experienced photographers about?

toasterman

Hi,
I'm looking to take a hobby to get myself away from MSE forums and out the house.
I considered learning the piano, but it's too heavy to take with me for a walk.

As I'm not the sporty type, I'm wondering about photography. I've wanted to be able to take better pictures for years, and when I looked at the sub £400 market for digital cameras, I noticed they've all fallen through the floor in price. You can get digital cameras with 12x optical zoom and good reviews for under £200.

As I don't really trust Jessops (and they're mad expensive) and I don't know much about it myself, thought I'd ask on here if someone could just tell me this....

Should I buy a high-end bridge camera?
I'm thinking probably a Panasonic Lumix one as they have mostly superb reviews, and the 12x optical zoom with image stabiliser good enough to actually use it (a friend bought one) is very exciting.

OR

Should I look into a low-end DSLR?
I'm obviously looking at the Canon EOS.
I've seen pictures taken with both on various non-manufacturer-owned websites, but the ones on the EOS blew me away totally. They have shots taken at night with apparently the standard lense that came with it, and everything that should be in focus, is in focus. Considering its night too, theres a shocking amount visible - a lot more like I'd imagine seeing it myself to be like.

I don't know whether to trust sample photos though - as even ones from apparently independant sites might not be all that independant.


I would like to be able to take shots at night - I love the look of the city all lit up. I have tried it before with digital cameras and never really got anything viewable, but I haven't bought a digital camera in 4-5 years, so I'd imagine they've improved.
My only current camera is an incredible 2.1mp with 3x optical zoom...in many ways its beaten by the one on my K800i phone..both are useless as soon as it gets past noon in the winter.

What do you think people?

dandare

As a photographer i would say dslr all the way, quality and functionality will be better, the ability to use more features as you learn more. should you get more involved any lenses etc will be capatible if you upgrade( as long as its the same brand).
as for your night shots you will need a camera with manual settings so you can expose for longer dslr will allow this.
as for cameras i haven't looked at the market recently, i am a nikon user but that was more to do with using nikon in my film days.
i have been using the d100 for a couple of years and it has served me great, still dont know half the things it can do but hey!!
en fin if you can afford to go for dslr if not get the best you can for the dough as much optical zoom as poss. ( no digital zoom) if it gives manual settings for exposure and aperture all the better. oh and look out for raw files, no compression the best way to shot then you can do your manipulating, compression via photoshop.

f1charlie

For the best image quality (certainly in low light situations), go for dSLR.

For convenience and cost (no extra lenses to carry around or buy) and image quality which most of the time you won't be able to tell the difference from dSLR, go for the Panasonic.

Take a look at the forums on www.dpreview.com for owners views on their cameras and photos they have taken.

Jzpop

My advice would be DSLR, rather than a hybrid. Careful googling will get you a Canon 350d or 450d for about £400. The quality of print that you will get from either of these is phenomenal, even with the standard kit lens. You can always add better quality and/or different focal lengths later, if you need them.

I curently use the Canon 20D, but I am familiar with the 10D, 350D and 450D - all great cameras.

As for the convenience and cost issues raised by f1charlie, I (respectfully) disagree. There is nothing more to carry if you just take the standard Canon body and kit lens out for the day than if you took a Panasonic, and the price difference is very small (especially considering the huge flexibility that any SLR offers in terms of lenses, flash etc).

Finally, remember that although the marketeers push the megapixel count as the thing to get excited about, before the light hits the CMOS sensor (the electronic 'film'), it has to pass through a lens. My opinion, and that of many others, is that Canon and Nikon are streets ahead of Panasonic, Sony, and other 'bridge' camera manufacturers.

P.S. I strongly endorse the advice to vidit dpreview.com - a highly respected and independent review site.

vandanfc

Personally I think that a lot depends on what it is you want to photograph !

It is all well and good saying that you can get a Canon whatever with a basic kit lens for £400 or so, but you are limited with what the kit lens can cover. The photographer is more likely to get frustrated about the shots/results that they are not getting than the decent ones they are. To get around these issues you would have to buy more lenses.

A decent "normal" camera such as the Canon S3 IS would possibly be more suitable ???

Definitely go with having a look at dpreview's website for unbiased info, also check out pbase (http://www.pbase.com)for photos by amateurs and pros alike for a feel of what each camera can do, and if looking at dslr note the variety of lenses used.

ManAtHome

Another good website http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM

Loads of decent cameras out there - a dslr will give you the best technical picture mainly due to the sensor size, but you'd be pushed to spot much difference on a standard 6x4 (or even 10x8) print.

I haven't bought a dslr yet, despite having film slrs (lenses are not auto focus), probably will at some point, but currently using a "bridge" camera (Fuji) which I find more convenient to carry around than the slr kit.

sevlow

I know when I was looking around I was looking for the perfect instrument with great reviews and poxel perfect images and you can drive yourself nuts on analysis. All of today's DSLR's are going to give you great pictures and the flexibility to give you the opportunity to experiment.

Personally I started with a bridge camera and then onto a Nikon D70. If I were you I'd go straight for the DSLR and buy a canon or Nikon and consider a used purchase - there are lots of good 6MP DSLR's around on ebay etc.

I love to get out with my camera and am very pleased with the D70. I have not gone mad on lenses as I want to move to a Canon next so I can compare the two brands for my own style and use and then invest on good glass for my chosed body.

However after a few months I realised that the DSLR did not allways fit the bill. I wanted a camera I could use every day, take with me to the office and use at lunctime, slip in my pocket if I was going out for the evening. So the camera I now take most shots with is the Canon IS800 IS which as very few manual controls and produces great images. I also find you can get far more natuarl shots with a small camera as peope tend not to notice you.

have fun

superjaggybunnet

Dslr for sure

Good entry level would be Nikon D50 or D70

Check this one:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Nikon-D50-18-55-last-few-great-price_W0QQitemZ120110500164QQihZ002QQcategoryZ31388QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Well within budget and a cracking camera!

Lyrrad

dSLR - second hand. I would always recommend 1 fixed prime lens. For dSLR 35mm would be the best, but a 50mm would suffice. It will make you think more about each shot. Nikon d70 or D70s and 50mm lens is within your budget, and perhaps even a 35mm lens instead. If after 6 months you decide it's not for you either of those 2 kits will still re-sell without too much loss to you. If you want to also consider the Nikon d70 with 60mm macro lens then you will be able to add another dimension to your hobby (macro requires a tripod though). The 60mm lens is a great focal length for portrait, the 35mm lens is good for general phtography and the 50mm is there or there abouts for everything, but not particularly great for any. However the 50mm will be your cheapest option.

f1charlie

Jzpop wrote: »

As for the convenience and cost issues raised by f1charlie, I (respectfully) disagree. There is nothing more to carry if you just take the standard Canon body and kit lens out for the day than if you took a Panasonic, and the price difference is very small (especially considering the huge flexibility that any SLR offers in terms of lenses, flash etc).

But, the kit lens won't give you 12x zoom like the Panasonic does.

Lyrrad

Just to add and completely changing the whole drift of the thread.


The FUJI F30 or F31fd are unbelievable cameras for lowlight/night time photography. F31fd only has 'face recognition' as an extra and is really not worth more than a max of £15-20 more than the F30. This tiny little point & shoot puts most dSLR's to shame at iso800 and can really be used at iso1600 too. These high ISO's would certainly come into their own for creative night photography. Night photography will nearly always require a tripod. A small point & shoot, a tiny tripod, and a wall can suffice, but a dSLR and a full on tripod is the proper job. However the first option can be carried in your pocket(s) the second becomes more of a bind. The best camera in the world sitting in the boot of your car (believe me it's where they can end up) won't capture any image for you. Think about your actual needs prior to purchase.