Pentax ist DS).

A difference between P&S digital and DSLR that didn't really hit home till I bought mine is that the photo sensor is used differently. With most P&S the sensor works all the time, sending a signal to the screen on the back. When you shoot that signal is diverted to full processing and the memory card. The optical viewfinder is secondary, giving you an alternative way of composing the picture.

With a DSLR, the sensor is used only while actually taking the picture. The rest of the time, the image is directed to the optical viewfinder, which is your primary tool. The screen on the back is used for menu items, and to view the picture AFTER you take it. That is, you don't preview the picture on the screen.

The lack of preview is not much of a disadvantage, since you can easily adjust settings (white balance, exposure etc) and retake the picture. An advantage is the DSLRs typically have good battery lift, despite the fact that their sensors tend to be larger than on P&S digitals.

With some DSLRs it is possible to use lens that were sold for film SLRs. With an adapter ring I can use 40yr old lenses on my Pentax. You can also use filters. For scenery shots, a polarizing filter is particularly nice, improving the contrast between sky and mountains.

paulj