You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Photography LabTHIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE!
A place to display digital masterpieces, enhance photography skills, photoshop, and share photo tips with one another...
My sister bought it..she loves it. Durable build, waterproof, yadda yadda. If I had one negative thing to say, it's that it's very bulky and big compared to the Olympics tough series and the other element-proof cameras that other companies provide.. but then again it's probably better to have something bigger to hold onto if you're in the water.
What I thought was really unique was the ability to change which corner you wanted your wrist strap on. Just a simple twist-on lock thing, but still very handy..
Typical Canon quality in terms of pictures etc.
We just received our Sony DSC-TX5's. they're pretty cool, I want to read some reviews about it, 3m waterproof, 1.5m shockproof...
i was gonna make that suggestion as well. my friend is getting one for an upcoming trip to hawaii to accompany the dslr so i hope to try it out as I wouldn't mind a waterproof cam in the family.
haven't read too many reviews but it looks pretty rugged.
My AFC gave me an ABS CEL code of LOL while at WOT!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,810
Thanked 736 Times in 167 Posts
Failed 175 Times in 39 Posts
I have an XTI (400d) Canon right now, I'm not loving the AI focus on it. It's always off. I don't have a huge collection of lenses and so a move to Nikon or another company wouldn't be difficult.
My friend's entire family uses Nikon... they love it, and have no complaints.
I'm wondering if Canon is the right choice to stay with on my next camera? I just saw my Dad's 50D and I'm not really impressed with the user controls... that spinning wheel is hideous.
Would you recommend that I stay with Canon, or jump over to Nokia? I've tried reading some comparisons and some people are saying Canon is better for studio photography (higher megapixels) and Nikon has better images at higher ISO's.
** note ** I tend to shoot indoors under low lighting using prime lenses... dinners with friends ect. If that makes any difference in what brand would work better.
I have an XTI (400d) Canon right now, I'm not loving the AI on it. It's always off. I don't have a huge collection of lenses and so a move to Nikon or another company wouldn't bee difficult.
My friend's entire family uses Nikon... they love it, and have no complaints.
I'm wondering if Canon is the right choice to stay with on my next camera? I just saw my Dad's 50D and I'm not really impressed with the user controls... that spinning wheel is hideous.
Would you recommend that I stay with Canon, or jump over to Nokia? I've tried reading some comparisons and some people are saying that Nikon is taking over Canon?
You gotta give more context bro.
What kinds of things do you shoot? What kinds of features do you want?
The following is taking from Thom Hogan's website:
I've written it before, but the camera body is usually the last thing up need to upgrade. I'd say that's certainly true for a landscape shooter who has a D2x, D300, D3, or D700. My basic order of "upgrading" is:
"1. Upgrade the photographer. Technique has the biggest and most observable impact on results. Want to be the Perlman of Pixels? Practice, practice, practice (studying at Julliard doesn't hurt, either).
2. Upgrade the support and shot discipline. You can't maximize what you get out of the pixels if the camera is shaking for any reason. Just having a tripod isn't enough; it has to work and you have to know how to make it work.
3.Upgrade the lens. Having shot thousands of test charts--maybe more, but who's counting?--and examining the results very carefully, the difference between a bad lens and a good one is as night and day as shooting those charts with a good lens and a 6mp and 24mp camera.
4. Upgrade your understanding. Complaining about dynamic range of your current camera but not using UniWB? Oops. You may not actually know what the real dynamic range of your camera is. Ditto for sharpening, contrast, gamma, color, and noise. You're not ready for an upgrade to the camera until you've actually maximized your efforts on the current one.
5. Upgrade your camera. If you've hit the limits of all the above, then it may be time to find a better camera (but that requires that you know how to do #4 and have state of the art #2 and #3). Note that it also may mean you need to move up a format to get a large benefit (e.g. 4/3 to DX, DX to FX, FX to MF).
Note that most posts you see on Internet forums indicate people are doing the opposite. First, they get the latest and greatest new camera. They don't achieve any great improvement in their images, so then they start down the path of #4. Once they mostly understand their camera, then they discover that perhaps their lens choice (that ubiquitious superzoom, because it's so convenient) may be part of the problem, so they tackle #3. When they can't get sharp results with a lens that is known to be sharp, some are wise enough to tackle #2. Only a few actually make it to Step #1."
If you still insist on switching over to Nikon, then your best bet is to go to a camera store and play with the camera to see how you like the feel. It's a very personal thing. I have a Nikon, but thats only because I arrived to it from my own research and experience. I've had Canon point and shoots for a very long time, so I thought when it was time to get a dSLR, I'd get a Canon.. but it was not the case.
Edit: Okay, you've noted you shoot a lot of indoors with prime lenses. If you have money to spend, the ultimate low light monster is the Full Frame Nikon D700.
I have an XTI (400d) Canon right now, I'm not loving the AI on it. It's always off. I don't have a huge collection of lenses and so a move to Nikon or another company wouldn't bee difficult.
My friend's entire family uses Nikon... they love it, and have no complaints.
I'm wondering if Canon is the right choice to stay with on my next camera? I just saw my Dad's 50D and I'm not really impressed with the user controls... that spinning wheel is hideous.
Would you recommend that I stay with Canon, or jump over to Nokia? I've tried reading some comparisons and some people are saying that Nikon is taking over Canon?
** note ** I tend to shoot indoors under low lighting... dinner parties etc. If that makes any difference in what would work better.
well NOKIA shouldn't really be on your radar
it sounds like you're being branded by your friend's family. all I can really say is "do you want to change bodies to conform?"
they're both great camera companies that offer excellent products at all price points. since you're a beginner (or come off as one) there isn't much separating the two. Nikons in general handle better and have better beginner user interfaces, but both will be equal in most aspects. what i'm trying to say is that the body you choose will not improve your shots by much.
if it's the case you're shooting indoors at dinner parties, maybe it'd be best to invest in a fast prime, like a 50mm 1.8 which you can find used for a 100 bucks. tack on a flash (like a 430ex), and your images in low light dinner parties should be sharper than what you have already.
to summarize my long point- the body makes little difference. it's your lens selection and mastering of basics (aperture shutter speed and iso) that improve your work.
oh and btw, i think the wheel on the higher end canons are a god send
What kinds of things do you shoot? What kinds of features do you want?
The following is taking from Thom Hogan's website:
I've written it before, but the camera body is usually the last thing up need to upgrade. I'd say that's certainly true for a landscape shooter who has a D2x, D300, D3, or D700. My basic order of "upgrading" is:
"1. Upgrade the photographer. Technique has the biggest and most observable impact on results. Want to be the Perlman of Pixels? Practice, practice, practice (studying at Julliard doesn't hurt, either).
2. Upgrade the support and shot discipline. You can't maximize what you get out of the pixels if the camera is shaking for any reason. Just having a tripod isn't enough; it has to work and you have to know how to make it work.
3.Upgrade the lens. Having shot thousands of test charts--maybe more, but who's counting?--and examining the results very carefully, the difference between a bad lens and a good one is as night and day as shooting those charts with a good lens and a 6mp and 24mp camera.
4. Upgrade your understanding. Complaining about dynamic range of your current camera but not using UniWB? Oops. You may not actually know what the real dynamic range of your camera is. Ditto for sharpening, contrast, gamma, color, and noise. You're not ready for an upgrade to the camera until you've actually maximized your efforts on the current one.
5. Upgrade your camera. If you've hit the limits of all the above, then it may be time to find a better camera (but that requires that you know how to do #4 and have state of the art #2 and #3). Note that it also may mean you need to move up a format to get a large benefit (e.g. 4/3 to DX, DX to FX, FX to MF).
Note that most posts you see on Internet forums indicate people are doing the opposite. First, they get the latest and greatest new camera. They don't achieve any great improvement in their images, so then they start down the path of #4. Once they mostly understand their camera, then they discover that perhaps their lens choice (that ubiquitious superzoom, because it's so convenient) may be part of the problem, so they tackle #3. When they can't get sharp results with a lens that is known to be sharp, some are wise enough to tackle #2. Only a few actually make it to Step #1."
If you still insist on switching over to Nikon, then your best bet is to go to a camera store and play with the camera to see how you like the feel. It's a very personal thing. I have a Nikon, but thats only because I arrived to it from my own research and experience. I've had Canon point and shoots for a very long time, so I thought when it was time to get a dSLR, I'd get a Canon.. but it was not the case.
Edit: Okay, you've noted you shoot a lot of indoors with prime lenses. If you have money to spend, the ultimate low light monster is the Full Frame Nikon D700.
My AFC gave me an ABS CEL code of LOL while at WOT!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,810
Thanked 736 Times in 167 Posts
Failed 175 Times in 39 Posts
Thanks for the info + "steps" !
I guess I was going backwards, because I wanted to get a decision about the body before I sunk $$$$ into a lens... but I understand now why ppl make decisions based on the lens they have. Time to begin my lens hunt
try and find someone to lend you the nifty fifty (50mm 1.8) if you don't want to splurge right away.
it's one of those "best bang for bucks" purchases, but i do warn that it puts a lot of beginners off because it forces you to move your feet instead of zooming with your fingers, but eventually you'll appreciate what the cheapo prime can get you
I'm trying to get into some photography and want a good, not too expensive, DSLR camera to buy. It doesn't have to be really complex, but have the basics. Just for any amateur. Any ideas or sales going on right now?
nikon d90 is an awesome dslr! my advice would be study a couple of cameras that you are looking at and then go to a camera shop and see how it feels in your hand.
Hi guys, I'm currently in the market for a decent beginner DSLR camera and I'm wondering if anyone can give me some good suggestions. I'm looking for something around the $500 range.
What are the thoughts on the T2i? Is it worth the $250 more over the T1i? I'm in the upgrade/BIGGER, BETTER, FASTER, STRONGER stage of my camera life, and want something with a little more power than my Rebel XS. Body only, of course.
__________________ Classifieds Head Moderator Automotive Service Technician
I don't have an anger problem. I have an idiot problem.
What are the thoughts on the T2i? Is it worth the $250 more over the T1i? I'm in the upgrade/BIGGER, BETTER, FASTER, STRONGER stage of my camera life, and want something with a little more power than my Rebel XS. Body only, of course.
Essentially the T2i has very powerful video modes. If its durability you need, I don't think the T2i is any more durable than the XS? You'd need to move up to Magnesium Alloy bodies such as the 5DM2 or 7D for that.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
