What digital camera do you use?

[10-Ring]

What do you guys use & what would you recommend in a good digital camera I can grow into??? Now I was at one time into film photography but I'm ready invest in a good digital camera & I'm looking for some insight.... :D
TIA
10-Ring

[hexidismal]

10-Ring, what you looking to spend ? Price point would be a major factor in what I would recommend you looking into. My older playing around camera is an Canon SD45 and I'm quite fond of it. I do use other cameras though in graphic design. If you want something for dedicated home use (for gun pictures), you may want to avoid the canon A series. Although I notice a lot of THR members use them, it's the beginner series which is good for carrying around but has few options and doesn't leave much room as you put it "to grow in to". I think the canon S3 is a very good camera for the medium level price at around $315. Or for around $500 you could take a big step up and look at the canon G7, which is somewhat high end without having the full size and bulk of a DSLR.

[04hemi]

Nikon D80- I love mine and highly recommend it! Having a digital SLR is the only way to go, can use many of the old lenses and gear! Had a coolpix 8800, and wasn't impressed, the vibration reduction was cool, but was not an easy camera to use for anything other than still shots of nature/landscape - couldn't fire off the shots quick at all.

Good luck with your hunt, but I highly recommend a digi SLR!

[jac714]

Canon Rebel XT.

What you want to use it for will have a huge influence on the camera you buy. Kind of like a .22 is great for a plinker but not so great for personal defense.

Good Luck.

[Derek Zeanah]

How serious are you going to be?

I've got a Fuji S2Pro, which is essentially one of the better 6 megapixel sensors from a few years back, shoved in a low-end body. It does everything I need it to do, and keeps up with the 10 Mpixel DSLRs I've seen. I'd prefer something newer (for a better body, faster shooting, and better low-light performance), but from my experience an older quality DSLR can perform very well.

This isn't to recommend my camera to you (they're all fairly old), but to let you know where I'm coming from.

So, if you're serious then I'd say DSLRs are still hard to beat, and any of the offerings from the major manufacturers will do what you need. Nikon, Canon, Olympus (I would have mentioned Minolta, but Sony bought out their camera division and I'm not a fan of Sony...) There are differences, but all will produce very nice images if you do your part.

In compact cameras, I am a huge fan of the Fuji F30/F31fp. It's a solid image taker with some amazing low-light abilities. It's not up to DSLR low-light performance, but it's great for what it is.

[koja48]

I carry a low-end Kodak in the woods & fields (no harm/no foul if I drop, lose, or drown it) and use a Panasonic Lumix FZ30 for all else.

[Arkie]

I use a Nikon D50 and I love it. It's big but it takes really nice photos.

One of these days I'll learn how to use the other controls other than Auto. lol.

[earplug]

Will this be a pocket piece or A drag out for when needed camera?

[nitesite]

I use a Canon EOS 30D DSLR, but the less expensive Canon EOS XTi is an amazing camera. Both have a control wheel on the back that makes using the more advanced features much, much easier.

Having a DSLR is an advantage, not so much for gun and still photography, but the instant shutter trip vs. the lag time of most digital cameras is a real treat.

Being able to control your ISO speed is another valuable feature. You want to shoot something at f/22 and get a shutter speed fast enough for handheld shots? DSLR is the way to go.

Adding lens filters is yet another factor when considering your creative potential and DSLR makes that possible. Only a very few non-SLRs can accept filters and they are hard to find because of their non-standard diameters.

Add the option of slave strobe units, manual focus and 3-5 frames per second and the DSLR is why I made the jump to spend all the dough.

In my bag is an 18-55 zoom, a 50mm f/2.5 Macro and a 75-300 zoom. All my lenses are Canon but you can get very fine lenses by other makers in all kinds of price ranges.

[Damien45]

Well, so for good range shots (fast action, not necessarially catching the bullet, but the brass) kind of shots, what would you all recommend? I am thinking a DSLR, but also lenses, accessories, ect.

[CK]

I would suggest, you invest in a really good lens first. Digital SLR camera body always getting better. But, for me, the problem is always the small viewfinder in the cheaper end of the DSLR. If you are on a budget, get a cheapest DSLR but a really good lens first. any constant f.2.8 on zoom lens will yield good result, sharp subject which is in focus with smooth out of focus background. Then, when you are able, get a DSLR with a good large viewfinder. Either Nikon or Canon would be very good. But, don`t forget, the lens is what makes the picture, not the DSLR body.

But, then again, what are you planning to shoot?

[Damien45]

I was looking into the Nikon D40 kit. Just not sure what the second (or first purchase) lense to get.

[PPGMD]

It really depends on what you are planning to use it for. I use a 70-200 2.8, and 17-55 2.8 for most of my photography. Of course I do pull out my other lens as the shoot requires, but I rarely carry them with me unless I know that I am going to need them.

Personally I shoot with 2 Nikon D200s great cameras IMO, much better then that Canon junk. :neener:

[carpettbaggerr]

DSLR prices are dropping -- I've read that most low end prices should drop to ~ $250 by the end of the year

[Zak Smith]

I run a Canon 30D (DSLR) and the lens I use the most for action shots at shooting events is the 70-200 F/4L.

http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/CC3G-2007.04/?small=D101_4673_img.jpg

[nitesite]

Zak~

That is one great shot!

Had your 30D long? I got mine last summer.

Isn't it amazing to have enough battery to shoot 1000 photos? I'm storing images on a 2GB card and on the large/fine setting I can store almost 1000 JPEG pics.

May I ask why you decided on the 30D?

Thanks, Zak.

Dave

[Rembrandt]

Canon SLR Rebel.....

http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/d_eos/rebel_xt_586x225.jpg

[yhtomit]

and I *do* like the feel of Pentax cameras.

If I were to get a DSLR right now, I'd be tempted by one of Pentax's offerings -- in large part because it's the only company I know of that makes an interchangeable-lens DSLR that's AA-powered.

(And I don't care to get into any fights on the matter :) -- I know that proprietary Li-Ion packs have some nice things in their favor.)

Agreed with some earlier posters: esp. if you're getting this to shoot guns, your lens is key! If you get really nice glass, it may be in use when you're several camera bodies down the road ;) (Then again, cameras are a good technology, and if you're smarter than me, you'll try to be satisfied with one at a time for as long as possible ;))

If you're not interested in getting into the world of cameras-as-hobby, there are several very nice long-zoom all-in-ones with quite a bit of manual control available; with one of those and a lightbox, you can make some very nice close-ups (guns etc) and some at least passable at-the-range action shots. Two summers ago, I went to China for two weeks, and shot 2000 or so exposures with a 10X zoom Fujifilm 5100 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms5100/), and I thought my best shots stacked up very favorably with those of the more expensively-equipped shooters in the same group, partly because I just shot more and culled more ;) (Which was easier with a camera so light that I carried it most waking moments.) Having a 10X zoom helped, too -- it's near useless in dim light, but very useful for playing with depth of field with at least medium daylight.

My main current camera though is a small Casio; 7.2MP, 2 AA batteries, in a tiny little body that I carry frequently, even when I'm not specifically anticipating picture-taking. Having it along is key!

timothy

[Zak Smith]

Dave,

I got my 30D last November. Before that, I had been using a S400 and SD550 since 2001. The main reason I went to a DSLR in the first place was that making the little P&S cameras deliver great photos was a hit or miss proposition. A couple of my editors were asking for photos of much better quality than I thought I could deliver consistently with the little P&S's.

Once I figured out I needed a DSLR, I stayed with Canon because I'd been impressed with their user interface. Also, at my day job, we have a few "Photo Geeks" and they all run Canon (1D's and 5D's). I wanted the additional usability features the 350D didn't have (and LCD size). The 400D wasn't out yet, but it looks like it still lacks the "wheel", which works really well.

Right now I shoot JPG-Small + RAW. RAW allows me to do pretty drastic corrections in post-processing, which means I can get more "great" photos in the end. Using an 8GB card, I can shoot about 800 RAW+Small JPEG images. I have never run out of battery life...

http://demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/CGMG-2007.04/?small=D101_4231_img.jpg
(above used my 24-70 F/2.8L at ISO 3200, 1/3s)

http://demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/CGMG-2006.11/?small=D100_3361_img.jpg
http://demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/CC3G-2007.04/?small=D101_4502_img.jpg

Going into this, I had no SLR/DSLR experience. The ability to shoot an infinite amount of "film" and get immediate feedback is incredibly helpful. I've hit the shutter about 14000 times in the last 6 months.

My "mindset" about cameras has changed too. With a set of good lenses, the DSLR body is basically a consummable device. It has a finite number of exposures before the mechanism dies, at which point the electronics will be several generations older than state of the art. The sensor needs cleaning about every month or so. No need to "baby" the camera-- run it hard just like a good pistol or carbine, then replace when necessary.

Fun stuff!

-z

[PPGMD]

I agree that the bodies are getting almost disposable. My main D200 has about 35,000 captures on it. Waiting for the D3 or the D300.

Though I prefer JPGs for most of my work, it downloads to the cards much more quickly, timing is critical at airshows and on the sidelines.

[CK]

Ok, first of all. Do you have a budget to how much you want to spend?

[Ala Dan]

Nikon 8400 Cool Pix

[RNB65]

Read the reviews and I think you'll find that Canon's consistently have the best picture quality. There are other good brands, but Canon is the leader of the pack and everyone else is playing catch up.

http://www.dpreview.com/
http://www.steves-digicams.com/
http://www.photo.net/

[Damien45]

I think I am going to get a Nikon D40x. I have read reviews where they are as good as and sometimes better than the Canon XTi. Anyone have any experience with the Nikons?

Some lense and accessory suggestions would be great. I am starting to save, looking to spend about $1,200. Thanks

[CK]

Damien,

For 1200, hm......

Just my suggestion,
This should fit into your budget.

1. used DSLR or lower end of a new one. If you buy a new one, buy one without the kit lens.
2. Sigma or Tokina (3rd party) 28-70mm zoom constant f.28
3. A good flash, get the SB800 or 600 for nikon or canon equivalent.

If you decided to get a used D70, find out how many times has the shutter operated, and the firmware for used D70 need to be upgraded because the old firmware will eventually freeze.

high speed Flash is fun, if you can sync 1/500, Nikon D70 can, I am not sure about the new model one.

Mainly, always remember, you can always upgrade the body, But, lens is what makes the picture, thus invest in lens.

[AZ9J]

I use a nikon D70s amd a nikon D50. both are great cameras. I use the 70 more because it has a depth of field preview. I have a couple of Nikon lenses but mostly use Tamron. (good lenses at a good price)

http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o181/AZJohn/P-94BWR.jpg

[PPGMD]

Read the reviews and I think you'll find that Canon's consistently have the best picture quality. There are other good brands, but Canon is the leader of the pack and everyone else is playing catch up.

Blatant fan boyism, Canon used to have better high ISO noise, but Nikon currently has caught up, and is beating Canon in certain camera brackets. But picture quality has been the same if not a little better from Nikon's.

Anyways for $1,200:
D50 used B&H: 400
Sigma 70-300 Macro Lens: 220
Sigma 28-70 2.8: 330
Nikon SB600: 185
Lexar 1GB SD Card: 30

That should be about $1200 including shipping, all the prices are from B&H Photo Video.

[grimjaw]

10-Ring, it does depend on what kind of images you want to produce and how much you're willing to spend on something that's basically money down the drain. If the only thing you do is shoot controlled conditions in your living room, you can get away with a decent point and shoot. I've been using a Canon G3 for almost the last two years to record stuff around the apartment and people have been very complimentary about the images.

For anything in uncontrolled conditions, a DSLR is generally a better choice. I've used both Canon (300D, 10D, 1D MK2) and Nikon (200D) DSLRs. I was very pleased with the Canon line but I sold all that gear to help with the move out west. I happened to have Nikon manual focus lenses when I looked at DSLRs again so that's the brand I went with after reading the reviews on DPreview.com. If the camera doesn't see much abuse, you'd be safe to go with one of the plastic fantastics from a major manufacturer like Canon/Nikon. I've been known to drag my gear into cave pools and up the sides of mountains, so I prefer a little more metal in my gear. For example, the lower end Canon DSLRs will usually have the same sensors as the mid-tier (used to be that way for the 300D and 10D anyway), and using the same lens you'd get the same image from both. What you got for a higher price was more frames per second, some additional features, and a more robust body.

I have both a Canon P&S and a Nikon DSLR. I wanted something that would be able to do movies as well as still pictures, and the DSLRs won't get you that. Also wanted something to slip into a pants or jacket pocket, another DSLR failing. If want to capture the shell ejection of a semi-auto, I resort to the five frames per second on the DSLR.

Sites like Imaging-Resource.com and DPreview.com have been extremely useful to me when making a purchasing decision.

[SiG Lady]

A Canon 20D DSLR with three interchangeable lenses: Canon 18-55mm, Tamron 75-300mm zoom, and a Sigma 10-20mm wide-angle. I do architecture, real estate, construction, chamber-of-commerce local color, shooting academy action shots and tabletop product photos (guns 'n knives a specialty). The wide-angle was/is an absolute necessity for many of the architectural subjects.

Got all of it on eBay for a few hundred less than original retail. The 20D is not a current-year model by any means, but was a popular model at the time and a slight departure from the 10D. After spending a year researching many types and models--and talking to friends who are high-end amateurs or out-n-out professionals, the perfect compromise was the Canon 20D.

Canon also makes a comparable ultra-wide-angle lens of this type but it's about $200 more than the Sigma.

My backup emergency digital is the HP945 Photosmart, a reasonable little cam for certain types of work. No interchangeable lens capability, but takes crisp photos and the color (along with anything else) can be adjusted in Photoshop. I also have a full 35mm Minolta film workhorse camera field kit that is also now a backup system. It has three superb lenses too, and that's one reason I'm keeping it. Super-sharp negatives and prints.

[Caimlas]

I'd recommend one of the lower-end Canon DSLRs or an EOS (whichever has the low-lag shutter speed - I can't recall). Theyre pretty cheap these days, especially if you can find one used and in good condition. My brother got his (can't recall the exact model #) bout 2 years ago for IIRC $350, and he's taken some incredible photographs with it. It was his first non-point-and-click camera, and he's grown into it marvelously. Here's some of his work with the camera, to show what's possible:

http://www.myspace.com/abram (Can't find his deviantart site - he's got a lot more stuff on there)

I've got a Canon G5 (5megapixel), an expensive "normal" digital camera that has many of the features of the SLR/EOS cameras, minus the cool quick shutter feature and the ability of taking lenses. Foolish purchase on my part, as I could've gotten more for less, BUT: I have the advantage of taking high-res photos, and I do have shutter timing, aperture, etc. control via jog dial. Not as nice as a "digital 35mm" camera, but still good enough to take some very nice photos.

Overall, I'd recommend canon equipment: cheaper than the competition in many cases, and IMO they've got the best digital photography and video chips out there by far. Anything over 5mp will likely be more than enough resolution for anything you'd want to do. (2000x1500 pixels or so? it's huge)

For photo prints up to (say) 8"x11" in size, any of the modern and recent (2 - 3 years) 'professional' and semi-professional cameras are, IMO, on par with a decent 35mm, if not superior.

[PPGMD]

Overall, I'd recommend canon equipment: cheaper than the competition in many cases, and IMO they've got the best digital photography and video chips out there by far.

Canon is not that cheaper when you factor in the feature differences in many cases. About the only place where I found a truely cheaper are in their high speed telephoto lens (300 2.8 and bigger).

[nitesite]

Even if there's a better camera out there than the one I've got, I still consider myself blessed and fortunate that I have a good DSLR. Truth is, I'd probably be quite proud of any of them!

[Ala Dan]

Here is a pic taken with my Nikon 8400 "Cool Pix"

And, its a good camera for us "non expert photography types"~!