Digital SLR Cameras - Recommendations

[Low Level E30]

Teej - Can you recommend a good point 'n' shoot then? Coz my ol' Olympus is not cutting it.

[CorvallisBMW]

I have a Casio Exilim EX-S600 and I love it. It's very small, lightweight, takes fantastic quality photos and has manual adjustments if your feeling frisky. As a point-and-shoot I am very happy with it. It may have been discontinued by now for the S700 (7MP), and they also make a 10MP version. My only complaint is that you cannot shoot in RAW format, but that may not matter to you.

[Digitalwave]

Teej - Can you recommend a good point 'n' shoot then? Coz my ol' Olympus is not cutting it.

I helped my girlfriend shop for a camera last month, we settled on the Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-H9. After playing with it for a bit, its a really nice camera.

[Jean]

Rebel XT(i) + a couple of L series lenses FTW . Quality lenses + filters are expensive.

[Digitalwave]

What kind of advice is that? There isn't even a single L lens in his price range.

[Jean]

What kind of advice is that? There isn't even a single L lens in his price range.

I didn't see a price range in the first post ?? anyways, get a nikon or cannon and you won't go wrong with a huge selection of lenses to choose from down the road should you choose to make it into an expensive hobby lol

[StereoInstaller1]

Hey camera doodz, can you answer a question for me?

Pawnshops are always full of used lenses for 35mm SLRs.

Can these be used with a digital SLR of any brand?

My Panasonic DMC-FZ1 (FZ2 firmware) is just not cutting it anymore, especially with car audio shots.

Luke

[YAN-3]

old 35mm SLR lenses, (most of them) will fit right up to their newer bigger better DSLR bodies, however you will lose the AF (auto focus) feature along with some other things that new DSLR can do with fully digital lenses.

[Low Level E30]

old 35mm SLR lenses, (most of them) will fit right up to their newer bigger better DSLR bodies, however you will lose the AF (auto focus) feature along with some other things that new DSLR can do with fully digital lenses.

Why DO you lose AF w/ a 35mm SLR lens?

[StereoInstaller1]

old 35mm SLR lenses, (most of them) will fit right up to their newer bigger better DSLR bodies, however you will lose the AF (auto focus) feature along with some other things that new DSLR can do with fully digital lenses.

So for like "macro" stuff, or basically any tripod stuff I would be fine, but slow...right?

'Nother dumb question: can I plug the camera into a USB (firewire, whatever) port and see the pic as I am taking it on the PC? I wonder if my FZ1 will do that...or if there is some kind of remote trigger so I can take more effective tripod shots.

I dunno, I just want to be able to take excellent interior shots. I used to use some special shit film and a pair of flood lights with a shuttered spot...awesome shots then, but what a freaking hassle!

Luke

[Digitalwave]

Why DO you lose AF w/ a 35mm SLR lens?

Most old lenses don't have the built in electronics that new lenses are using. Canon has basically used two mounts in the last 5 years. FD, which was used into the early 90s, and the EOS which is current, for Canon's film AND digital bodies. FD lenses will not mount on EOS bodies without an adapter. An FD lens on an EOS body will be FULLY manual; manual focus, manual aperture, manual metering. The last 2 are the hardest part; if the lens doesn't have an aperture ring on the lens, as most lenses don't, you ALWAYS have the shoot at the largest aperture the lens has. And the camera body can't do TTL (through the lens) metering, so there is no automatic mode whatsoever, you always have to be fully manual, and it won't be able to tell you if your shot is going to be over and underexposed. You will either have to experiment and keep looking at your shots until they look right, or use a hand-held light meter.

This is all not to mention the fact that in the last few years the multi-coating on lenses has come a LONG way and the optics of the 70's-80's-90's are a far cry from today's lenses. Couple it with the fact that most lenses you see in pawn shops are no-name third party junk, and you are simply better off avoiding them.

There are people that use certain coveted lenses-of-years-past, but most are advanced users and many of those lenses are much more than even new lenses, like the Canon 50mm f/1.0 MkI, usually sells for $2,500 or so.

Luke, as far as good interior shots, you'll need a very good wide angle lens. You could get a prime lens (doesn't zoom) like the Canon 15mm for $400 or so, or a wide angle zoom like the Canon 10-22 or Sigma 12-24mm for about $550. It's important to set a custom white balance for the mixed light that is usually inside, and stopping down the aperture for a large depth of field. A good tripod is necessary (and good tripods START at $250).

Canon's EOS Utility allows you to trigger the camera from a laptop, and capture the image to the PC, but its slow and I don't know why'd you want to do that unless you are running a portrait studio... and I don't think that's what you are going for.

[Low Level E30]

Alright then - what is a good contemporary lens to start with for a DSLR?

It would be nice to have some zoom... but not 100% necessary.

[Digitalwave]

Well, it really depends on what you think you are going to be using the lens primarily as. To be completely honest, it can be smart to just start with the kit 18-55mm lens because once you use it for a bit you will realize if you want to upgrade your wide angle zoom to a better one (like the Canon 17-55 IS for $1,200, the Sigma 18-50 EX for $500, etc.) or if you want to pick up a telephoto lens (like the Canon 70-200 L for $550, Sigma 70-200 EX for $900, I have the Sigma) etc. etc. On the other hand, I replaced my kit lens 2 weeks after I bought my camera because its a plastic piece of junk, and I couldn't stand using it.

[Jean]

I agree, the 18-55 is a good starter lens. From then you might want to try 50mm prime f/1.4 (or the cheaper f/1.8 and just replace it when it breaks)

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

The next lens would then be up to you, do you want a wide or zoom ? The 7-200L f/2.8 is a nice zoom lens but it's expensive, another version is the F4 version.

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/70-200

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/70-200is.shtml

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06082414canon70-200f4lens.asp

IS lenses help you take sharper pictures w/o a mono/tripod.
A good replacement for the kit lens is something like 28-70 or the 24-70

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/28-70

http://www.fredmiranda.com/24-70/

I suggest you go to a local dealer and try different bodys and lenses foryourself, they will let you do that. You could probably ask them if they rent the lenses out so you could that way play with different lenses w/o shelling out big bucks for them right away.

my 2 cents.

[CorvallisBMW]

like the Canon 70-200 L for $550, Sigma 70-200 EX for $900, I have the Sigma

I am seriously looking at getting the 70-200 F/4 L with a 1.4X teleconverter. Do you recommend the Sigma over the L? why?