Digital cameras

[phaedo]

I bring this question to the forum, since we have a lot of photo buffs here. A few years ago, I wanted to get into professional photography, but just never got there, and even as a hobby photography has taken quite a back seat. I still don't even have a digital camera, although even 3 years ago I never wanted to go digital - I still have a medium format camera (broken) sitting at home. (Will have to get it fixed some time). But with everything going digital these days, it being cheaper, easier, I don't have easy access to a darkroom, I am ready to cave into getting a digital. What I would ideally like is the hasselblad H3DII-50 at 50 megapixels, but also at close on $40,000 I am just not that serious right now.

After all that background, my basic question is this: do I look at a reasonably cheap compact digital, or go to a reasonable canon DSLR? My big thought on choosing the compact over the SLR is actually using it - I could slip a compact into a pocket and carry it around everywhere, whereas I am not likely to carry the SLR very often, and hence will not obviously get much use out of it. Of course, I would rather be using the SLR as a camera guy.

I think I have answered my own question here really, the compact would be the better idea from the perspective of actually bing used, but am keen to hear other peoples thoughts on the matter.

And to that end, any up to date suggestions on what to be looking at buying?

[cornerstone]

The easy answer is.....both!

Compact ones can be reasonably cheap.

For Digital SLR, I have the Canon EOS450D, which has been fantastic. The 400D is great bang for the buck too.

[siesta181]

Got to agree with CS on that. You are gonna need both...

Wrist shots with a view is almost impossible to get with a DSLR. So that when a P&S comes in handy.

I have a Oly P&S and a Sony Alpha 200 which I acquired recently. The thing about DSLR are lenses which are not exactly cheap so there you go.... another expensive hobby.

Boys don't grow up, they just have more expensive toys.

Cheers

[Toadtorrent]

I've gone through the same debate and went with a compact P&S after normally using pro SLR film gear.

The last handful of extended shoots I've worked on have me realize it would be nice to have both, but I would likely use the P&S more.

The P&S can suffice for 90% of the time, but a bunch of that time you will complain that it isn't fast enough, you wish you had a specific lens instead of the limits of the P&S, too much noise under low light, etc.

Using the SLR you will realize that that is the best way to get quality images...but your shoulders will hurt from carrying 20 lbs of kit, and it's too bulky to get intimate with subjects without extended time warming them up, and you will likely miss many photo opportunities because you didn't want to carry the big kit.

So with the P&S, you will capture more keepers and have usable shots than an SLR and have a more continuous stream of photo-documentation, but the images won't be as good quality (depth of field control, low light noise, focus control/tracking, softness/sharpness, etc) as the DSLR.

The big question then is...are you using the pics for business and publishing? If so what is the quality of the clients expected by the client? OR, are you shooting for personal pleasure and the less discerning public (i.e. family for family photos)? If you need top quality for freelance work...DSLR is the only way to go...otherwise a P&S may suffice.

[phaedo]

Thanks for the replies so far guys, of course getting both would be the plan, but at this stage only one will be enough I hope. Toad, it isn't going to be used for business, so in that respect not goign to matter either way, but I would like to blow pictures up to say 8 by 10 inch to frame and maybe on the odd occassion be wanting to go up to 11 by 14. So the question would really be, what P+S would be good enough for this sized enlargement?

[capice]

8x 10's are not a problem for the digital P&Scameras today, but used SLR's are randomly available....

[highoeyazmuhudee]

Point and shoots are quick and dirty, lack a viewfinder, and even if they have the viewfinder it never lines up with what youre shooting anyways. i use a point and shoot ONLY when im doing something quickly and not for display of quality purposes. at ISO800 i find point and shoots to noisey looking.

look into the Canon 50D or 40D about $400 cheaper right now 15 vs 10mpx $1399canadian

if you want 35mm full frame and NOT 1.6X crop look at the 5D mkII or the 5D $900 difference between mk2 and original 5D right now 12 vs 21 mpx $1800-$2700 candian

anything above 10mpx on a crop sensor is pointless anything bove 12 on a full frame is also pointless at these format sizes

Nikon also makes great cameras, i shoot canon and find myself very curious about their in camera processing. to me canon feels simple to use.

canons are made by engineers, and nikons are engineered by photographers. both are very good

Nikon D90, D300, D700, and D3 is worth looking at. (in order of price)

if you buy canon: some lenses and accesories that i use:

B+W uv filters

vertical grip

lexar or sandisk CF card 4gb or higher, CF card reader

580IIEX flash

lowepro case

manfrotto pods

hand strap

some lenses:

70-200mm 2.8 L IS (defacto standard zoom lens)

24-70mm 2.8 L (every day walk around lens)

100mm 2.8 macro (good for portrait and macro)

if your budget can do it, stick to 2.8L or quicker lenses IS is a bonus

[Chino]

I'd prefer a DSLR for fine shooting and a decent cell phone with an over 3.2 mp and a decent flash for a p&s... just for practical reasons. I just hate to carry too many things in my pockets so I decided to get a SonyEricsson p1i for a cell phone, which carries a 3.2 mp camera with a led flash for those party-at-night-pics (besides it manages excel, word, wifi and other windows compatible stuff which I use at work). Now I think I'll get it one of those 6-8x optical zoom lens found in the bay to enhance distance pics. that's because I don't need to plot pics taken with my cell phone... Now a 5.0mp cell phone must be had at a decent price these days.

just my two "practical" centavos for you to consider.

good luck with your choice!

[Toadtorrent]

Point and shoots are quick and dirty, lack a viewfinder, and even if they have the viewfinder it never lines up with what youre shooting anyways. i use a point and shoot ONLY when im doing something quickly and not for display of quality purposes. at ISO800 i find point and shoots to noisey looking.

look into the Canon 50D or 40D about $400 cheaper right now 15 vs 10mpx $1399canadian

if you want 35mm full frame and NOT 1.6X crop look at the 5D mkII or the 5D $900 difference between mk2 and original 5D right now 12 vs 21 mpx $1800-$2700 candian

I have a very similar rig in Nikon film format to what you listed above, but haven't bought a digital body yet. D200's can be had for a decent price too. They lack a lot of the features of the D300 and D700...but cost substantially less, and if you are used to film, you will not notice these features (e.g. live view) except for the full frame CCD.

My P&S is a G9, but like 99% of the P&S's out there...it sucks on the wide angle end. There are few PS cameras that shoot wider than 28mm...which is way too long for me for 75% of my general shooting. The G10 improves on the wide end...but as fast as the G9 is...it's still achy-slow compared with any DSLR.

[swissaddict]

Have you considered a feature-rich point and shoot? I researched P&S and DSLR for a while before deciding on the Canon G9 and I've been very happy with it. For $450 shipped you get a 12mp camera with tons manual settings (and RAW format!). It's not slim and compact.. but it's not as bulky as a DSLR either, so I can take it just about anywhere. Image quality is great for a point and shoot... the macro is fantastic.

Edited October 9, 2008 by swissaddict

[Pugwash]

I use a Canon EOS400D with the stock lens. Before that, I used a Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ20.

Any modern SLR will do, to be honest, but you're best off with a Nikon or Canon for the breadth and quality of lenses.

[phaedo]

Thanks for the advice all, think the P+S will be the right way to go for now, going to have a look at the sony cybershot w150. Not the cheapest around, but a step up from the cheapies. Then look into the canon SLR down the track sometime. And also looks like I will have to renew my platinum subscription!

[capice]

take a look at dpreview.com, great comparisons and info...

[highoeyazmuhudee]

Thanks for the advice all, think the P+S will be the right way to go for now, going to have a look at the sony cybershot w150. Not the cheapest around, but a step up from the cheapies. Then look into the canon SLR down the track sometime. And also looks like I will have to renew my platinum subscription!

if you're coming from film you might feel more at home with the canon rebel, an XTi can be found for under $600 now.

if point and shoot is your path panasonics have nice engines that render beautiful colors. IMO

Sony look nice also, but i really dislike Sony products personally.

[Toadtorrent]

if you're coming from film you might feel more at home with the canon rebel, an XTi can be found for under $600 now.

if point and shoot is your path panasonics have nice engines that render beautiful colors. IMO

Sony look nice also, but i really dislike Sony products personally.

The Rebel series is great value. The story goes...buy the cheapest body and most expensive lenses you can afford.

[Toadtorrent]

Thanks for the advice all, think the P+S will be the right way to go for now, going to have a look at the sony cybershot w150. Not the cheapest around, but a step up from the cheapies. Then look into the canon SLR down the track sometime. And also looks like I will have to renew my platinum subscription!

Don't forget the "mysterious" charge on your credit card from the mystery company so the PP doesn't associate things with RWG. I'll bump the Admin thread. They've been having problems with people filing charge complaints which may get another PP account shut down.

The P&S is great for general usage and highly recommended to have around...especially if you are going someplace and don't want a big camera around and want a low profile.

Another option that's good is the Canon 650...essentially the G9 without external flash control and a few menu changes for a lot less money.

[alphakazi]

same here - I have a Canon G9 - arguable the best P&S out there

saw one yesterday for $375 at Futureshop (open box)

I returned my first g9 due to a few dead sensor pixels - my 2nd one is flawless - this is why I like buying from the likes of futureshop - I can test it out for a couple weeks to see if there are any flaws and exchange it if need be.

the 1024x768 video @ 15fps is great for sharp video that doesn't have much movement (I use it to take video while flying)

taking pics in "auto" almost always gives you a great shot but if you want to get professional - you have full control

I'd love to carry a DSLR around where ever I go but it's not going to happen - I like something I can put in my jacket pocket - the G9 overall is a well rounded prosumer digicam

I've upgrade to the G9 from a 4MP Canon S45 - another marvel of a camera that will blow away much of the crap on the market today that has double the megapixels

Optics > Megapixles

[jeffshead]

same here - I have a Canon G9 - arguable the best P&S out there

I have the G7 and love it. My previous was a S50.

alphakazi, do you use a macro lens for your shots?

[lanikai]

I'm really not a Camera Whiz .. but I'm very happy with my nikon D60 .. the only additional lens I have is the Macro .. I still have a lot to learn but I went with what my buddy advised , he does it for a living so who was I to debate it..

Good luck! .. I found a hobby to go with my rep hobby..

Aloha~Cheers

Lani