Choice of Photography Equipment

[jdrblue]

FlyingRev - Several posters have given some good input on your question but here is my two cents. I bought a Nikon D70 digital slr about two years ago. I kept my old film camera and all of the gear and I haven't used it since. One reason I went digital is I would shoot hundreds of film pictures and only keep about 1/3 of them. It is easier to just shoot digital and delete the pictures you don't want.

 

This point has been made but the 1.5 factor is a difference. I have the 18-70 DX Zoom which was the kit lense with the D70. I use it the most. I don't think you will find your 18-35 very useful. Nikon makes a 12-24 that is pretty expensive and Sigma has a 10-20 wide angle zoom that is about half the price. To me the 1.5 factor is a draw back but not a deal killer. I also have a Nikon 55-200 DX Zoom and a Nikon 105 Macro.

 

If I were buying a camera today, I would most likely get the D200 partly because I already have the Nikon lenses. A good film camera could last you 15 years. That won't be the case with digital. Digital cameras will become obsolete becasue of new technology much faster. I plan to replace my D70 after 3 or 4 years depending on the new models introduced.

 

Prints are very high quality. I have a very good printer that will do an excellent 11x14 and 13x19. If I want to print a lot of 4x6's I have used Kodak and Sony online services with very good results. There are a lot of online print services for pro quality prints of all sizes. I recently did a 16x24 oil on canvas through Photofiddle that I was very pleased with. When you consider you aren't paying for prints you don't want like with film the digital printing is cheaper and just as good quality.

 

The Nikon RAW format is called NEF. Almost every picture requires some manipulation. I open the RAW picture in Photoshop and then work with it in PSD. I use the JPEG Large format a lot. The memory card will hold a lot more pictures and it is a little easier to use than RAW. I have 2GB, 1GB and 512 MB cards. I took almost 700 pictures on the 2GB card using the JPEG Large format and had room for more. The same card would have held probably half that in RAW.

 

I've never been sorry I went to digital and also enjoy working with the pictures in Photoshop.

[jdrblue]

A correction. I have a 70-300 ED lense not the 55-200.

 

I just checked my camera. I have taken 86 RAW pictures on the 1GB card and show room for 89 more. The memory card will hold more than 89 additional pictures. Nikon uses a conservative approach. They figure the remaining picture space as if each picture used up the maximum memory. That will never happen so you will be able to take more pictures than the camera indicates.

[kristing63]

OK, this is probably going to sound ridiculous with all of the high tech camera discussion going on, but I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the Sony DS-CH1 (Cybershot)? I want a new camera, and I was originally thinking of a digital SLR (Nikon D50) and buying a 100-300 lens, but I am not very experienced with these type of SLRs so I was thinking that the Sony (bascally a point and shoot with many manual features, might be better for me) It seems to have a zoom range to over 400, and it has image stabilization, which I will most probably need, but I was wondering about the quality of the prints compared to a digital SLR.

 

If anyone has any thoughts, I would be most appreciative! Thanks!

[tinkerme1]

OK, this is probably going to sound ridiculous with all of the high tech camera discussion going on, but I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the Sony DS-CH1 (Cybershot)? I want a new camera, and I was originally thinking of a digital SLR (Nikon D50) and buying a 100-300 lens, but I am not very experienced with these type of SLRs so I was thinking that the Sony (bascally a point and shoot with many manual features, might be better for me) It seems to have a zoom range to over 400, and it has image stabilization, which I will most probably need, but I was wondering about the quality of the prints compared to a digital SLR.

 

If anyone has any thoughts, I would be most appreciative! Thanks!

 

If you check out this website, you will read reviews of folks that already have this camera. There are some definite plus and minus reasons for owning this camera. Check it out: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinions.asp?prodkey=sony_dsch1

[crusingici]

Thanks, Celia, for the info on memory -- I think I have 3 1 gb cards and several smaller ones -- hopefully I will have enough to see me thru. I'll just have to watch it as I go along. In seeing some photos from others I see there really IS such a thing as too many photos of glaciers.:o I will try not to over do it early on!

[kristing63]

Thank you Celia, the website was very helpful! I really think that although I will certainly be happy with a digital SLR, I will probably get more use out of something like the Sony DSCH1. I went to Alaska last year with a regular, old fashioned point and shoot (very limited zoom) and I was disappointed that I couldn't get closer with regard to wildlife shots. Other than that, I took some beautiful pictures. We are returning to Alaska this year, and I really want to be armed with a better camera, altough one that is not too much camera for me. The ony thing that I am concerned with is that the Sony uses AA batteries, which I realizes has its plus and minuses. Also, the DSCH1 apparently does not have a Carl Zeiss lens, whereas the new DSCH2 does. People seem to be happy with the DSCH1 anyway. Thanks again for all of your help!

[tinkerme1]

Kristin: There are several things that I think are very important on buying a digital camera (P&S in particular).

 

Optical range at least a 10X or higher

Pixel Count - for the times when you wish to enlarge or crop photos

Low Light ISO settings for those times when you are shooting in low light conditions

Battery life

Shutter Speed

 

If you have a choice between the "1" and "2" model, you may wish to move up to the new technology in the "2' model. It does have some significant plus features.:D

[jdrblue]

OK, this is probably going to sound ridiculous with all of the high tech camera discussion going on, but I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the Sony DS-CH1 (Cybershot)? I want a new camera, and I was originally thinking of a digital SLR (Nikon D50) and buying a 100-300 lens, but I am not very experienced with these type of SLRs so I was thinking that the Sony (bascally a point and shoot with many manual features, might be better for me) It seems to have a zoom range to over 400, and it has image stabilization, which I will most probably need, but I was wondering about the quality of the prints compared to a digital SLR.

 

If anyone has any thoughts, I would be most appreciative! Thanks!

 

I posted the info on the Nikon D70. My guess is the Sony would be better for you. The SLR has some negatives. The SLR camera is bigger and heavier and generally you will want to carry the lens on the camera and at least one more and maybe two more lenses. That is a lot to lug around. I also have a Pentax 5MP, 5X Zoom that will fit in my pocket. Some days I just take the Pentax depending on what I'm doing that day. The DSLR also takes more of a commitment to really learning how to use it.

 

The Sony has a 36mm-432mm zoom lens. This probaly will suit your needs in almost every situation. The more a single lens trys to do the less likely it will do everything very well. This lens trys to do a lot but it seems to work very well in most situations and it gets very good reviews. My guess is it could be challenged in a very low light situation and the wide angle may have some distortion. The image stabilization feature is a real plus.

 

You wouldn't be satisfied with just the 100-300mm zoom with the Nikon D50. The Nikon sensor is smaller than the film equivalent which results in a crop factor. This effectively turns the 100-300 lens into a 150-450 equivalent. You would have no wide angle capability. I use a wide angle more in my travels than a big zoom. The wide angle is good for landscapes, sunsets, and any panorama. It also is good for narrow streets, inside buildings, group photos and general close in work.

 

The print quality should be just fine with the Sony. The 5MP is plenty for a very nice image unless you are trying to do poster size. There are several factors that go into digital image quality including the lens quality, sensor, focus, metering, etc. Two 5MP cameras could be very different in quality. The camera is just a little computer with a shutter and some glass. When you take a picture with the Sony the computer will do some amount of digital enhancement and compress some of the data. Sony is very good at this stuff. They buy the glass (lens) from a third party. Sony gets good camera reiviews.

[gohoos1]

I hope I'm not completely rehashing someone else's post earlier in this thread... Generally most people will want to go with a point-and-shoot digital. DSLR gives you more flexibility - but most people never use it or need it. I have a Nikon D70 and love it, but it isn't for everyone. I have a number of lenses that I can swap depending on the shot I want to take. I have a big Nikon flash that I can use for all sorts of lighting situation. But most people would just be confused by all that gear.

 

 

For P&S, I recommend (as others in this thread have) the Canon S? IS series of cameras. They just came out with the S3 IS recently with a bump in pixels and features. The "IS" Image Stabilization is the key here - the biggest problem most people have is keeping the camera still. You can also get IS lenses for Canon SLR's and VR (Vibration Reduction - a similar technology) for Nikon cameras.

 

 

I have two articles I recommend to folks new to photography - How to Make Great Photographs and Why your camera does not matter. That last article is especially tough for some people to understand, especially when they can't figure out why their new $1000 camera doesn't take pictures for them like the ones on the box. :) If you nose around on that site you can also find some tips on travel photography and lots of reviews.

 

 

The best camera equipment is the equipment you are comfortable with and can take good photos with. Buy it, take it out, and use it. Burn it up. Get as much light through that lens as possible. The more you practice, the better your photos will be.

[tapia]

I hope I'm not completely rehashing someone else's post earlier in this thread... Generally most people will want to go with a point-and-shoot digital. DSLR gives you more flexibility - but most people never use it or need it. I have a Nikon D70 and love it, but it isn't for everyone. I have a number of lenses that I can swap depending on the shot I want to take. I have a big Nikon flash that I can use for all sorts of lighting situation. But most people would just be confused by all that gear.

 

 

For P&S, I recommend (as others in this thread have) the Canon S? IS series of cameras. They just came out with the S3 IS recently with a bump in pixels and features. The "IS" Image Stabilization is the key here - the biggest problem most people have is keeping the camera still. You can also get IS lenses for Canon SLR's and VR (Vibration Reduction - a similar technology) for Nikon cameras.

 

 

I have two articles I recommend to folks new to photography - How to Make Great Photographs and Why your camera does not matter. That last article is especially tough for some people to understand, especially when they can't figure out why their new $1000 camera doesn't take pictures for them like the ones on the box. :) If you nose around on that site you can also find some tips on travel photography and lots of reviews.

 

 

The best camera equipment is the equipment you are comfortable with and can take good photos with. Buy it, take it out, and use it. Burn it up. Get as much light through that lens as possible. The more you practice, the better your photos will be.

 

 

Have you tried the S3 yet? I know it was supposed to come out sometime in May, but I didn't think it came out yet?

 

Some people say it's not worth the extra money over the S2.....what do you think?

[gohoos1]

Sorry, I haven't actually tried the S3 yet. :) It looks like it is due out "end of April" so I'd guess it's shipping any day now. I have used the S2 and I'd buy one if I needed a P&S today, although it doesn't really count as a "small" P&S - it's a bit fat.

 

The S3 adds 1 MP, a bigger screen, higher ISO sensitivity, and a few other features. I doubt it'll be much more expensive than the S2 was when it was released.

 

Actually, I carry a Casio EX-Z750 when I need a pocket camera. Small, durable, well-designed 7.2 MP camera.

[kristing63]

Thank you all for your great advice!! The more I read, the more certain I am that an advanced point and shoot is for me! ...which leaves me more money for FUN in AK!

[jdrblue]

I just checked B&H. They are showing the S3 at $499.95 and the S2 at $339.95. They are taking orders for the S3 but it isn't in stock yet. Both the S2 and S3 get great reviews.

[tapia]

So, do you think $100 is worth:

 

"The S3 adds 1 MP, a bigger screen, higher ISO sensitivity, and a few other features."

 

I hear that the sensitivity makes it more fuzzy, but i"m not sure.....

[gohoos1]

So, do you think $100 is worth:

 

"The S3 adds 1 MP, a bigger screen, higher ISO sensitivity, and a few other features."

 

I hear that the sensitivity makes it more fuzzy, but i"m not sure.....

 

For me it would be worth it. It's always better to capture at the highest resolution possible - you can always scale it down later but you can never scale it up. (That goes for anyone else reading along - NEVER use your camera at anything less than the max resolution and finest detail. You can always chop it down later, but you can never add that resolution back in.)

 

The higher ISO sensitivity means you have a bit more flexibility. That ISO number is a setting you can change, and the higher you set that number the more sensitive the camera's sensor is to light. If you have less light to work with you can turn up the ISO to take a sharper picture. The down side is that the higher you turn that number the more "noise" you will see in the image. Generally, higher ISO lets you take pictures with less light.

[tapia]

Thanks!

 

I'm going to stop at B&H in 2 weeks. I'm hoping they will have at least the 'show' model in the store. So, I'm hoping to compare them close together....

 

Thanks!

[jdrblue]

It is best to actually hold the camera. A couple of years ago I did all the homework concerning a small digital. I made up my mind what I wanted and then went to the camera store. My first choice camera was awful. The shutter lag was terrible and I ended up buying something else. Some cameras just don't fit your hands.

[tapia]

It is best to actually hold the camera. A couple of years ago I did all the homework concerning a small digital. I made up my mind what I wanted and then went to the camera store. My first choice camera was awful. The shutter lag was terrible and I ended up buying something else. Some cameras just don't fit your hands.

 

I know exactly what you mean. That's why I want to see them next to each other.

[wolfnature]

I realize I'm joining in this late, but I just thought I would add my 2 cents to the P&S vs SLR debate.

 

The biggest thing to consider is if you are wondering if an SLR is right for you, it probably isn't. I know that sounds pretty cut and dry, but it's pretty true.

 

Probably the other big thing to consider is convenience. Most people want a camera that is easy to use. That usually means something that they can easily carry with them (usually in a pocket or purse) that they can just pull out and take a quick picture. That is exactly what a P&S camera is for, and if you get a good one they are capable of taking very good pictures.

 

An SLR takes a time commitment to learn, which is something that a casual photographer isn't interested in doing. However, if you are more than a casual photographer (or want to be) than an SLR is definately the way to go.

 

I don't mean any of this as trying to put anyone down or anything, just from my observations most people on vacation are casual photographers and want something easy to use, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Just because I have multiple cameras, lenses, filters, bags, flashes, etc... doesn't mean everyone else has to :)

[tinkerme1]

Wolf: I think you are absolutely right. There are many reasons to NOT buy an SLR, especially for someone who prefers to go quickly, take some pictures, and have their memories forever. I have a G5 Canon, P&S, and love that camera with few exceptions. It takes fantastic pictures, equal almost in every way to some that I shoot with my SLR.

 

Holding and "feeling the feel" of a camera is essential. I would never advocate buying a camera through the internet until you actually hold it and try it out.

 

I was in the Photo/Camera store the other day, and a woman came in to look at the Nikon SLR's. She kept complaining that it was hard for her to hold. This was "without" the lens! I suggested she look at some of the P&S cameras and she said, "her husband wants her to use a SLR". She was clueless. I really felt sorry for her, since it wasn't her decision, but her husband's. Bottom line, use what feels comfortable for you and don't be swayed by others comments. Only "you" can judge what kind of camera you are willing to carry/use on your trips.

[tapia]

I'd just like to thank eveyone who posted responses about my camera choice.

 

Yesterday, I went into the city, held the cameras and decided on the Canon S3. I love it so far and am now going to start learning it.

 

My question is: On these "point and shoots" can I put something over the lense to shoot better in harsh light or through an airplane window? (I'm forgetting the 'technical' term at the moment...)

 

Thank you!

[kristing63]

Hello Again,

 

Well, I got the Canon S3 for Mother's Day and took it to my daughter's soccer game to try it out. The camera is fun and easy to use, but I have not been very happy with the quality of the photos. I knw I have a lot more to learn about using the camera, but after using it I checked out some of the reviews to see if other have had the same complaints as me. In the sports mode, which apparently shoots at a higher ISO (it was very cloudy yesterday, as well) the photos were all very grainy. Also, the color was very green and overly exaggerated. I later tried to lower the ISO and take some moving shots, but I have not printed those out yet.

 

I am seriously thinking of returning this camera. Does anyone have any advice on good point and shoot cameras with 12X zoom? If the photo quality is going to be about the same, I might as well save a good amount of money and buy the Sony DSCH1. Also, my daughter's $140.oo camera lets you edit right on the camera, and this camera does not allow for that. :(

[tinkerme1]

KristiniG63: Hi there. I'm sorry to hear that the photos you took weren't too impressive, however, "sports photography" is one of the more difficult techniques to really master. I would take the camera and do some stills and see if the camera is focussing correctly. Even with IS (image stabilization), if you move the camera too much, especially on a cloudy day, you may wind up getting a much grainier and out of focus photo. Also, are you focussing correctly. The S3 is a very powerful camera and can do just about anything, but you do need to "really know the camera". Are you still using all the pre-sets from the factory? Are you simply running on "P" (Program)? Did you try using the "M" (manual) settings? Even though the S3 is considered a P&S, you have some very diverse choices to make when taking a photo. Learning curves can be high, but I think if you give it a chance, you may find you really like it. This model gets many rave reviews.

[gohoos1]

Hello Again,

 

Well, I got the Canon S3 for Mother's Day and took it to my daughter's soccer game to try it out. The camera is fun and easy to use, but I have not been very happy with the quality of the photos. I knw I have a lot more to learn about using the camera, but after using it I checked out some of the reviews to see if other have had the same complaints as me. In the sports mode, which apparently shoots at a higher ISO (it was very cloudy yesterday, as well) the photos were all very grainy. Also, the color was very green and overly exaggerated. I later tried to lower the ISO and take some moving shots, but I have not printed those out yet.

 

You can probably tweak things so that the photos are more to your liking. First, I wouldn't use any of the "modes" other than the "P" program mode. This mode will let the camera automatically set the shutter and aperature but remember things like "flash" when you set them. ("Auto" modes tend to always have flash ON, which is why I avoid them.)

 

Higher ISO = faster shutter speed to "freeze" the action but also more noise. They are probably over-saturating the colors since customers all want their photos to turn out like what they see in the magazine adds. :) Using the "P" mode should take care of this, too.

 

If you have the Image stabilization mode on you shouldn't have to worry about a higer ISO.

 

 

I am seriously thinking of returning this camera. Does anyone have any advice on good point and shoot cameras with 12X zoom? If the photo quality is going to be about the same, I might as well save a good amount of money and buy the Sony DSCH1. Also, my daughter's $140.oo camera lets you edit right on the camera, and this camera does not allow for that. :(

 

There are few P&S cameras that have optical zoom at 12x or greater. (Forget about Digital zoom - it's completely worthless) I'd recommend you stick with it for a while and play with the settings.

 

If you want to compare other cameras, check out this site. To find equivalents to your camera I selected Image stabilazation = YES and Zoom Tele to 310+.

 

Also, most cameras won't do any editing on the camera. They can't do it well, so they don't do it at all. For editing on the pc, check out Picasa, a great free program (now owned by Google) that helps you organize and perform simple edits on your photos.

[MikeT718]

You might like to try the Olympus C 60 it is a very nice easy camera to use that has great pic's..You cna see some of them in the link in my Sig. down below..These are pic's that have not bee doctored by any photo software:)

 

I hope this helps