• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-01-2007, 10:34 PM)
demon's Avatar
Some time this year I'd ideally like to have two new cameras: a good pocket-sized camera, and some kind of entry-level digital slr. Currently I have a Canon S1-IS, and while it's nicer than my last camera, it's far too bulky to just carry around, but it just doesn't do what I want in terms of having a "real" camera.

1. As for pocket digicams, how much do you have to pay for a good one? The last one I had (gone now) was a Canon S200 Digital Elph, and I'd like something thinner than that, but better picture quality. I'm more concerned with picture quality than megapixels, I really don't need anything over 3mp. Just something that's versatile for a pocket camera.

2. And while I'm not so concerned about this in the meantime, what will I want to be looking at in terms of DSLRs? I've heard a lot about the digital rebel, and I've seen it for as low as $550 or so on the internet.

3. And last question, along with my Canon S1-IS I have a polorizer filter, an IR filter, a "nd8" neutral density filter, and two 1gb CF cards (one UltraII) in case the next camera I have uses different mem cards.... how much do you think I'd be able to sell all that for? It'd be nice to be able to put at least a couple hundred bucks from that towards a new camera.
koam
(03-01-2007, 10:37 PM)
koam's Avatar
I JUST ordered a Canon Powershot SD700-IS from cameraaddicts.com. It was dirt cheap ($227) and the reviews for it were great. Only thing that bothers me is that they didn't charge me extra for shipping to canada? Im thinking it's a mistake on their site but whatever, awesome deal.

I chose the 700 over the 800 and 900 because of the 4X zoom and more favorable reviews.
ToxicAdam
Banned
(03-01-2007, 10:46 PM)
ToxicAdam's Avatar

Review here:http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...m_z750-review/


I always pimp the Casio z750. Great little camera that you can find for around 230 dollars (ButterflyPhoto, free shipping). Takes standard SD cards for memory.
aparisi2274
Member
(03-01-2007, 10:56 PM)
aparisi2274's Avatar
I have the Canon SD-550 Elph for my pocket camera. Its awesome...

White Man
Member
(03-01-2007, 11:05 PM)
White Man's Avatar
My pocket camera is a:

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerSho...e=UTF8&s=photo



I love image stabilization, and when I saw this was an affordable, pocket-sized point and shoot with image stabilization and a very nice feature set, I was ON THAT FAST.

I have a Digital Rebel XT, which is a nice entry-level DSLR. The XTi has since come out, and aside from a megapixel bump from 8 to 10 and a better screen, you'll be saving at least 100 beans going with an XT. 8 megapixels is a nice sweet spot, going much higher than that isn't necessary. The screen on the XT is a bit lacking. It gets the job done, but it's not the best screen for reviewing photos on. Also, when you are working with 10mp of detail, I doubt that even the XTi's 2.5 inch screen is really the best thing for reviewing photos. Fact is, unless you really **** up a shot, you won't know if a shot is a keeper until you get it on your PC.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-01-2007, 11:11 PM)
demon's Avatar
hmm thanks guys. White Man, that looks like a nice camera (I love the image stabilization on my S1 too), but it looks a little big for a pocket camera. How big is it?


actually, I was thinking I'd spend even more money than $200-250 if I had to, which is the price range of the cameras you guys are posting. Is there anything better (and worth it (and small)) in the $300-350 range?
terrene
Banned
(03-01-2007, 11:16 PM)
Seconding the rec. for the PowerShot A710. Another feature of it that blows me away is that it has all of the Digital Rebel's shooting modes (night portrait, aperture-priority, full-auto, full-manual (!), etc). Add to that the fact that Canon simply makes the best optics on the market (sorry Nikon fans), and you've got a winner.
White Man
Member
(03-01-2007, 11:19 PM)
White Man's Avatar

Originally Posted by demon

hmm thanks guys. White Man, that looks like a nice camera (I love the image stabilization on my S1 too), but it looks a little big for a pocket camera. How big is it?

3.8 x 2.6 x 1.6 inches ; 7.4 ounces. It fits in a coat or hoodie pocket. Too big for a shirt pocket, though. You can usually find them in Best Buys and Circuit Cities if you want to check the size. I find it a good balance between compactness and features. When I was looking for a new point and shoot to lug around with me, I picked this one, and I was prepared to spend a lot more money, too.


actually, I was thinking I'd spend even more money than $200-250 if I had to, which is the price range of the cameras you guys are posting. Is there anything better (and worth it (and smalls)) in the $300-350 range?

I was kind of surprised, too, but it seems like the point-and-shoot market has largely given itself a roughly 300 dollar limit ceiling. Like I said, I was prepared to spend a bunch more on a point and shoot, but everything above 300 was either too big or had too many video features I didn't care too much about.

Also, keep in mind that once you figure in accessories and crap, you're probably adding like 50-100 to the price anyway :p
dskillzhtown
keep your strippers out of my American football
(03-01-2007, 11:29 PM)
I have a coolpix 3100 for my point and shoot camera.



I have a Sony H5 for my "want to do something cool" camera.



I am thinking of getting a S2 IS for something in between.
2DMention
Banned
(03-01-2007, 11:45 PM)


Canon S200 Digital Elph
Have had it for awhile. Only 2MP, but works great for pictures on the web and anything smaller than an 8X10.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-01-2007, 11:51 PM)
demon's Avatar

Originally Posted by 2DMention



Canon S200 Digital Elph
Have had it for awhile. Only 2MP, but works great for pictures on the web and anything smaller than an 8X10.

lol. that was the last camera I had.
65536
Banned
(03-01-2007, 11:55 PM)
.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-02-2007, 12:14 AM)
demon's Avatar

Originally Posted by andrewfee

The Fujifilm Finepix F30 or F31fd are the only compact digital cameras I would recommend to anyone these days. The Casio Z750 mentioned above was surprisingly good for the money, but Fuji's SuperCCD chip makes it significantly better than any other compact I've seen.



Ok, it doesn't have a full manual mode (Aperture/Shutter priority though) or optical image stabilisation, but it more than makes up for it with image quality and battery life. ISO400 on these cameras looks as good as the majority of P&S cameras at ISO100, and ISO800 is perfectly usable too, which is insane for something this size. The flash is probably the best I've seen on a compact as well, producing very natural results.

This might also be of interest: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qFiEna9p4U

That looks interesting. And holy shit @ iso3200. What's the difference between the F30 and the F31fd?

-edit-
just looked it up, says it has "face recognition" and IR communication over the F30. Meh. It also says it as anti-blur.....is that like the Image Stabilization on the Canons?
sky
Member
(03-02-2007, 12:34 AM)
sky's Avatar

Originally Posted by demon

I've heard a lot about the digital rebel, and I've seen it for as low as $550 or so on the internet.

I recently snagged one, and I'm very pleased with it (Canon Rebel XT). All the reviews I'd read were very positive, and positioned the Rebel as a perfect entry in to both SLR and Digital (on a more serious level). Recommended! :)
regs
Member
(03-02-2007, 01:52 AM)
regs's Avatar
just stay away from the sony cybershots. I bought a DSC-T1 when it came out for over $550, even the extended warranty, no more than two weeks after the warranty ran out the camera "stopped working" and by stopped working I mean the lens just won't work any longer.
basis
Member
(03-02-2007, 02:13 AM)
i second the Fujifilm F30.

f30 > all other cams in low-light conditions. if you take lots of nite shots or indoor shots, can't go wrong with the f30. great iso vs noise ratio, great battery life, nice LCD, VERY FAST response (fuji has always been leader in this field, even back with the old f602).

only thing i dislike, no viewfinder. only coz im old skool. :)

i can't recall what are the newer features of the f31d but u can scour the net or dpreview.
65536
Banned
(03-02-2007, 02:38 AM)
.
dolph
Member
(03-02-2007, 02:55 AM)
I'm really interested in the A710 IS. Can you list some of the pros and cons?
How is the movie mode?
LRS
Member
(03-02-2007, 03:15 AM)
LRS's Avatar
Seems like the Fujifilm F30 is a great buy at an affordable price. I'll have to try and get one of those.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-02-2007, 05:12 AM)
demon's Avatar
Well after hours of looking at reviews and sample photos, I think I've decided on the Fujifilm F30. If there's one thing I've never liked about the cameras I've had it's the crappy pictures they take under low lighting, and the F30 looks freakin sweet in that respect.

I'm almost up to 2800 or so shots on mine, and I doubt I've even taken more than 10 photos lower than ISO400, it's just that good.

That's just awesome. I very rarely use anything but the lowest ISO settings on the cameras I've used. F30 = mine. Plus I'll probably hunt down a cheap Digital Rebel later this year anyway. Thanks guys!
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-02-2007, 06:18 AM)
demon's Avatar
I've got a question about the IR communication function of the F31fd... what does it do exactly? Can you wirelessly transfer pictures from the camera to, say, a wireless laptop?
thirty
Banned
(03-02-2007, 06:34 AM)
thirty's Avatar
another vote for the F30. it's a legend. many say that the F30>>>F31.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1012

the F30 also does amazing VGA video too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTFJEEbXhD8
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-02-2007, 07:01 AM)
demon's Avatar

Originally Posted by thirty

another vote for the F30. it's a legend. many say that the F30>>>F31.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1012

the F30 also does amazing VGA video too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTFJEEbXhD8

Thanks for the links. Why do people say the F30 is better than the F31?

Also, it sounds like the F3* isn't nearly as good for bright outdoor shots as the Canons. Is this really true? How would outdoor day-time shots compare to, say, my old Canon S200?
Dice
Member
(03-02-2007, 07:19 AM)

Originally Posted by demon

Also, it sounds like the F3* isn't nearly as good for bright outdoor shots as the Canons. Is this really true? How would outdoor day-time shots compare to, say, my old Canon S200?

Fujis can overexpose in bright sunlight if you don't know how to use a camera.
thirty
Banned
(03-02-2007, 07:25 AM)
thirty's Avatar
the F30 supposedly has less noise in the higher ISO settings while the F31 has more detail but more noise in the higher ISOs. fuji themselves said that the F31 was better so who knows.

as to how it compares to your canon SD200, i don't know. i too had a SD100 at one point and never liked any of the pics, day or night. i have a great 10x zoom cam now, the olympus C-770 which has takes beyond spectacular day pics but is unusable for night pics. so i've been looking into the F30/31 as well but i think i'll wait for reviews for some of the newer cameras like the panasonic TZ3.
Fifty
I was FIDDY before 50 Cent. Moo.
(03-02-2007, 07:28 AM)
Fifty's Avatar
The F30 is a great compact camera. I just bought one recently, partially thanks to the positive impressions I got of it here. On a side note, I lost said camera the other weekend after I left it in a cab. Do not use the Fuji Finepix F30 in moving vehicles while intoxicated, that is my only warning.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-02-2007, 07:31 AM)
demon's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fifty

Do not use the Fuji Finepix F30 in moving vehicles while intoxicated, that is my only warning.

well then what the hell's the point?
Fifty
I was FIDDY before 50 Cent. Moo.
(03-02-2007, 07:35 AM)
Fifty's Avatar
I know!

I should have attended a Learning Annex course on how to properly take photos of drunk people, while drunk, and not lose your camera. Strap it to yourself at all times or install a GPS device to it.

Ugh sorry for hijacking your thread. I will close by saying that if you're looking for something pocket sized with great quality in low light, great non SLR quality and a nice LCD screen you can't go wrong with the F30. I read tons of reviews and almost all were raves. If I had to say one negative thing it would be it doesn't use traditional SD cards, it uses their own XD picture cards which are more expensive but that didn't bother me since I could take plenty of photos with just a 256 meg card and then just move the photos to my computer.

If you can, go to a store after you've reached a consensus top 2-3 choices and see which feels better in your hands. Apply some lotion to the camera for supreme comfort.
basis
Member
(03-02-2007, 07:58 AM)

Originally Posted by Dice

Fujis can overexpose in bright sunlight if you don't know how to use a camera.

mickey-mouse colors FTW! :)
Dice
Member
(03-02-2007, 08:06 AM)

Originally Posted by basis

mickey-mouse colors FTW! :)

...are you saying overexposure = mickey mouse colors (wrong)? or that canon = mickey mouse colors (closer, but wrong)?
White Man
Member
(03-02-2007, 08:38 AM)
White Man's Avatar
Camera buying stuff seems to come up often. Let's see if we can't keep the buying questions to this thread.
fart
Savant
(03-02-2007, 09:40 AM)

Originally Posted by White Man

Camera buying stuff seems to come up often. Let's see if we can't keep the buying questions to this thread.

So, speaking of, I seem to need dSLR advice.

Last year I bought an S2 IS on the advice of my mom (an avid photographer) who insisted that everything else i suggested was crap. I knew nothing about photography (and still don't!), and went along with it. Good news/bad news: on the upside (downside) I guess I've gotten the photography bug pretty badly. On the downside (:() I'm unhappy with the S2 for a variety of reasons, largely the inability to shoot available light with it (the S2 is famous for ridiculous noise at even moderately high ISO). So, I think I'd like to move to a dSLR for that reason and for ease of manual control. Getting to the point:

I've been looking at the Nikon D40, Pentax K100/110D, Canon XTi. My budget is non-existent at the moment, but I'm not looking to buy for a while, and I expect it will have hit modest by then. I'm more interested in making sure that I have a camera that will fit me for a while than I am in a dollar amount. My plan is to buy make sure that, first off, I have a fast prime (~50mm or so?) with the body, and then to go from there. From reading reviews I'm starting to think that maybe IS is a pretty good idea as well.

Before you ask, I've gone out and held all three bodies, and my favorites are probably the Pentax (less so) and the Nikon (mostest). I am aware of the Nikon's AF motor deficiency though, and the lack of an AF fast prime is worrying for me, as I enjoy moving subjects.

Other notes: I've inherited a very nice Nikon N50 that I'll be using a little as well. Film is probably not the best media for me, though, as the processing cost and latency don't fit very well for someone who averages about 2 decent shots per 4-500.

Thoughts? Bueller? Bueller?
GamePnoy74
Member
(03-02-2007, 09:42 AM)
GamePnoy74's Avatar
As for an entry-level DSLR, you can't go wrong with this one for $550:

Nikon D40


I just got one yesterday, I'm totally loving it, hope to learn lots of stuff using this.
disaster_area
Member
(03-02-2007, 10:23 AM)
I'm also an F31fd fan. the camera uses the same sensor and lens as the F30, but in addition to facial detection, allegedly they tweaked the firmware a little.

It's the first time I've been able to simply point and shoot without flash at night without having to hold my breath and stand very still with half a second+ exposures. ISO 800 and 1600 is good for that!!!

Although the newest canons and sony's also do high ISOs like the fuji's, the amount of noise is much, much higher making them almost unusable IMO.
SnakeXs
about the same metal capacity as a cucumber
(03-02-2007, 10:28 AM)
SnakeXs's Avatar
So, slight sidetrack: Where do you guys buy your stuff?

With expensive equipment, and hard to find/bargain-able items like lenses, there's gotta be some places, online or off, that you trust.
Dice
Member
(03-02-2007, 10:32 AM)

Originally Posted by SnakeXs

So, slight sidetrack: Where do you guys buy your stuff?

With expensive equipment, and hard to find/bargain-able items like lenses, there's gotta be some places, online or off, that you trust.

adorama.com and bhphotovideo.com both have good used goods sections, they are very professional and check out everything and give it a rating.
GG-Duo
Member
(03-02-2007, 10:46 AM)
GG-Duo's Avatar
Fujifilm cameras do seem like a good choice, with their focus on CCD instead of megapixels... but my concern is xD.

I've already got SD and SD converters laying around... xD would just piss me off.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
(03-02-2007, 11:02 AM)
AlteredBeast's Avatar
I just acquired a Nikon N65 SLR with a 28-90mm Aspherical lens. Is this any good for doing art photography? I am looking to start taking amazing photos and this free camera will offer me that ability.
Dice
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:19 AM)

Originally Posted by AlteredBeast

I just acquired a Nikon N65 SLR with a 28-90mm Aspherical lens. Is this any good for doing art photography? I am looking to start taking amazing photos and this free camera will offer me that ability.

Art photography as in style, or as in actually submitting to artistic institutions?
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
(03-02-2007, 11:23 AM)
AlteredBeast's Avatar
style. Shooting landscapes, the finer details of architecture, perhaps some depth of field shots in action, etc.
Dice
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:31 AM)

Originally Posted by AlteredBeast

style. Shooting landscapes, the finer details of architecture, perhaps some depth of field shots in action, etc.

Sure, it's plenty good. If you ever want to get into submitting stuff to places you'll want to get a medium or large format camera as 35mm is generally an amateur or photojournalist format. It's not big enough to have the details, subtlety, and large prints that interest the "fine art" world.
mrkgoo
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:31 AM)

Originally Posted by fart

So, speaking of, I seem to need dSLR advice.

Last year I bought an S2 IS on the advice of my mom (an avid photographer) who insisted that everything else i suggested was crap. I knew nothing about photography (and still don't!), and went along with it. Good news/bad news: on the upside (downside) I guess I've gotten the photography bug pretty badly. On the downside (:() I'm unhappy with the S2 for a variety of reasons, largely the inability to shoot available light with it (the S2 is famous for ridiculous noise at even moderately high ISO). So, I think I'd like to move to a dSLR for that reason and for ease of manual control. Getting to the point:

I've been looking at the Nikon D40, Pentax K100/110D, Canon XTi. My budget is non-existent at the moment, but I'm not looking to buy for a while, and I expect it will have hit modest by then. I'm more interested in making sure that I have a camera that will fit me for a while than I am in a dollar amount. My plan is to buy make sure that, first off, I have a fast prime (~50mm or so?) with the body, and then to go from there. From reading reviews I'm starting to think that maybe IS is a pretty good idea as well.

Before you ask, I've gone out and held all three bodies, and my favorites are probably the Pentax (less so) and the Nikon (mostest). I am aware of the Nikon's AF motor deficiency though, and the lack of an AF fast prime is worrying for me, as I enjoy moving subjects.

Other notes: I've inherited a very nice Nikon N50 that I'll be using a little as well. Film is probably not the best media for me, though, as the processing cost and latency don't fit very well for someone who averages about 2 decent shots per 4-500.

Thoughts? Bueller? Bueller?

Just keep in mind, if you are serious about SLR photography, the body is nearly the least of your equipment - when you get a an SLR system, you are buying into the entire lens system - the lenses you will keep forever, but the body you will upgrade. Which is one reason I went canon - for the huge extensive lens range. Also, I wanted available light photography, and I'm a stickler for low noise, and I understood that the canon CMOS sensor were meant to be awesoem in that regard. I'm happy with my 350D (Rebel XT), but it's the lenses that keep me buying more. I will probably upgrade to whatever the successor to the 30D is, though, but even until then I'm happy with my equipment.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-02-2007, 06:54 PM)
demon's Avatar
Alright, I was almost set on a F30/F31, but then I started seeing stuff about a Fujifilm F40 which should be out really soon, and I'm not really sure if it's supposed to be an upgrade to the F30/31 or what?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp...f31fd&show=all

This side by side comparison chart makes it look like it doesn't even have all the features of the 30/31, like where it says it doesn't have aperture or shutter priority. But it sounds like people on this board are saying it has less purple-fringing and whatnot. Is this something worth waiting for?
Squirrel Killer
Member
(03-02-2007, 07:51 PM)
Squirrel Killer's Avatar

Originally Posted by White Man

Camera buying stuff seems to come up often. Let's see if we can't keep the buying questions to this thread.

That reminds me, I've been meaning to ask about a telephoto lens for my DSLR.

I've been looking at this for a while now, especially after a local photo place advertised it for ~$160. Now that's dirt-"WARNING: THIS IS A PIECE OF CRAP"-cheap for 75-300mm, and even though it doesn't have the best reviews, I wonder if it might be "good enough" for what I want. Basically, I just want something for my personal use of some amateur outdoor sports, just something long enough to get relatively close up on a big field. f/4 qualifies as "slow glass", but since I'm going to be shooting outside, is f/4 really all that slow? I'm pretty meticulous about and take pretty good care of my gear, so I'm not too concerned about build quality, but obviously if I'm shooting sports, I can't always treat it with kid gloves.

Any thoughts?
mrkgoo
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:05 PM)

Originally Posted by Squirrel Killer

That reminds me, I've been meaning to ask about a telephoto lens for my DSLR.

I've been looking at this for a while now, especially after a local photo place advertised it for ~$160. Now that's dirt-"WARNING: THIS IS A PIECE OF CRAP"-cheap for 75-300mm, and even though it doesn't have the best reviews, I wonder if it might be "good enough" for what I want. Basically, I just want something for my personal use of some amateur outdoor sports, just something long enough to get relatively close up on a big field. f/4 qualifies as "slow glass", but since I'm going to be shooting outside, is f/4 really all that slow? I'm pretty meticulous about and take pretty good care of my gear, so I'm not too concerned about build quality, but obviously if I'm shooting sports, I can't always treat it with kid gloves.

Any thoughts?


Well, just in case anyone also wants an answer and uses this thread:

All reports I hear is that that lens (and it's makI-III brethren) are all crap. Now, I don't know if that's just elitist posturing or not, because I haven't ever tried the lens myself. Different people will have different requirements and resolution acceptability. I'm a bit of a stickler in getting the best equipment I can, so I probably wouldn't get it myself.

Note that if you're taking sports, you may be using the long-end a bit more than the short, so the widest it goes is probably higher than f4.0 (it's f5.6 at the 300 end). Still, I'd think this is probably reasonbly fast. I use a 70-200 f4L, and in bright daylight, shutters of 1/1000 or more are easily doable (iso100).

If your budget can afford, I suggest looking into:

70-300 IS: the newest version of that lens, but it has IS, so the price is atleast doubled for a new one -they're close to what, US$600? The IS has a special panning mode for tracking shots, which activates only the vertical IS, so you can still track well. The reviews for this lens are pretty good - it has aspherical elements to help. At 300 end resolves into the 1600 line widths/per height (?) range which is pretty good (for reference, the older 75-300 only achieves that when stopped down,centre of the picture and at closer focal - at longer, it fails to even get 12-1300 which is pretty poor - source photozone. For more reference the 70-200f4l, which I have, gets over 1800 close to 2000 wide open, throughout the whole focal length, but it is a pro-style 'L'). This model has been known to have an issue with portrait orientation images being soft, but that waas recognsied by Canon and fixed (certain serial no.s).

The other suggestion is to take a look at the 70-200 f4L - it doesn't have that great a zoom range, but it's adequate for most occasions bar long-distance bird shots. But the quality is exceptional! It's relatively cheap (for nuts), but the main problems are still that it's quite expensive for just an enthusiast, and since it's 'L', it can be hard to go back to other lenses :p. When I first was looking into a tele myself, I posted here, and I was considering these two lenses - I settled on the 70-200 as someone suggested here (sickboy?), and I'm so happy a made that choice.

Haha, I am insane.
SvelteBoy
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:46 PM)
As others have already mentioned you can't go wrong with the Fujifilm F30. I've had mine for about 6 months and it takes great photos. Being a gadget whore, I decided to get another camera, the Leica D-Lux 3, which has a unique 16x9 CCD and super sharp Leica lens. The Panasonic DMC-LX2 is essentially the same camera as the D-Lux 3 besides some aesthetic differences.

SvelteBoy
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:50 PM)

Originally Posted by demon

Alright, I was almost set on a F30/F31, but then I started seeing stuff about a Fujifilm F40 which should be out really soon, and I'm not really sure if it's supposed to be an upgrade to the F30/31 or what?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp...f31fd&show=all

This side by side comparison chart makes it look like it doesn't even have all the features of the 30/31, like where it says it doesn't have aperture or shutter priority. But it sounds like people on this board are saying it has less purple-fringing and whatnot. Is this something worth waiting for?

The F40 is more of an update to the F20. There is no successor to the F30/F31fd yet. I'll try to find you the link from a Japanese website that compared the F40 and the F31fd, with the F31fd slightly beating it in image quality.
mrkgoo
Member
(03-02-2007, 11:54 PM)

Originally Posted by SvelteBoy

As others have already mentioned you can't go wrong with the Fujifilm F30. I've had mine for about 6 months and it takes great photos. Being a gadget whore, I decided to get another camera, the Leica D-Lux 3, which has a unique 16x9 CCD and super sharp Leica lens. The Panasonic DMC-LX2 is essentially the same camera as the D-Lux 3 besides some aesthetic differences.


that's such a sexy camera.
demon
I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
(03-03-2007, 12:35 AM)
demon's Avatar

Originally Posted by SvelteBoy

The F40 is more of an update to the F20. There is no successor to the F30/F31fd yet. I'll try to find you the link from a Japanese website that compared the F40 and the F31fd, with the F31fd slightly beating it in image quality.

That's alright, I've already seen it (if you're speaking of the night shots of some japanese street). The biggest difference I noticed was a lot of purple glowing around brightly lit objects. Supposedly you can edit it out in photoshop with a number of ways, but it'd be nice to not have to do that.
Grimlock
Member
(03-03-2007, 05:57 AM)

Originally Posted by fart

So, speaking of, I seem to need dSLR advice.

Last year I bought an S2 IS on the advice of my mom (an avid photographer) who insisted that everything else i suggested was crap. I knew nothing about photography (and still don't!), and went along with it. Good news/bad news: on the upside (downside) I guess I've gotten the photography bug pretty badly. On the downside (:() I'm unhappy with the S2 for a variety of reasons, largely the inability to shoot available light with it (the S2 is famous for ridiculous noise at even moderately high ISO). So, I think I'd like to move to a dSLR for that reason and for ease of manual control. Getting to the point:

I've been looking at the Nikon D40, Pentax K100/110D, Canon XTi. My budget is non-existent at the moment, but I'm not looking to buy for a while, and I expect it will have hit modest by then. I'm more interested in making sure that I have a camera that will fit me for a while than I am in a dollar amount. My plan is to buy make sure that, first off, I have a fast prime (~50mm or so?) with the body, and then to go from there. From reading reviews I'm starting to think that maybe IS is a pretty good idea as well.

Before you ask, I've gone out and held all three bodies, and my favorites are probably the Pentax (less so) and the Nikon (mostest). I am aware of the Nikon's AF motor deficiency though, and the lack of an AF fast prime is worrying for me, as I enjoy moving subjects.

Other notes: I've inherited a very nice Nikon N50 that I'll be using a little as well. Film is probably not the best media for me, though, as the processing cost and latency don't fit very well for someone who averages about 2 decent shots per 4-500.

Thoughts? Bueller? Bueller?

Well, I've only had my K100d a couple of weeks, but I'm already loving how much cleaner the output is in comparison to what I was getting indoors with my previous camera, a Canon S3is. While the S3 is a great and versatile running-about camera, I also wanted something that would do good low-light photos hand-held (I can't keep my Vivitar tripod in my back pocket, and I ain't too handy with a monopod), but I needed IS because my hands are so shaky, and the prices on the Nikkor IS lenses just about curled my hairs. For reference, here's the thread I made last month about deciding on the Pentax. After I made up my mind, I mangaged to get lucky and scored a K100d kit used for $500 shipped, and just got a new 50-200mm Pentax DA lens off Ebay for $165 shipped. Both of them have their UPC codes so I can get a $50 rebate off of each one, so I should get $100 back. I also just won a 50mm prime (fixed focus) F2.82 lens for $40 shipped-that should arrive by Tuesday. I also (reluctantly) returned my S3 for a full refund-I thought about keeping it, but a sudden $400 car repair right after the K100d arrived made that impossible financially-I think I'll pick it up on clearance again once Canon releases the next model. So far, I'd say the only real issue I have with the K100d is that I occasionally get a soft-focused shot-like 1 out of every 20 or so the autofocus doesn't quite lock before I take the shot, but since it doesn't show up in a 4X6 print and I'm still learning all the ins-and-outs of the SLR I'm not ready to sweat it.

But if IS wasn't an issue cost-wise, I'd have jump on the Nikon D40 instead. I think that it has a bit better image quality than the K100d, and it seems more newbie-friendly.

Thread Tools