A newbie request help selecting digital camera

In article , John Navas
wrote:

Hi, there's no "one size fits all" in photography.

True. More to the point, the camera is just a tool. What matters is
the *photographer*, not the camera. A great photographer can take great
pictures with pretty much any camera. A great camera cannot take great
pictures without a great photographer.

but a great photographer can take better pictures with a better camera
since it offers more opportunities and more configurations for what he
may want to create.

There are good, hi-end
P&S for example, if you are looking for convenience and compact size.

Damned with faint praise. "P&S" is a favorite pejorative of insecure
dSLR owners that badly mischaracterizes the better compact digital
camera, no more appropriate for them than for a dSLR in automatic mode.

bull****. p&s is common usage for non-dslrs by the public, by stores
that sell cameras and even by some camera makers. deal with it
already.

you keep insisting it's an insult. what were you saying about
'insecure' ?

The Panasonic DMC-FZ28, for example, has full manual control, RAW mode,
and more total capability than any dSLR.

more total capability? since when does the lens comes off so that any
lens can be attached? what if someone wants to use a tilt/shift lens
or a lensbaby?

... Advanced dSLR users use
what is called RAW, or digital negative, which is the raw output from the
camera sensor, with as few manipulation as possible (demosaicing and
compressing-you will do these on your computer, instead on-camera). ...

Some do; others do not. RAW is not essential to great photography.

nobody said it was essential but it's needed for the utmost quality.

"John Navas" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:06:02 -0400, nospam wrote
in :

In article , John Navas
wrote:

Hi, there's no "one size fits all" in photography.

True. More to the point, the camera is just a tool. What matters is
the *photographer*, not the camera. A great photographer can take great
pictures with pretty much any camera. A great camera cannot take great
pictures without a great photographer.

but a great photographer can take better pictures with a better camera
since it offers more opportunities and more configurations for what he
may want to create.

Many (most?) great photographers would disagree. The better camera just
makes the job easier, and a number of great photographers (e.g., Henri
Cartier-Bresson) have used modest cameras.

The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches
behind it. ~Ansel Adams

A photograph is usually looked at - seldom looked into. ~Ansel Adams

There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good
photographs. ~Ansel Adams

Every time someone tells me how sharp my photos are, I assume that it
isn't a very interesting photograph. If it were, they would have more to
say. ~Author Unknown

Buying a Nikon doesn't make you a photographer. It makes you a Nikon
owner. ~Author Unknown

Your Camera Doesn't Matter, by Ken Rockwell
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

paraphrase"I've never handled or even seen this camera but I'm sure it
isn't very good" - Ken Rockwell /paraphrase

I don't think I've ever seen Rockwell and Adams quoted in the same posting.

That's quite amusing.

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 07:41:13 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:42:18 -0700, Matt Ion wrote
in :

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?

At this level of technology, you see, people will argue minutiae in the
specs and compare things at a quantum level, and eventually you'll
probably see this thread degrade into simple bashing of one brand's
users over another...

Hmm, I guess I was wrong... it's degraded into the DSLR vs. P&S troll
battles. Which, admittedly, I should have seen coming. My bad.

That is, unfortunately, what r.p.d has degenerated into, mostly a result
of insecure dSLR owners who feel the need to attack non-dSLRs and those
who use them, although a notable P&S troll is fueling the fires as well.
It's all very childish, pointless, and destructive. [sigh]

You poor pitiful moron. Can't you realize that they're never going to
understand it unless someone mirrors their own behavior but from the
opposite point of view? We're dealing with the most immature of adults
here, the DSLR Trolls. Adults who can't treat others like adults deserve to
be treated like the useless perpetual children that they are. It's the ONLY
way that life-forms as low as they will ever learn. They'll never change by
showing them reason and logic. They can't comprehend more than what is now
happening to them, due to their OWN ****ed-up behavior and useless values
based on their total ignorance. When they stop behaving like the useless
children that they are then I'll stop treating them as such. NO sooner.
This whole thing started because I've had it up to here grabbing crotch
with their idiotic values over hardware. They'll never understand that the
camera matters little when it comes to photography of excellence. You know
as well as I do that photography is all about the talents of the person
behind the recording device. A pinhole shoe-box camera in the right hands
will blow away anything that they'll ever accomplish with $50,000 worth of
overpriced glass and high-tech electronics.

They are now reaping what they have sown for the last decade or two. And it
won't stop until they figure it out. I suspect that's going to take another
year ore two of mirroring their idiotic behavior relentlessly. They're that
****ingly slow and amazingly stupid. They've already proved that many times
over. I suspect that's why they adamantly choose DSLRs too. This does not
bode well for being one of the DSLR clan. If they're that amazingly stupid
then it only follows that all the reasons they choose to buy and promote
the purchase of DSLRs is just as amazingly stupid and ignorant. "Show how
****ingly stupid you are! Blindly buy a DSLR just because another huge
idiot told you to!" That's the ONLY message that they have EVER sent out
into the world.

On 2009-06-14 07:41:13 -0700, John Navas said:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:42:18 -0700, Matt Ion wrote
in :

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?

At this level of technology, you see, people will argue minutiae in the
specs and compare things at a quantum level, and eventually you'll
probably see this thread degrade into simple bashing of one brand's
users over another...

Hmm, I guess I was wrong... it's degraded into the DSLR vs. P&S troll
battles. Which, admittedly, I should have seen coming. My bad.

That is, unfortunately, what r.p.d has degenerated into, mostly a result
of insecure dSLR owners who feel the need to attack non-dSLRs and those
who use them, although a notable P&S troll is fueling the fires as well.
It's all very childish, pointless, and destructive. [sigh]

Agreed.

Many DSLR users are also P&S or bridge users.
Some P&S users will never have the need for a DSLR, and there are
certainly many DSLR users who will appear holier than thou in their
chase for bragging rights to ownership of whatever, to justify their
purchase.
Each camera type has its place in the World, however the manner in
which some individuals make the argument for their prefered camera
make/camera type/PP software etc. creates a provocative, hostile
situation, which can only be damaging to the NG.

Our resident P&S troll has done one thing though, anything he posts now
is mostly discounted, even if there might be some valid points made
within his diatribe of the moment.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2009-06-14 12:18:55 -0700, DSLR-Troll Killer said:

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 07:41:13 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:42:18 -0700, Matt Ion wrote
in :

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?

At this level of technology, you see, people will argue minutiae in the
specs and compare things at a quantum level, and eventually you'll
probably see this thread degrade into simple bashing of one brand's
users over another...

Hmm, I guess I was wrong... it's degraded into the DSLR vs. P&S troll
battles. Which, admittedly, I should have seen coming. My bad.

That is, unfortunately, what r.p.d has degenerated into, mostly a result
of insecure dSLR owners who feel the need to attack non-dSLRs and those
who use them, although a notable P&S troll is fueling the fires as well.
It's all very childish, pointless, and destructive. [sigh]

You poor pitiful moron. Can't you realize that they're never going to
understand it unless someone mirrors their own behavior but from the
opposite point of view? We're dealing with the most immature of adults
here,

Now that is funny coming from you. Talk about immature!


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:46:57 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2009-06-14 12:18:55 -0700, DSLR-Troll Killer said:

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 07:41:13 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:42:18 -0700, Matt Ion wrote
in :

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?

At this level of technology, you see, people will argue minutiae in the
specs and compare things at a quantum level, and eventually you'll
probably see this thread degrade into simple bashing of one brand's
users over another...

Hmm, I guess I was wrong... it's degraded into the DSLR vs. P&S troll
battles. Which, admittedly, I should have seen coming. My bad.

That is, unfortunately, what r.p.d has degenerated into, mostly a result
of insecure dSLR owners who feel the need to attack non-dSLRs and those
who use them, although a notable P&S troll is fueling the fires as well.
It's all very childish, pointless, and destructive. [sigh]

You poor pitiful moron. Can't you realize that they're never going to
understand it unless someone mirrors their own behavior but from the
opposite point of view? We're dealing with the most immature of adults
here,

Now that is funny coming from you. Talk about immature!

Nyaa nyaa NYAAA nyaa nyaa... So are you but what am I?

Get a ****ing clue you useless immature moron.

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:46:57 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2009-06-14 12:18:55 -0700, DSLR-Troll Killer said:

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 07:41:13 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:42:18 -0700, Matt Ion wrote
in :

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?

At this level of technology, you see, people will argue minutiae in the
specs and compare things at a quantum level, and eventually you'll
probably see this thread degrade into simple bashing of one brand's
users over another...

Hmm, I guess I was wrong... it's degraded into the DSLR vs. P&S troll
battles. Which, admittedly, I should have seen coming. My bad.

That is, unfortunately, what r.p.d has degenerated into, mostly a result
of insecure dSLR owners who feel the need to attack non-dSLRs and those
who use them, although a notable P&S troll is fueling the fires as well.
It's all very childish, pointless, and destructive. [sigh]

You poor pitiful moron. Can't you realize that they're never going to
understand it unless someone mirrors their own behavior but from the
opposite point of view? We're dealing with the most immature of adults
here,

Now that is funny coming from you. Talk about immature!

Nyaa nyaa NYAAA nyaa nyaa... So are you but what am I?

Get a ****ing clue you useless immature moron.

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."

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

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."

In the movie, it was "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn." A
Southerner would never call a woman, even a Scarlett one, a "madam".

In the novel, the word "Frankly" is not in the statement.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

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

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."

In the movie, it was "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."

I stand corrected. You are correct. RB, in the movie, did not use the
word Madam.

A
Southerner would never call a woman, even a Scarlett one, a "madam".

Southerner or not, according to Wikipedia, such women in the South
were not even referred to as Scarlett. They were said to be "fast."


In the novel, the word "Frankly" is not in the statement.

I've never read the book, however, I consider that to be an
informative statement which I'll remember that for the rest of my
days; for as long as I'm on this side of the sod.

Thanks.