Jasp
Bongabilla
+171|6633|The Outer Circle
I want to get a new camera, but i really don't know what I'm looking for tbh. I love taking photos, but currently I'm restricted to using the one on my k800i which isn't the greatest!

A few problems of the ones i take now are the quality, focus, and night time (its all cloudy)

i have £150-200 to spend..

Any recommendations?

BTW, I joined the flickr group.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/11882/holteendersig2.jpghttps://forums.bf2s.com/img/avatars/11508.gif
CammRobb
Banned
+1,510|6101|Carnoustie MASSIF
Pm Kmar, Burnzz, or Sealxo, camera gurus.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6468

oh i'd say mcminty knows way more than i. plus i'm at a disadvantage when it comes to shopping over there. Jasper, don't let Cam fool ya, he has taken some excellent captures.

i would recommend - a dSLR, one that you could swap lenses with, about 6mp (mega pixel), and if you could an extra battery and extra card (the 'memory' for a digital camera).
there are some nice point and shoot cameras out there, but - if you intend to get into photography, you will want the ability to change the lense.

there are plenty of camera makers out there, but two are really dominating the digital market right now, Canon and Nikon. each has it's fans, but i will say they are improving each other through competition.

i'm glad to hear you joined the flickr group - there are some talented photographers, here at bf2s.

Last edited by burnzz (2009-12-03 04:05:13)

liquidat0r
wtf.
+2,223|6598|UK
I think it'll be a bit tricky to get a DSLR + lens for £150-£200.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6468

liquidat0r wrote:

I think it'll be a bit tricky to get a DSLR + lens for £150-£200.
i think you or Camm might be more help here then - i do know, @ 6mp you can get a print big enough to hang on the wall, if you'd like.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6781|Nårvei

I would save another £150 - 200 if I were you ... and like burnzz (his dinner) I recommend a Nikon or Canon, cant really go wrong with either of them ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia

burnzz wrote:

oh i'd say mcminty knows way more than i. plus i'm at a disadvantage when it comes to shopping over there. Jasper, don't let Cam fool ya, he has taken some excellent captures.

i would recommend - a dSLR, one that you could swap lenses with, about 6mp (mega pixel), and if you could an extra battery and extra card (the 'memory' for a digital camera).
there are some nice point and shoot cameras out there, but - if you intend to get into photography, you will want the ability to change the lense.

there are plenty of camera makers out there, but two are really dominating the digital market right now, Canon and Nikon. each has it's fans, but i will say they are improving each other through competition.

i'm glad to hear you joined the flickr group - there are some talented photographers, here at bf2s.
I don't think I'd be the best person for that.. cameras have changed a lot in the 2 years since I got my 40D While I agree that a DSLR would be a worthy investment, there are a few more questions that should be asked.

A few problems of the ones i take now are the quality, focus, and night time (its all cloudy)
What exactly did you mean with you said quality and focus were problems? With quality - are the images not sharp enough? Not enough detail? Too much grain/noise? And with focus - is it too slow to focus? Can't track a moving subject?

Also, how serious are you with photography? You joined the flickr group, which is a good start
13rin
Member
+977|6450
Get one with the highest optical zoom.  Digital zooms suck and make the picture well, digital.  Look at the stat on how long it takes a camera to get ready to take another picture (lower the time the better).  Also look at how long it takes for the camera to power up and be ready to take a photo (the lower the time the better).  If you are planning on staying with normal photo sizes a 6 megapixel camera will be plenty for the novice.  The bigger you want to make the photographs the more megapixels you'll want.  Anyway, that is my 2 cents and guys please correct me if I'm wrong.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
=NHB=Shadow
hi
+322|6336|California
Get a Canon Powershot, leave for the summer to China only to find out you lost/forgot the charger somewhere, only to buy a chinese universal adapter in Shanghai!
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6572|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:

I would save another £150 - 200 if I were you ... and like burnzz (his dinner) I recommend a Nikon or Canon, cant really go wrong with either of them ...
Point and shoots I'd definitely go with a Canon. I actually suggested a Nikon coolpix to my sister. Howver, when reviewing everything and I regretted it big time after looking over the results.


Canon and Nikon are very competitive in the DSLR range though.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Get one with the highest optical zoom.  Digital zooms suck and make the picture well, digital.  Look at the stat on how long it takes a camera to get ready to take another picture (lower the time the better).  Also look at how long it takes for the camera to power up and be ready to take a photo (the lower the time the better).  If you are planning on staying with normal photo sizes a 6 megapixel camera will be plenty for the novice.  The bigger you want to make the photographs the more megapixels you'll want.  Anyway, that is my 2 cents and guys please correct me if I'm wrong.
You are right with the optical zoom being better than digital, however a point to note is that anything over 3x optical zoom begins to suffer from optical distortion. Seeing those "hyperzoom" cameras and lenses, 12x or more, insights a massive /facepalm. The distortion manifests itself most noticeably with "barrel distortion" at the wide end of the lens. In a point and shoot camera, I'd want at most 6x zoom, and to pay more attention to the "equivalent focal length" which tells me more about what I'll actually be able to see.

Also, more megapixles aren't necessarily better. While 6 should be fine for a point and shoot camera, increasing the pixel density past a certain point will only result in increased amounts of noise and a reduced image quality. If the lens can't resolve enough detail, the sensor will just see that lack of detail as a fuzzy image. Interestingly, when Canon released the Powershot G11, they downgraded the number of megapixels from 14 to 10 in order to give better image quality and noise.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6572|132 and Bush

Low megapixles probably wont be a problem for any modern camera. Crop factor aside.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Wallpaper
+303|5965|The pool
If you can find it for cheap, a Panasonic DMC-TZ3 wouldnt be too bad. I have it. Great lens and zoom (Leica lens no distortion either) great screen, good battery life, and pretty good color. The only thing it lacks is manual controls.

All my pictures from page 3 all the way back to 8 on my Flickr were taken with my TZ3 /shamelessplug
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6127|Vancouver | Canada
Nikon D40.

I think those run for about $200-400 USD/CND.
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia

Kmarion wrote:

Low megapixles probably wont be a problem for any modern camera. Crop factor aside.
Yeah true. Back in the day, even the 4MP of the EOS 1D (classic) were enough to fill the front page of Sports Illustrated with a nice action shot. Of course, more megapixels will allow one to crop more while retaining an image large enough to print. That being said, most people upload photos to the web or show them to friends on their computer. In these instances, there is no real need for an image more than several thousand pixels high and wide.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6572|132 and Bush

I remember paying $700+ for an HP camera that was 5 mp. Actually wasn't too long ago in the grand scheme of things. I think almost every photo mag I read now says don't get hung up on mp. There is more important things to consider.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia

Wallpaper wrote:

If you can find it for cheap, a Panasonic DMC-TZ3 wouldnt be too bad. I have it. Great lens and zoom (Leica lens no distortion either) great screen, good battery life, and pretty good color. The only thing it lacks is manual controls.

All my pictures from page 3 all the way back to 8 on my Flickr were taken with my TZ3 /shamelessplug
I agree that Panasonic make some nice point and shoots, especially the more DSLR looking ones. And the Leica lenses are indeed However personally, a major stumbling block would be that lack of manual control. Manual is the best way to learn about correct exposure (if even the most frustrating ).

Nice photos btw, you did well with a point and shoot
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia
Not this one.

DefCon-17 wrote:

Nikon D40.

I think those run for about $200-400 USD/CND.
From the review at DPReview.com:
Perhaps the biggest negative on the D40 is that it doesn't have an internal focus drive motor and hence no mechanical focus drive pin, instead it only has CPU contacts which means it can only Auto Focus with AF-S and AF-I lenses (those with built-in focus motors). Indeed our 'standard' lens the Nikkor 50 mm F1.8D (and the F1.4D) are manual focus only on the D40.
Source - http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/

When you buy a DSLR, you buy into a lens system. I shoot Canon, and now that I've got nearly 4-5k in lenses, I'll be sticking to Canon cameras. Thus when looking at a DSLR, you need to also factor in the types and cost of the lenses that you may end up buying down the road. Both Canon and Nikon offer an incredibly well rounded line of lenses (which is why I would never suggest the new players such as Olympus or Sony - they just don't have the lens selection), so the distinction between them then comes down to the smaller features on each camera.

But yeah, not the D40. It's pointless to get one that can't drive the AF of the good lenses..
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6127|Vancouver | Canada
D90 then, if he wants to spend 3 times as much.
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia

DefCon-17 wrote:

D90 then, if he wants to spend 3 times as much.
Is that the next one in the range? Sorry, I don't really know Nikon stuff at all..


With all this stuff being said, he could still do well with a better Point and Shoot
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6127|Vancouver | Canada
Well the two choices used to be the D40 and D80, with the D40 being preferred for newer photographers since it was way cheaper and nearly the same...but now the D90 is out, and according to Mr. Rockwell, it completely 'obsoletes' the D80.

The Dxx's are the entry level ones though.

I just don't want him to do the same thing I did:
Spend $350 on a decent point-and-shoot, then realize a month later that a DSLR would be much better.
..although I love photography. If it's just a "once in awhile thing" for him, then he might as well get a cheaper one.

Last edited by DefCon-17 (2009-12-04 21:35:06)

mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6692|Sydney, Australia

DefCon-17 wrote:

Well the two choices used to be the D40 and D80, with the D40 being preferred for newer photographers since it was way cheaper and nearly the same...but now the D90 is out, and according to Mr. Rockwell, it completely 'obsoletes' the D80.

The Dxx's are the entry level ones though.

I just don't want him to do the same thing I did:
Spend $350 on a decent point-and-shoot, then realize a month later that a DSLR would be much better.
..although I love photography. If it's just a "once in awhile thing" for him, then he might as well get a cheaper one.
Ahhh ok. yeah, I agree with that. He just needs to.. reply
Jasp
Bongabilla
+171|6633|The Outer Circle
I should save up more and get a DSLR?

that sounds alright!

here's my flickr page, just a few phone pics at the mo.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/11882/holteendersig2.jpghttps://forums.bf2s.com/img/avatars/11508.gif
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6468

some nice captures, Jasper - the buss on the curb,
Amdi Peter
peut-être
+111|5519|paris
Get a Lomo.

A seariously awesome camera.
If you want digital though, then .. Erm, then I don't know which to get.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard