Looking for my next camera 

Dept. of Eventualities 

discuss

I have the Canon 5D. Not sure when we will be at the same event but if you ping me you can play with it for a day or so. Maybe Gnomedex? Of if you are in Palo Alto area before let me know. It's an awesome camera, especially if you use a fast 1.4 or 1.2 Lens. No flash required.

I have a few Flickr shots taken with it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kteare/

Keith Teare ceo/edgeio

discuss

I would really like to try one of the new Panasonic DMC-L1s which apparently shares some pieces with the Olympus E-Volt 330 (can't help but think revolt whenever I see that name).

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022801panasonicdmcl1handson.asp

Just wondering what software you use to manage your 30-40 thousand images files. I'm switching and trying to figure out how I'm going to organize all the image files I've accumulated over the years.

Rod

discuss

I had Canon point and shoots from the start. I decided to go the SLR route for the same reasons you mention. Since all of my old lenses from my film SLR's were obsolete, I could start from a blank slate. After looking at Nikon and Canon, I came down pretty hard on the Canon side.

Better battery life. Amazing lens lineup. Fewer artifacts from in-camera sharpening (to my eye). I bought the original Rebel planning to spend most of my money on lenses at first, ,knowing that the bodies would continue to get better and come down in price. I meant to get a new body by now but I haven't felt enough restrictions from the Rebel to do it yet. I'm having too much fun taking pictures to shop!

discuss

As you move up in quality you also move into the territory where the reality of photography intrudes. What matters most is the lens. Consider what pictures you usually take and decide whether you want other lenses. Megapixels mean much less. The Nikon CCD is a 10-bit CCD, rather than the 8-bit found in less expensive cameras. This makes much more difference to picture quality than you expect at first.

Another factor that will be a bother at first. The Nikon UI is totally oriented around through the viewfinder operation. You need to read the manual, learn the button positions, and practice a bit. This investment is not too high and the reward is real camera control while looking at the photo scene. One result of this decision is that the menu-oriented UI on the back LCD is unsuitable for taking pictures. They expect you to use the viewfinder for that. The back LCD is for non-picture operations like setting defaults. If you don't make the investment in reading and a few hours practice, you will be unhappy and miss the really good UI for the camera.

Finally, be prepared to operate in RAW mode. It makes a big difference once you get the software to take advantage of it. The default Nikon RAW mode gobbles RAM (about 6MB per picture) but captures both a RAW and a surprisingly good JPEG preview. RAW captures the full 10-bit CCD values, which permits re-adjustment of lighting color temperature and exposure corrections. JPEG compressed away the information needed to do this right. I dealt with this by getting a 1GB CF card for the camera. That holds about 150 shots.

discuss

Lots of Vancouver flickr people have all of these cameras and you will be happy with all of them. Can't recommend the EVOLT because nobody I know has one.

According to pro photographer Ken Rockwell, (kenrockwell.com/tech.htm), the Nikon interface is better because you can adjust important parameters like ISO and quality without taking your eyes off the viewfinder.

I have a Canon 20D and I love it but if I had read Ken's stuff first and didn't love flashless photography and fellow Bryght guy Kris Krug (flickr.com/photos/kk) didn't have a 20D and 5D I would have gone with the Nikon. The only advantage the 20D has over the D70 and D50 is ISO 3200 which I use a lot (I hate flash photography)

If you have the money go for the 5D in my opinion and get a 50MM 1.8 or 1.4 lens and a zoom lens and you will be set for many, many years (depending on how tough you are with the gear).

If you don't have the money or are tough on gear, get a Rebel XT and the 50MM 1.8 or 1.4 plus a zoom and then when you destroy :-) the Rebel in a couple of years, upgrade to the a full frame camera like the 5D which should be at least $US 500 cheaper in a year or so.

If you are at Gnomedex, you can also try my Canon 20D. '

discuss

I get by with Canon Powershot SD550, but then it's a pocket piece Use to shoot Mamaya TwinLens, Leica, Nikon, slew of Canon's but quit all the "semi-pro" stuff so damn long ago.

Besides, only post online or with iPhoto and, most of the time the resollution is just fine... not going for poster size.

That said Youngest daughter works with Canon Digital Rebel Does some semi-pro work Eldest daughter got new DigReb for Christmas and youngest offered to swap (fat chance)

Bottom line - you can't go wrong with Canon.

Bottom bottom line is the UI and feel If you are comfortable, you'll shoot, of not you won't

BTW - went with my current pocket because I sometimes need the viewfinder... both habit and sometimes light conditions with the LCD.

In any case Enjoy

Ciao Chip

discuss

discuss

I'm quite happy. My wife is happy with the 8800 (8mp, 35-350mm equiv with VR). Big plus for Nikon D70S over 8800 is selection of lens and ability to shoot over ISO 400.

I had a SB800 flash for the 8800 and a copy of nikon capture which cemented my stay with Nikon. Canon seemed a equal choice.

My next step is a D200 but i"m waiting for a price drop.

Also just got a vintage 50mm 1.2 adapted for us with a D70.

I'd stay Nikon because of your flash.

discuss

I love my Nikon D50. It's an absolute bargain at $620 (B&H Photo) with a Nikon 18-55mm lens. The D50 is a 6 megapixel camera by the way. I looked long and hard at the Canon Digital Rebel, but that camera just didn't feel good in my hands. The D50 may be Nikon's entry level SLR, but it's rock solid, takes amazing images, and handles like a professional SLR.

I've had no issues with the user interface. I learned it in a few days, and I've been shooting like crazy every since.

If you're looking at Canon, consider their new D30. It's at a completely different price point ($1500 with a lens), but it's a much better camera than the 350D, and it's half the price of the 5D, which is a serious pro camera with a full-frame sensor.

My dream camera is the Nikon D200, a really wonderful new SLR. You have to wait a few weeks to get one, but I'm reading and hearing great things about.

Good luck - I've been enjoying your blog and your appearances on Gillmor Gang for a long time!

Michael Rice

discuss

In the line of not-SLR high-end cameras, a friend recently bought a Panasonic Lumix camera, with the Leica 12x zoom lens. It also does a decent job of macro close-up work, and is identical to the Leica camera, except wrapped with rubber instead of leather, and $300 instead of $600 price.

It isn't an SLR, but it IS a great camera.

I just like Nikons, and Canon cameras just don't do it for me, even tho I confess they are great machines, I guess it's just tastes rather than objective facts. I do love Canon scanners and printers, tho, because they don't play funny ink games.

Get a Nikon, you won't be sorry!

discuss

discuss

Can't say enough good things about it.

discuss

My totally biased opinion would suggest the RebelXT/350D, since I have one and am completely happy with it. Although that being said, your photos with the Coolpix are wonderful and all of the cameras you mention come well recommended, so I don't think you'll go wrong with any of them really. Myself, I'm starting to wonder if Nikon maybe has got it right not going to the full frame. Eventually people will not be buying based on the lens (and associated focal lengths) that they already own.

So read up and test drive them all and see what you like best in terms of controls and features. Of course remember that what you're getting now for under $1000 wasn't even part of the $4000 camera's feature set a few years ago.

discuss

I got a Coolpix 4500 some years ago, after seeing a 990 a co-worker had. I took a bunch of photos with it, and loved the digital-ness of it, no chemicals, no negatives, no muss or fuss.

But there were a few things I hated about it. You could do manual setting of nearly everything, but it was agonizingly slow or difficult or complicated or backwards from how I expected it to work. And you could press the shutter button, but you never know when it was actualy going to take the exposure.

So I bought a D70s just a few weeks ago, and I spent much of the last weekend crawling around in my backyard taking pix of flowers. I got the standard kit lens on the body, on sale for $1100. Then I bought a 60mm Micro lens for close-up work. One of the many things I like about the 4500 (which I'm not getting rid of!) was the one-botton puch to be in Macro mode.

I'm a big rock collector, and into nature in all the other ways you can be, so getting VERY close to the subject is sometimes real important to me.

If you don't get the Nikon D70s, try a Panasonic with the Leica lens, my co-worker with the Coolpix just got one, and it's pretty good...but that shutter lag is still there. The D70s just shoots! And everything can be manual, and it's just like a traditional Nikon in that mode.

discuss

What did you end up buying?

discuss

From what I've seen so far, the Canon Digital Rebel appears to be a winner. It does an awful lot for the money, it's light, it's relatively easy to use, and it's being succeeded by something else, or we wouldn't be seeing such steep discounts and rebates.

Something else to consider is the Olympus eVolt 500. It's lighter even than the Rebel, and has an enormous range of options. And it's cheap. You can get the body and two lenses for something like $700 at some stores. Here's a review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page26.asp.

I recently shot a bunch of pictures with the Olympus, the Rebel and several different high-end Nikons and Canons. The results were, on most subjects, remarkably similar. Meaning: stuff like "highlights which can look 'hard clipped', the over-processed looking sharpening and noise at ISO 1600" are of relatively little concern.

Main thing: I've never met anybody who didn't like their Canon. Can't say the same for any other brand.

discuss