Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

which digital slr?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
July 21, 2005 2:53:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi,
I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
lens.

Any suggestions?
Gary

More about : digital slr

Anonymous
July 21, 2005 2:53:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Digital Camera Reviews and News Digital Photography Review Forums, Glossary, FAQ

hi gary,
go to this site and do a side by side comparison of the cameras you've quoted.
i think the new canon 350d would be a safe bet.rgds from TBM...
Related resources
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 2:53:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gary wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.
>
> Any suggestions?
> Gary

Why an SLR?

You can do that ("reference shots for portrait painting") with a P&S,
and you can also use ptlens to "fix" any optical distortions, and here
I would suggest the Fujifilm F10.

But if you insist on an SLR, the obvious choice for you would be the
Olympus E300. If you haven't already got Nikon or Canon lenses and
won't need many lenses then go Olympus; definitely go Olympus.

Again, why an SLR?

If you're a professional painter read no further, but if you're a
hobbyist I would suggest you get a small and inexpensive P&S.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 2:53:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gary wrote:
> Interesting - why would the Olympus E300 be an obvious choice?
>

If you insist on an SLR then it would be your obvious choice - for the
following reasons

- Olympus makes excellent cameras and lenses; superb image quality and
very high durability.
- the supersonic save filter aka "self-cleaning" sensor
http://tinyurl.com/7s9jl; you do not want to endure the trouble of
having to clean your sensor or sending your camera for professional
sensor cleaning, or worrying about it everytime you change a lens. If
you're in doubt about this point look at many, many threads in this
newsgroup from many who complain in frustration about dust on their
nikon or canon dslr sensors
- you have no existing lens collection, nor do you want to buy many -
as some seem to delight in owning many lenses or shooting in a variety
of situations, such as shooting birds in flight - and for such a
situation you'll get the benefits of the "designed for digital" Olympus
4/3 lenses, rather than the canon or nikon cameras which are meant to
accomodate 35mm lenses originally designed for film with compromises
involved in that
- Olympus cameras are very well-built and they cut no corners in
quality of materials or construction, or technology or features
included for price. Canon and Nikon (especially Canon) largely depend
on reputation from their top of the range models and professional
products and services to entice other "consumers" to their "consumer" -
as opposed to professional - lines on which they reap marketting-led
profits (thanks to the "it's a canon/nikon, so it must be the best!"
delusion). Generally speaking, when you buy an Olympus you are getting
your money's worth and possibly even more, when you buy especially a
consumer-line Canon you are paying them a handsome or even fat profit
just for that logo. Throughout its history whether in film or digital
Olympus has made legendary and lasting-in-appeal classics of "consumer"
cameras, most of which proved their durability over time, whereas Canon
and Nikon have largely made forgettable and unremarkable "consumer"
models.






> >
> >
> >Gary wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> >> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> >> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> >> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> >> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> >> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> >> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> >> lens.
> >>
> >> Any suggestions?
> >> Gary
> >
> >Why an SLR?
> >
> >You can do that ("reference shots for portrait painting") with a P&S,
> >and you can also use ptlens to "fix" any optical distortions, and here
> >I would suggest the Fujifilm F10.
> >
> >But if you insist on an SLR, the obvious choice for you would be the
> >Olympus E300. If you haven't already got Nikon or Canon lenses and
> >won't need many lenses then go Olympus; definitely go Olympus.
> >
> >Again, why an SLR?
> >
> >If you're a professional painter read no further, but if you're a
> >hobbyist I would suggest you get a small and inexpensive P&S.
July 21, 2005 3:27:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gary" <g.morrow@strath.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:u4sud1hjpmen4j0ph07h6785jvs2ggvk1v@4ax.com...
> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.
>
> Any suggestions?
> Gary

might also be worth asking in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems

My opinion between the 3 you mention is pick the one you like best,
features, handling etc because you won't see big differences between them
quality wise.
(others may disagree)
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 4:06:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Op donderdag vroeg Gary hulp van boven en hij verblijdde ons met het
volgende:
> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.
>
> Any suggestions?
> Gary

think about the Olympus E300!

--
Only those who know the secret can read a stream of bytes ....

Eric
July 21, 2005 5:14:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Interesting - why would the Olympus E300 be an obvious choice?

>
>
>Gary wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
>> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
>> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
>> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
>> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
>> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
>> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
>> lens.
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>> Gary
>
>Why an SLR?
>
>You can do that ("reference shots for portrait painting") with a P&S,
>and you can also use ptlens to "fix" any optical distortions, and here
>I would suggest the Fujifilm F10.
>
>But if you insist on an SLR, the obvious choice for you would be the
>Olympus E300. If you haven't already got Nikon or Canon lenses and
>won't need many lenses then go Olympus; definitely go Olympus.
>
>Again, why an SLR?
>
>If you're a professional painter read no further, but if you're a
>hobbyist I would suggest you get a small and inexpensive P&S.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 5:54:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Am Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:53:45 +0100 schrieb Gary:

> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.

I recommend any DSLR (THERE IS NO BEST!!!). Just go to your local dealer
and play a little bit with them. And buy the one you like. I personally use
a Canon 350D with Tamron 28-75 or Canon 70-200 4.0 L for portraits.

But if you really just need the camera for taking reference shots for oil
paintings you could as well buy a compact with a good lens.

Regards,
Andi
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 7:38:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

dylan wrote:
> > Throughout its history whether in film or digital
> >Olympus has made legendary and lasting-in-appeal classics of "consumer"
> >cameras, most of which proved their durability over time, whereas Canon
> >and Nikon have largely made forgettable and unremarkable "consumer"
> >models.
>
> A bit of a OTT statement.

Not at all.

Look at the Olympus film rangefinders - RC, SP and so on. Look at the
Olympus film compacts and you'll find Olympus XA, and stylus epic. Look
at the SLRs and you'll find the OM Range. Look at the digitals and
you'll find the 5050, 5060, 8080 and others.

Compared to Olympus cameras the comparable-in-lcass Canon or Nikon
"consumer" products are of subpar quality both in design or durability.
July 21, 2005 9:22:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Throughout its history whether in film or digital
>Olympus has made legendary and lasting-in-appeal classics of "consumer"
>cameras, most of which proved their durability over time, whereas Canon
>and Nikon have largely made forgettable and unremarkable "consumer"
>models.

A bit of a OTT statement.
Anonymous
July 22, 2005 12:03:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gary" <g.morrow@strath.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:u4sud1hjpmen4j0ph07h6785jvs2ggvk1v@4ax.com...
> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.
>
> Any suggestions?
> Gary

Yeah, no problem, go with the sheep and get a Canikon.

Or be sensible and buy the Pentax *istDS

Deep.
Anonymous
July 22, 2005 2:15:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:53:45 +0100, Gary wrote:

> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any lenses
> so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly for taking
> reference shots for portait painting and have decided on supplementing any
> kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks to everyone for
> previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera to buy. I've been
> looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I also notice the d100
> can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit lens.
>
> Any suggestions?

Suggestions? No. Questions? Yes. Why do you want a DSLR (and all
the money it costs) for reference shots? Or are you going to be using
the camera for some other projects where you need an SLR? You can get a
higher end P&S (new or used) that would do the referencing shot just fine,
and for a lot less money.


Stefan
July 22, 2005 3:01:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gary wrote:

> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.
>


I'd go somewhere you can actually handle the cameras and hopefully try a
few shots with both the nikon and the canon with a 50mm lens and see which
one you like. Either of these with that lens should work fine.

--

Stacey
July 22, 2005 4:15:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gary" <g.morrow@strath.ac.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:u4sud1hjpmen4j0ph07h6785jvs2ggvk1v@4ax.com...
> Hi,
> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> lens.
>
> Any suggestions?
> Gary

Do you plan to take the pics in existing light?
Then consider the camera with the lowest noise at low light/high ISO.
But, if you expect to use flashlight, look more at the flash performance.
That alone may lead to different choises.
A point-and-shoot is more often than not useless above 200 ISO, while a
Rebel XT/350 will be ok up to 1600 ISO. The Nikons are close, but Pentax and
Olympus are not at all that good at higher ISO's.
And the Nikon guys will praise their flash performance all night.
Not much easier...

/per
Anonymous
July 22, 2005 4:15:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

per wrote:
> "Gary" <g.morrow@strath.ac.uk> skrev i meddelandet
> news:u4sud1hjpmen4j0ph07h6785jvs2ggvk1v@4ax.com...
>
>>Hi,
>>I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
>>lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
>>for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
>>supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
>>to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
>>to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
>>also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
>>lens.
>>
>>Any suggestions?
>>Gary
>
>
> Do you plan to take the pics in existing light?
> Then consider the camera with the lowest noise at low light/high ISO.
> But, if you expect to use flashlight, look more at the flash performance.
> That alone may lead to different choises.
> A point-and-shoot is more often than not useless above 200 ISO, while a
> Rebel XT/350 will be ok up to 1600 ISO. The Nikons are close, but Pentax and
> Olympus are not at all that good at higher ISO's.
> And the Nikon guys will praise their flash performance all night.
> Not much easier...
>
> /per


Why would Pentax be worse than Nikon? They use the same Sony sensor, I
think.
July 22, 2005 4:59:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>> Do you plan to take the pics in existing light?
>> Then consider the camera with the lowest noise at low light/high ISO.
>> But, if you expect to use flashlight, look more at the flash performance.
>> That alone may lead to different choises.
>> A point-and-shoot is more often than not useless above 200 ISO, while a
>> Rebel XT/350 will be ok up to 1600 ISO. The Nikons are close, but Pentax
>> and Olympus are not at all that good at higher ISO's.
>> And the Nikon guys will praise their flash performance all night.
>> Not much easier...
>>
>> /per
>
>
> Why would Pentax be worse than Nikon? They use the same Sony sensor, I
> think.

This is what Steves digicams say about the XT/350:
"... quite improved at high ISO settings over the original Digital rebel.
Noise is absent from images shot at ISO 100 and ISO 200, barely detectable
in shadow areas at ISO 400 and 800, and noticeable in shadow areas at ISO
1600, but still usable. The XT's high ISO image quality distinguishes it
from both competing consumer dSLR's and high-end prosumer digicams. Long
exposures are essentially noise-free, even without the use of the Long
Exposure Noise Reduction Custom Function."

And this is what Steve says about the Pentax *ist DS :
"The image noise was practically non-existant at ISO 200, at ISO 400 it's
still very clean, at ISO 800 shadow noise becomes noticeable, I would only
use ISO 1600 or 3200 in a pinch where either a tripod couldn't be used or
the subject wasn't stationary."

I wouldn't know why.

/per
July 22, 2005 10:18:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <3kb5roFtd839U6@individual.net>, fotocord@yahoo.com says...
> > Hi,
> > I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any
> > lenses so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly
> > for taking reference shots for portait painting and have decided on
> > supplementing any kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks
> > to everyone for previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera
> > to buy. I've been looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I
> > also notice the d100 can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit
> > lens.
> >
>

I didnt get the original post so Ill hitch a ride on this one (Stacy?)

I the only thig you are going to shoot with it is reference shots then you
can use any one of about 300 different cameras.

The ones I would recomend for ease of use and versatility are, in no
particular order:

Nikon D70
Canon 300D
Canon 350 xt
Sony F-828
Canon Pro-1
Olympus E-300
Olympus C-8080
Olympus C770


I have used other cameras, and I still own a few that aren't listed, but I
dont think they would be up to the job so I didn't list them.

To break the group down:

1. DSLR

I would recomend the D70 over the 300 D
I would recomend the 350xt over the D70
I would recommend the 300D over the E-300
I would recomend the E-300 over any of the point & shoot cameras

2. Point & shoot.


All the Sony Cameras seem to have a special way they interpret color, and the
828 is the most SONY of all, so you would have to decide which color mode to
use with it (it has 2 called "Real" and "Normal" (or "Standard" I forget
which)) The F-828 really shines at its 2 lowest ISO settings (64 & 100) but
is un-usable at anything higher in my opinion. It suffers from some purple
fringing in situations with strong backlighting and very high contrast at the
outer edges. I have learned to shoot in such a way as to avoid it or make it
"crop-out-able" (new word?)

Even though I like the color in the shots I've taken with the Olympus 8080 I
would still recomend the Sony over it as the 8080 takes about a day and a
half to focus in anything other than perfect lighting conditions. There is
apparently no "fix" for this forthcoming from Olympus. (some things cant be
fixed with firmware updates). It is also noisy at anything higher than its
lowest ISO.

The Oly C-770 is only 4mp, but it is very versatile, and takes a beautiful
photo, and has the added benefit of only costing about $350 (US). Its also
not as noisy as the Sony or the 8080 or the Pro-1 at ISO 200 or 400.

The Canon Pro 1 had a focus problem like the Oly 8080 but a firmware update
made it MUCH better (but still slower than the focus on the Sony 828).

The Pro-1 has no real advantage over the Olympus C-770 other than twice the
megapixels, which in reference shots would not make much of a difference
unless you make reference prints larger than 8x10. It (the Pro-1) is also
about the noisiest of all the top end (or so-called Pro-sumer) non DSLR
cameras at anything higher than its lowest ISO setting. (50 if I recall)

To sum up:

If you feel you MUST have more megapixels the Sony F-828 (even with its
faults) has turned out (for me) to be the best of the Pro-sumer bunch.

If you arent doing the megapixel climb, then the little Oly C-770 has no
major faults, and will do a great job, and has a Hotshoe that will fire
either the proprietary Oly flash or a common generic flash, and can be used
with a pc cable adapter for studio flash. Its not big, its not impressive
looking and its only 4mp, but it will do the job and save money you can spen
elsewhere.

The 8080 had potential because of less fringing problems, but if it doesnt
focus, you dont get the picture, and remember, even in the studio, unless you
have the lighting VERY bright between strobes (modeling lights), the 8080
will take forever to focus and fire the strobes.



I hope I have contributed to your quest.




--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
July 22, 2005 1:06:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:15:50 -0700, stefan patric
<not@thisaddress.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:53:45 +0100, Gary wrote:
>
>> I'm about to buy a digital slr - max price £900. I dont have any lenses
>> so am starting from scratch. I'll be using the camera mainly for taking
>> reference shots for portait painting and have decided on supplementing any
>> kit lens with a 50mm f1.8 fixed length lens (thanks to everyone for
>> previous advice). My problem is deciding which camera to buy. I've been
>> looking at the Canon 350d, Nikon d70s, Nikon d50. I also notice the d100
>> can be picked up fairly cheaply but with no kit lens.
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>
>Suggestions? No. Questions? Yes. Why do you want a DSLR (and all
>the money it costs) for reference shots? Or are you going to be using
>the camera for some other projects where you need an SLR? You can get a
>higher end P&S (new or used) that would do the referencing shot just fine,
>and for a lot less money.
>
>
>Stefan

Reference shots is perhaps a misleading term. I'm looking for slightly
more than that. I need as good a quality as I can afford and also the
ability to shoot in low lighting conditions wihtout flash. The
adaptability of an slr means I can also use the camera for a whole
range of different purposes from portrait through to landscape.
!