Help buying a digital SLR | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 330 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613461
Today 4
Topics 127500
  
 
Messageboard index
Help buying a digital SLR
 

offline clark672010 on 2010-11-25 06:39 [#02399223]
Points: 398 Status: Lurker



Hi guys, just wondering if anyone has any experience with
DSLR cameras. Specifically I'm trying to decide between the
Canon and the Nikon as my budget is pretty tight I'm going
to have to buy it used, probably from ebay. The Cannon has a
higher resolution and a few more fancy features, but the
Nikon has a better quality lens / optics which I feel is
more important. My friend suggest me to go with this Canon
SX130is Digital Camera on black friday .
http://tinyurl.com/2vapocr
I don't know about it for sure. What ya think?
Any other advice from any photographers out there?


 

offline isnieZot from pooptown (Belgium) on 2010-11-25 10:29 [#02399233]
Points: 4949 Status: Lurker



are you real or are you a bot. that's my question.

and do you know what this forum is about?


 

offline jnasato from 777gogogo (Japan) on 2010-11-25 11:43 [#02399235]
Points: 3393 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Clark- hurry! TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN!!!


 

offline penexpers from Toronto (Canada) on 2010-11-25 15:24 [#02399251]
Points: 4030 Status: Regular | Followup to isnieZot: #02399233



Leave him alone, he's 2010's best member.


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-11-26 01:12 [#02399324]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



If you were for real I would suggest something. But you are
not real so you can go with the one is not as good as far as
I am concerned. I actually feel a bit bad having wasted my
time posting even this much. And that last sentence too.
DOH!


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-11-26 01:47 [#02399334]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



the bodies will be pretty equivalent
find out which specific lenses you need and then look at
what both companies have to offer and the strengths
(iq/price) for each.

if you're shooting telephoto primarily, then i think that
answers the body questions


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-11-26 01:51 [#02399336]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Followup to elusive: #02399334 | Show recordbag



are you saying Nikon and Canon sensors are the same?


 

offline hedphukkerr from mathbotton (United States) on 2010-11-26 23:34 [#02399408]
Points: 8833 Status: Regular



bot or not, go with the canon, nikons are fucking toys.


 

offline larn from PLANET E (United Kingdom) on 2010-11-27 00:00 [#02399410]
Points: 5473 Status: Regular | Followup to clark672010: #02399223 | Show recordbag



maybe there are robots who can opperate cameras and even
enquire advice on which to buy, but it makes me wonder why
an advanced robot would need our help to compare
specifications since he himself probably has all of this
information stored in a positronic brain...

But then why would a robot need to take pictures unless it
had a specific purpose or program which required it to carry
out such a task?, if it was recriational or artistic then we
are talking about an extremely sophisticated robot


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-11-27 00:59 [#02399415]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



tractern, yes. for the greater part unless the user has
extreme design requirements...the bodies can be considered
about even. small pros/cons upon each (within the same
tier/price level) --- but what it really comes down to is
glass.

DR, AF speed, ISO performance et al is pretty damn 'good
enough' across canon and nikon current platforms. what the
OP needs to ask himself is what are his design requirements
-- what will he/she be shooting, and then work from there
... except in extreme cases where the slightest bit of
higher AF performance may mean the difference, then body is
the trump... but for most part, find out what glass you
would like to purchase, and then base your body decision on
that.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-11-27 01:00 [#02399416]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



larn,
can you cite which dictionary to reference the definition of
'robot' you are using in the case of your post?


 

offline Moot from Antarctica on 2010-11-27 12:30 [#02399429]
Points: 169 Status: Lurker



http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/guides/2010/11/holiday-camer
a-shopping-picking-the-perfect-point-and-shoot.ars


 

offline taking_the_piz on 2010-11-27 13:43 [#02399430]
Points: 795 Status: Lurker



mystery clark. are you a bot or not?

i'm voting for cs student doing a project on chatbots who
likes to use his random accounts for some other stuff as
well. or worse, a marketing student.


 

offline Moot from Antarctica on 2010-11-27 15:20 [#02399432]
Points: 169 Status: Lurker



LAZY_TITLE


 

offline anirog on 2010-11-27 21:50 [#02399464]
Points: 762 Status: Regular



If you enjoy advertisements grab a copy of this months
popular photography which features a long review of the
Olympus E-5.

In addition I spoke with a pushy salesman at national camera
exchange and video today and he recommended a D90 body and a
Tamron 10-24 lens.



 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-11-28 00:59 [#02399474]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Followup to elusive: #02399415 | Show recordbag



Are you the person who I had a discussion with about image
'noise' and stuff- remember, when I started that thread
about photography?

If so, what is the deal? Did you once become
pro-photographer and it didn't work out, so now you are
bitter about it, or what?


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-11-28 01:06 [#02399475]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



I would recommend Nikon D80 body with the kit lens that
comes with it.

Canon DSLR=poo. Sensors are bad and the kit lenses are shit.
They are overpriced, too.

If you like superficial features to play with, get Canon. If
you want to take it more seriously, buy a Nikon D80. This is
a professional camera. Also slightly cheaper and much better
than entry-level Nikon DSLRs.


 

offline Moot from Antarctica on 2010-11-28 06:11 [#02399481]
Points: 169 Status: Lurker



D80/90 class don't sound like his budget. His SX130 is like
200 bucks. I don't think you can find even a D80 body for
that little.

Just googled for 5 seconds, and it looks like 400 US bucks
for a used D80 case.


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-11-28 13:19 [#02399493]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Followup to Moot: #02399481 | Show recordbag



The title of this thread is 'help buying a digital SLR' That
camera you mentioned is not a DSLR.

You can't get a DSLR for the price of that run-of-the-mill
Canon camera that you are for some reason focussing on.

clark, if you are thinking about buying a camera for the
long term and taking up photography as a hobby, buy the D80
body and maybe attach one of the newer kit lenses to it.
Buying a DSLR is quite a commitment, as you are likely to
buy more lenses later on, which costs a lot.

From what you have said, you don't fall into this category
and you just like the look and idea of having a DSLR,
without being willing to make the time commitment which
would justify paying such a price. If this is the case, just
go with that Canon or any other ubiquitous point and shoot/
bridge camera. Bridge cameras can be good for beginners who
want to learn about all the settings and stuff, cos they
have a lot of manual setting changes. Auto too, for when you
want to just concentrate on what you are shooting.

Alternatively, you could start shooting film, which is a lot
more fun and in some ways cheaper (at least in the short
term). ;) It means the difference between getting an older,
far better build quality and optical quality (and many can
be used on DSLRs). Film = $70 nice 'standard 50mm lens',
$200 for the digital equivalent, which would break if you
drop it and will usually lower optical quality.


 

offline Moot from Antarctica on 2010-11-29 07:07 [#02399567]
Points: 169 Status: Lurker



I don't think he wrote DSLR in the title knowingly, but
mistakenly chose that P&S as object of his research and
above inquiry.


 

offline Moot from Antarctica on 2010-11-29 07:08 [#02399568]
Points: 169 Status: Lurker



minus a comma


 

offline wavephace from off the chain on 2010-11-30 03:10 [#02399617]
Points: 3098 Status: Lurker



what is SLR. i have a samsung camera (digital)


 

offline Moot from Antarctica on 2010-11-30 15:39 [#02399634]
Points: 169 Status: Lurker



Google
Digital single-lens reflex


 

offline wavephace from off the chain on 2010-11-30 18:58 [#02399645]
Points: 3098 Status: Lurker



still i dont know what it means


 

offline wavephace from off the chain on 2010-11-30 18:59 [#02399646]
Points: 3098 Status: Lurker



my camera has single lens though


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-11-30 22:17 [#02399658]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



tractern, no i still shoot i just dont share my photos
because they're not meant to be advertisements of look-at-me
capabilities. and it was only ever a hobby.

hello, tractern. sensors and subsystems have made strides
*in the past year alone*. so if you're in attempt to bring
up an old conversation, context is fuking relevant.

he's not buying pro here --- consumer or prosumer.

"Canon DSLR=poo"
can you elaborate? maybe with some vocabular from an EE vs a
faboy? i shoot canon but i would never say nikon sensors are
crap. they are pretty much on par with each other.

DR and ISO performance have come so far it's not the
deciding factor in the body anymore unless you're pro and
you're specifically shooting a certain environment ==== e.g.
you have specific design requirements that will trump other
features for the one most important. for some people,
that's AF speed/accuracy in servo. for others, it's all
about the highest dynamic range possible or the absolute
best ISO performance/noise.

clark, again ... spend your money on glass. it will be far
more rewarding. the only thing kit lenses are good for is
so people can essentially "try before you commit" ...e..g
you're not spending too much on glass then realizing you
dont know what you're doing and arent as interested as you
once were.

the bulk of the consumer/prosumer bodies are pretty close in
overall performance. a few leap-frogs here/there but with
specs changing so fucking often it's nothing to get hung up
about.

you always start with design requirements. no one asked him
what he wants to shoot. you cant decide glass until you
know what you want to shoot (and price range) ... you cant
decide body until you know glass.

tractern, the fanboy stench grows on you like wild moss.

what's the price range, clark-bot?


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-11-30 22:19 [#02399659]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



lol at deciding body before glass/lenses. talk about
horse-before-the-cart.


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-12-01 00:03 [#02399662]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Followup to elusive: #02399658 | Show recordbag



elusive, I like the fact that you can smell me ("fanboy
stink") through a computer screen. :)

I can see that you know more about DSLRs that me. I have a
Konica Minolta Dimage Z2, which I don't use for creative
purposes. I shoot film, because there is no soulful
aesthetic in digital photography, at least without editing,
which is artificial and therefore almost always gives
soulless results anyway. Please don't be jealous and 'flame'
me just cos I still have passion for something you no longer
see as being very important or creative to you any more, as
you are (I assume, from the way you speak) old. If you
aren't old, then you come across as a passion-less,
cantankerous old man.

I don't understand what you mean in saying I am a 'fanboy'.
I have an opinion and know what I like is all. I accept that
this can cloud my judgement when trying to give advice which
should be objective as possible. In the context of this
thread I guess your advice could be more useful, although I
don't know if saying 'they're all the same' is really that
helpful...

I wonder if this is a genuine thread and clark actually
wants to buy a camera...


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-12-01 00:17 [#02399663]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Actually, I'm not really a Nikon fanboy in general. Only for
digital. I have a Canon RM with 50mm 1.8 FL lens, which I
really enjoy using. Barely any noise, even when wide open on
a sunny day (lens was accidentally on 'auto'). Great bokeh
too. Used to have a Nikon FM, but I had to sell it. So with
film I like both, but I dislike Canon for DSLR.


 

offline Tractern from Brighton (United Kingdom) on 2010-12-01 00:18 [#02399664]
Points: 4210 Status: Regular | Followup to elusive: #02399659 | Show recordbag



Certain bodies fit certain lenses, so this is sensible.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-12-01 01:46 [#02399666]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



"elusive, I like the fact that you can smell me ("fanboy
stink") through a computer screen. :) "


you said canon sens0rs = poo. yes - you stink.

it has nothing to do about knowing more, as you proclaim -
because i dont keep up on that stuff as to want to put
myself into the position of being one that knows. it has to
do with your commentary.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-12-01 01:56 [#02399667]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



"Please don't be jealous and 'flame'
me just cos I still have passion for something you no
longer
see as being very important or creative to you any
more"


lol wat. are you listening to yourself? how are you drawing
these conclusions? fuck, man. get a grip. how on earth did
i flame you in regards/context to your self proclaimed
"passion". re-read my posts. in no way did i make a
distinctive vector in any fuking quadrant adjacenct to your
fuking "ability" to take photos. stop getting personal when
im attacking your commentary and approach to designing a
solution for the OP.

i take pictures when i feel like it. i have a camera and i
use it sparingly. i 1) have some kind of disorder where i
can never fully settle on a final post-processing
solution... so i generally take many photos, then let them
sit for a year or two before i get really drunk one night
and start going through the archives. it's then that i
usually dish out a few final edits and can finally say "here
is a photo i took" ... you are like little girl who seems
to siphon straw man arguments and try and handshake some
kind of draw on attack from my sentences that in no way had
any original approach to your situation or how you function
regarding the topic.




 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-12-01 01:59 [#02399668]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



"Actually, I'm not really a Nikon fanboy in general. Only
for
digital. I have a Canon RM with 50mm 1.8 FL lens"


that's the photography equivalent of "i'm not racist!!! i
have black friends!"


 

offline larn from PLANET E (United Kingdom) on 2010-12-01 02:07 [#02399670]
Points: 5473 Status: Regular | Followup to elusive: #02399668 | Show recordbag



elusive I can see you have some good input for this
discussion, but i should point out that the OP is nothing
more than a advertising bot or even worse a person posing as
an advertising bot, who shows up here once in a while and
asks us advice on which dress or boots he/she should buy. it
just so happens that this time he/she decided to post a more
believable question. so i would not bother giving more
advice unless of course it helps anyone else interested.
check the last 25 posts you will see what i mean


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-12-01 02:13 [#02399672]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



"check the last 25 posts you will see what i mean "

check my references to 'clark' in the last 25 posts


 

offline jnasato from 777gogogo (Japan) on 2010-12-01 08:38 [#02399692]
Points: 3393 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



um... I took a photo once. It had a picture in it! Da
bomb.


 

offline dariusgriffin from cool on 2010-12-01 13:17 [#02399708]
Points: 12394 Status: Regular



elusive you're such a forum poster


 


Messageboard index