Now that I've got my lens I've gone back to film photgraphy, so now I have to wait for the developed photos to see how they look. I need a good, high quality digital SLR.
Waiting to get your pics does indeed suck. However, since you're invested in the Nikon system, IIRC, there're several excellent digitals made by Nikon -- though, of course, they're pricey as hell compared to a film camera body. If you can save up to get one, though, it's -definitely- worth it.
Ad agent friend of mine bought the earlier "Digital Rebel" (don't know the model name/number where you are), instead of the newest one, and he's been VERY happy with it. If you shop sharp, you can find them for FAR less than what Canon "price fixes" the new one at (which goes for $1K US, minus a $75 US mail-in rebate, 18-55mm lens incl.). It's a bit over 6 megapixels, and for anything other than heavy-duty sports/photojournalism work, is (like the low-end Nikon digital SLR) a competent camera.
Couple of weeks ago I bought a Panasonic Lumix 5pm SLR-style camera for around $345 US, including shipping/no tax. (Also bought a spare lithium ion rechargible battery and a couple of 512mp SD cards.) 5 megapixel, 36-452mm (35mm equivalent) zoom with *image stabilization* (which works INCREDIBLY well!), and a small, lightweight size that travels well. (I, too, have a low-end Canon pro-35mm outfit---which I seldom even take out of the bag anymore.) Love to have a full-size SLR digicam, but can't afford the ticket for the body, special flash, grip, etc. (Around $1,500 US.)
Unless I come into a *bunch* of "mad money", the Panasonic will do me just fine... (And might satisfy your digital "itch", too!)
I've got the current Canon low-end model (i.e. the 'new' digital rebel, 350D - it has significant improvements over the older one). It's very nice and quite small too. Obviously, it costs a fair bit; didn't seem unreasonable to me, but may be to you. So anyway, if you're considering that, I'd recommend it. There are only three things that mildly annoy me about it:
1) The viewfinder image is a bit small 2) It has just a single control dial - so in manual mode, moving the dial changes shutter speed, you have to hold a button as well to change aperture 3) It doesn't show ISO speed on the little info screen or in the viewfinder
Otherwise it's great. Check www.dpreview.com for comprehensive reviews on any digital cameras you might be considering.
Apart from the cost, the other issue you might encounter with Canon's lower-end digital SLRs is that they have a smaller sensor than 35mm film, meaning that your lenses effectively have 1.6x the focal length. So you might not have a lens that covers the wide end, and obviously if you have to buy another lens it starts looking more expensive... (The wide-angle lens I'm looking to get costs about as much as the camera.)
Canon do make full-frame digital SLRs, but these are both hugely expensive and also plain huge (big & heavy). Personally I think the smaller sensor is a better compromise...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
I've been a Canon fan since my first AE1.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Couple of weeks ago I bought a Panasonic Lumix 5pm SLR-style camera for around $345 US, including shipping/no tax. (Also bought a spare lithium ion rechargible battery and a couple of 512mp SD cards.) 5 megapixel, 36-452mm (35mm equivalent) zoom with *image stabilization* (which works INCREDIBLY well!), and a small, lightweight size that travels well. (I, too, have a low-end Canon pro-35mm outfit---which I seldom even take out of the bag anymore.) Love to have a full-size SLR digicam, but can't afford the ticket for the body, special flash, grip, etc. (Around $1,500 US.)
Unless I come into a *bunch* of "mad money", the Panasonic will do me just fine... (And might satisfy your digital "itch", too!)
no subject
1) The viewfinder image is a bit small
2) It has just a single control dial - so in manual mode, moving the dial changes shutter speed, you have to hold a button as well to change aperture
3) It doesn't show ISO speed on the little info screen or in the viewfinder
Otherwise it's great. Check www.dpreview.com for comprehensive reviews on any digital cameras you might be considering.
Apart from the cost, the other issue you might encounter with Canon's lower-end digital SLRs is that they have a smaller sensor than 35mm film, meaning that your lenses effectively have 1.6x the focal length. So you might not have a lens that covers the wide end, and obviously if you have to buy another lens it starts looking more expensive... (The wide-angle lens I'm looking to get costs about as much as the camera.)
Canon do make full-frame digital SLRs, but these are both hugely expensive and also plain huge (big & heavy). Personally I think the smaller sensor is a better compromise...