new digital slr

[wahoo]

I think I am going to take the plung. I see the Canon XTi with 2 lenses and the 2 gig card for $750 seems like a good deal. Thanks for all the help. Happy new year

[Phil Magistro]

Best of luck with the camera.  Post some photos!

[wahoo]

I went to order and found out I need a battery and charger. Any suggestions on that? Sounds like you can get a 1hr or 2. Is that the same battery and charger that I have with my power shot S50?

[Dave N./TX]

Sounds like you went to one of those places that advertize a real low price and then charge you for each part - that normally comes with the camera. They bust up the camera package and sell it by parts. I run from any place that sells by parts. I have good luck with these places on line:

 www.buydig.com   www.adorama.com  and  www.ritzcamera.com

I just got a Nikon AF 18-200 VR lens from Ritz and really love it. I will most likely get rid of my 70-210 and 35-70 Nikon AF lens. With this one
I never have to change lens and it is REALLY clear!!

Dave N/TX

[wahoo]

I am looking at best price cameras and they seem to have nice packages.I see they have the Canon 70-300mm lense and I wonder is that a lense that you need a tripod to use, if so I would look at the 200mm.

[Phil Magistro]

A rule of thumb is to use a tripod anytime you shoot slower than the lens focal length.  So if you use a 200mm lens and cannot shoot at 1/250 sec. or higher you should use a tripod.  Of course there are exceptions to this rule including how steady you can hand hold, if the lens has image stabilization, etc.  But for the most part you'll probably find a tripod a necessity for any lens 200mm or longer.

[Weasel]

I'll "ditto" Phil's comments above. I'd pass on the cheap Canon 75-300mm IS (Image Stabilization) lens. It's junk at the 300mm end. (I shoot Canon).

The best rule of thumb is to scrimp on the camera body and buy the best lens you can possibly afford. The best camera out there won't make an unsharp lens take sharp photos.

Here's a great site for looking at subjective lens tests:  http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

I find it a good guideline for buying lenses based on sharpness and quality.

Jerry

[wahoo]

Thanks I didn't think this was going to be so tuff. That website is great. There just seems to be so much to know it's crazy.I see there is alot of companies offering packages with different lenses and flash cards and this and that and then figure I would buy just the body and shop for lenses and well you know I think I am just going crazy. Oh well I think I'll just go shoot for awhile. Thanks

[Phil Magistro]

In some respects it can be intimidating.  It takes some homework to make sure your money is well spent.  I have to admit that all my lenses are the same brand as my camera but there is absolutely nothing wrong (and in many cases it makes good sense) to consider third-party lenses like Tokina and others.  Someday I will buy a 12-24mm lens.  I have a hard time justifying spending over $1000 for the Nikon version when I will only use the lens a small percent of the time.  The Tokina 12-24 is about $450 and is nearly the equal (some think even better) of the Nikon.

I think it makes good sense to write down exactly where you want to spend your time with photography.  If your goal is to photograph mostly wildlife, you'll eventually end up with a longer (300mm or more) lens that is relatively fast (f4).  Anything else will leave you without enough light at the best times of the day.   Ideally you'd probably like a 2.8 lens but financially that's a big bite.  

Canon makes a 300mm f4 that you can buy new for $1139 or used for $850.  While you may not be able to afford that lens now you'll likely spend more than that by buying lower-priced lenses and trading up until you finally end up with the right lens.

If you want to do landscapes you will need a different primary lens (or two).  If you want to do close-ups you'll need a different lens. And on, and on.

If you know what type of photography you want to get started with I'm sure there are folks here that can give you excellent suggestions on Canon lenses.  You can also visit KEH Camera Brokers (KEH.com) where you can find great deals on used lenses.

[Weasel]

The Canon 300mm f4 is an IS lens and is very sharp. If you add a 1.4x teleconverter you have a 420mm f5.6. With the crop facter of the camera body (1.6), you essentially have the 35mm equivalent of a 672mm Lens!

The 70-200mm f4 L is one of Canon's sharpest zooms. It's small, and many pros use it.

Like I mentioned earlier, the Tamron 28-75mm Di is very sharp.

Beware of the lenses that come in "kits". They are very cheap and commonly referred to as "Coke bottles" due to the lack of sharpness.

Phil, the Tokina 12-24mm is excellent. I'm kinda wishing I'd gone with the Sigma now, as it focuses much closer.

Jerry

[Steve Kendrot]

I took the same plunge a little over a year ago. Bought a used Canon 10D with a 100-400 F4.5/5.6 IS zoom. Followed up with a Canon 24-105 (about $225) for an everyday lens (which I'm not all that happy with) and then a Tamron 10-18mm Superwide (about $600)which I have had a lot of fun with.

If you are looking to just "document" your outdoor experiences, I would recommend a high end point and shoot. If you want to develop photography as an art and a craft, then go with the DSLR. I don't regret my decision as I intend to try to make something out of this "hobby". However, I wasn't prepared for all the money and more importantly time involved with processing digital images.

If you invest that much money, your going to want to get good... and then you will NEED a tripod, and not a cheap one either (>=$250). Then you will need more memory ($100)and and back up batteries (>=$50)and a system for storing the thousands of images ($$$) and another sytem to back them all up (>=$200) and then a computer program to categorize and process the images  ($450 for photoshop) and then you will want to get a flash (>=$250) and a bag you can carry it all in ($100) and ...well you get the picture. Before you know it, your $800 camerqa has cost you $3000 and you still don't have all the stuff you really need, or want.

I'm not saying its not worth it. I went to a wildlife photography exhibit at the Smithsonian over Christmas and it was very inspiring. I want to get that good. But...before you take the plunge, you should really think about why you want to get into it. If you aren't going to really take full advantage of everything a DSLR has to offer, I honestly think you'd be better off with a high end point and shoot. They take very nice images with a much shallower learning curve and not much need for post processing. The price difference isn't $500 for the P&S vs $900 for the DSLR. Its $500 vs thousands if you plan on owning more than one very basic lens.

Not trying to be pessimistic. Just a little realism to temper your enthusiasm as you try to make a decision that I deliberated for months before jumping in. Good luck with whatever you do.

[Weasel]

That's great advice, Steve! You make some excellent points.  The other thing to consider (especially if you hunt out west where you may have to cover a lot of ground) is the weight and bulk in your pack.

There's some excellent 8 to 10 MP compacts with 10-12x  optical zooms.  Some with IS.

I just received my Canon Powershot A710 7.1 MP compact today. Very small, lightweight, 6x zoom with optical IS, and has manual controls and an actual viewfinder should I want to use them. Exposure compensation in aperture priority mode is a huge plus. Runs on two AA batteries, another plus. All for $325. Takes movies, too.

I hope to put it through some testing this weekend, but fully expect it to replace my DSLR in my hunting pack. It conveniently fits in my pack's belt pocket, so I'll use it more than I normally would.

Jerry

[Jay Campbell, JD]

My wife Karen carries a 6 meg Nikon internal zoom pocket camera, while I carry a Nikon D 200.  Then it gets interesting, making lens choices.  I have the Nikon 17-55, 28-80, 70-200 Silent wave f 2.8 lenses, but I find myself carrying the 18-200 Vibration Reduction Nikon 3.5-5.6 all the time.  It’s a nice, sharp lens.  I usually add the Nikon 300mm f 2.8 Silent Wave II and Nikon 2x doubler, but all that equipment means a special vest with lens and camera pockets, or my waterproof dry bag backback camera bag.  Everything of benefit has a trade-off, as with all things in life.

And, I will drop my gear to make a stalk, as happened for the recent TBM article with a picture of me and a pig, taken by Karen with her pocket camera.  Not the image I wanted, but the only one we had.  When she does the stalking, I have more time to set up.  Was able to get a real nice shot of her for an upcoming Bowhunter piece this way, using a 400mm Nikon f3.5 on a manfrotto monopod.  Only one snap though – she was moving too fast, and not paying enough attention to my picture taking needs.  She got the pig, though.  :-)

One thing I know – I will never have the dedication to haul my Nikon 600mm f4 around.  It requires a real tripod and gimbaled head.  It will stay in the house or get sold.  As I try to figure what we’ll take to Australia this summer while we both hunt Water Buffalo, its coming down to the 18-200 and the 300, a D-70 backup and the D-200.  Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if some good pictures are with the pocket camera. In some conditions, I can’t tell the difference when we take identical shots.  -  Jay Campbell, JD

[JL]

A lot of good advice here. I went the D-SLR route (Canon XT) and was pretty pleased with the kit lens. Then I started looking at "real" lens', Canon external speed lights, ect. Man oh man, the $$$ can add up very quickly just in quality lens'. You can pick your poison. Both Canon and Nikon are the front runners in the D-SLR world. Not unlike other manufacture's, they offer both consumer and pro quality equipment.

I have been using Sony camera's for some time and I solt off my XT and bought a DSC-R1. It is a fixed lens camera with a 10.3 CMOS sensor. The lens range from 24 to 120mm and really is tack sharp. Like other's said, it's a trade off. I normally throw a 5 MB Canon S-50 in my pack when I head out. Nice compact, light point and shoot camera. team it up with a small folding tripod and your set. I had a dated Vivitar flash I use on my Sony right now. it makes a lot of light but I plan on getting the maching speed light for the R1. I picked up the R1 for $525 with a 1GB card included.

 

JL

[wahoo]

you guys better sit down.I ordered a Canon XTi today.Thank you very much for all your help.I beleive I will enjoy this a bunch.Thanks to all Mike

[Phil Magistro]

Congratulations!!  I hope you have years and years of enjoyment from that camera. You'll have to post some pics when you're up and running.

[wahoo]

I'm shooting pics like crazy.My wife hates it ,they are all of her.This is going to be big fun. Need to buy a case any suggestions? Thanks to all.

[Phil Magistro]

Camera bags are a very personal thing.  I've owned quite a few bags and recently started thinning out the ones I don't use.  LowePro and Tamrac are two of the better known brands.  Both are excellent quality.  I've been using Think Tank products for some time now and love them.  They're a bit pricey but the quality and design are worth the cost.

You'll have to decide how you'll be using your camera and under what conditions.  Then you can decide if you want a belt system, a backpack or a shoulder bag, then find the right one for you.  You may likely find that you'll have a couple of bags - a small one for family time, parties, get-togethers....and a larger, easy to carry one for taking your stuff out in the field.

One word of caution - get a bag with more room than you need today.  That way you won't have to replace it when you buy another lens or two, a flash, etc.

[Moooseran]

I’ve been reading some of the ideas and questions that members have written asked and commented on. I’ve been in photography since 1961 and have had a lot of on hands experience with equipment.

My personal choices have been Canon SLR’s and Leica M cameras.

Digital is not for everyone, it has its place where a quick photo is needed as a time saver.

Quality is in the Lens, Film, and the paper that the images are printed on.  To days point & shoot  and even some of the more expensive cameras  may not have quality glass.  On other point  about lenses,  most of to days lenses are slow unless your  willing to pay big money.

Film cameras give much better quality images always. Example on a 35mm frame you can crop out 1/3 of the images and from that 1/3 still produce 16x20 prints with excellent results.  

What I’ve been doing for the last few years is scan my negatives  into my computer and the make my changes and load the finished images back into my card and then print them.

Yes I do own an SLR which I use for all my City photos.  I work for the city I live in and when called upon to shoot photos, time is a factor.  I bought canon 20D and two lenses, 18-85 and 75-300 both with IS. When time isn’t a factor then I rely on my Canons and Leicas.

Today’s digital cameras are being replaced by newer models way to fast.  New models with more bells and whistles then the average person really needs… The user manuals have become thicker and by the time you’ve read them and try to use the information, your photo op is gone.  

In 1981 I bought 3 Canon F-1 n‘s and over the years have purchased 14 lens which are my working tools. In my Leicas I use 4 lenses.  Just as a note, my Canon F-1’s are 26 years old and still ticking.

What I have said here may not sit well with some, but I wanted to express some of my thoughts on the subject.  I type with two fingers and forget what I want say before I can type it out.  

My phone number is 1-219-659-1327 and my email address is mooseran@sbcglobal.net  I’ll be glad to answer questions.

Moose  (aka Milan V. Rancich)

[Str8Arrow]

Originally posted by wahoo:
Whats the best for $1000 or less. I was thinking of buying a new camera and would like a slr type.Thanks. I also have old lenses that fit a pentax.Would or could they work on a new digi?

I'm a Pentax user and can give you some good reasons to choose them. First, you can use all old Pentax lenses with their new DSLRs. There is some great old Pentax glass out there and it can still take some very nice photos.

More importantly, you can get a K10D that has weather sealing. It also has in-body shake reduction, that works on all their lenses! That is an incredible value by itself. With the weather sealing, you can safely use you camera in many outdoor weather conditions that you wouldn't dare with most other cameras.

Add in the fact that the features on this camera are unheard of on any camera even remotely close in price (less than $1000 with kit lens), and you can see why it's not a bad idea to start out using your old Pentax lenses and add new ones as you want.

When I got my new Pentax DSLR, I was able to use the five old lenses I had and even bought a few old manual lenses off **** for less than $50 each! They still take great photos, and since I grew up using manual SLRs, manual focusing is second nature to me.