If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
Canon 400D (rebel xti) with kit 18-55mm lens and buy a 50mm 1.8 (430ex flash
if you want.) Will kill any P&S for quality and is a budget choice for DSLR's |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
"wiyum" wrote in message
... snip The 400D and D40x are wonderful choices, but I'd look at other options, namely from Sony and Pentax. I wouldn't necessarily recommend these options if you were planning on buying into a system, but if you're looking to buy a camera and lens to use for the next five or so years without expanding your system, these options will do fine for your needs. Is that even possible? I can't imagine anyone owning a DSLR for five years without ever lusting for a new lens... dwight (now with No. 3 - the 100mm macro) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
2Bdecided wrote:
Any helpful advice gratefully received! It really depends on your uses. I started out with a point and shoot 5 years ago and still use the camera. It is light and fits into the pocket. I use it where I don't want to lug around an SLR. I've had DSLR cameras for several years (latest is the Nikon D200). I use them for kids and pets and shots where I want quality, quick response, etc etc. For example, for Christmas opening presents the DSLR is a must. My old point and shoot seems to take for ever to take a picture...it is the classic Open the present, hold it up, hold the fake surprised/pleased look for an eternity etc etc Get the best camera your budget will allow with a lens. Later add another lens. One thought however....you say your point and shoot was broken or died. Was it something you did? Did you drop it or something? Or did it just fail? Just something to consider before putting a large amount of money into a new camera |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
On 2008-01-18 08:30:46 -0800, Whiskers said:
I don't know if it's the case with that particular flash unit, but some have a capacitor that can hold enough charge for several flashes (how many, depending in how much power is used for each flash, which varies with most modern automatic systems). That means that the flash can be ready for the next shot very quickly - but if you take a lot of shots in rapid succession, the capacitor becomes discharged more quickly than the battery can charge it up again and when that happens you have to wait a bit longer than 'usual' for the 'flash ready' indicator to re-appear. It is not just that. Flash strobes will also overheat if you take too many pictures in quick succession. Recycle times become longer to keep you from damaging the flash. So sometimes just letting it cool for a few minutes is all you need to do. -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
On 2008-01-18 02:58:14 -0800, 2Bdecided said:
We hated... * after lots of continuous shooting, the flash suddenly needed a very long time to recover, and became very sluggish Several things possible he 1) The battery is running down. 2) You have discharged the capacitor so much that it is taking longer to recycle. 3) You have taken so many flash pictures in quick succession that the circuitry is overheating and the recycling time is taking longer in order to allow the unit to cool off. * having to look through a view finder - I know that's intrinsic to how almost all DSLRs work, but we really missed the live view on the LCD Yeah, but your shots are steadier if you hold the camera to your face. You get better pictures if you are using the viewfinder, so that should be your preferred method. Also, that live view introduces a delay as the camera has to process the picture. For example, on the Nikon D300, which has Live View, you press the shutter to raise the mirror and turn on Live View, then press it again to lower the mirror and hold the shutter down until the picture is taken. It takes almost twice as long to take picture with Live View turned on as it does with it off. Nevertheless, live view has its uses, such as when you have the camera on the floor and you don't want to lie down there with it, or when the camera is on a tripod. The D40x and some other cameras are on close-out right now. That is why they are so cheap. Wait a few weeks -- the manufacturers will probably announce new DSLRs at PMA. I would bet we will see some new Nikon and Canon DSLRs that are small, light, and feature live preview. I can't imagine wanting to change lenses. The idea of exposing the sensor to dust doesn't appeal anyway! I seem to have enough bad luck with cameras as it is. That problem is overblown. And almost all the new cameras coming out have some sort of sensor dust control that works with varying degrees of success. Alternatively, if there's a point-and-shoot which can match the speed and safe exposure of the 400D, and yet still fit in my pocket and show me everything on an LCD, I'd like to hear about it. So would I. -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-18 08:30:46 -0800, Whiskers said: I don't know if it's the case with that particular flash unit, but some have a capacitor that can hold enough charge for several flashes (how many, depending in how much power is used for each flash, which varies with most modern automatic systems). That means that the flash can be ready for the next shot very quickly - but if you take a lot of shots in rapid succession, the capacitor becomes discharged more quickly than the battery can charge it up again and when that happens you have to wait a bit longer than 'usual' for the 'flash ready' indicator to re-appear. It is not just that. Flash strobes will also overheat if you take too many pictures in quick succession. Recycle times become longer to keep you from damaging the flash. So sometimes just letting it cool for a few minutes is all you need to do. Last year I think I smoked a cap on an old thyristor Vivitar. I didn't see the magic smoke, but I sure smelled it. It's still in use, though -- AC operation wasn't affected. -- Blinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
"2Bdecided" wrote in message ... So, my question is, if I'm to take the leap into the world of DSLR, what should I consider? I've looked at the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X on dpreview. These reviews don't seem to focus on what I really care about - they didn't mention the fantastic lack of red eye, or the Red-eye is far less likely to be a problem with any DSLR because the pop-up flash is much farther away from the lens axis. That's what causes red-eye: the flash is too close to the lens axis, which is usually unavoidable with compact cameras because of their small size. So practically all compacts require some sort of red-eye fix, either in the camera or done later in software. DSLRs not only have the advantage of the built-in flash being farther away from the lens axis, but also have provision for mounting an external flash which is better still, in that and several other respects. Most compact cameras don't have the hot shoe for an external flash so you're pretty much stuck with the red-eye problem. annoying flash recycle time problem with the 400D for example. How am I to learn about these things before buying the camera? I don't want to make an expensive mistake. My Nikon DSLRs haven't given me any problem with long recycle times the relatively few times I've used the built-in flash. But it's very possible I just haven't taken as many flash shots that way as you were doing. You had probably run down the camera battery to a considerable degree. Mostly I use an external flash anyway, which saves the camera battery as well as having many other advantages -- more power, fast recycle time, tilt and swivel for bounce light, and a lot of other features. I can't imagine wanting to change lenses. The idea of exposing the sensor to dust doesn't appeal anyway! I seem to have enough bad luck with cameras as it is. That's nothing to be concerned about at first anyway. Later on, you may or may not want to buy one or more other lenses. Many 35mm SLR owners never bought any other lens than the one the camera came with, and I suppose DSLR users may be much the same. Think of it as an option that's there for you if you should want to expand your hobby that way in the future, but not something you're obliged to do. Alternatively, if there's a point-and-shoot which can match the speed and safe exposure of the 400D, and yet still fit in my pocket and show me everything on an LCD, I'd like to hear about it. I doubt very much you'll ever find a point-and-shoot that will give you overall results equal to a DSLR. I have three Nikon DSLRs and several Nikon Coolpix compact cameras, and I love them all -- some of the Coolpixes are much too large to be pocketable and were originally quite expensive, too -- but the DSLRs are just an entirely different breed of cat. I'd go for the D40 or D40x if I were you. (Of course as one of the Nikon faithful I would say that, but one of my DSLRs is a D40 and I really love it. And its kit lens is generally regarded as much superior to Canon's equivalent product.) Neil |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
2Bdecided wrote: On 18 Jan, 16:45, Paul Furman wrote: Do you really need zoom for family photos though? It seemed very useful, but I don't know. The idea of changing lenses worries me - I'd break something. Unless you are in the habit of dropping your Ixus, you won't. It's _build_ to be used. The reason I ask is a fixed length fast 'prime' lens is really ideal for kids & indoor family shooting: you can shoot without any flash at all and capture the ambiance much better and you can get a faster shutter speed for herky-jerky little kids. This is something I'm interested in. Let's say a given amount of light (indoors, night, normal-ish lighting) meant the zoom lens needed ISO 1600 and 1/100th. I have no idea what aperture. The zoom lens would probably have ca. f/4 (short end) or f/5.6 (towards long end) as fastest aperture. The result would be noisy, of course. What ISO could I come down to with a fast fixed length lens, still at 1/100th, for a comparably bright picture, with hopefully much less noise? If the lens is f/2.0 or better (e.g. Canon 50mm f/1.8, ~ USD100 IIRC, optically sound but all plastics), ISO 400 or ISO 200. If the lens is f1.4 or better (e.g. Canon 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, ...), ISO 200 or ISO 100. -Wolfgang |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR for "full auto" shooting of kids? or Point-and-shoot?
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
2Bdecided wrote: On 18 Jan, 13:09, "Allowa" . wrote: No point and shoot will compare to a dslr for picture quality but they are big and if that doesn't suit then there are plenty of alternatives. The link below will give you everything about canon you want to know.http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...ad.php?t=42034 Thanks, fascinating. Lots to read! P.s. The viewfinder is better for getting sharp pictures Even if I don't plan to focus them myself? A viewfinder has no lag. A monitor has the read sensor-interpret- convert-display cycle, which you'll see if you turn with the camera: the monitor lags behind. AF is also faster and more accurate if you do not have to flip up the mirror (there are a very few cameras that have a secondary sensor for life view), because for AF you either have to flip down the mirror again or you have to use contrast based AF (compact camera type) instead of phase shift AF (SLR type). The viewfinder also works when any monitor will only show grain and noise due to a lack of light. -Wolfgang |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is there a decent point and shoot with image stabilization and a 3" screen for $150.00?. | Ted[_2_] | Digital Photography | 1 | April 2nd 07 07:41 AM |
Canon SD600 terrible for "point and shoot", help me find an alternative!!! | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 8 | February 8th 07 06:42 AM |
ABCNEWS: "FOLEY WON'T BE PROSECUTED" - "KIDS" WERE TOO OLD!! | Meine Ehre heist Treue | Digital Photography | 1 | December 10th 06 05:57 AM |
Auto "Image Sharpening" and "Image Adjustment" with Nikon 5700 | Anthony | Digital Photography | 2 | February 24th 06 10:29 AM |