A newbie request help selecting digital camera

"Charles" wrote in
:


"Kris Krieger" wrote in message
...
"Charles" wrote in news:h0uk4r$iem$1
@news.eternal-september.org:


http://porters.com/LENS%20COMPATIBILE.pdf




Wow, That was fast! I'm thinking that mylenses won't do - they're
early- 1970's vintage. So it's good to know that I can't jsut buy a
camera body -
that will save me some grief

I saved that document for future reference. I'm also opening the
website in
a new window

THanks!

Kris, you are most welcome. It's always a good idea to build on what we
already have and what we already know.

As to modern digital SLRs, they are mostly all very good. I don't think
you can go very far wrong.


Ah, OK, good to know, thanks Despite the "firestorm" I'm getting some
great info and links, so I think i'm getting a great launching point to look
into this. I guess maybe most people go throguh several cameras, but I tend
to be a person who expends much thought deciding about my purchases, so I can
get something that will be a companion/partner, so to speak, for many years.

- Kris

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:53:56 -0500, Kris Krieger
wrote:

Bob Larter wrote in news:4a333f53$1
:

Ignoring the dSLR-Trolls wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:07:29 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:
Kris K.


Go with any of the excellent super-zoom P&S cameras (and ditch your old

Kris, please ignore this loon. He hangs out in this group purely to
complain about DSLRS. If you're already used to an SLR, you really don't
want to downgrade to a digicam.


I thought DSLR is a type of digicam?

Any camera that uses digital media to capture the image, and not film,
can be called a "digicam". The terms most commonly used are dslr
(digital single lens reflex) or, for cameras without
interchangeability of lenses, Point & Shoot or compact camera.

I'm looking for info, so I can be an educated consumer and get what will work
for me. If the Canon Power Shot models are worth looking at, that's good to
know; if DSLR will be closer to what I want, it's good to know which are
reliable (and outdoors-capable).

The Canon Power Shots are Point & Shoots or compact cameras. They
come with a wide variety of features, but - from what you have
described in your other posts - you should be looking at a dslr. The
entry level price for a dslr is about $450 with one kit lens. The
prices go up from there.

If you do look at the compact camera (Point & Shoots) models, read the
specs to make sure the model can be set to manual focus because that
seems to be important to you. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 is one that
does, but it sells for as much as a dslr does.

I'm not recommending the Lumix or any other camera. You have a long
way to go in research, and you should do it on your own.




--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:25:50 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:

It'll change everything that you ever thought or knew about "power shot
type" P&S cameras.

Since I don't know squat about them, that wouldn't be hard LOL!!

Anyway, thanks for all the great info, and links!

Virtually all of it intended to be misleading. This was, after
all, the pathetic anti-DSLR troll you were responding to, who is
easily recognizable and changes his name *very* frequently because
he knows that if he doesn't do so, most people will quickly add his
name to their newsreader's kill files.

It's true that some *good* P&S cameras are capable of taking
excellent photos and they may be that you need, but they *all* have
severe limitations in many areas. First, if there isn't enough
light available, all digital cameras need to increase the ISO (in
other words, boost their light sensitivity - ISO is practically the
same as the ASA value used with film). Because they use much
smaller sensors than DSLRs, even a slight increase in sensitivity
degrades the image considerably. When the low base ISO is boosted
to 200 or 400 the images from P&S cameras become "noisy" and is
often easily seen without substantial magnification. Many DSLRs can
be used at ISO 1600 and ISO 3200 and produce cleaner images than P&S
cameras. I have several of the better Canon Powershots and they're
nice, but they turn into little noise boxes when the lighting is
low.

Second, P&S cameras focus using contrast detection, which is
*much* slower than the phase detection used by DLSRs, which under
similar conditions is much quicker and more accurate. Try them out
in a camera store that allows you to test them. You'll see, easily.

P&S cameras have several other drawbacks (which others can point
out if they wish), but they still serve a purpose and most DSLR
owners find it convenient to also use a P&S. So if you get a one
and find that its limitations are sufficient to force you to get a
DSLR, all is not lost.

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:25:50 -0500, Kris Krieger
wrote:


Yeah, $500 is absolute upper limit - $300 is preferable upper limit. A
"Pro" setup simply is not in the budget.

Why did you wait so long to bring this up? At $300, you are limited
to compact cameras and to a camera that may not have the feature you
want the most: manual focus.

At $500, you are limited to the Nikon D40 with just the 18/55 lens for
a dslr, or some of the better compacts. (I don't know the compacts)

You can forget Canon or Pentax dslr unless you go used.

I suggest you read Steve's Digicams at http://www.steves-digicams.com/
and read the specs very carefully of the cameras in your price range.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Kris Krieger wrote:
[]
My worrry, tho' is spending a couple hundred $$ on one, and finding
out that it doesn't take crips pictures, or that the colors are off,
or some other flaw, because I didn't know what I was buying...

Kris,

I think you will find that any of today's DSLRs will do what you want.
They all have fine control over the colour rendering - but it may be up to
you to get the colour temperature correct for your shots or using manual
colour balance and a white card. You can usually adjust the sharpness for
the JPEGs produced by the camera.

My prime camera is a Nikon D60 - the bottom of the range - and I've been
very pleased with it. I usually carry the 16-85mm and 70-300mm VR (image
stabilised) lenses, giving me a "35mm equivalent" focal length range of
24-450mm. I also carry a compact P&S camera - the Panasonic TZ3 - for
those times when I need a "pocket-sized" camera.

Cheers,
David

ASAAR wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:27:48 GMT, nick c wrote:

I may be a lurker but I recognize good advice and feel compelled to
say something. In the days of film I was (with momentary exceptions)
a devoted Nikon user. With the onset of digital, I thought it wise to
change to Canon 'cause Canon seemed to be more advanced than Nikon. I
sold my F4 and F5 Nikon's, and all the associate equipment and went
totally Canon. I've experienced the need of some repairs for my Canon
equipment but on the whole, I've found the Canon system to be a good
system. But I wasn't comfortable using Canon and I can't specifically
say why. Several years passed and my pictures didn't reflect any
technical problems, so to speak of. Least wise I was happy with them
and since I pay my bills, that's all that counts. Yet, I didn't quite
feel comfortable with the use my equipment.

I'm not a pro but I do know pros. Discussing my situation with them, I
was advised to think about going back to Nikon simply because I may
have some sort of psychological attachment to Nikon equipment, since
I've used Nikon equipment for over 50 years (I'm 81 years old and my
right hand shakes). Since I have the means to indulge myself, I rented
a Nikon D300, a Nikon 16-85 lens, and a Nikon SB-600 flash. A week
later, I felt great. I felt comfortable using the Nikon D300, in fact
I was so sold on the camera I sold all my Canon equipment and bought
the D300 and the D700 Nikon cameras along with a bunch of lenses.

I hope that your 81 years haven't contributed to the discrepancy
shown by what some guy named nick posted about 5 months ago. If you
care to tie up the loose ends it would be appreciated.

I haven't post anything to this group within 5 or more months
therefore I'm unaware of posted discrepancies. I've never posted
anywhere using just the name Nick. I have always posted using the name
Nick C to avoid confusing folks. Besides, that's who I am. Although I
must confess, during my span of years, some people have taken the
liberty of calling me other names ..... unjustifiably of course. But
that hasn't happened too often.

I did, at one time some 3 or 4 years ago post some pictures in
response to someone asking about lenses and lighting conditions. Other
than that, I've just enjoyed lurking and reading the many posts from
knowledgeable folks who post regularly. Then again, I've been known to
doze off reading posts too. Either way, I've found the discussions of
this group to be beneficial one way or another.


Snip

Kris Krieger wrote:
nick c wrote in
news
Jürgen Exner wrote:
Matt Ion wrote:
Kris Krieger wrote:

So, given all of that, could some kind soul perhaps direct this
totally- confused newbie to a good starting place to look?
[...]

users over another... but at the end of the day, all of these cameras
will give you great results and serve you well for years, and so it's
important to have a camera that *YOU* enjoy using. If it feels
awkward for *YOU* to handle, or the menus are confusing for *YOU* to
navigate, or the controls are poorly-placed for *YOUR* hands, then you
won't enjoy using it, and the camera is much more likely to simply sit
on a shelf collecting dust, where all those arguments become moot.
100% ACK.
This advise above it the most important factor. If the camera doesn't
feel right for *YOU* then it is the wrong camera for you.

jue
Applause .......

I may be a lurker but I recognize good advice and feel compelled to
say something. In the days of film I was (with momentary exceptions)
a devoted Nikon user. With the onset of digital, I thought it wise to
change to Canon 'cause Canon seemed to be more advanced than Nikon. I
sold my F4 and F5 Nikon's, and all the associate equipment and went
totally Canon. I've experienced the need of some repairs for my Canon
equipment but on the whole, I've found the Canon system to be a good
system. But I wasn't comfortable using Canon and I can't specifically
say why. Several years passed and my pictures didn't reflect any
technical problems, so to speak of. Least wise I was happy with them
and since I pay my bills, that's all that counts. Yet, I didn't quite
feel comfortable with the use my equipment.

I'm not a pro but I do know pros. Discussing my situation with them, I
was advised to think about going back to Nikon simply because I may
have some sort of psychological attachment to Nikon equipment, since
I've used Nikon equipment for over 50 years (I'm 81 years old and my
right hand shakes). Since I have the means to indulge myself, I rented
a Nikon D300, a Nikon 16-85 lens, and a Nikon SB-600 flash. A week
later, I felt great. I felt comfortable using the Nikon D300, in fact
I was so sold on the camera I sold all my Canon equipment and bought
the D300 and the D700 Nikon cameras along with a bunch of lenses. I'm
as happy now as a frog would be if he discovered he had two peckers.

My pictures my not be the greatest and they certainly do not justify
the money spent for a total change in equipment, but as Rhett Buttler
said to Scarlett O'Hara, "Frankly Madam, I don't give a damn."


Wow. That is a real object-lesson.

OTOH, when I was first selecting computer 3D modelling software soem years
back, I went through a similar thing - people kept *telling* me that Max
was *THE* program, or Lightwave, btu I tried both and thoroughly loathed
them. I ended up getting a program that has no menus whatsoever, only
icons that have associated settings windows - this was perfect for me,
because I'm a visual/spatial thinkger, whereas it was impossibly "linear"
for me to keep track of endless menus and sub-menus. I continued to
upgrade that program. Meanwhile had I gone with the "must haves", I'd
haev quit doing 3D modelling before I could even get into it.

So there ya go. To each his own.

- Kris


Yes Sir, to each his own.

I too have used mucho software hoping to find something that's simple
to use and yet produces good results; something that satisfies me.
Like that Greek Diogenes, who spent a lifetime looking for an honest
man, I'm still looking for a simple program that produces good
results. There are times I do miss my wet darkroom.

On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:33:12 GMT, nick c wrote:

I'm not a pro but I do know pros. Discussing my situation with them, I
was advised to think about going back to Nikon simply because I may
have some sort of psychological attachment to Nikon equipment, since
I've used Nikon equipment for over 50 years (I'm 81 years old and my
right hand shakes). Since I have the means to indulge myself, I rented
a Nikon D300, a Nikon 16-85 lens, and a Nikon SB-600 flash. A week
later, I felt great. I felt comfortable using the Nikon D300, in fact
I was so sold on the camera I sold all my Canon equipment and bought
the D300 and the D700 Nikon cameras along with a bunch of lenses.

I hope that your 81 years haven't contributed to the discrepancy
shown by what some guy named nick posted about 5 months ago. If you
care to tie up the loose ends it would be appreciated.

I haven't post anything to this group within 5 or more months
therefore I'm unaware of posted discrepancies. I've never posted
anywhere using just the name Nick. I have always posted using the name
Nick C to avoid confusing folks. Besides, that's who I am. Although I
must confess, during my span of years, some people have taken the
liberty of calling me other names ..... unjustifiably of course. But
that hasn't happened too often.

Sorry. I said "some guy named nick" not in an attempt to fool
you, but to give you an opportunity to remember. The post that I
referred to was actually made by you five months ago unless it was a
forgery posted by someone else. Here's a copy of it, minus a couple
of header items that aren't relevant :

From: nick c
Reply-To:
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Subject: Crap!
References:
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 03:06:22 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 96.229.54.102
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:06:22 EST
Xref: core-iad-easynews rec.photo.digital.slr-systems:143697

SteveB wrote:
One of my ships reached port yesterday, and now I am going to toodle off to
buy a dslr. I have investigated the Nikon D300, the Canon 40d, and the
Lumix dmc g1, as my friend has one of those, and he really likes it and
takes some great pictures with it.

There are a ton of suppliers and packages available. And prices are all
over the map. The lens packages are enough to bewilder the average human.

Questions: does it make a difference where you get it? If you get it from
a big supplier, can you depend on service and repair? I have a Sony that
has been in the shop now for a month, and I just want it back for a work
camera. What would be a good lens package for wildlife, family, and close
up hummingbird photography. I would like to buy the two lenses that are
matching brand names with the camera, and buy them as a package deal.

Lastly, I read the Nikon 300d vs. Canon 40d google article, and it seems
that one can get a very good camera in the 40d at about half the price of
the d300. For the average user, and entry level person (me), is it worth
all that extra cash? I know I can go down to the Lumix or even Olympus and
get a decent camera, but the jump to a 40d isn't that much. However, the
jump to a d300 is.

Thanks for bearing with me. I'm going to spend more for this camera than
I've spent for cars in my life, and just want to get a good one that I will
be satisfied with and not outgrow.

Steve

PS: I no longer have the urge to buy a bigger camera than my SIL who has a
D300.



I have used both Canon and Nikon systems and have accumulated lenses
for both systems. The camera in my bag has been the Canon 1DMKll. Many
months ago I had been bitten by the update bug and pondered the
thought of buying either the Canon 40D or the Nikon D300. I looked at
other cameras and many were reported as being good cameras but I
favored getting either the Canon 40D or the Nikon D300. Try as I
might, I did my very best to zero in on getting one or the other
camera. I read reports, questioned users, and could not readily decide
which one to buy. Indecision led to procrastination. Finally, I could
contain myself no further and I did the only thing one could do who
labored with a muddled mind; I bought both cameras. Yeah, I bought the
Canon 40D and the Nikon D300.

Regrets? I have none; IMO, both cameras are very good and may well
exceed your photographic needs and expectations. However, having had
the opportunity to take the time to use both cameras I must say I tend
to favor using the Nikon D300. Couple the D300 to a MB-D10 Grip and
you have a winner. There is much to learn about using the D300
capabilities and it is not likely that as your photographic knowledge
improves you will out grow the camera.

I would say the Canon 40D is a camera that is suitable for use by
serious amateur and pro alike while the D300 is definitely a pro
camera. What I mean to say is the Canon 40D straddles the market
fence, enticing a broader span of users, while the D300 is all pro. If
you're financially strapped and feel the Canon 40D fits into your
photo equipment budget, then by all means, the Canon 40D is the camera
of necessary choice. But if you could fit procuring the Nikon D300
into your budget, then go for it. There are many good reasons why some
5 or 6 photo publications have chosen the Nikon D300 as the best
camera in its class.

When film cameras reigned, there were cameras that when production
stopped, buyers would pay more to get an obsolete camera that was in
mint condition than the original cost of the camera when it was in
production. I guessing that the Nikon D300 might very well become one
of those type sought after digital cameras.

Nick

Kris Krieger wrote:

Full manual sounds closest to my old film camera. I often like to do things
like, get close to, say, a big palm frond, and focus on, say, a tree frog
that I've "placed" in the lower third of the frame, so that it will be what
is in sharp focus. So that's why I have reservations about auto-focus - it
sounds cumbersome, BUT that might just be because it isn't what I think it
is...

In your manual focussing SLR you probably had a special central
focussing aid, such as a split prism. So you pointed that at what you
wanted to focus on, got the focus right, and then swung the camera
round to compose the shot as you wanted.

I don't know of any good digital camera which doesn't allow you to use
its autofocus in the same way. You first set it to central spot focus
and single shot focus (if applicable). You then aim that central focus
point (indicated by aiming marks in the viewfinder or LCD) at what you
want in focus, and half press the shutter button. That autofocusses on
the chosen thing, and locks that focus so long as you keep the button
half pressed.

You then swing the camera round to compose the shot, holding the
focus, and finish pressing the shutter when you're done.

Unless you have one of the more expensive DSLRs with unusually
accurate focussing aids this is not only much the fastest way of
focussing, it is also the most accurate, because good modern autofocus
systems are better than even the trained manual eye and hand. There
are the usual special exceptions of course, such as shooting through
wire netting or twigs when the autofocus will probably choose the
wrong thing to focus on.

The best modern autofocus systems can also do all sorts of new
wonderful things, but only if you specifically ask them to do them,
such as select the best compromise focus for a group shot, or track
the rapidly changing focus of a bird in flight even when you can't
keep it in the centre of the image.

The same kind of choose-and-lock facility can be selected for
autoexposure as well, e.g. in a portrait of someone looking at a
sunset you can choose to set and lock the exposure on the face and
then compose the shot.

I suggest you borrow the manual of a camera you fancy, or print a copy
from the maker's web site, and have a good lengthy browse through
it. I think you may be in for some pleasant surprises :-)

--
Chris Malcolm

On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:16:49 -0700, Matt Ion wrote:

sounds like you're fueling the fire too by referring to dslr owners as
'insecure'.

I dunno, read to me like he was blaming on some particular DSLR users
who were insecure. Nothing there intimates that all DSLR users are
insecure... or that insecure people are inherently DSLR users... or any
other crazy combination you can come up with.

You just aren't aware of Navas' stormy history here. Part of it
was repeatedly referring to DSLR owners (not just specific ones) as
being insecure and making all kinds of mystical, magical claims for
his P&S cameras. He also never (that I can recall) admitted to
being wrong, even when it was obvious to virtually everyone in the
newsgroup that he was. He apparently eventually tired of all of the
argumentative threads that he caused and fled, only to return after
a suitably long absence. Not once. He's done this several times.


Alas, there appear to be at least as many insecure P&S users hereabouts
as well, so why don't we just chalk it up to a mix of "insecure people",
and those who troll just for the sake of trolling (hmmm, isn't that
redundant?)

There are some in each camp, but I'll give Navas one thing. He
apparently believes everything that he writes, unlike the
nym-shifting anti-DSLR sock puppet troll that doesn't believe much
of what he writes and is here just to cause trouble and to try to
ruin the newsgroup - which he recently admitted.