1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Equipment Buying a DSLR

Discussion in 'Photography, Art & Design' started by TNash, 6 Jun 2007.

  1. x06jsp

    x06jsp da ginger monkey!!!!

    Joined:
    2 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    1,651
    Likes Received:
    1
    wot its comfortable and you can do everything with it up to your face you just need to get used to it for more than 5 mins!
     
  2. BUFF

    BUFF What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    912
    Likes Received:
    1
    from an ergonomics pov you should try a KM Dynax 7D :D, unfortunately 6Mp is passe these days :(
    Ah well, new body due out shortly.
     
  3. Nath

    Nath Your appeal has already been filed.

    Joined:
    28 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    1
    If you have tiny hands. Fod's got a point, the 30D etc. and most Nikon cameras have Canon's low-end line completely beaten on ergonomics. Of course it's possible to get used to anything, but those cameras are just nicer to use than the 400D.
     
  4. Jumeira_Johnny

    Jumeira_Johnny 16032 - High plains drifter

    Joined:
    13 Nov 2004
    Posts:
    3,708
    Likes Received:
    144
    QFT. And the flash system is miles ahead of Canon. CLS rawks.
     
  5. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    202
    I really like Canon. Ever since I bought my first SLR - an AE1 - those many years ago, I've always liked Canon's camera system. However, if you've settled on the Nikon D80 vs the Canon 400D, my vote would go to Nikon. As others have said, the 400D is not really meant to compete with the D80. While they have about the same megapixel count, their features set them apart.

    If you're considering a D80, then your budget might also include the Canon 30D, which is a much closer competitor to the D80. For a very high level glance at the 3 cameras side-by-side, click here. The 30D has a fewer megapixels, but in reality once you get above 5 or 6 then there's no real difference when printing up to 8x10. If you want to print large (i.e. 16x20 or more), then you might prefer the extra resolution from the D80.

    If you think you might shoot more action-type photos, then the 30D's higher maximum shutter (1/8000 sec), and higher frame rate (5 fps) might appeal to you more.

    A decent external flash can cost quite a bit, so you may put off buying one for a while. Since all of the cameras mentioned above come with a built in, pop-up style flash, you'll be ok for the time being. A lot of professionals will bemoan the pop-up flash, but if used well the results won't be as bad as you think. Plus, you can get a light diffuser made for pop-up flashes, and they don't cost very much.

    As far as lenses, both Nikon and Canon offer a host of lenses for pretty much any situation you might encounter. Someone mentioned a 10-20mm lens for portraits, but I would avoid going that wide. Even with the "crop factor," you're looking at 20-35mm on an effective 35mm camera body. Perspective is a function of the distance of the camera to the subject. Since 20-35mm is pretty wide, you'll have to move in close to get good portraits. This may result in unpleasant exaggerations in the subject's features.

    For portraits, I'd recommend something in the 80mm range. With a crop factor of 1.6 (for Canon), a 50mm lens will get you pretty darn close. As mentioned above, Canon offer a terrific lens in the 50mm, f/1.4 f/1.8 (edit: oops) (often dubbed the "Nifty Fifty"). This was one of the first lenses I purchased, and I absolutley love the image quality. It's my preferred lense for portraits.

    For landscapes, you can run the whole gamut of lenses. Wide angle lenses are great for capturing majestic views of mountains with sweeping clouds. Medium length lenses make for great, neutral shots of landscape features. Plus, the minimal barrel distortion lends itself to stitching several shots into a natural-looking panoramic. Telephoto lenses can help get close to a subject that's far in the distance, like a rocky outcrop across the lake, that would be otherwise inaccessable.

    Edit: A lot of people don't like the 18-55mm kit lens that comes with the 400D. Maybe my eyes just aren't what they used to be, but I've taken some wonderful photos with it. In the hands of an "advanced amateur," you may be hard pressed to see the difference between the kit lens and a $1500 prime. After minor post prosessing, the image from the kit lens won't be that bad at all.

    Go to a camera store and try out the 3 cameras above (the 400D, the 30D, and the D80). Get a feel for each one. Everyone's hands are different (I prefer the feel of a Canon, for example), and you may find that none of them is particularly comfortable. Check out the image samples for each camer over at DPReview.com to get an idea of which cameras offer the best quality image at given ISO/shutter speed/f-stop values.

    This will be an investment. Once you start buying lenses and accessories, you may find yourself locked into one brand or another. Some people are reluctant to switch brands due to the expense of replacing all their gear.

    Hopefully this information helps. Good luck and happy shooting.

    -monkey
     
    Last edited: 7 Jun 2007
  6. Fod

    Fod what is the cheesecake?

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    5,802
    Likes Received:
    133
    you know? i thought the same :D

    then i bought some other lenses. going back over my past photos the other day during a clean-up, i can just see visually when i bought my new lens. i don't need to check the date, it's like someone just cleaned the windows.

    the 18-55mm isn't toooooooo bad. you get a very good idea of what SLR photography is all about with it, but the second you get something slightly better, it's served its purpose and can be disposed of respectfully :)

    (oh and, for the record, i didn't recommend a 30d - i recommended a used 20D.)
     
    Last edited: 7 Jun 2007
  7. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,731
    Likes Received:
    2,210
    Not anymore. Nikon solved the noise problems on all recent dSLRs.
     
  8. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    202
    True enough. The differences between the 20D and 30D are very subtle. So much so, in fact, that many people called the 30D a "20D mkII."

    They boast the same imager and processor; in fact, the 30D is so close to he 20D that DPReview recycled much of their 20D review for the 30D. The 30D does have a larger LCD screen. While this may lead to decreased battery time, I've never used my camera long enough to completely drain the battery. At any rate, you should always carry a charged, spare battery with you, just in case. The 30D also offers spot metering, a larger buffer for continuous shooting, and 1/3 ISO steps (compared to the 20D's whole step).

    Are those features worth the price increase? It's hard to say without considering the type of shooting you normally do. I like the 30D, and I'm planning to get one soon.

    If those features aren't much of a concern, then the 20D is a wonderful camera, and can be found for a very modest price!

    -monkey
     
  9. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    202
    They sure have. If you look at some of the examples over here, you can clearly see that the D80 handles low light very well. Some of the shots taken at ISO 1600 and 3200 have a pretty even, subtle noise pattern.

    Page 18 of the D80 review has a side-by-side comparison of the noise level at several ISO settings, for the D80, the 400D, and the sony DSLR-A100. In this test, the noise levels were pretty even up through ISO 400 (the range in which most users shoot). Past that, the A100 fell off pretty quickly, and the 400D maintained a pretty close second. I rarely need to shoot higher than 400, so that's the range I'm most interested in. Your mileage may vary.

    Also keep in mind that noise level can also be influenced by the image processing software. As seen here, the choice of RAW conversion software can heve an effect on the visible grain in a given image.

    -monkey
     
  10. scq

    scq What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    4 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    879
    Likes Received:
    6
    I never liked Nikon's ergonomics - or even the 30D that much - probably because I'm used to the 350D, and I have slightly smaller hands.

    I'm still an advocate of decide on a system, then buy the camera. D80 may look a little better now, or 30D might look a little better, but it won't matter in the long run.

    As for the kit lense, I didn't like mine either. It's rarely ever on my camera, and I hate using it. It's good to start with, but it was never too satisfying, producing soft photos riddled with CA, all packed in with a restrictive aperture.

    If you have some money left over, my first accessory would be a 50mm F/1.8 (it's not as good as the 1.4, but it's a lot cheaper, and offers sharp images). I would also recommend an add-on flash, since the popup usually gives that snapshot, redeye, washed out face effect.
     
  11. BUFF

    BUFF What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    912
    Likes Received:
    1
    the A100 uses the same Sony sensor as the D80 but the camera is set up differently - it's a balancing act betweeen detail & noise & the Sony veers more towards the detail end at the expense of being noiser at higher ISOs.
    Choose which suits your needs/style better but imo Canon still have the edge in lower noise/high ISO. Sony are rumoured to have a CMOS sensor coming though so we'll see if it's got similar performance to the Canon CMOS.
     
  12. TNash

    TNash What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2007
    Posts:
    259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Really? They use the same sensor? So does that mean that if I were to shoot RAW that the noise would be the same at higher ISO, or is that more than a function of the sensor?
     
  13. Fod

    Fod what is the cheesecake?

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    5,802
    Likes Received:
    133
    AFAIK, that is correct.
     
  14. BUFF

    BUFF What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    912
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, Sony supplies the sensors for lots of other camera makers.
    No, the noise would be different due to the different camera electronics, different RAW format (Sony v Nikon) etc.
    As I said above there is a balancing act between optimising for detail or for noise - if you opt for more detail you get more noise at higher ISO & if you optimise for lower noise at higher ISO you lose a bit of detail (it's already been proven that some of the Minolta/KM/Sony lenses can out resolve the 10.2Mp sensor so there's even more detail available to be captured & that's probably true of the other mfrs too). Nikon & Sony obviously have different views on where that balance should lie using current technology.
     
  15. Jumeira_Johnny

    Jumeira_Johnny 16032 - High plains drifter

    Joined:
    13 Nov 2004
    Posts:
    3,708
    Likes Received:
    144
    I seem to make these points a lot, so I'll try and keep it brief and to the point:

    1. Compare any properly exposed shot at ISO 1600 in digital to film and you'll see a marked improvement.

    2. ISO noise is highly dependent on good exposure. I regularly shoot at 400-800 and have never heard a complaint about picture quality.

    3. Stop viewing images on screen at 100%. Look instead at finished prints. ISO noise is rarely a problem when the shot isn't under exposed. I have concert shots at ISO 3200 that look fine printed at 4x6, even 5x7; which is what 80% of the world prints at.

    I think we all expect way to much from low light digital, having forgotten what low light film looks like. We really do have it 100 times better. But keep your expectaions within reality. ISO 1600+ will have grain no matter what you do, even the pro Canon bodies. It's how you use that, and how you expose for it that makes it a non issue. Or start using off camera flashes to get your ISO back down. These days Vivitar flashes are super cheap and so are ebay triggers.

    Oh, and the Nikon D80 is a magnitude better then the 350D/400D. The CLS commander of the built in flash alone sets it apart. And I find the build quailty of the D80 slightly better then the 20D/30D. I like the skin tones of the 20D better then the D80. I find the ISO perfomance of the 20D even with that of the D80. The D40x on the other hand is a great fun camera, with GREAT jpg performance. But it's just a bit to small.

    My 2 cents, buy the D80 body and a nice lens. By the time you out grow it, technology will be at least a generation ahead, if not two.

    *I have actualy used the D40x, D80, and D200. And I regulary swap my D200 with a co-workers 20D, so I have had some hands on with that as well.
     
Tags:

Share This Page