Post by: Hornseeker on March 11, 2014, 08:06:30 AM
Thanks all
Post by: Bean Counter on March 11, 2014, 09:34:33 PM
Before you buy a camera, is good to ask: What kind of pictures are you looking to take? Candids of kids? landscapes? wildlife? I have $4k+ into my DSLR + 2 lenses, but you can take great photos spending 1/10th of that. Someone on here is advertising an XSi for $250. As I commented on that thread, you could take all kids of great photos with that and adding a 50mm f/1.8 for under $400-- as I said 1/10th of what I mob out with.
The best reason NOT to get a DSLR is because they're big, heavy, and noisy. If that isn't an issue its really tough to get better picture quality out of a mirror less, compact, P/S, etc.
Post by: Hornseeker on March 12, 2014, 12:52:28 PM
I would like to have a DSLR with a 1.8 50mm and a couple other affordable lenses, but truth is, Ive been extremely happy with the captures I've made with the Canon S5IS... I would think the newer version of that camera, or the Panny... would do me fine. I NEED to have telephoto capabilities and I simply cannot afford any of the lenses I would need if I bought the DSLR. Maybe someday, but not this year... or next.
So... anyone, no one??? No FZ200 users here? Dang its amazing...as 5 yrs ago we were almost all shooting Superzoom compacts... now you all have left me for the DSLR world!! :'(
Post by: Bean Counter on March 12, 2014, 02:30:19 PM
I checked out the camera you mentioned and looked into its technical specs. At first, it seems to have some nice things going for it:
- Carl Zeiss optics. Quality coatings for better color saturation and less flare.
- Constant f/2.8 aperture. Lets in more light but more in this in a minute.
- C1 and C2. These are total recall settings
- up to 6,400 ISO. My 8 year old DSLR tops out at 1,600.
- built in flash. pro Canon DLSRs lack this and cost thousands
That said, if Panasonic is selling a lot of these cameras, they're laughing it all the way to the bank. They probably have a higher % profit margin than my $1,500 EOS 6d I bought last fall. Check out the sensor dimensions--almost as small as the sensor in your camera phone. For objects that don't move, I'd be happy enough using my cell phone. If you want to print larger than 4x6 or you ever shoot in low light, you'll really start to notice the "noise" (pixilation and color artifacts) from the smaller sensor. The sensor is far and away the largest cost driver in a camera body. More than megapixels, or knobs and buttons. The larger sensor you get, the better low light performance, shallow depth of field (when desired), and large print image quality. f/2.8 might suggest that you could blur some background for portraits and what not but with that small a sensor its going to be a rarity that the composition allows this.
Because this one is at the end of its life... sometimes it doesn't zoom anymore... sometimes it shuts down and wont restart right away... the lens is dirty and scratched up a bit and its 5 yrs old... I am due for a new one. Because I LOVE to photo landscapes and my kids in sports and all outdoor activities... from hunting to fishing and rockhounding to just chillin at the river... or swimming the pup. I take several thousand of shots a year and I dont take the best care of my cam... Its all used up...Good reasons. Sounds like that old one is headed for the family museum. Also sounds like you have the right attitude about using your cameras. check out this pro's camera! (http://www.karlgrobl.com/EquipmentReviews/ThrashedCanons.htm)
Quote
I would like to have a DSLR with a 1.8 50mm and a couple other affordable lenses, but truth is, Ive been extremely happy with the captures I've made with the Canon S5IS... I would think the newer version of that camera, or the Panny... would do me fine. I NEED to have telephoto capabilities and I simply cannot afford any of the lenses I would need if I bought the DSLR. Maybe someday, but not this year... or next.
I wish I were up there--I'd let you try one of my SLRs out and I bet you'd be hooked. No going back.
Is that Panny the top of your budget? I just did a CL search (http://seattle.craigslist.org/search/sss?zoomToPosting=&catAbb=sss&query=canon+75-300&minAsk=&maxAsk=&sort=rel&excats=) of Seattle and saw three Canon lenses with a 75-300mm focal length for around $100. You could add that to a $200-300 used DLSR and come out around $400.
Quote
So... anyone, no one??? No FZ200 users here? Dang its amazing...as 5 yrs ago we were almost all shooting Superzoom compacts... now you all have left me for the DSLR world!! :'(Nice thing about so many people buying DSLRs its hat there is a huge market of them used. After they've passed the bulk of their depreciation you'll probably be able to sell it for close to what you've paid for it if you decide to upgrade later on. Lenses hold their value even better. I've sold three lenses that I bought used at a profit. You won't likely see that used value with the Panny. If you're willing to carry around something the size of that Panasonic, you can get an SLR for not much larger that will have a ton more flexibility and far better print quality.
Best wishes whatever you choose. :)
Post by: Hornseeker on March 14, 2014, 08:28:18 AM
Hmmm... seems like there is always something to cloud up the waters, just when I thought i knew what I wanted! hehehe... and I had not long ago settled for the DSLR!! hehehe...
So... what canon bodies might I want to look for used? I already have a sigma lense for my older canon SLR (not that old... EOS Elan II... probably 98 or so???)... Its a 28-70 or some such... would get me started. Throw in the nifty 50 for another hunnert..... then try and get one of htose 300's you are talking about... that would allow me to get some decent pics of wildlife.... without having to be on top of them...
Thanks for making me think again. How does that Panny sensor compare to the Canon S5IS sensor?Just curious, cause I have many pics I've blown up to 8X10 with that s5is and been really happy with.
Thanks again,
Ernie
Post by: timberghost72 on March 14, 2014, 10:01:59 AM
http://www.dpreview.com/ (http://www.dpreview.com/)
Post by: Bean Counter on March 14, 2014, 10:09:31 AM
You could look for used t3i's, t4i's, etc. You probably don't need to spend more than $300 on a used body. Post one up here or PM me or one of the pros (not me) and someone should be able to tell you if its a good deal. I looked in the Seattle area and there are tons of them. I hope by now you've been convinced not to shop on megapixes. Anything > 8 to 10 megapixels is more than enough. Truth be told my new full frame has 20MP and I often shoot it at 1/2 power for 10mp just because I don't want to replace hard drives. I'm lazy and cheap.
I wouldn't commit to going with canon just because you have an older Sigma lens. Some people really like Nikon and they have some advantages over Canon. Many love the way Nikon feels in the hand and that its controls are supposedly more intuitively placed. I have top shelf Nikon glass for hunting and can attest to the quality of their optics. Not sure how I wound up shooting Canon for photos. GK Chesterton said that consistency is the brevity of simpletons ;)
I couldn't find sensor dimensions for your old Canon but I'm guessing they're similar--both markedly smaller than even a crop sensor DSLR. The biggest difference between that Panny and the Canon is that the Canon is a CCD sensor as opposed to the Panny's CMOS. Now you've opened up a can of worms. CCD's are more power hungry and have typically been associated with higher image quality. Its no accident that medium format digital cameras ($10,000-30,000) have been CCDs up until this year where CMOS has finally poked their head in. Leica choose a CCD for their M9 rangefinder ($8,000) when they gave the boot to anti-aliasing filters. Given the M9s 18 megapixels they were confident that the m9 would't be susceptible to moire that the AA filter prevents at the cost of softening the image up a bit. CMOS's are typically more 'noisy' (grainy, green and red artifacts) at higher ISOs. Up to our knees in useless info yet?
In looking over your old Canon's specs what I found most painful to read where the laggishly slow start up times as well as the recycling rate from frame to frame. Like I said earlier, once you try an SLR I think you're going to be hooked. Think of going from a pedal bike to a motorcycle.
The 75-300mm will let you get good shots of wildlife, and its light enough to let you run around in the woods with it. You could also buy a 400mm lens that is as heavy as a baby elephant, and look like that dude at Estes or Yellowstone who pulls it out of the trunk of his Mini Cooper in the viewing area to set up on the tripod--but can't carry it 5 minutes away from the parking lot. If you get the 75-300 and it is not image stabilized, you'll need to stick with shutter speeds of 1/640-1/1,000 to get sharp images, so that will restrict you to daylight and/or higher ISOs. Whether or not you'll want to upgrade to say the 70-200 f/4L IS ($1,000) which many on here and myself have will be factor of budget and how much time you spend on this ever consuming hobby. Learn to buy lenses used, and again, you can sell them for about what you paid for them.
My photos aren't any good, but you can see what I was able to shoot with an XTi/400D, which is worth about $150 today, if that. A lot of what makes these pop is using Lightroom 5, which may or may not still be on sale like I posted recently.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,130336.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,130336.0.html)
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,127505.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,127505.0.html)
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,127148.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,127148.0.html)
Post by: Hornseeker on March 17, 2014, 07:45:34 AM