Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: scuppy007 on December 11, 2005, 02:08:58 am
-
I am looking for a new digital camera. I capture some great moments with my granddaughter but the photo quality of my current camera is terrible! I have an easy to use Sony DSC-F717. I take 700-1500 shots a month. It seems I have to take so many to get a decent one I can use out of the bunch. I have a grandson due to be born on the 20th of this month and would like to get a little more professional with my photos. My daughters friends have begun asking me to take pictures of their children as well. I enjoy the hobby and would like to take it to the next level. I am hoping to get the HP DESIGNJET 130 printer for Christmas. It prints up to 24x64in. I don't have a budget I have to work within but I would like a camera that is moderatly easy to use, is good for portriats and has has a good zoom. I would also like some advise on editing programs. I use Microsoft Digital Image Pro 9 now and have found it pretty easy to use.
-
Keep the Sony until you get more than a few keepers out of 1500 shots a month. And you know enough about photography to find the Sony limiting.
-
Pictures of young children are difficult.
The most challenging aspects being IMHO AF and lack of light. Based on this, the Nikon D50 might be you best bet for an entry level DSLR with a decent AF and good high ISO image quality in jpg.
As far as a lens is concerned, I would buy a 35 mm f2.0 for these low light indoor shots, along with the newly released 18-200 VR lens.
Regards,
Bernard
-
The problem of course with digicams when shooting kids is the shutter lag, 2nd recommendation for the D50 plus 18-200. Buy a flash too.
-
Scuppy: given you are, like me, no longer a spring chicken, you may find the D50's finder to be on the small side and of course with any dSLR you can't use the LCD on the back to compose with. There is also the question of how many pixels you need to produce the maximum size print you aspire to with the DJ130. Close up people shots are perhaps the most forgiving of all subject matter for enlargement; but I'm not convinced 6 megapixels can be pushed past 16x24". So I think we need some feedback from you about both your eyesight for close focusing and your maximum print size aspirations.
As for editing software, I don't have any idea what the capabilities of Microsoft Digital Image Pro 9 are, since I've never heard of it before. Most of the people who post on this site use the high-end version of Photoshop. The bantam weight version, called Photoshop Elements, might be a good choice, since if you later find you need more power, you can upgrade to the high-end version without having to re-learn the interface.
There are actually two parts to post processing: editing such as cropping and colour adjustment is one part. The other part is printer control. Getting the print that comes out of your printer to closely resemble what you see on your monitor can be anything from falling-off-a-log easy to Ph.D. difficult, depending on how critical you are, how difficult the colours in your images are, and how close a match there is between your printer and your monitor out of the box. I suggest you stick with the Pro 9 product until you get your printer; see if it meets your needs; then if not, where it lets you down will determine which direction you take in buying a new product.
-
Another recommendation for a Nikon D50 with a decent zoom lens, AND spend some time learning how to better control the quality of your photos (and practice until it becomes second nature). It's not clear from your post how much of the terrible picture quality is the camera and how much is the relatively unskilled photographer behind it, but it's pretty common for inexperienced people to think, "I could take better pictures if I had a better camera" only to be surprised that the better camera doesn't help because that isn't the problem. (I don't know whether or not you are in this category; you will know better than I.)
On the other hand, it's tough to get good digicam pictures of moving things like kids because of the shutter lag, so a DSLR (like the D50) would be a big improvement on that front.
Lisa
P.S. I think (someone correct me if I'm wrong) the new 18-200mm lens doesn't come out until late December, if you can wait that long.
-
You haven't given us enough information to give you reallly specific help, but we might be able to figure out a few areas you should think about.
First, you should be able to get good, if small, shots from the Sony. If the 5x7s from WalMart or Target look bad, then there's a good chance that your technique is poor, and before you do anything, you should get a good solid how-to book from the local bookstore or Amazon. If that's the problem, ask here and you can probably get some good book recommendations. For example, when shooting kids, even when they're moving, the camera can't be jerked, any more than you can jerk the trigger on a rifle. You'll get blurred shots. If your problems are more in the area of lighting, then look at a lighting book -- you may simply be standing too far back (using too much zoom) for the reach of your flash, which is quite limited.
If you really do need a good step-up camera, the Nikon D50 would be fine, unless...
The printer you are getting could outrun the resolution of the D50 at the sizes you mention in your post. If you shoot your D50, the crop a photo and print it 24 inches wide, you're going to be disappointed, because the pictures are going to be blurry.
Also, I would urge you to do further research on your printer, because I think you are about to make a mistake. If your grandson is about to be born, then the prints you make on the Designjet may not last until he's an adult. The Designjet uses dye-based ink, which even when "fade-resistent," WILL fade. A better choice for you might be the Epson 2400, which will give you a wider print that you can probably use with an entry level camera, will cost half as much as the Designjet, and will have pigment-based inks that will fade much less (we all hope.) I suspect that most people on this forum use Epsons, although I may be wrong about that.
And finally, you suggest that budget isn't much of a problem. I don't know that that means, but if you are reasonably affluent, you might consider buying a higher-end camera than the D50, such as the Nikon D200 which is coming out this December -- next week, I think -- and which will give you something close to the best digital shots available. You could buy one, I think, for the cost of the D50 plus the savings from not buying the Designjet and going with the Epson. And THEN, use any extra money to go out to the Santa Fe Photo Workshops, which you can Google, and take their really excellent course for new camera users, which is designed for people exactly like you. It's a week-long course, and when you finish it, you'll know how to take good photos, even if you'll need a little additional experience before they become really good. You'll also get exposed to the Santa Fe workshop culture, which can provide courses with well-known photographers who will take you as far as you want to go.
JC
-
You haven't given us enough information to give you reallly specific help, but we might be able to figure out a few areas you should think about.
First, you should be able to get good, if small, shots from the Sony. If the 5x7s from WalMart or Target look bad, then there's a good chance that your technique is poor, and before you do anything, you should get a good solid how-to book from the local bookstore or Amazon. If that's the problem, ask here and you can probably get some good book recommendations. For example, when shooting kids, even when they're moving, the camera can't be jerked, any more than you can jerk the trigger on a rifle. You'll get blurred shots. If your problems are more in the area of lighting, then look at a lighting book -- you may simply be standing too far back (using too much zoom) for the reach of your flash, which is quite limited.
If you really do need a good step-up camera, the Nikon D50 would be fine, unless...
The printer you are getting could outrun the resolution of the D50 at the sizes you mention in your post. If you shoot your D50, the crop a photo and print it 24 inches wide, you're going to be disappointed, because the pictures are going to be blurry.
Also, I would urge you to do further research on your printer, because I think you are about to make a mistake. If your grandson is about to be born, then the prints you make on the Designjet may not last until he's an adult. The Designjet uses dye-based ink, which even when "fade-resistent," WILL fade. A better choice for you might be the Epson 2400, which will give you a wider print that you can probably use with an entry level camera, will cost half as much as the Designjet, and will have pigment-based inks that will fade much less (we all hope.) I suspect that most people on this forum use Epsons, although I may be wrong about that.
And finally, you suggest that budget isn't much of a problem. I don't know that that means, but if you are reasonably affluent, you might consider buying a higher-end camera than the D50, such as the Nikon D200 which is coming out this December -- next week, I think -- and which will give you something close to the best digital shots available. You could buy one, I think, for the cost of the D50 plus the savings from not buying the Designjet and going with the Epson. And THEN, use any extra money to go out to the Santa Fe Photo Workshops, which you can Google, and take their really excellent course for new camera users, which is designed for people exactly like you. It's a week-long course, and when you finish it, you'll know how to take good photos, even if you'll need a little additional experience before they become really good. You'll also get exposed to the Santa Fe workshop culture, which can provide courses with well-known photographers who will take you as far as you want to go.
JC
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53241\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thanks JC, That sounds like some great advise! I guess I really didn't give enough information and also made it sound like I only had a few good pics out of the number that I take. I do get many good pictures but only choose to print one out of every 25 or so. I am not a professional and not even a very good amateur where knowledge of the camera or lighting is concerned.
I like taking photos when its overcast outside, taking them inside with my granddaughter in front of the french doors or on our front porch. I think I have a good eye where composition is concerned and my shots are creative but I do desperatly need some basic classes.......or books that would help me to understand the camera and lightning better. I would appreciate any suggestions. I don't know about going all the way to Santa Fe! I live in Atlanta, Ga. Know any good courses around here? I would also like to learn more about infrared photography. I think its sooooo cool.
Thank you also for your advise on the printer. You have saved me a lot of money! I didn't mean to suggest that I was "affluent" only that this was something I was willing to spend some money on, if I needed to in order to get a camera that takes good quality photo's now and wouldn't feel I had to replace if I did become more knowledgable and wanted yet another upgrade. I realize a lot of my problems come due to my lack of knowledge and inexperience. Some also come because this camera is so darned slow and I miss the shots. I also have a LOT of "out of focus" shots!
I am a "grammy" but I'm a young one at 46 so I don't really need "big buttons" or anything.
I will check out the Epson 2400 and the Nikon D200. If I have given you enough information to give me more advise...I welcome it. Thank you so much for your honesty and kindness.
-
What lens and flash do you recommend with the Nikon d200? I like to have close up head and shoulder shots without being in my grandaughters face so a good zoom is important to me.
-
What lens and flash do you recommend with the Nikon d200? I like to have close up head and shoulder shots without being in my grandaughters face so a good zoom is important to me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53276\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How much you can afford to spend is obviously a key aspect here too, but if budget is not really an issue, then the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 is a great pick. The ultimate close portrait lens for the D200 would be a 85 f1.4. The 18-200 recommended before remains a good general lens.
As far as flash is concerned, the SB800 is the top of the range, with great function and the ability to pilot other distant flashes remotely. The built-in flash of the D200 might however be enough for your needs. The best way to figure out is probably to try using the D200 built-in flash first, and to complement it later on with a SB800 if it doesn't appear to be good enough.
Actually, if budget is really not an issue, then you migh also want to consider the Canon 5D, although it is still significantly more expensive than the D200. It is probably the best compromise for a high end portrait camera as we speak.
If money really doesn't count, then a Hasselblad H2 with the full Hassy lens line up, a Phase one P45 digital back (39 MPixel) and a full studio flash set up (including 2 assistants) is my personnal advice. But we are looking at 45.000+ US$...
Regards,
Bernard
-
A good introductory textbook for general photography (written for beginners, but complete enough to take you a long way) is "Photography" by London & Upton. There are multiple editions available used, but be sure to get a relatively recent one because the recent ones have more on digital photography. After that, reading the tutorials here in this web site will take you even farther.
Regarding near-infrared photography, a great resource is Bjorn Rorslett's web site:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html (http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html)
I do ersatz IR photography with my Nikon D70 as described by Bjorn, so I imagine it works well with the D50 (which is a similar camera) too; however, most Canon SLRs (like the 5D someone suggested above) don't do ersatz IR well. There have been a couple of requests for IR-photography information in this forum over the last year or two, so a search should turn up more web sites with good info.
Lisa
-
How much you can afford to spend is obviously a key aspect here too, but if budget is not really an issue, then the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 is a great pick. The ultimate close portrait lens for the D200 would be a 85 f1.4. The 18-200 recommended before remains a good general lens.
As far as flash is concerned, the SB800 is the top of the range, with great function and the ability to pilot other distant flashes remotely. The built-in flash of the D200 might however be enough for your needs. The best way to figure out is probably to try using the D200 built-in flash first, and to complement it later on with a SB800 if it doesn't appear to be good enough.
Actually, if budget is really not an issue, then you migh also want to consider the Canon 5D, although it is still significantly more expensive than the D200. It is probably the best compromise for a high end portrait camera as we speak.
If money really doesn't count, then a Hasselblad H2 with the full Hassy lens line up, a Phase one P45 digital back (39 MPixel) and a full studio flash set up (including 2 assistants) is my personnal advice. But we are looking at 45.000+ US$...
Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53277\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I have looked at the Nikon D200 and the Canon 5D. I like the Canon 5D. What lens do you you recommend for taking photos, especially close ups of children?
Lisa, I'm going to look for the book you recommended too.
Thanks for the help!
Leisa
-
Leisa,
I have two kids (4 and 2), and when I bought my 20D I bought only one lens, so I got the 50mm 1.4. Soon I found that I was having to move around alot to get pictures of the kids. I found myself lusting over the wider lenses. I ended up getting the 16-35 f2.8L which has solved my problems for about 8 months..... now I lust after telephoto range, because what I found in the summer when the kids were at the pool for swimming lessons... I could get great shots of the pool with my children in it.... instead of great shots of my kids in a pool.
-
I have looked at the Nikon D200 and the Canon 5D. I like the Canon 5D. What lens do you you recommend for taking photos, especially close ups of children?
Lisa, I'm going to look for the book you recommended too.
Thanks for the help!
Leisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53602\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
70-200mm works well. Anything shorter and you end up with the cherubs moving towards the lens to get a closer look and fingerprints on the lens - though needs about 10 feet of clear air to get a decent framing (if space is short you may need to drop a zoom range e.g. 24-105mm). If you can afford both then you are well away. F/4 should be fine as a minimum otherwise depth of field becomes limiting. For the Canon 5D you will need an external flash the 430/550/580s will have more than adequate power, though if bouncing off the ceiling the higher powers have an advantage. Also, for the external flash consider purchasing a stofen omnibounce (10-20USD) to soften the light a little - gentler on the eyes for all concerned and gives more diffuse shadows.
Following picture was at an equivalent 35mm of 90mm (apeture is f/4, anything less and too little is in focus).
(http://www.pbase.com/mexmoon/image/38468714/medium.jpg)
Here's another at 30mm f/11 - strong fill flash required due to bright day.
(http://www.pbase.com/mexmoon/image/48419417/medium.jpg)
-
I am looking for a new digital camera.
I enjoy the hobby and would like to take it to the next level. I am hoping to get the HP DESIGNJET 130 printer for Christmas.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53210\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
All the recomendations are fine. The D50 will not produce blurry pictures on the DJ130 if the shot is properly focused and processed. Maybe not nose on the paper micro sharp. But then if thats what you want plan on spending far more dollars on a pro level camera. And then go through the learning curve.....If you want to spend more money, the D200 just coming out looks very tasty especially for the price.
I have both Epson and HP Deskjets in the shop. The DJ is just as archivial as the Epson when using HP papers which by the way are very good papers. If you prefer glossy or satin prints, I recommend the HP. For matte, the Epson does better. If you don't print every day you will use FAR less ink with the DJ as it rarely needs cleaning cycles. Ink is the big hidden cost when printing. I turned into a big fan of the DJ as I like glossy papers for some subjects. It 'never" clogs and just sips ink compared to my Epsons (7600-2200-1800).
The printer (HP130) you want is a monster. Huge foot print. The DJ series all use the same mechanicals with different size carriages. For a home printer, I would strongly recommend the DJ30 (13 wide x paper length) or 90 (17 wide x paper length). I suspect the HP30 will please you more. The savings in printer cost will buy a darn fine flash system, which is the key to shooting kids anyway
Bob
-
All the recomendations are fine. The D50 will not produce blurry pictures on the DJ130 if the shot is properly focused and processed. Maybe not nose on the paper micro sharp. But then if thats what you want plan on spending far more dollars on a pro level camera. And then go through the learning curve.....If you want to spend more money, the D200 just coming out looks very tasty especially for the price.
I have both Epson and HP Deskjets in the shop. The DJ is just as archivial as the Epson when using HP papers which by the way are very good papers. If you prefer glossy or satin prints, I recommend the HP. For matte, the Epson does better. If you don't print every day you will use FAR less ink with the DJ as it rarely needs cleaning cycles. Ink is the big hidden cost when printing. I turned into a big fan of the DJ as I like glossy papers for some subjects. It 'never" clogs and just sips ink compared to my Epsons (7600-2200-1800).
The printer (HP130) you want is a monster. Huge foot print. The DJ series all use the same mechanicals with different size carriages. For a home printer, I would strongly recommend the DJ30 (13 wide x paper length) or 90 (17 wide x paper length). I suspect the HP30 will please you more. The savings in printer cost will buy a darn fine flash system, which is the key to shooting kids anyway
Bob
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53614\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thanks Bob. I use the hp photosmart 7960 now and only use hp paper but I prefer the matte. For 8X10 prints its good for my purposes. I just wanted a printer that would give me supersize prints.
I'm having a hard time deciding between the Canon 5D and the Nikon D200. I had about decided on the Canon, but the more I read on comparison websites the more confused I seem to be. As an amatuer I should probably stick with the Nikon but I really do want to take some courses and if I do I wonder if I would regret not getting the Canon. Also, I believe someone said the Canon would do the infrared if I wanted to do that as well.
I have to find something quick! The Sony I have just "died" on me this morning! We have an ice storm here in Atlanta, its beautiful and when I went out at daybreak to take pics my camera will turn on but it shows nothing in the viewfinder. To be sure it wasn't just the viewfiender I took one pic. nothing.
My grandson will be born Tuesday!
-
I'm having a hard time deciding between the Canon 5D and the Nikon D200. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53616\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The 5D is an excellent camera, the singular focus is the full frame chip. Fairly basic (but metal) body.
The Nikon D200 is the latest of the DX breed. What I like is a pro level (quality)body in a compact form factor (read not heavy and bulky). Its a first.
I know either camera will take spectatcular images, neither wanting in any way. I use pro bodies and the bulk and weight is tiring at times, to say the least.
Frankly the thing that would sway me is not the camera as much as flash for shooting the grandkids. Nikon has that part wired over any other camera manufacture from my experience.
As to printers
Properly mounted, the DJ output will last your lifetime on matte papers, the other papers (HP Glossy/Satin/Epson on fine art matte) will last your ancestors lifetimes too. Is that really necessary? The best chemical color prints lasted maybe 30 years. Most lasted a few years.
I have a love hate relationship with my epsons. The ones (2200/2400 and equivalent) with the small carts are outrageously expensive. My 7600 really ticks me off when I see (give or take) $50 going down the drain when I have to deep clean it. If you don't run an epson frequently you WILL have head clogs. The DJ is a breath of fresh air in comparison. I keep my 90 at home and use it only 3 or 4 times a month. It has never clogged and the ink carts are relatively cheap.
As to size, do you really want 24x36 prints? Your technique needs to be first cabin to justify spending the time, paper and ink. Any of the cameras your looking at will produce an acceptable print if you do your part. But a lot of skill is required. The average or even above average snapshot with any camera including the high end pro cameras won't do a good job. My 90 does 16x24 which look relatively gigantic compared to 8x10. Even 13x19 when mounted and matted are sizable and take up significant wall space.
The deskjet series is from a different planet, compared to the amature printers from HP or others
Bob
-
I just reread the entire thread. I think we're having fun spending your money. You need a step up camera from your point and shoot. The D50 was an excellent recomendation.
Use it, let your skill level grow and if you outgrow the camera, step up to the latest digital 2 years from now. With all consumer electronics you'll get far better value out in the future. The D50 is highly capable and will help you learn rather than spank you with poor output which will likely be the case with a pro camera without the requisite skill level. The best equipment does not make up for lack of training. If anything it will be far worse as the camera is less forgiving.
The printer is also a device that takes conciderable skill. Starts with Photoshop skills (exposure/image optimization,etc), plug in skills (noise reduction/sharpening), printing skills (perceptual or relative colormetric, uprezzing, profiles, soft proofing) and you have a lot to digest.
I would recommend a D50, upgraded kit lens (18-70 ED or a 17-55DX), a HP 30. If you get a great capture and it begs to be larger than 13x19, send out the file to a pro lab and you will get a print that will be better than any your likely to be able to produce at home.
I would suggest getting a movie poster which is likely 24x36 and holding it up. Add hmmmm 6 inches of matte around it and then a frame. Unless you live in a 10,000 sq ft home, it will be hard to find a place for it. Even then it will dominate the room.
Bob
-
Just to reemphasize something Bob mentioned: For very large prints (about 13"x19" or bigger), if you're using pretty much any decent DSLR, you will generally be limited more by your skill than by the camera, and you will need a good tripod. Snapshots are rarely going to look good that enlarged.
Lisa
-
Thanks for all the advise. The best advise has been to talk me out of the printer I thought I wanted. I am so amazed by my granddaughter that I thought bigger would be better but I can see where I was wrong. I have looked online for the HP DJ30...? I can't find it retail. Any suggestions?
I believe the Nikon D200 might be the camera for me. I like the price much better than the Canon and I believe it would be all the camera I would need. It seems the most recommended lens is the 18-200vr due out late this month?
I haven't heard any suggestions about classes to take in the North Atlanta area? Anybody?
David, love the pics of the kids.
-
6 megapixels will get you an 11x14 roughly at about 250 DPI. I would suggest Canon because they give you more of a lense selection and they seem to perform better at high ISOs (what about when they start sports?) but I'm just a newcomer so...
If you do go Nikon the 18-200vr is what everyone is raving about but I don't know that I would go with that. You seem to be doing close up stuff and you'll never use the 200 range of it. That and why not get a close up lense and a telephoto that will do the job better? I have the 17-55mm f/2.8 lense and it's pretty good. I would lookat the 28-70mm f/2.8 too, though, because I'm kind of regretting not having that one (there really is too little on the 55 end of the 17-55).
As for Canon lenses the 85 f/1.2 is sweet for portraiture. It is a bit slower focusing though, so you might miss a few shots of the kids.
-
Scuppy . . . First-off, the Sony F717 is a very capable camera, as a trip to http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sony/dsc_f717 (http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sony/dsc_f717) will testify. If you're burning through 700-1500 photos a month with it, and only getting minimum results then possibly some improvement in technique, rather than equipment, is called for.
I can't help feel that stepping from your F717 to a 5D would be like trading in a VW Rabbit for a Ferrari because you wish to learn to drive better. On the other hand, if you've got the necessary $$$'s for a 5D, and a good lens to go with it, and probably a new computer to handle the 3x larger file sizes, and a copy of PhotoShop to get the best from the RAW files, then what the heck! Go for it.
Personally I believe a Canon 350D + 17-85mm lens, or Nikon D50 + 18-200VR lens, or Olympus E-500 + 14-45 f2.8 lens would all be better options . . and you'd have money over for printers, computer upgrades, software, and even some photography lessons.
-
Thanks for all the advise. The best advise has been to talk me out of the printer I thought I wanted. I am so amazed by my granddaughter that I thought bigger would be better but I can see where I was wrong. I have looked online for the HP DJ30...? I can't find it retail. Any suggestions?
I believe the Nikon D200 might be the camera for me. I like the price much better than the Canon and I believe it would be all the camera I would need. It seems the most recommended lens is the 18-200vr due out late this month?
I haven't heard any suggestions about classes to take in the North Atlanta area? Anybody?
David, love the pics of the kids.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=53676\")
For the printer, I'd start with the HP web site. They should have a list of dealers in your area. The shop where I bought did not stock my 90. They took the order and it was delivered the day after, direct from HP. I was in shock, how they got it so fast to me.
[a href=\"http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF25a/18972-236251-236266-12600-236266-352379.html]http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF...266-352379.html[/url]
The HP30 is part of the pro lineup and are not in your local Fry's or equivalent. I found mine at a dealer who specializes in wide frame printers/paper/ink for the advertising industry. It's available direct from HP, often with deals and from many of the NYC mail order houses. Atlanta is a big city. There are dealers local for you.
Lesson/classes are often organized by a local Junior college, or camera club. The Jr college way is a very good way to get the basics down and have a lot of fun at the same time. I wanted to teach my wife photography. Well we all know that husbands can't teach wifes w/o much turmoil. I suggested she go to the local college which had night classes. She advanced very quickly and got a chance to spend time in a chemical darkroom. They're gone, (darkroom) but still an artform.
For the camera, pick a pro type dealer, stay away from the mass stores (ritz, wolf,etc). Their salesman are BS artists and are rarely well trained in photography. There are exceptions, of course, but its all about making the sale. They will beat you up on insurance or extended warrenties. With the depreciation rates of electronics, its a huge rip off. The make far more money selling "warrenties" than they make off of the camera sale. A pro dealer rarely even brings it up.
The D200 is a fine camera and has one significant advantage over it's cheaper brothers and that is a superior finder to all other DX/APS-C cameras.
Wide FL (zoom) range lenses are by necessity compromises, though not as much as they used to be. I'd personally recommend two lenses.
On the inexpensive side but good quality I suggest the 18-70 ED matched up with the 70-300 ED. You can get both for $500 and they both are excellent image gathers especially the 18-70. I Often carry it on my D2x in leiu of an "uber lens". Very light and very sharp. The 70-300ED is good small, and lightweight. Good walkabout lens.
The other option is buying the best of the best. That would be a 17-55 Dx and the 70-200VR. Both rival any comparable lens made and are fast (F2.8) compared to the lesser brothers. Downside is they are heavy, sizeable and expensive. Roughly $3000 for the pair.
I know too many choices.
I'd suggest starting with the 18-70ED and then adding as you see the need. If you have surplus cash the 17-55 makes a nice christmas present to go with your new equipment.
Good shooting
Bob
-
Hi there,
I have been following the Nikon D200 release (too) closely as it is just beginning to make its way into the hands of those who preordered one on November 1 (when it was announced). That includes me, though I am waiting patiently. I agree that either of these cameras will produce spectacular images, and what matters more at this point is how each one feels in your hands. Both are pro-caliber machines.
My 2 cents here is that if you want the D200 it might be very difficult to acquire. Most stores offered pre-orders and basically pre sold all the bodies they would get in the first shipment. It might be a while until more are available. Even preordering one will not guarantee anyone's possession by Tuesday. If time is so important, and obviously in your case it is, rushing a decision will generate more insecurity in the long run, in my opinion. If I were you I'd probably rent a body, and it doesn't necessarily have to be the pro models. You could rent a D50 or a Rebel or 20D and see which control layout is more intuitive to you (actually I'd go with a D70 or 20D because they are more like the D200 and 5D than the others). That will help your decision regarding which company you want to invest in. And it gets you something to shoot with for this hugely important occasion.
Hope that helps! Good luck on your decision, and congratulations!
Sam
-
...
If you really do need a good step-up camera, the Nikon D50 would be fine, unless...
The printer you are getting could outrun the resolution of the D50 at the sizes you mention in your post. If you shoot your D50, the crop a photo and print it 24 inches wide, you're going to be disappointed, because the pictures are going to be blurry.
...[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53241\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have been admiring the Nikons, particularly the D50 per the price and my existing equipment. I already have a film Nikon N55 with a couple lenses. But I am concerned about the ISO 200 rating on the D50 (and other Nikons).
I'm definitely not a professional, but do regularly use (play with) 64 speed film and periodically suprise myself with some very nice results. I don't want to lose that capability when I make the jump into the digital world.
Should I avoid the Nikon (D50/D70)? Or is the digital world different enough that I'm comparing apples & oranges with ISO ratings and sensitivies.
Best Regards,
Gary
-
Should I avoid the Nikon (D50/D70)? Or is the digital world different enough that I'm comparing apples & oranges with ISO ratings and sensitivies.
With digital, a low ISO is not nearly as important to image quality as it is with film. Many DSLRs offer less image grain/noise at ISO 800 than 35mm film at ISO 100. If you absolutely have to have an unusually long shutter speed for some reason, use the camera's lowest ISO setting and and ND filter. I'd certainly not avoid digital on account of ISO range.
-
I agree that teh Sony 717 is not your liomiting factor. It's a very capable camera. I think the 717 has a hot shoe, so get yourself a flash.
If you don't want to learn another camera, try the new Sony R1. It's similar to the 717, but has a C class sensor, 120mm leans, like your 717, fairly noise free, and it is 10.3 MP too. It's probably more camera than you will ever need for family pictures. I recently sold a Sony F828, and it took REALLY good pictures with a flash or studio lighting:
Sony R1 REVIEW:
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony-r1.shtml (http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony-r1.shtml)
-
I would like to thank everybody for all the good advise I received! For now, since I couldn't get my hands on a D200 by the time the baby is born I have purchased a D50 from Costco. I was told by the salesperson if I held the receipt I could use it and return it if I didn't like the performance. I would like to upgrade after Christmas to maybe the D200 or at least a couple more lenses and a flash. It came with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ed af-sDx zoom lens.
I also bought the "NikonD50 Digital Field Guide" book and also "The Book Of Photography" by John Hedgecoe. I want the one you recommended Lisa, but my bookstore didn't have one and I was crunched for time. This one seems good and I have learned a lot already. After Christmas I intend to find a good course on photography and learn the basics to using my dslr. In looking through the parts on how to "see" better pictures I have discovered that I knew a lot of that already due to my interest in painting and art so if I can learn some good basick photography skills I should do fairly well for family photography.
I still haven't decided on a printer but would like to look into the deskjet 30. I can do that after Christmas as well.
Thanks again for the help!
Leisa