SLR Camera

[BigBuck$]

I keep seeing incredible pictures of wildlife on this sight and I think its time for me to get a better camera. I have a cheap digital that I bought at Wal-Mart that is good enough for up close stuff and to take along when there is fear of loosing it or filling it full of water but I would really like to get something that I can take some good pictures with.

That being said what camera would be good for someone just getting into photography? What lens do I need to take pictures of say a deer at 200 yards? Can someone recomend a book or website to do some research on camera / lens combinations?

[Big Bull]

Check out http://www.dpreview.com

[Versatile]

Nikon and Canon.

[TheClash]

fuji or olympus....more features less money.


look for a high optical zoom...digital zoom sucks.

[BigBuck$]

Check out http://www.dpreview.com

Thanks BB awesome website for comparing the cameras side by side. Looks like it comes down to deciding how much you want to spend and what features you want and need. As far as lenses are concerened what power (not sure on the term) do "most" of you use? Are the lenses interchangable, will say a canon lense work on a nikon camera?

Sorry about all the stupid questions, maybe I'll join a photography message board and direct my questions there :wave:

[LongDraw]

If you are looking at taking quality pictures at deer @ 200 yards get ready to dish out 7k for a lense.

[slipbobber]

Have a look at www.kenrockwell.com. Some good comparisions of cameras from a pros point of view.The Nikon D-40 is a good entree level camera and add a 70-300mm telephoto lense for around $1000.00. If you think you need a better camera than that get the one in your price range with the features you want. Go talk to the guys at Mcbain Camera or Vistec. They will point you in the right derection.

[Versatile]

I think there are some Nikons and maybe even a few Cannon Rebels on CGN right now.

[SauceDonkey]

Personally I would recommend a Canon 30D and for the lens....
If you want to take quality pictures of a deer @ 200 yards your
going to need a tripod and a lens with image stabilization and wicked
zoom capabilities, your going to spend as much on a lens then the
camera itself. If you get a Canon or Nikon camera body you can always
get a Sigma lens, these lenses have decent quality and a decent price.
But one thing for sure is don't just go to one camera store and get suckered
into buying a camera, camera salesmen are the worst salesmen.
They will try to sell you anything and everything so just take it easy and
learn as much as possible before settling.
I found "The Camera Store" to be the friendliest, most helpful and they
bargain with the already cheap prices. Happy I spent a couple grand there.
On the other hand Saneal Camera in sunridge mall was the absolute worst.
the morons working there are not afraid to let you know they just want your money.

[Mish]

Personally I'm partial to Nikon. I used to sell cameras and I absolutely fell in love with Nikons. They back up their product 110%, as opposed to most other companies that pick and choose which cameras get extended warranties. Nikon offers a minimum of 2 years (double that of most companies) on everything, and I've seen lenses have 5+ years. That being said, I have an Olympus I take everywhere, just because it's what I need.

Anyway, that's just personal preference, you need to get what works for you. I sent you a PM.

[Big Bull]

BigBuck$, I'm using a Canon Rebel XTi, and my main lens is a 100-400mm image stabilised lens(equivalent to 160-640mm because of the image sensor, but that could get confusing). I bought the camera with two kit lenses, but the quality of image from these lenses is limited. The 100-400 lens is pricey(about $1500 now - they have dropped about $500 since our dollar increased in value), but the quality of the images from it is very noticeable. Because of the image stabilization, you are able to use this lens without a tripod, which I find very useful, since wildlife shots usually happen pretty fast. The 17-55mm kit lens that came with the camera is OK for basic shots, but I will eventually upgrade this lens when I can afford to. I am partial to Canon, but Nikon is equally as good a camera. Canon and Nikon lenses are not interchangeable, but you might be able to get adaptors. Sigma makes very good lenses that are made to fit each brand of camera, and they are a little cheaper than Canon or Nikon lenses, however, all camera features may not work with an aftermarket lens. The way I look at it: I will have my 100-400mm lens for many, many years, I will probably replace the camera body in a few years as I become a better photographer, and the digital technology improves. I would not go with anything less than 10MP. Do as much research as possible. I find camera sales people try to sell you what they would want, rather than listening to your wants and needs. I have done most of my major camera purchases online, for this reason. I have dealt mainly with McBain Camera in Edmonton and Henrys.com out of Toronto. I have just recently discovered The Camera Store in Calgary. I haven't dealt with them, but they have good prices and have a great selection of quality products. Looking forward to seeing your photos on hear soon!!!

[harv3589]

I have been using Pentax for years and it is the most under rated camera manufacture out there...there new DSLR's are great, their glass is outstanding and will give Canon or Nikon a run for their money. Read through the reviews on the B&H site on the Pentax K10D and other stores...alot of pro's have changed over to it....by far the best bang for your buck. They do have a standard 2 yr warranty in Canada as well.

[Bear]

If you don't want to go the full SLR route I would suggest looking at the Canon Powershot S5IS. It has features galor that make it almost DSLR but can still point and shoot as well. Best feature is a 12X optical zoom and 8MP sensor. With the built in Image Stabalization you can get pics out to 200yrds and then crop them and still have a pretty good sized image.

This picture is unedited or touched up. Was taken at about 100yrds without any cropping. I own the S3IS which is the previous model and only 6MP. Love my camera. Takes wonderful pics.

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/9162/deersmallyq5.th.jpg (http://img524.imageshack.us/my.php?image=deersmallyq5.jpg)

[TheClash]

i don't want to sound like a turd...or **** anyone off...i am just relating my experiences....others may differ..but it think it should be said...

i used to be a huge canon fan..and admitedly they usually take pretty goood photos...however...ove the last 8 or so years i have had at least 4 canon products just up and die....no mistreatment...no abuse....just quit. each time i recieved the same response from customer service...."prodicts have a lifetime....and it varies from product to product and user to user.." to me this is unacceptable customer service and product expectations. i will not own a canon again......but to those that are using them and are happy with them i say good for you..i hope yours last longer than mine did...

btw...3 were digital cameras and one was a digital video camera. i take good care of my gear and keep things neat, clean and in good working order.

[Vindalbakken]

I run the AV department at our school. I started with the Nikon CoolPix and have since switched to Canon. We have all Canon equipment from cheap point and shoot to a 40D with lenses as well as a variety of video cameras. They are used by an endless parade of students from grade 5 through 12. We have never had a camera quit on us yet.

Nikon has recently entered the budget SLR market in a big way with the intro of the D40 undercutting Canon's Rebel XT by about 50 dollars. They are technically not the same but practically are so little different that you wouldn't know. If you fancy expanding your camera requirements in the future you would do well with Canon or Nikon - they have the widest range of options in the system. If you just want a camera and won't likely be upgrading substantially then any of the other brands will work for you as well.

If you don't really want the size and cost of the full SLR I would second the recommendation of the Canon S5.

If you bought a Rebel XT with the standard lens and sprung for a 70 - 300 IS lens you would be covered quite nicely.

[Bull Shooter]

If you bought a Rebel XT with the standard lens and sprung for a 70 - 300 IS lens you would be covered quite nicely.

Vindalbakken – Talk about prophesy! I had been admiring the quality of some of the poster’s pictures and PM’d looking for info (thanks to Copi, by the way) and last week I purchased the new Canon Rebel XTi and only yesterday did I order the 70-300 USM IS lens!

You just got me over any “Buyer’s Remorse” that I may have been suffering.

My decision to go with a Canon was based equally on my previous product satisfaction and the fact that I had a few lenses that would be interchangeable with the new camera format. I see a lot of great SLR’s in the market today. Regards, Mike

[davem]

[QUOTE=Bear;106943]If you don't want to go the full SLR route I would suggest looking at the Canon Powershot S5IS. It has features galor that make it almost DSLR but can still point and shoot as well. Best feature is a 12X optical zoom and 8MP sensor. With the built in Image Stabalization you can get pics out to 200yrds and then crop them and still have a pretty good sized image.

This picture is unedited or touched up. Was taken at about 100yrds without any cropping. I own the S3IS which is the previous model and only 6MP. Love my camera. Takes wonderful pics.
QUOTE]


I have this same camera (S3IS) and am very happy with it, good video as well, I paid $350 for it last summer. There are some similar competitive models out there now with an 18 times zoom worth checking into them as well.

Dave

[TheClash]

good site to help ya out

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp

although the stores/sites they quote are american...with the strong dollar you can sometimes get a good deal.

[BigBuck$]

Right now I'm leaning towards the Canon but haven't made a final decision yet. I need to get to a camera shop and ask a few more questions on the lenses. The image stabalizing feature in the high powered lens is a must unless I want to drag a tripod along. I'm still trying to interperate all of Canons letters and what they mean. Ken Rockwell website does a good job with the Nikons but I have to find some Canon info.

Example: EF-S 18-55m f/3.5-5.6 IS and EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lenses

What does the 3.5-5.6 part mean? EF is External Focus right? And IS is Image Stabalizing?

:confused: Confusing for someone just starting out but interesting learning about all the options.

[Bear]

You are correct on the EF and IS discriptions. The f/3.5-5.6 is the f-stop or apperature setting. This allows for how much of the foreground and background will be in focus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F_stop

A 55-250mm lens will give you about the equivanlent of 7times zoom. The canon S5IS has 36 - 432 mm capabilities. Now the image quality from the S5IS will be less than that of the Rebel XTi but only cost you about $500 at most where the Rebel will go over a grand with lens kits and the such. The Rebel will also shoot in RAW format which is better for post processing with programs such as PhotoShop.

[Copidosoma]

Canon vs Nikon is pretty much a tossup. Don't get into the debates over that choice or worry about it too much. Both are excellent. Slightly different but excellent.
Check out this (http://photo.net/equipment/building-a-digital-slr-system/)article.
I'd personally buy something that was popular "last year" or get a used rebel (even the new ones are only 5 or 600 dollars). Spend the money on a lens. Seriously, this is what "makes" a digital SLR. I can't stress it enough. Money spent here is the real investment. A 300mm f4L IS is a bit pricey but will do great jobs on deer at 200m. Get a teleconverter and you will have a really sweet setup. With the sensor size you can crop alot too. Use the kit lens for landscape stuff and pick up a macro lens (and a tripod for everything).

Really try to avoid the temptation to get every little gadget out there. Figure out what you need and buy good stuff. It really makes a difference

Check out This book (http://www.amazon.com/Shaws-Nature-Photography-Field-Guide/dp/0817440593/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202226840&sr=1-1)

I found I learned alot from it. Some things are a bit outdated but the principles are the same. You need to get a really good grasp of the fundamentals (fstop/Depth of field issues, exposure) to consistently take great pictures. It is like shooting competitively.

Buy and learn to use Photoshop (or something like it) just a bit (don't get carried away though).

Go to photo.net (http://photo.net/) for occasional inspiration and information.

Have fun.:wave:

[TheClash]

good advice copi.....

learning how to use your functions will greatly improve your shots. you can make a decent picture into an incredible photograph just by using different settings.....as well as expirimenting with your layout and the framing of your subjects.....try to get away from the same old shot of the subject in the middle of the shot blah blah blah.....don't be afraid to mix it up...get some great foreground detail in your shots etc...

it is like anything else....educate yourself as much as you can and then get out and use it.

[JohninAB]

Just found out something new. I did not know that some of the old 35 mm SLR lenses will work on these newer Digital SLR's. May have to check into getting a digital SLR and using my lenses from my 35 mm SLR if they are compatable.

[harv3589]

Not all DSLR's are backwards compatible with lenses...the only one that is 100% is Pentax. Nikon and Canon both have changed mounts making some of their older lenses useless for the new DSLR's

[lippy]

Check out e-bay for an old AE-1( there are a lot of them on there ) They were extremely well made and take unbelievably good pictures. I have had mine since 1979 or so and still have not bought a digital camera. The e-bay site is also full of parts and accessaries..read(cheap lenses) and some in almost new condition. I think the reason for the large number of these cameras on the site is due to the digital cameras success and not because it isn't a good camera.

[Copidosoma]

Just found out something new. I did not know that some of the old 35 mm SLR lenses will work on these newer Digital SLR's. May have to check into getting a digital SLR and using my lenses from my 35 mm SLR if they are compatable.

The old manual focus Canon lenses won't work (I think you can get an adapter but you lose infinity focus or something weird like that) but any EF lens will.

Don't expect your old lenses to "look the same" though. There is a change due to the sensor size though. A 100mm lens will appear to be 160mm (unless you have a full frame digital sensor $$$). Essentially you are using a smaller format of "film" in the camera. Big bonus for the telephoto lenses and macros. Not so good for the wide angle.

[Vindalbakken]

For those considering a photo editing program such as Photoshop I would recommend Photoshop Elements. Not the full featured program but has the popular features that a person will use.

[Copidosoma]

For those considering a photo editing program such as Photoshop I would recommend Photoshop Elements. Not the full featured program but has the popular features that a person will use.

X2. It is usually bundled with the camera and saves you a pile of cash (the full version of Photoshop is expensive, although very powerful).

[russ]

Another editor you may like to look at is GIMP. I use it for re-sizing quite often because PS is such a slow loader. I haven't used it much for retouching though but if I did I would dupe the originals and work with the copies. "just in case"

[winged1]

I've been a Canon nut for 30 years. Have tried several other suppliers, but for the larger investment, I've stuck with a single supplier.

I'd also recommend looking into the older 35mm cameras. Canon A series was a quality offering. I don't use them much now, largely because my habits have changed (less time in the field).

I have become intimate with many of the Canon point and shoot (repair), and have adopted the A5xx series for my game cams.

For quality wildlife photography, you need to invest in some good quality zoom lenses. You need to decide film over sensor, as most manufacturer's lenses are not interchangable.

You can bet thier are some great deals on used lens/camera combinations in 35mm. Otherwise, make a longer term plan to invest in quality digital units.

[mskrecek]

I have a nikon d50, but if looking strickly from the lens selection stand point without purchasing aftermarket products, Nikon has a greater selection of nikon brand lenses vs canon brand lenses. Both nikon and canon put out a superior product regarding dslr and the processors they put in them. Nikon has a 2 yr warranty on their bodies and 5 yr warranty on their lenses. I'm not sure what canon has. I had to send one nikon lens back for repair and had it back in three weeks.

[deadeye]

Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Pentax all offer reasonably priced digital cameras that have more features than you will ever use. Decide what you want in a camera and buy the camera that suits your needs. Film is dead for more reasons than I can mention, don't even go there. 8mp will get you an amazing enlargement over 4 ft. long
No lens will get you close to a 200 yd deer, a deer has to be at bowhunting distances to get a decent shot. If you have the cash and are serious about wildlife photography definitely go with an IS or VR lens, you will still need a tripod unless you have really good light but they do make a big difference. I have a Canon xt which has shot over 70,000 frames, which is more than most people will shoot in a lifetime, and it has preformed flawlessly, also a 2 month old xti which I love. Attached to the xti is a Canon 100-400 IS lens which IMO is a dream lens. While any of the top brands are great cameras there is a reason when you go to a football game or to Jasper in the fall you see most of the pros with white lenses (Canon) on their cameras.
Photography has more to do with the person behind the camera than the equipment.

[Waxy]

I'm in the market for a DSLR, so I thought I'd bump this thread up.

I've done a TON of reading in the last few days, and I've pretty much narrowed it down to the Canon and Nikon cameras. I'm sure there's absolutely nothing wrong with the other options, but I think I've pretty much made up my mind to go with one or the other.

I'm looking at the Canon XSi or 40D, and the Nikon D40x, D90 or D200.

I'm currently leaning heavily toward the Nikon D90 and then trying to find a couple used Nikon VR lenses.

Any input is much appreciated...

Waxy

[Copidosoma]

As stated before, the quality of the lens makes a big difference. The pros sink alot of money into them. The investment is worth it as they move with you as you replace bodies.

You can get deals on used ones and if you get a really good one the resale value is also very high (but you won't want to sell it).

However, as usual, the tool behind the camera is by far the most important part.

Enjoy.

[russ]

Waxy, I have a Rebel XT and the ISO is just not quite there for low light wildlife photography. I mentioned this to an a acquaintance of mine that's a fellow Canon aficionado and he told me flat out, while 50D is a lot better (and would be my choice given my lens investment). The Nikon D300 is the one to go with since it has about 1/2 as much noise with the equivalent ISO, this isn't a factor until you exceed 1600 or better. If you're doing any amount of low light photography and want good quality then the D300 is worth a look. I might still go that way BUT if I do, it won't be anytime too soon just because of the bucks involved.

[Waxy]

Waxy, I have a Rebel XT and the ISO is just not quite there for low light wildlife photography. I mentioned this to an a acquaintance of mine that's a fellow Canon aficionado and he told me flat out, while 50D is a lot better (and would be my choice given my lens investment). The Nikon D300 is the one to go with since it has about 1/2 as much noise with the equivalent ISO, this isn't a factor until you exceed 1600 or better. If you're doing any amount of low light photography and want good quality then the D300 is worth a look. I might still go that way BUT if I do, it won't be anytime too soon just because of the bucks involved.

Yeah, the D300 would be a nice rig, but the big $$$ and the rather big and bulky size of the camera itself are big drawbacks for me.

According to what I've read, the D90 supposedly uses the same processing wizardry and produces nearly identical low light results as the D300/D3/D700.

Waxy

[Waxy]

However, as usual, the tool behind the camera is by far the most important part.

That's not what I wanted to hear. :D

If only you could buy talent... :lol:

Waxy

[artie]

After spending about thirty years backpacking I found that if I was going a long way the first thing I would do is pick up my loaded back pack. If it was too heavy the first thing I would throw out was the camera and lenses. Twenty years ago we longed for something like the small digital point and shot cameras you can get now. Think about all the conditions you will be using the camera under. If you are just goin to be car camping you can carry a big heavy camera but if you are hiking any distance into the back country then consider how heavy and bulky the camera is.

[Young Buck]

Look for used DSLR's, I got a Nikon D1x for $500! Chances of finding that kind of deal are slim but keep an eye out. I have shot film for three years now and I still am not getting really consistent results, however my film camera is 100% manual, no auto options makes it tough! As for the lens get a fast lens so you can shoot in low light, I have the Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm with vibration reduction and a 2.8 apperture through out the whole focal length. Actually, your best bet is to go to Vistek or McBain camera and talk to a pro there, then you can look at the cameras and lenses and they would help you get the right set up. I do think you would be happier with a digital vs. film, and when you get the camera, take a beginner photography course whether you get digital or film. If you're from Edmonton area the Devonian Gardens has a course in june and october I believe. Hope that helps.:wave: This reply is for BigBuck$, But I think the D90 is a good choice Waxy.

[Maverick_Brittany]

I am a Nikon guy and currently use a D200. I absolutely love the camera and all it has to offer but am now looking to add a D300 to the camera bag as well.
The higher ISO abilities of Nikon's newer camera's like the D300, D90, D700 and D3 is amazing.
If you are just starting out a D90 will do you no wrong, it is very feature rich and user friendly as well.
I am hoping to add a much longer lens to my collection soon but it will probally end up being a sigma bigma lens as I used a friends last week and was really impressed with it.
Good luck with your camera shopping, post up some pictures when you get it home and give it a try.

Mav....

[Jeromeo]

another great website is www.Cameralabs.com and once you buy a camera www.dslrtips.com is a site with a ton of info and tips.

I like Canon DSLR camera's but I personally find their kit lenses to be a little.... junky. You have to spend a few more bucks and get a decent IS lens. Nonetheless the camera's are nice. Their point and shoots are the best on the market but we are talking DSLR here.

Nikon is a great camera. The D60 is a nice camera and the kit lens is a VR (vibration reduction) lens. Nikon makes some beautiful entry level DSLR's.

A nikon lens will not fit on a Canon lens.
A minolta AF lens will fit onto a sony as sony bought out minolta.

Sony is quite possibly the most underrated DSLR camera on the market. I personally own one and it takes great shots. The reason I bought the sony was because I had some minolta lenses kickin' around from my 35mm so I decided to not spend another crapload on new lenses and stick with Sony. They have a built in Shake reduction in the camera that actually isn't too bad.
The reviews on Cameralabs will help you in deciding what you want to go for.
As for the 200 yard shots of deer. I'd suggest a 300mm zoom lens. Learn about what you are going to buy before you buy it. It's a big purchase and nothing aggravates me more than someone who buys an expensive camera and has absolutely no idea how to use it. Why buy a $3000 camera and keep it in Automatic mode??

Anyways good luck and I hope this info somewhat helps.

[harv3589]

How bout looking at which one to go with, Nikon or Canon by what they each offers in lens department? Camera bodies come and go and are now replaced with new ones regularly, but lenses aren't. They don't offer the same lenses....thats what made me decide to with Canon for my wildlife photog....I was shooting Pentax and it was great but lacked the lens choices I wanted. The best investment will be in your lens choice.

[canadianhunter]

I just ordered my Canon XSi the other day. It is very comparable to the Nikon D90 but not as expensive. I ordered it from www.vistek.ca they have retail outlets in Edmonton and Calgary. Great sale on right now where you get the body, standard lense and a 70-250mm image stabilized lens for about $900.

[Waxy]

Great info.

I'm headed over to The Camera Store here in Calgary at lunch to put my hands on as many of the different options as I can. They have a pretty good reputation for knowing their stuff too, so hopefully I can learn something while I'm at it.

Thanks,

Waxy

[Big Bull]

The Camera Store has the best prices Waxy, or that's what the say. I'm in deep with Canon for all of my photo and video, but I wouldn't have a problem buying Nikon. I bought the Canon XTi and have been fairly happy with it, good value. I did get the kit lenses with it, but they are bottom end lenses. Depending on your budget, as others have said, the lenses are what really make the difference. I got a Canon 100-400 image stabilized lens for wildlife photography, and it is very easy to see the difference in picture quality between it and the 75-300 lens that came with the camera. In summary, I wouldn't get the kit lenses, if you are willing to buy better ones. I'm sure there are quite a few people like me that would be willing to part with the kit lenses for cheap, barely used.

[harv3589]

You can buy a cheaper body, put a great lens on it and get good pics but dump your money into an expensive body, put a cheap kit lens on it and your pics won't be as good.

[russ]

You can buy a cheaper body, put a great lens on it and get good pics but dump your money into an expensive body, put a cheap kit lens on it and your pics won't be as good.

Oh you mean like matching my XT up to this 100-400mm L lens. I don't think my marriage can survive it though...

http://www.vistek.ca/store/CameraLenses/159066/canon-ef-100400mm-f4556-l-usm-super-telephoto-zoom-lens.aspx

Ah, but I can dream :D

[Vindalbakken]

Russ, with your XT you already have 1.6x magnification with the smaller sensor so you don't really need the real long zoom. Couple that with the fact that it is the low light you are after so you could really use the faster lens.

This is the baby you should divorce over http://www.vistek.ca/store/CameraLenses/204265/canon-ef-70200mm-f28l-usm-telephoto-zoom-lens.aspx

[deanmc]

I have a canon XTi and love it. I bought it off E-bay from Henrys.com. Awesome service BTW.
Lenses and high end cameras are big bucks. Unless you have a lot of photograpic experience I would suggest starting with a Canon xsi and a decent 300 or 400 mm lense. (lots of good used stuff on e-bay as well).
These units used still bring a decent dollar on ebay if you decided to upgrade in a year I dont think you would lose a lot.

[russ]

Crop factor not withstanding, I already have a 100-300mm lens but it's not IS, that's what I want next. According to Canon and other sources I can gain up to 3 stops by switching to an image stabilized lens. Now I'm not sure if the claim is accurate BUT I know it would be nice to get even 1 stop lots of times and I know that I would love a little more focal length. It's the "go big or go home" factor. (well there is a $20,000+ Sigma but that would definitely cause a great deal of grief!)

[Vindalbakken]

The IS lenses do work. I have them on the 40D body at the school and they are what Canon says they are.

Anyway, if you throw the 2x converter on that 70-200 lens you will still have an f5.6 lens at 400 mm and you will have the extra stop and a half of lens when you want it for low light use. Otherwise, since you already are covered in the 100-300 zoom range, you are into this pretty lady http://canon.ca/english/index-products.asp?lng=en&prodid=976&sgid=7&gid=2&ovr=1

[russ]

you really are trying to get me into trouble aren't you Scott!

And if anyone's wondering, good ol' vindal just point y'all to a $7250 lens :lol: That would be grounds for a divorce!

[Vindalbakken]

oh, but you would be able to see the hairs on that bugling elk's nape like it was daylight at an hour after sunset. How sweet it would be.

Seriously though, the 70-200 F2.8 IS with the 1.4 converter is what is on my wish list. First I need to get together the cash for the 50D body.

[russ]

Well the 50D certainly piqued my interest and I have a feeling that will be my next camera, however given that my XT isn't even a year old yet I have a feeling it might easier to slip a lens by the wife. Too bad IS L glass is white, she'd notice that!

[Vindalbakken]

Airbrush?

[russ]

Airbrush?

yeah very very carefully, wouldn't want to blow the warranty.

[Copidosoma]

. deleted because someone already posted a link to a lens worthy of a divorce.:evilgrin:

[Waxy]

Well I can report that after going and actually putting my hands on the cameras yesterday, I have a clear cut favourite.

I tried a Canon 40D and XSi and the Nikon D60, D90 and D300.

I'm 99% sure I'm going to go with the Nikon D90.

Canon 40D - nice camera, I like the really fast FPS it can do, but too big and bulky and no liveview on the LCD screen. (These are major strikes with my wife.)

XSi - this one is a CLOSE second, mainly due to the price, a little more than half of the D90.

Nikon D300 - very nice camera, but a little too big again, and WAY too expensive.

The D90 seems to have everything I want, and be in my somewhat acceptable price range. That said, if someone told me two years ago I'd spend $1500 on a camera, I'd have told them they were insane.

So now it comes down to lenses. I was sold on the 18-200 VR lens, but my wife doesn't like it. It's "too big and clumsy, and it's heavy". So, what are people's thoughts on the 18-55 VR kit lens? I think this is where I'll end up starting, simply due to its size and weight. I'll have to add the 18-200 VR later...

Waxy

[Copidosoma]

So now it comes down to lenses. I was sold on the 18-200 VR lens, but my wife doesn't like it. It's "too big and clumsy, and it's heavy". So, what are people's thoughts on the 18-55 VR kit lens? I think this is where I'll end up starting, simply due to its size and weight. I'll have to add the 18-200 VR later...

Waxy

You (and your wife) are probably going to have to learn to deal with the fact that to get really good photos you have to deal with equipment that is "too big and clumsy, and it's heavy". Sorry.

18-55 kit lens is a great lens for walking around doing people shots and maybe the odd landscape. Certainly the one you want for your touristy things.

It won't do the deer at 200yds. For that you have to get bug, bulky and expensive. You really can't cut corners or you might as well have bought a point and shoot.


Best of luck though. I'm sure you will enjoy the results.

p.s. go buy a book on nature photography (Robert Shaw wrote a very good one). It will really make a big difference.

[Copidosoma]

You (and your wife) are probably going to have to learn to deal with the fact that to get really good photos you have to deal with equipment that is "too big and clumsy, and it's heavy". Sorry.

18-55 kit lens is a great lens for walking around doing people shots and maybe the odd landscape. Certainly the one you want for your touristy things.

It won't do the deer at 200yds. For that you have to get bug, bulky and expensive. You really can't cut corners or you might as well have bought a point and shoot.


Best of luck though. I'm sure you will enjoy the results.

p.s. go buy a book on nature photography (Robert Shaw wrote a very good one). It will really make a big difference.

Ignore most of that. Got the poster wrong.

Enjoy the new camera. Learn how to use it properly. Save your pennies for good lenses as you decide how you want to specialize.

[Waxy]

You (and your wife) are probably going to have to learn to deal with the fact that to get really good photos you have to deal with equipment that is "too big and clumsy, and it's heavy". Sorry.

You're preaching to the choir. :lol:

18-55 kit lens is a great lens for walking around doing people shots and maybe the odd landscape. Certainly the one you want for your touristy things.

That's all I wanted to hear. That will end up being the bulk of the camera's use anyway.

It won't do the deer at 200yds. For that you have to get bug, bulky and expensive. You really can't cut corners or you might as well have bought a point and shoot.

Yep, I'm already saving my pennies for that. :D

p.s. go buy a book on nature photography (Robert Shaw wrote a very good one). It will really make a big difference.

Great minds think alike lol. It's on my Christmas wish list.

Waxy

[Big Bull]

Waxy, I've been looking for a new wide angle zoom lens with image stabilization and see that Vistek has a lens that I am considering, and I noticed that they have it available with the Canon XSi as a kit. I don't think the lens would be too bulky. You might want to check it out.
http://www.vistek.ca/store/CameraLenses/238195/canon-eos-digital-rebel-xsi-kit-sigma-af-18200mm-os-lens.aspx

[BigBuck$]

I have made up my mind on the lense I want. This is the only way to get a good photo of any wildlife at 200 yards.

http://gizmodo.com/353422/i-see-london-i-see-france-i-see-your-underpants-from-32-miles-away-with-canon-5200mm-ultra-telephoto-lens

:D

[Copidosoma]

I have made up my mind on the lense I want. This is the only way to get a good photo of any wildlife at 200 yards.

http://gizmodo.com/353422/i-see-london-i-see-france-i-see-your-underpants-from-32-miles-away-with-canon-5200mm-ultra-telephoto-lens

:D

Wow, Imagine the pack you would need for that. "Tripod mandatory":evilgrin:

[Vindalbakken]

I would think it should read "sherpa mandatory".

[harv3589]

Canon 40D - nice camera, I like the really fast FPS it can do, but too big and bulky and no liveview on the LCD screen. (These are major strikes with my wife.)

Waxy

Waxy,

You are wrong about the 40D, it does have live view on the LCD....I shoot with that camera myself and love it.

The bulky thing I guess is personal, but I dont feel it is and I use mine with the battery grip on it all the time as well as a Really Right Stuff L bracket.

[harv3589]

Oh you mean like matching my XT up to this 100-400mm L lens. I don't think my marriage can survive it though...

http://www.vistek.ca/store/CameraLenses/159066/canon-ef-100400mm-f4556-l-usm-super-telephoto-zoom-lens.aspx

Ah, but I can dream :D

What I am saying is dont run out and spend all your money on an expensive body and then cut your lens budget....you are better buying your lens and spending less on the body.....this will work out better for you in the long run, like I said their are new bodies coming out every year to match or beat the competition when it comes to Nikon and Canon....the lens is the heart of your equipment and makes the picture.

[Maverick_Brittany]

The D90 is a great camera and will get some great shots with it for sure.
The best advice I can give you now is to spend a little mone and take a one day coarse that will walk you through using the camera and taking pictures.
I did that when I got my DSLR and it was some of the best money I spent.
Now if anyone is looking for a nice lens to really reach out there and get those pictures have a look at the below lens.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3308&navigator=3

or even bigger and better, this one

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3349&navigator=3

You just need to win the lotto for the last one.. :lol:

Mav....

[harv3589]

Again, Canon wins out.....this is the ultimate wildlife lens ;)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/newsLetter/Mother-of-All-L-Lenses.jsp

[Waxy]

The D90 is a great camera and will get some great shots with it for sure.
The best advice I can give you now is to spend a little mone and take a one day coarse that will walk you through using the camera and taking pictures.
I did that when I got my DSLR and it was some of the best money I spent.
Now if anyone is looking for a nice lens to really reach out there and get those pictures have a look at the below lens.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3308&navigator=3

or even bigger and better, this one

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3349&navigator=3

You just need to win the lotto for the last one.. :lol:

Mav....

I bought it at The Camera Store, and they include a 2 DVD instruction manual specific to the camera and a one day instructional course on SLR photography with the purchase. I'm booked to take the course in January. I have to give a plug to The Camera Store here, their prices were the best I found, and the service was excellent, even on a busy Sat. afternoon. I left with everything I needed to get started at a very fair price.

I've done a lot of reading on the net too. I found this site really helpful for everything SLR, including the D90 specifically - www.kenrockwell.com - so much so, that I made a donation.

So far so good, I'm really impressed with this camera. It's amazingly easy to use right out of the box, and the more I learn the ins and outs, the more I appreciate it. I got some great shots of my boy in the backyard and around the house this weekend. Stuff I never could have captured with my point and shoot. The 18-55 VR lens is excellent for everyday and indoors, but I can see that I need to invest in an 18-200 VR lens sooner than later, the zoom is pretty limited with the 18-55.

Waxy

[Waxy]

Waxy,

You are wrong about the 40D, it does have live view on the LCD....I shoot with that camera myself and love it.

Yup, I stand corrected.

The bulky thing I guess is personal, but I dont feel it is and I use mine with the battery grip on it all the time as well as a Really Right Stuff L bracket.

Yeah I agree, it was far from a deal breaker for me personally, in fact I was really leaning toward this camera, but, like I said, my wife just didn't like the size of it. To each their own, I don't think there's right answer.

Waxy

[harv3589]

Spend the money on a high end lens now and see what you get...

[deadeye]

Spend your money on the lens. Any of todays low end cameras will take a photo comparable to a high end camera with the same lens. A low end camera will take great shots with a great lens, and high end camera will take lousy shots with a cheap lens. It's all about the lens.

[sbtennex]

Who needs an SLR? Newer digital cameras are getting unreal. Just picked up a new Panasonic DMC-FZ28 - 18X optical zoom (27-486 mm equivalent in a 35mm), real HD video, incredible controls, and you can choose to shoot in RAW format. Lightweight, small but comfortable to handle, and who can argue with the Leica lens? $400 and it does anything buddy's Rebel will do plus some it won't. Pic quality is easily as good (up to 10.1 MegaP's) and 13fps to boot.

[russ]

Here's a finger, 17-55mm kit lens & reverser ring.

[harv3589]

Who needs an SLR? Newer digital cameras are getting unreal. Just picked up a new Panasonic DMC-FZ28 - 18X optical zoom (27-486 mm equivalent in a 35mm), real HD video, incredible controls, and you can choose to shoot in RAW format. Lightweight, small but comfortable to handle, and who can argue with the Leica lens? $400 and it does anything buddy's Rebel will do plus some it won't. Pic quality is easily as good (up to 10.1 MegaP's) and 13fps to boot.

The point and shoot are getting good but they still won't touch a DSLR that is being used properly. DSLR are still superior.

[Young Buck]

Those are some WICKED lenses, I stand in awe. Hey I'm not a computer pro and I can't figrue out how to get pictures posted on here??? help!!!!!:cry:

[harv3589]

HOLY $#!^ !!!!!!!!!! Those are some WICKED lenses, I stand in awe. Hey I'm not a computer pro and I can't figrue out how to get pictures posted on here??? help!!!!!:cry:

The best way to upload pics to the internet is to get urself an account with either Flickr or Photobucket...I prefer Flickr. Once they are uploaded to there you will be given an address that you can add to your post using that little icon at the top that looks like a yellow envelope. Its pretty easy once you get the hang of it.

[KWO]

For those considering a photo editing program such as Photoshop I would recommend Photoshop Elements. Not the full featured program but has the popular features that a person will use.

Adobe Elements is an excellent program. If you want a more powerful program, but not quite full Adobe Photoshop (expensive/complex), then Adobe LightRoom is a great alternative too.

[Copidosoma]

The point and shoot are getting good but they still won't touch a DSLR that is being used properly. DSLR are still superior.

X2

Sorry.

[harv3589]

Adobe Elements is an excellent program. If you want a more powerful program, but not quite full Adobe Photoshop (expensive/complex), then Adobe LightRoom is a great alternative too.

I am using Photoshop Elements 6 and Lightroom 2 for my processing.

[Young Buck]

Thanks, I'll check them out and see what happens.
P.S. Sorry about my typing language.
Here is another great photo web site: www.naturephotographermag.com