06-21-2007, 07:36 PM

hi

can anyone recommend a good not high end slr digital
that will bring better results than my compact?

regards

p.s. any guidance or advice appreciated

06-21-2007, 07:37 PM

Canon Degital Rebel XTi or 400D, depends on which country you live in. Its a top of the line low cost camera.

06-21-2007, 07:39 PM

hi

thanks i'm in the uk - but i'll check it out

regards

06-21-2007, 07:42 PM

So it will be a 400D for you.

06-22-2007, 01:37 AM

I'd recommend the 400D as well. Very good quality, good performance, EF lens compatible, and cheaper then the higher end "pro-sumer" models without giving up much quality. I have one and love it.

Welcome to the DSLR world. The DSLR photography, especially Canon cameras, be sure to check out www.photography-on-the.net It's like the M-F of the photography world: big community with nice, helpful people and many pros too.

06-22-2007, 02:25 AM

Hi Brendan

What camera are you using at the moment? What type of photography do you do? Do you print them and if so at what size? What budget are you working to?

Remember - it's not just a case of buying a better camera to get better results. You need to factor in buying lenses too - especially if you want to replicate the sort of range that a high end compact has, say, x10 for example.

A few things that may be useful once you do get a DSLR - especially for when you don't get the results you hoped for right away and get the "New camera blues" that most of us have had at some stage...

• Your photos straight out of the camera are probably going to look worse than they did straight out of your old camera. They may look dull and flat. Unless you specifically set up your Digital SLR to do things like increase saturation and sharpness in camera then they probably will do.
  
• A Digital SLR is designed to give you the best raw materials with which to work to arrive at the best end result that can be achieved. They may need more editing than your old files but the end result will be better once you have an efficient and effective post processing workflow in place. This is not rocket science - just some basics using image editing software that everyone else has had to and has managed to learn.
  
• If you wish to print straight from the camera and are not prepared to put in the time to learn how to process them yourself on the computer - Digital SLR is not a step I'd advocate. You CAN let the camera sharpen and colour manage so that they look like your old photos - but you would be better off saving a heap of cash and using your old camera!
  
• Due to the larger sensor size in relation to apertures available, you will find that depth of field and focusing are more critical. This can be a pro and a con depending on your viewpoint. You have much more control of depth of field with a DSLR - but you must acquire the knowledge to utilise it, benefit from it, and make it work for you rather than hoping to chance then saying "Oooh cool effect, how did that happen?"

As for individual models - there are many good entry level DSLRs out there. Don't be swayed by people's prejudice for certain brands. I'm a Nikon man - Canon sux LOL! {j/k} Go into a few camera shops and handle some. Be wary of sales assistants trying to sell you what is best for their commission that month! Once you have an idea of what's available - ask more questions here.

... and good luck!

Oy

06-22-2007, 03:39 AM

fleurya
and
oy

thank you for the great information

i'm using an olympus muj clamshell but the main problem beleive it
or not is getting out of focus shots (probably my fault) and white out when using a flash.

i really just want to try an slr because i want to, if you know what i mean
but am truly disappointed with my compact.

i will take my time before i buy though.

best regards

ps my daughter

06-22-2007, 03:57 AM

Hi Brendan

I'd recommend a high end bridge camera for you rather then leaping straight to a DSLR. You'll get great results and have the facility to learn the basics that will make the jump to DSLR in maybe a year's time a lot smoother. You'll also get a decent zoom range without the outlay for long lenses that a DSLR requires.

Something like the Fuji S9600 or Panasonic FZ50 maybe.

06-22-2007, 11:36 AM

hi oy

interesting info - thank you for all the detail you've given

i've looked at a bridge camera but do you reckon the
results would be much better than my compact olympus muj

regards

06-22-2007, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by brendan67

hi oy

interesting info - thank you for all the detail you've given

i've looked at a bridge camera but do you reckon the
results would be much better than my compact olympus muj

regards

Yes - absolutely!

But also remember - cameras don't take photographs. Photographers take photographs

I know people who get outstanding results with high end bridge cameras.

If you wish to go the DSLR route - and plan on shooting anything that requires a decent level of zoom - then I'd budget for £1000 for both body and a few lenses - anything less and you won't get bridge camera beating results.

06-25-2007, 03:12 PM

Brendan-
If you decide to go with a "bridge" camera (i call them mockSLR's), i would recommend picking up a used Sony F828. The optics are Carl Zeiss, and it gives you the same controls as an SLR without loosing the functionality of having an active LCD. It's a great camera with great glass. I shot a lot of great concerts and weddings on it's predecessor, the F717, and will be buying an F828 to suppliment my canon as soon as some funds are clear.

It sounds like you really have the photo bug- just know that getting into DSLRs, while being quite fun, is a bit like heroin. It's expensive, addictive, and you'll always be wanting more :-) no scars or chemical dependency, though.

06-26-2007, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by CackalackyMac

Brendan-
If you decide to go with a "bridge" camera (i call them mockSLR's), i would recommend picking up a used Sony F828. The optics are Carl Zeiss, and it gives you the same controls as an SLR without loosing the functionality of having an active LCD. It's a great camera with great glass. I shot a lot of great concerts and weddings on it's predecessor, the F717, and will be buying an F828 to suppliment my canon as soon as some funds are clear.

It sounds like you really have the photo bug- just know that getting into DSLRs, while being quite fun, is a bit like heroin. It's expensive, addictive, and you'll always be wanting more :-) no scars or chemical dependency, though.

And dying because of having too many DLSRs doesn't happen as often as dying from an H OD

07-04-2007, 02:09 PM

What are the main differences between a regular Digital camera and a DSLR?

07-04-2007, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by jmf421

What are the main differences between a regular Digital camera and a DSLR?

Well, what do you mean when you say "regular digital camera"?

I understand you're talking about a point and shoot, but a DSLR is also digital. It's basically just the way it operates.

SLR = Single Lens Reflex

per Wikipedia - a type of camera that uses a movable mirror placed between the lens and the film to project the image seen through the lens to a matte focusing screen.

There's film and there's digital. The main difference is how the image is recorded.

An SLR, digital or film has a mirror that projects the image viewed through the lens into the view finder. When the button used to take a picture is snapped, the mirror lifts and the shutter opens, either exposing film or a sensor that records the image based on lens settings and camera settings/film speed.

The difference between an SLR and a digital point and shoot is that the sensor on the P&S is exposed all the time. Digital SLR's generally have much better sensors than in the P&S cameras, allowing for better pictures. an SLR also has the ability to change lenses mounted to the front of a camera, giving you a very good way of getting any picture you want (although at a price, some lenses run in the tens of thousands. Not many, but some) and are generally more flexible with more options for a photographer.

They allow for every aspect of the camera and lens to be set including aperture, shutter speed and ISO. Most P&S cameras do not let you do this. There are some out there that do, but then again, you're stuck with one lens.

SLR's offer amazing flexibility. If you're interested in getting into photography and learning how to take amazing pictures, you should look into them. If you're just needing a camera to tote around and take a few snaps, a P&S is a good way to accomplish this without breaking the bank.