Ready to graduate to DSLR

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

"Freedom55" <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:xX_We.92282$Ph4.2917232@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel that
> the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many choices out
> there.
>
> I have narrowed the field to Nikon D70,Canon Rebel XT, Pentax*ist, and
> Olympus E-1. I would like some help. Which of the above would be the best
> bang for the buck?

might be worth sending to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems also.

For my two penneth (cents) worth, choose between the Nikon and the Canon on
the handling and features you like, unless you already have some lenses to
bias you. Quailty wise etc they are pretty similar. The Olympus and Pentax
don't get as good comments.

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

In article <xX_We.92282$Ph4.2917232@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>, Freedom55
<"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> says...
> Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel that
> the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many choices
> out there.

Be careful that with a DSLR you make one step forward, but also a step
backward into the dark ages of photography, when no live preview
existed. A good option is the new Sony DSLR with 10MP and live preview.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/

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

Alfred Molon <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <xX_We.92282$Ph4.2917232@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>, Freedom55
><"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> says...
>> Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel that
>> the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many choices
>> out there.
>
>Be careful that with a DSLR you make one step forward, but also a step
>backward into the dark ages of photography, when no live preview
>existed.

Some people might argue that reality in the viewfinder is better than a
digital approximation.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

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

Freedom55 wrote:

> Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel that
> the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many choices
> out there.
>
> I have narrowed the field to Nikon D70,Canon Rebel XT, Pentax*ist, and
> Olympus E-1. I would like some help. Which of the above would be the
> best bang for the buck?
>

Money wise the E300 2 lens kit is hard to beat for "bang for the buck". You
hear lots of people who have never used one bitch about the image quality,
the people using them don't!

You really have to think about what you plan to use the camera for, how
"deep" a system -you- need, which lenses you may or may not need in the
future, what is your planned output size etc etc. Basically you didn't
supply enough info. Also you need to go handle them and see which one feel
comfortable to you and which type of controls you like etc. Check out the
different viewfinders and focus screens, try doing some manual focusing
with each and see which ones allow you to see the focus point easily. Do
you need good low light handheld without flash ability? The canon is really
good at that. Lots of thing only YOU can answer..

--

Stacey

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

> For my two penneth (cents) worth, choose between the Nikon and the Canon
> on the handling and features you like, unless you already have some lenses
> to bias you.

Personally I prefer anything to the 350D's handling, and the Pentac and Oly
handle just as well or better than the D70 anyway.

Quailty wise etc they are pretty similar. The Olympus and Pentax
> don't get as good comments.

And no one can work out why, feature for feature they are at least as good
and some things are better, mind you the Oly has limited support from second
party lenses so you can only buy the Oly lenses, not a problem for some.

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

Mark² wrote:

> S R wrote:
>> Could you fill me in on the difference between an optical viewfinder
>> and electronic.
>
> Optical is simply...optical...in that you are looking through a prism and
> mirror...which means you are looking directly at the light in the scene.

And isn't going to have any shutter lag..The EVF has to have a sensor design
that can feed the "video" to the EVF and then switch to "capture". There
will always be some lag during this "switch" in modes. Also there is going
to be some compromise in the sensor to allow this "live preview" from the
sensor as you're asking it to peform 2 jobs. The only reason people use the
"live preview" on the P&S is because the optical finders they use have BAD
paralax and many don't show the actual shooting focal length very well. the
only advantage an EVF has over an SLR system is it's cheaper to make.

>
> With an electronic viewfinder...though you look into a little lens, you're
> really looking at a video representation of the scene--much in the same
> way
> you would see when looking at a scene with a video camera. You don't see
> the actual light of the scene...you see a video of it.
>

It's also harder to judge the focus point with an EVF compared to an SLR
with a good focus screen.

--

Stacey

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

Stacey wrote:
[]
> It's also harder to judge the focus point with an EVF compared to an
> SLR with a good focus screen.

But which low-end DSLR offers a good focus screen?
I don't see split-prism or micro-focus screens any more...

David

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

In article <dgia8a$9qu$1@bolt.sonic.net>, Ray Fischer says...
> Alfred Molon <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >In article <xX_We.92282$Ph4.2917232@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>, Freedom55
> ><"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> says...
> >> Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel that
> >> the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many choices
> >> out there.
> >
> >Be careful that with a DSLR you make one step forward, but also a step
> >backward into the dark ages of photography, when no live preview
> >existed.
>
> Some people might argue that reality in the viewfinder is better than a
> digital approximation.

Tons of situations where a swivelable LCD screen is helpful, if not
essential:
- underwater photography (essential for correct framing)
- panorama photography (necessary to be able to rotate the camera arond
its nodal point, if you don't have a tripod and panorama head with you)
- low light photography (a viewfinder might be too dark)
- unconventional angles, when you cannot look through a viewfinder
- when you need a live histogram before pressing the shutter
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/

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

Alfred Molon wrote:
> Be careful that with a DSLR you make one step forward, but also a step
> backward into the dark ages of photography, when no live preview
> existed.

Absolutely. Beware of photographers who learned their
craft in the dark ages; they tend to think of new
facilities as toy-features for dilettantes, while
anything missing is a defect no serious photographer
could tolerate.

> A good option is the new Sony DSLR with 10MP and live preview.

I'm tempted. But what were they thinking leaving out
image stabilization?


--
--Bryan

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

In article <Tt8Xe.110678$G8.95496@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
David J Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:
>Stacey wrote:
>[]
>> It's also harder to judge the focus point with an EVF compared to an
>> SLR with a good focus screen.
>
>But which low-end DSLR offers a good focus screen?
>I don't see split-prism or micro-focus screens any more...

In my opinion, the big disadvantage of focusing aids is that they only work
in the center of the screen. Subconsciously that may lead to bad compositions.
But they are also quite useless when you want to track a moving object that
is not in the center of the screen. On a tripod you have to move the subject
to the center, focus, and re-compose.

I prefer ground glass with the horizontal and vertical 'architecture'
aids.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

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

David J Taylor wrote:
> Bryan Olson wrote:
>>Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>A good option is the new Sony DSLR with 10MP and live preview.
>>
>>I'm tempted. But what were they thinking leaving out
>>image stabilization?
>
> I think their argument goes: we provided a large sensor, which works at
> higher ISO, and therefore shorter shutter speeds, and therefore less
need
> for IS. And it's only a 120mm lens anyway.

I think you may be right that that's how the argument goes,
but it's a silly argument. If the camera performs well in
kinda-challenging light, I'm all the more interested in how
it does in big-time-problem light.

> I think the Sony camera is a market tester. If it sells well, future
> variants will provide the features potential customers demand and other
> makers will jump on the bandwagon; if it doesn't sell it will be
noted in
> history....

Sure. All products are market testers.

I'm on the edge; I probably won't buy it as it is, but I
probably would if it had IS. That means history could note
that people like me do not want and will not buy a fixed-lens,
large-sensor, electronic-viewfinder camera, when really we do
want it and would buy it.


Note to Sony: Good ideas. But if you lock a camera to one
lens, that lens has got to rock. Lens design is a matter of
trade-offs, but image stabilization is a huge advantage, and
the price is only cost and modest battery drain.

Please, build it. I'll buy it. And the laser-focus-assist on
my old F-707 was a winner too (just don't put it behind the
filter/converter treads).


--
--Bryan

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

In article <MPG.1d96bdaac8d1604898ad4f@news.supernews.com>,
Alfred Molon <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Be careful that with a DSLR you make one step forward, but also a step
>backward into the dark ages of photography, when no live preview
>existed. A good option is the new Sony DSLR with 10MP and live preview.

Have you perhaps considered changing the record?

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

> - low light photography (a viewfinder might be too dark)

Actually, optical viewfinders are MUCH better in low light. Most of the EVF
that I have used are terrible in low light situations.

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

Steven Wandy wrote:
> > - low light photography (a viewfinder might be too dark)
>
> Actually, optical viewfinders are MUCH better in low light. Most of the EVF
> that I have used are terrible in low light situations.

In that case, you must not have had a chance to use any of the (Konica)
Minolta Dimage 5, 7 or A series cameras.
They all have an "amplified" brightened b&w view in the EVF that
automaticaly kicks in when the scene is too dark to otherwise see
anything much.
It is very useful for dark areas and is pretty much the same as "night
framing" mode that the Sony F828 has.
The only downside is that if you don't use flash, the length of
exposure alomst assures lots of camera shake and a fair dollop of image
noise shows up in the image.

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

"Freedom55" <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:xX_We.92282$Ph4.2917232@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel that
> the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many choices
> out there.
>
> I have narrowed the field to Nikon D70,Canon Rebel XT, Pentax*ist, and
> Olympus E-1. I would like some help. Which of the above would be the
> best bang for the buck?
>
> Ron
> --
> And it really doesn't matter if
> I'm wrong I'm right
> Where I belong I'm right
> Where I belong.
>
> Lennon & McCartney


Have you thought about the Dynax/Maxxum 5D or 7D. Their both excellent.

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

Jock wrote:

> what is the model number of the SONY DSLR? Are you mixed up with the DSC-R1
> P&S?
> If so, the link here shows it: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/sonydscr1/
> Jock

If you want to go wise-guy on Alfred, get it right. The Sony is
technically an EVF ZLR, not a "Point and Shoot." We had raging arguments
when the Oly E10 came out whether it counted as an SLR or not. We ended
up refining the definitions between SLR and ZLR as to whether the lens
was interchangeable or not.

The argument with the Sony will be whether it can be called a ZLR or
not, since its viewing system is electronic and not "reflex." To my
mind, you are still viewing through the lens, which makes it like an
SLR. On the other hand, it is much the same as the 717 or 828 or the
Minolta A1, which are considered EVFs.

But it certainly isn't a P&S.

Gary Eickmeier

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

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 13:49:00 GMT, Gary Eickmeier
<geickmei@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:

>The argument with the Sony will be whether it can be called a ZLR or
>not, since its viewing system is electronic and not "reflex." To my
>mind, you are still viewing through the lens, which makes it like an
>SLR. On the other hand, it is much the same as the 717 or 828 or the
>Minolta A1, which are considered EVFs.

Since the light to the EVF comes through the lens, wouldn't it be a
TTL viewfinder system?
A TTLEVF?

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com

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

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 07:14:59 +0000, David J Taylor wrote:

> Stacey wrote:
> []
>> It's also harder to judge the focus point with an EVF compared to an
>> SLR with a good focus screen.
>
> But which low-end DSLR offers a good focus screen?
> I don't see split-prism or micro-focus screens any more...
>
> David
You don't absolutely need prism screens (although they can be handy) you
just need to learn how to focus. It takes much longer to describe than to
do. Basically get approx. to the focus point, go past it and then just
back the other way past it and then just betwenn the two points and you
should be exactly in focus. Takes practice but can be very fast.

--
Neil
Delete delete to reply by email

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

In article <ps8Xe.110676$G8.7991@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, David J
Taylor
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
wrote:

> So no swivel viewfinders for those awkward taking angles! Plus you lose
> movie mode, and may get problems with dust ingress (and spots being
> visible on every subsequent picture) every time you change lenses. Better
> low-light performance, though.

Yeah, I was always pissed that my Hasselblads couldn't take movies.

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

Neil Ellwood wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 07:14:59 +0000, David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> Stacey wrote:
>> []
>>> It's also harder to judge the focus point with an EVF compared to an
>>> SLR with a good focus screen.
>>
>> But which low-end DSLR offers a good focus screen?
>> I don't see split-prism or micro-focus screens any more...
>>
>> David
> You don't absolutely need prism screens (although they can be handy)
> you just need to learn how to focus. It takes much longer to describe
> than to do. Basically get approx. to the focus point, go past it and
> then just back the other way past it and then just betwenn the two
> points and you should be exactly in focus. Takes practice but can be
> very fast.

Well, actually I have used both plain ground-glass and
micro-prism/split-focus screens on my SLR cameras, and I know which I
preferred. Why are the present low-end DSLR users being forced to put up
with inferior manual focussing aids?

David

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

David J Taylor wrote:

> I was also dubious about the value of movie mode until I tried it - even a
> few seconds of movie can enhance the enjoyment of memories of an event.
> Try it!

Try it? I am a videographer.

Gary Eickmeier

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

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
message news:UYgXe.110901$G8.80149@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Randall Ainsworth wrote:
>> In article <ps8Xe.110676$G8.7991@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, David J
>> Taylor
>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So no swivel viewfinders for those awkward taking angles! Plus you
>>> lose movie mode, and may get problems with dust ingress (and spots
>>> being visible on every subsequent picture) every time you change
>>> lenses. Better low-light performance, though.
>>
>> Yeah, I was always pissed that my Hasselblads couldn't take movies.
>
> Can any camera with that format make movies?

Any 70mm movie camera...

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

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

David J Taylor wrote:
> Alfred Molon wrote:
>
>>In article <xX_We.92282$Ph4.2917232@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>Freedom55 <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> says...
>>
>>>Have had a Finepix 1300 and a Canon A95 (both P&S cameras), I feel
>>>that the time is right to graduate to a DSLR but there are so many
>>>choices out there.
>>
>>Be careful that with a DSLR you make one step forward, but also a step
>>backward into the dark ages of photography, when no live preview
>>existed. A good option is the new Sony DSLR with 10MP and live
>>preview.
>
>
> So no swivel viewfinders for those awkward taking angles! Plus you lose
> movie mode, and may get problems with dust ingress (and spots being
> visible on every subsequent picture) every time you change lenses. Better
> low-light performance, though.

What is the "best" way to take a really blurry image (no need for high
megapixel count)? Use the EVF and hold the camera at arm's length
with two hands to compose and shoot. WRONG! Use one hand! ;-)

EVF is very hard to see in daylight. Regardless of advances, it takes
time to read out a chip, reformat and send the data to a display. If you
want to follow action (one of the great advantages of a DSLR, whether it
be sports, wildlife, your pets, or your kid's first step) use a true optical
viewfinder. If you want to critically compose, use a true optical
viewfinder (e.g. see the details--do you really want that stick in your
composition?). If you want fast frame rates, low noise, with low shutter lag,
and great lenses, a DSLR is the top choice.

I have a Canon right angle finder that I can put on the camera when I want
odd viewing positions, and it gives me more magnification to help with
manual focusing. And it is true live preview, limited only by the speed
of light!

I do agree that DSLR manufacturers could add swivel LCD screens, and live
preview. In fact Canon has added live preview in the 20Da DSLR, designed
for astro-photography.

The big disadvantage of a DSLR system is weight. Many lenses, heavier camera,
mean bulk. But if image quality is what you want, and ability to have that
image quality from macro to super telephoto, dedicated lenses optimized
for a specific task is the only way to get top those quality images.

I often carry a 30 to 60 pound day pack of photo gear. My wife asks why?
I respond: because I can. And I will continue until I can't. Be happy that I am
in shape and still can (in my 50s). I look at it as exercise too.
When I want to travel light, I take a single lens (just spent 2 weeks in
England one 28-135 mm lens on a DSLR). If ultra light, I take a P&S.
A DSLR is not the only choice. But if I want to get great photos,
the gear comes out, including DSLR and 4x5.

For the OP: in choosing a DSLR, choose the lens and accessory system first.
Where do you want to be? Do you ultimately want an image stabilized super
telephoto? Do you want top end macro? Wide angle? Need Flash?
Choose the manufacturer's lens and accessories that best suit your desires.
Then choose the camera. As you build a lens set, camera bodies will change,
but you will likely keep your better lenses. That will allow you to maximize
you upgrade path. With a P&S you have to evaluate and pay for the lens as well
as the sensor. With DSLR, you get to choose the best independently and
can upgrade the sensor (body) and keep the great lens.

Roger
Photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com

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

In article <dgjcl1$e65$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, dylan says...
>
> > A good option is the new Sony DSLR with 10MP and live preview.
>
> First line from unique points at dpreview:-
>
> "First non-SLR camera to feature a large format sensor (APS size)"
>
> not quite a DSLR then..

How is an SLR defined ? What does "Single lens reflex" mean ?
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/

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

Alfred Molon <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1d97cbf941887ae98ad54@news.supernews.com:
> They could add IS the way Konica-Minolta do it - by moving the CCD
> instead of the lens.

It might not be so easy, as KM have most likely carefully patented the
method worldwide.

--
Matti Vuori, <http://sivut.koti.soon.fi/mvuori/index-e.htm>