Recommendations for my first DSLR

JohnR · « **Reply #60 on:** 11 May 2010, 02:42 pm »

Quote from: Goosepond on 11 May 2010, 02:32 pm

For instance I've got a Canon 100mm macro lens that I love. Now a 100mm telephoto lens is nothing to sneeze at. But in the case of this lens, I can just keep getting closer and closer to the subject. The minimum focus is around 11 inches. And at min. focus, it is a 1:1 macro lens. This means the image on the sensor is life-size.

That may not sound like much but if you take a pic at min. focus and display it on you monitor at 100%, wow!

Yep, this is the kind of thing where you think "I wonder if I can..." and you can, but it may cost a few extra $$. I love a good lens that can be used for macro as well as whatever else - the 150 Sigma I mentioned earlier is one, as is the Nikkor AF-S 60mm that I also really like. I'm sure every brand/mount has similar options (with varying tradeoffs).

Mike Nomad · « **Reply #61 on:** 11 May 2010, 06:51 pm »

Quote from: JohnR on 11 May 2010, 02:51 am

Ah - you don't hear much about Sigma DSLRs. Are they still making them? Innovative but in the marketplace a bit of an also-ran like my Fuji?

SIGMA is still very much around. They moved from 9-10 MP to 14. They also have a small model (DP1 & DP2) that uses the same chip, with a form factor similar to the Panasonic DMC-LX3 / Leica D-Lux 4.

SET Man · « **Reply #62 on:** 12 May 2010, 08:31 pm »

Quote from: PhilNYC on 11 May 2010, 01:56 pm

One quick note...one of the biggest adjustments in using a DSLR vs. a P&S is using "Live View". On P&S cameras, you have a screen on the back of the camera that shows you a live view of the picture you are about to take. Because of the way SLR cameras work, older generation DSLRs do not have a Live View mode...you can frame your shot using the viewfinder, but you can't really see what the picture will look like on the screen before you take the shot. In recent DSLR generations, manufacturers have implemented "Live View" with various designs. One of the secondary reasons why I got a Sony was because their implementation of "Live View" mimicked that of a P&S the best...but it's still not completely perfect. That said, I often find myself simply using the viewfinder, then reviewing/evaluating the image after it has been taken (one of the benefits of being digital and not worrying about wasting film!).

Not sure if Woodsyi's camera has a Live View mode, but definitely something to keep in mind when evaluating whether or not you like it...

Hey!

Yes, Sony have the fastest "Live View" by using a separated sensor instead of the main sensor. So, for people who want the ease of "Live View" and fast respond of DSLR this works best. Hey! You are buying DSLR to take picture right?

But I don't know how Sony going to implement this if they come out with DSLR with movie capable.

My DSLR don't have "Live View". But I'm pretty "Old School" and I'm OK with that. Believe it or not even the top models Sony DSLRs don't have "Live View"

Take care,
Buddy

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #63 on:** 12 May 2010, 09:18 pm »

Quote from: SET Man on 12 May 2010, 08:31 pm

My DSLR don't have "Live View". But I'm pretty "Old School" and I'm OK with that.

I don't know what to think of LV. I don't use it. Like HD video and the megapix race, it seems like once one manufacture starts something, everyone else joins in and it becomes the standard by which everything else is judged.

jqp · « **Reply #64 on:** 13 May 2010, 03:55 am »

On my Nikon D90 I use reluctantly use Live View (or whatever they call it) in certain situations where it is difficult to look through the viewfinder. It helps, but I don't like to use it. And I rarely use the video since I don't have a track mounted dolly and a film crew

zybar · « **Reply #65 on:** 15 May 2010, 03:57 pm »

Woodsyi's goody package has arrived and it is loaded!!

Now I need to quickly learn how to use it.

Next Friday is my little sister's high school graduation and I really want to use it for that event.

I bought The Digital Photography Book by Scott Kelby and I am hopeful that it will cut down on my learning curve.

Woodsyi you are awesome!!! Thank you so much for providing me this opportunity.

George

low.pfile · « **Reply #66 on:** 15 May 2010, 04:11 pm »

Have fun Man!

zybar · « **Reply #67 on:** 23 May 2010, 05:52 pm »

Well it has been an interesting week on the photography front (culminating in my sister's high school graduation and subsequent 2 day celebration) and at this point all I can be certain of are three things:

1. I really don't know how to take good pictures (regardless of what camera I am using)

2. Using a DSLR definitely requires a lot more skill and understanding than a point and shoot

3. I haven't yet decided if a DSLR is for me

Besides using Woodsyi's loaner, I also played around with my brother's Nikon D3000 (with the kit 18-55 lens) and my stepfather's Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 (I will call it a more advanced point and shoot).

On the DSLR's, I really did like the ability to switch lenses and try to match up the lens to the activity or location. However, lugging around the lenses and having to switch them out is a PITA! I am sure you seasoned photographers are used to this, but for a point and shoot guy, it was quite a change. One of other things I really liked was the ability to shoot lots of pictures quickly. This was very useful at the graduation ceremony and on Saturday when taking pics of the kids playing badminton. I definitely couldn't do that with the p&s cameras.

While the p&s camera didn't produce pictures as accurately as the DSLR's, it was simple to use and light.

I'll try and get some pics up soon and show you how meager my skills are.

George

zybar · « **Reply #68 on:** 23 May 2010, 06:16 pm »

Here are a couple of pics taken with Woodsyi's Canon EOS Rebel XTi:

My little sister - the high school graduate

My youngest son before cleaning up

My oldest son showing how seriously he takes his bandminton

Some flowers for the graduate

George

mjosef · « **Reply #69 on:** 23 May 2010, 07:40 pm »

George, I think you are selling yourself a lil' short with regard to your pix-taking abilities...those posted looked pretty good.

However...I think you may need to keep your eye on the younger son, he might just be eating #1 son's food.

zybar · « **Reply #70 on:** 24 May 2010, 12:10 am »

Quote from: mjosef on 23 May 2010, 07:40 pm

George, I think you are selling yourself a lil' short with regard to your pix-taking abilities...those posted looked pretty good.
However...I think you may need to keep your eye on the younger son, he might just be eating #1 son's food.

Thanks mjosef.

As for my oldest...he is indeed skinny (just like his used to be) and tall.

He eats and eats, but the weight stays off.

George

JohnR · « **Reply #71 on:** 24 May 2010, 02:19 am »

Hey, nice pics

You see how the blurred background (esp in pics #1 and #4) make the subject stand out more? Gives more of a "3D" look. That's why you need a DSLR

What lens is it?

WerTicus · « **Reply #72 on:** 24 May 2010, 04:11 am »

technically you don't need a DSLR you just need a fast lens for shallow DOF.

Id get a Pentax Kx and a DA limited lens of some choice focal length(s)... DA 40mm is great, and the DA 70mm is amazing.

Then you will have price, quality, and small size. Also it will handle newbie mode well and allow you to grow with it.

Also according to every review and comparison out there you'll have the best entry level camera going right now.

JohnR · « **Reply #73 on:** 24 May 2010, 05:41 am »

Um.. technically, DoF is a function of magnification and aperture. A smaller sensor will have proportionately lower magnification when shooting the same scene, and therefore will require a proportionately faster lens to get the same depth of field. So while in theory you could use a compact with a lens 2 or more stops faster than what's available for DSLRs, in practice, they don't exist.

zybar · « **Reply #74 on:** 24 May 2010, 12:45 pm »

Quote from: JohnR on 24 May 2010, 02:19 am

Hey, nice pics You see how the blurred background (esp in pics #1 and #4) make the subject stand out more? Gives more of a "3D" look. That's why you need a DSLR

What lens is it?

John,

I can definitely see many of the ways that a DSLR is superior to p&S camera.

Here is the additional info on the first picture:

May 21, 2010
3888×2592 pixels – 3771KB
Filename: IMG_0839.JPG
Camera: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
ISO: 400
Exposure: 1/500 sec
Aperture: 5.6
Focal Length: 50mm
Flash Used: No
Latitude: n/a
Longitude: n/a

George

woodsyi · « **Reply #75 on:** 24 May 2010, 02:10 pm »

This is the acid test, George.

Can you go back to P&S only?

DSLR with several lenses, filters, tripod, flash etc definitely will be more cumbersome. But for special events that deserves to be captured in the best detail for posterity, can you do it with just a P & S now that you know the scope of what you are missing?

I carry a P & S for events I can't carry big bag to but I wouldn't dream of covering special occasions without the full arsenal of DSLR and lenses.

SET Man · « **Reply #76 on:** 25 May 2010, 12:53 am »

Quote from: zybar on 23 May 2010, 06:16 pm

Here are a couple of pics taken with Woodsyi's Canon EOS Rebel XTi:

....

George

Hey!

Nice pictures there George.

I see you still have some doubt about going DSLR route. With DSLR you have more option with lenses and you gain speed of which can be important for certain shots.

But if you don't want to go the DSLR route than check out some upper level P&S digicam with faster lens and Manual setting option. It won't be ultra compact but than it won't big like DSLR. But it is unlikely it will have the speed or pictures quality as full blown DSLR.

Take care,
Buddy

zybar · « **Reply #77 on:** 25 May 2010, 02:13 am »

Guys,

If I went DSLR I was leaning towards the Pentax K-x, but this seems like a pretty good deal on the Nikon D5000:

http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/INKD5000RD.html

Any thoughts?

George

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #78 on:** 25 May 2010, 04:57 am »

The D-5000 was my second choice, it has an articulating viewfinder which is really nice, but it doesn't have an auto focus motor which according to dpreview limits / restricts your choice of lenses.

One of the reason I chose the K-x is for the in body shake reduction. That feature stabilizes every lens Pentax has made in the past 3 decades and then some. Also it uses AA batteries which in a pinch are available almost anywhere at anytime... plus with lithium AA's you can get up to 1900 shots. With Sanyo Eneloops (rechargeable) battery performance is more comparable to a proprietary battery. However the K-x does not have visible focus points in the viewfinder, which can be a problem for some people. However I don't find focus to be an issue with the K-x.

If I were to buy a Nikon, I wouldn't settle for less than the D-90, but the Nikon I'd really like is the D700.

JohnR · « **Reply #79 on:** 25 May 2010, 08:36 am »

Quote from: Wind Chaser on 25 May 2010, 04:57 am

it doesn't have an auto focus motor which according to dpreview limits / restricts your choice of lenses.

But, is it of practical significance...

low.pfile posted a list of 138 lenses that will AF with the D5000, including 57 from Nikon. The kit 18-55 VR lens is very good for what it is, in fact I just bought one for my D40 (the earlier non-VR one came with that kit and contrary to what many people seem to think, I find VR to be most useful for wide...). The next lens people typically seem to want is a fast normal prime, telephoto, and/or macro. For which Nikon has (in consumer grade) the 35/1.8, the 55-200 or 70-300, and the 60mm or 85mm macros. Or if you don't have to have zoom on your telephoto, the Sigma 150/2.8 will kill both of the last two birds for very cheap (considering what it is). In fact, the Sigma is so good that... I'm selling mine, George, just in case you're interested

(Seriously, I need to get an 85mm PC macro lens and I don't really need a 150, a 180, and a 200...)

If you want to upgrade the kit lens to one that goes wider and longer, there's the 16-85. If you just want more longer there's the 18-105 or the 18-200 if you like that kind of thing. If you really need super-wide there's the 10-24mm. (Prices are getting up now though.) Fisheye? No problem - the 10.5mm. Need real telephoto? Try the 300/4 (I have one, it's very nice), or get out the emergency credit card and get a 400, 500, or 600....

So, what lens would anyone want that is an AF lens but doesn't AF on the D5000? The ones I can think of would be the 85mm f/1.4 or 1.8, the 105/2 DC, the 180/2.8, ... the wide primes like the 20/2.8 and 24/2.8, although f/2.8 is not that much faster than what you're getting with the kit lenses anyway.... and other than that, perhaps some used lenses you got for cheap. Or lenses you already have, which is of course not an issue here.

Quote

but the Nikon I'd really like is the D700.

Me too

Although honestly, if I just wanted to take pictures I'd be very happy with a D5000, I played with one in the store on the weekend out of curiosity and it seems very like my D40 (which I still use), but with the moving screen and the higher resolution. And video I guess, didn't try that. I liked that you could just fold the screen away and shoot like a film camera. The movement of the screen was a bit limited, you can't turn it sideways for example.

I guess the other thought is does it have to be new. What would happen if you made woodsyi an offer on his Canon. Just a thought!