A newbie request help selecting digital camera

ASAAR wrote in
:

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:07:29 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:

I've been using a nice Minolta with Fuji ASA 100 film and a modest
telephoto lens. [etc - snipped]

For lens compatibility look to Nikon DSLRs for your 55mm Nikkor
and Sony DSLRs for your Minolta lenses. Some here that are more
familiar with Sony's products and may be able to say whether some
lenses are more compatible than others. For the Nikkor, if it's an
AutoFocus lens, you'll probably want to avoid the cheapest bodies
since they don't have the in-body motor that is needed to focus
screw-driven AF lenses. This means that you'd want to avoid the new
D5000 as well as the very small D40, D40x and D60. Some older DSLRs
that are still available as manufacturer refurbs are the D50, D70,
D80 and D200. Some stores may still have a few new D200s, otherwise
your choice would be between a new D90 or D300.

Thanks! I saw a link here to the Luminous Lansdscapes website, and the info
about the Sony "Alpha DSLR-A200" (if I got that right) - since I'd like to
take pics outdoors, the Sony sounds like ti is worth looking into in detail.

I don't have anything that's "auto-focus"; I've never been, am still not,
interested because I almost always have my primary focus someplace other than
dead-center, and I'm not convinced that auto-focus would be able to handle
that. So that at least keeps things a bit simpler


By the way, all of these cameras have sensors smaller than a 35mm
film frame (usually called DX sensors), so the images you'd get with
55mm Nikkor will appear magnified, more like what you'd get with an
82.5mm focal length lens on a film camera. Same for the Minolta
lenses.

OH!! I had seen info via another link that the DSLR sensors are smaller, btu
I didn't realize that woudl magnify the image! THanks 4 that info , I'll
have to think about that one - unsure whether it'd be an advantage or a
disadvantage. Depending upon what's seen on the little "screen" (neo-
viewfinder), it might not be a good thing...

The multiplier for Nikkor lenses is 1.5, and 1.6 for
Canon's lenses. I don't know what the multiplier is for Sony DSLRs,
but it's sure to be in this vicinity. Sony's A900 and Nikon's D3,
D700 and D3x are exceptions, all having large sensors (called FX or
Full Frame)

Another great explanation, thanks!

(THe people in Best Buy sure didn't know any of this!)

that are the same size as your film SLRs, so there won't
be any need for a focal length multiplier. Unfortunately, these
tend to be much more expensive DSLR bodies. They're good for wide
angle photography, such as landscapes, because a 20mm lens on an FX
DSLR is very wide, what you'd expect from a 20mm lens on a film SLR.
But it would be only slightly wide on a DX DSLR (30mm on Nikon, 32mm
on Canon). On the other hand, a 300mm lens that might be desirable
for some nature/wildlife photography would perform like a 450mm or
480mm lens on a DX DSLR, which is why most wildlife photographers
prefer using DX DSLRs.

Ah! Good to know!

It sounds like I need a good book...



What I definitely do not want is an "automated" thing that takes away
my control over the photo, focuses eveythign in the center (as opposed
to where *I* want the focus to be), and other such interferences. So
I've been leery of "power shot" types or other types that sound like
they are merely for taking nice little snapshots (as opposed to
decent-quality photographs).

That shouldn't be a problem with Nikon's DSLRs, even the cheapest.
It's probably also true for Sony's DSLRs, but I'm not the person to
ask about them.

'S'OK, you're giving me loads of info I didn't know about


At the same time, I cannot pay hundreds upon hundreds of dollars...so
price is a consideration

Oh yeah, I also am not concerned about it being able to take video,
tho' I wouldn't reject that ability, either

Reject it. DSLR videos can be ok if you use a tripod, but for
following moving subjects you'd be much better off with videos taken
with much cheaper P&S cameras.


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

Here, for replies that others will provide, and DPReview's forums
might be a better place. See

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/

and check out these forums:
Beginners Questions
Nikon D90 - D40 / D5000
Nikon D300 - D100
Nikon SLR Lens Talk
Sony SLR Talk

as well as any others that may pique your interest. You don't
have to register unless you want to post questions or replies. DPR
also has very good full reviews of many DSLRs, and while they may
seem overwhelming to some readers at first (there may be more than
30 pages per camera), with time and osmosis they'll eventually
become very readable. Until then, don't miss the Conclusions page
that's near the end of each "full" review.

Great info! THanks! I don't have a problem with info volume; I'm used to
that. Knowing where to look, tho' is 80% of the battle so to speak - I tried
Google but didn't know how to limit the search.

So I'll save this (prob otehr posts, too) because it's a great place to get
started.

Thanks again!

- Kris

Matt Ion wrote in -
september.org:

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?

http://www.dpreview.com is a good place to start comparing features.
Some here will debate the "objectivity" of some of their reviews and
articles, but the side-by-side feature is handy for comparing different
cameras, and there's a Search function that lets you select which
features are important to you, to help narrow your selection.

Yup; no review is 100% objective, because each user of any product has
different goals, methods, and so on, ergo a different perspective. But if
a number of perspectives from reasonably-experienced/knowledgeable people
are seen, a decent conclusion can be arrived at. So that link is very
sueful


Now, use of your existing lenses and accessories is something you're
interested in, and others have given you some info there that can also
help with your selection.

To that, then, I would add my standard advice: once you've narrowed your
search to two or three models, go to your local store (camera specialty
store, Best Buy, etc.) and actually try them out. Pick them up, handle
them, snap some lenses on and fire off some test shots... work all the
controls, look through the menus and settings. In the end, your best
choice will be the one that you're most comfortable with.

I dod a *little* bit of that, didn't bring my lenses but did try the
display items at Best Buy (best local selection and prices), which is what
got me to post here, so yup, that's always good advice - it's like test-
driving a car before plunking down the money.


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...

Oh, yeah - like computer-shoppers But it's all grist for the proverbial
mill and I appreciate all info.

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.

THat's a great point, I'll keep that in mind!


Two different friends of mine were shopping for DSLRs not long ago, and
asked me what they should get... I told them both to get Canons, so I
could borrow their lenses and accessories Then I gave them both this
same advice... one ended up with a Nikon D80, the other with a Pentax
*ist, based largely on their own preferences after handling and trying
out several different bodies.

One other thing: ASAAR makes a good point in that cheaper DSLRs' sensors
are smaller than a 35mm film frame, and thus will give a cropped view
from what you're used to with your existing lenses. However, I should
clarify one of his statements: "By the way, all of these cameras have
sensors smaller than a 35mm film frame (usually called DX sensors), so
the images you'd get with 55mm Nikkor will appear magnified, more like
what you'd get with an 82.5mm focal length lens on a film camera. Same
for the Minolta lenses. The multiplier for Nikkor lenses is 1.5, and
1.6 for Canon's lenses."

The multipliers apply to the BODY, not the lens. A 55mm lens is
*always* a 55mm lens - that number refers to the lens's focal length and
has nothing to do with the size of the imaging device it projects onto,
be it film or digital.

Ah, OK, that's what I'd thought so it's good to be sure (given my lack of
expertise!)

What the "crop factor" gives you, is a relative
comparison to the 35mm frame. For example, you know what sort of view
you normally get out of your 55mm lens... on a Nikon body with a 1.5X
crop factor, then, you would need about a 36-37mm lens to achieve the
same view. Or conversely, as ASAAR notes, that lens on a 1.5X sensor
will look about the same an 82.5mm lens on your Minolta.

Oh, you know what, I read ASAAR's post backwards then. What i'm thinking
is that I ought to actually just get a "package", IOW, a camera with a
couple lenses that are designed to eb used with it. That seems less
confusing, which translates into "less frustrating"


It's nit-picking, to a degree, and again, it's not something you'll
probably spend a lot of time comparing on the different DSLRs you look
at, but it's something important to just keep in mind - that for any
given lens length, the view is going to be "tighter" than you're used
to. That is, of course, unless you go for a body with a full-frame
sensor, but that's probably getting well out of your price range.


But it's so tempting... And it depends on 1) how much I save up and
especialy 2)how many stained-glass pieces I can make *and sell*. So it's
actually an impetus to make me "work" harder (if you can call it work)!

THanks for the great info, I'll save all these posts

- Kris

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

Matt Ion wrote in -
september.org:

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.

Well, given that I had specifically asked for info about DSLR, because I'm
used to using my Film SLR and wish to continue with th elevel of control it
gives me, there was no "degradation" - people simply were generously giving
their time to answer the question I'd rather specifically asked, which I
appreciate very much, since it's not like anyone is making money or gaining
personal advantage from doing so.

Sorry you had a negative perception of this.

- Kris

Savageduck wrote in
news:2009061412301727544-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom:

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.


See my answer 2 Matt Ion.

I had specifically asked about DSLR. SLR is what I'm comfortabel with in
film, and what i like, so I naturally am therefore looking at DSLR. I
really don't have any issue or problem with what other people use; I simply
asked what I did becuase, as someone new to digital, I am looking to find
what *I* am comfortable using.

- Kris

On 2009-06-14 17:12:26 -0700, Kris Krieger said:

ASAAR wrote in
:

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:07:29 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:

I've been using a nice Minolta with Fuji ASA 100 film and a modest
telephoto lens. [etc - snipped]

For lens compatibility look to Nikon DSLRs for your 55mm Nikkor
and Sony DSLRs for your Minolta lenses. Some here that are more
familiar with Sony's products and may be able to say whether some
lenses are more compatible than others. For the Nikkor, if it's an
AutoFocus lens, you'll probably want to avoid the cheapest bodies
since they don't have the in-body motor that is needed to focus
screw-driven AF lenses. This means that you'd want to avoid the new
D5000 as well as the very small D40, D40x and D60. Some older DSLRs
that are still available as manufacturer refurbs are the D50, D70,
D80 and D200. Some stores may still have a few new D200s, otherwise
your choice would be between a new D90 or D300.

Thanks! I saw a link here to the Luminous Lansdscapes website, and the info
about the Sony "Alpha DSLR-A200" (if I got that right) - since I'd like to
take pics outdoors, the Sony sounds like ti is worth looking into in detail.

I don't have anything that's "auto-focus"; I've never been, am still not,
interested because I almost always have my primary focus someplace other than
dead-center, and I'm not convinced that auto-focus would be able to handle
that. So that at least keeps things a bit simpler

One thing to remember with the DSLR and some of the bridge & P&S
cameras is the ability to have focus points other than the center of
the viewfinder.
With my D300 for example you can have up to 51 different AF focus
point. These can be select for composition as you frame the image, they
can be set to track a moving target, or any number of variables.
AF is not all bad (pretty good actually) and could probably deal with
most of your demands..


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:12:26 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:

ASAAR wrote in
:

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:07:29 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:

I've been using a nice Minolta with Fuji ASA 100 film and a modest
telephoto lens. [etc - snipped]

For lens compatibility look to Nikon DSLRs for your 55mm Nikkor
and Sony DSLRs for your Minolta lenses. Some here that are more
familiar with Sony's products and may be able to say whether some
lenses are more compatible than others. For the Nikkor, if it's an
AutoFocus lens, you'll probably want to avoid the cheapest bodies
since they don't have the in-body motor that is needed to focus
screw-driven AF lenses. This means that you'd want to avoid the new
D5000 as well as the very small D40, D40x and D60. Some older DSLRs
that are still available as manufacturer refurbs are the D50, D70,
D80 and D200. Some stores may still have a few new D200s, otherwise
your choice would be between a new D90 or D300.

Thanks! I saw a link here to the Luminous Lansdscapes website, and the info
about the Sony "Alpha DSLR-A200" (if I got that right) - since I'd like to
take pics outdoors, the Sony sounds like ti is worth looking into in detail.

I don't have anything that's "auto-focus"; I've never been, am still not,
interested because I almost always have my primary focus someplace other than
dead-center, and I'm not convinced that auto-focus would be able to handle
that. So that at least keeps things a bit simpler


By the way, all of these cameras have sensors smaller than a 35mm
film frame (usually called DX sensors), so the images you'd get with
55mm Nikkor will appear magnified, more like what you'd get with an
82.5mm focal length lens on a film camera. Same for the Minolta
lenses.

OH!! I had seen info via another link that the DSLR sensors are smaller, btu
I didn't realize that woudl magnify the image! THanks 4 that info , I'll
have to think about that one - unsure whether it'd be an advantage or a
disadvantage. Depending upon what's seen on the little "screen" (neo-
viewfinder), it might not be a good thing...

The multiplier for Nikkor lenses is 1.5, and 1.6 for
Canon's lenses. I don't know what the multiplier is for Sony DSLRs,
but it's sure to be in this vicinity. Sony's A900 and Nikon's D3,
D700 and D3x are exceptions, all having large sensors (called FX or
Full Frame)

Another great explanation, thanks!

(THe people in Best Buy sure didn't know any of this!)

that are the same size as your film SLRs, so there won't
be any need for a focal length multiplier. Unfortunately, these
tend to be much more expensive DSLR bodies. They're good for wide
angle photography, such as landscapes, because a 20mm lens on an FX
DSLR is very wide, what you'd expect from a 20mm lens on a film SLR.
But it would be only slightly wide on a DX DSLR (30mm on Nikon, 32mm
on Canon). On the other hand, a 300mm lens that might be desirable
for some nature/wildlife photography would perform like a 450mm or
480mm lens on a DX DSLR, which is why most wildlife photographers
prefer using DX DSLRs.

Ah! Good to know!

It sounds like I need a good book...



What I definitely do not want is an "automated" thing that takes away
my control over the photo, focuses eveythign in the center (as opposed
to where *I* want the focus to be), and other such interferences. So
I've been leery of "power shot" types or other types that sound like
they are merely for taking nice little snapshots (as opposed to
decent-quality photographs).

That shouldn't be a problem with Nikon's DSLRs, even the cheapest.
It's probably also true for Sony's DSLRs, but I'm not the person to
ask about them.

'S'OK, you're giving me loads of info I didn't know about


At the same time, I cannot pay hundreds upon hundreds of dollars...so
price is a consideration

Oh yeah, I also am not concerned about it being able to take video,
tho' I wouldn't reject that ability, either

Reject it. DSLR videos can be ok if you use a tripod, but for
following moving subjects you'd be much better off with videos taken
with much cheaper P&S cameras.


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

Here, for replies that others will provide, and DPReview's forums
might be a better place. See

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/

and check out these forums:
Beginners Questions
Nikon D90 - D40 / D5000
Nikon D300 - D100
Nikon SLR Lens Talk
Sony SLR Talk

as well as any others that may pique your interest. You don't
have to register unless you want to post questions or replies. DPR
also has very good full reviews of many DSLRs, and while they may
seem overwhelming to some readers at first (there may be more than
30 pages per camera), with time and osmosis they'll eventually
become very readable. Until then, don't miss the Conclusions page
that's near the end of each "full" review.

Great info! THanks! I don't have a problem with info volume; I'm used to
that. Knowing where to look, tho' is 80% of the battle so to speak - I tried
Google but didn't know how to limit the search.

So I'll save this (prob otehr posts, too) because it's a great place to get
started.

Thanks again!

- Kris


You do realize that you are taking advice from someone who has never even
held a camera, don't you? All he does is read downloaded camera manuals and
read websites about photography his whole sad life. Then he comes here and
tries to pretend to know something about real cameras and real photography.
He thinks he wins if he can fool others into believing that he's a some
kind of "photographer", like some sad virtual-reality-game in his head.
ASSAR is THE longest-lived resident pretend-photographer TROLL. Everyone
who has subscribed to this group for less than month knows this.

Enjoy your (ahem) "advice". :-)

Too too funny! LOL!

On 2009-06-14 17:36:20 -0700, Kris Krieger said:

Savageduck wrote in
news:2009061412301727544-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom:

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.


See my answer 2 Matt Ion.

I had specifically asked about DSLR. SLR is what I'm comfortabel with in
film, and what i like, so I naturally am therefore looking at DSLR. I
really don't have any issue or problem with what other people use; I simply
asked what I did becuase, as someone new to digital, I am looking to find
what *I* am comfortable using.

- Kris

Then follow your instincts and your own interpretation of the reviews.
Try and evaluate what you read in this Group and go with what will meet
your requirements, handling comfort and price point.

Sometimes it is best to lurk in these groups to get a feel for the
various regular contributers before raising an issue. That way you
might be better prepared to filter the information.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2009-06-14 18:04:50 -0700, LOL said:

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:12:26 -0500, Kris Krieger wrote:
-----------------
Great info! THanks! I don't have a problem with info volume; I'm used to
that. Knowing where to look, tho' is 80% of the battle so to speak - I tried
Google but didn't know how to limit the search.

So I'll save this (prob otehr posts, too) because it's a great place to get
started.

Thanks again!

- Kris


You do realize that you are taking advice from someone who has never even
held a camera, don't you? All he does is read downloaded camera manuals and
read websites about photography his whole sad life. Then he comes here and
tries to pretend to know something about real cameras and real photography.
He thinks he wins if he can fool others into believing that he's a some
kind of "photographer", like some sad virtual-reality-game in his head.
ASSAR is THE longest-lived resident pretend-photographer TROLL. Everyone
who has subscribed to this group for less than month knows this.

Enjoy your (ahem) "advice". :-)

Too too funny! LOL!

....and Kris, if you hadn't noticed before, the above remark is from our
resident P&S troll who will try to hide his identity via constant
change, and has an agenda which is more destructive than helpful.
There are doubts in this Group of his ability to produce images as he
has yet to submit any sample of his work.
The best advice remains buy what works for you.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:12:26 -0500, Kris Krieger
wrote:

I don't have anything that's "auto-focus"; I've never been, am still not,
interested because I almost always have my primary focus someplace other than
dead-center, and I'm not convinced that auto-focus would be able to handle
that. So that at least keeps things a bit simpler

I still suggest that you are a bit confused on this issue. You will
not find a dslr to be different than a slr as far as focussing. The
dslrs are not restricted to center focussing in auto focus. You can
focus at any point in the frame. You also have the ability to change
from auto focus to manual focus and never use auto focus. (That's
with a dslr and not a point & shoot. Some point & shoots have a
manual setting, but not all of them.)

You will not be restricted by the camera no matter what brand of dslr
you purchase. There may be something different to get used to, but I
can't imagine an experienced photographer not adapting in a matter of
minutes. You may have to read, or at least skim, the manual though.

I spent years using a slr before changing to a dslr. The only thing I
had to get used to was not being stingy with my shots. I still take
fewer shots than many dslr users because there's something ingrained
in my mind about more shots costing more money.






--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida