Help me choose a camera (Jobe? Anyone?)

[P4rD0nM3]

I'm in the process of choosing a camera...I got 3 main choices, Canon Rebel, Nikon D50. and Nikon D70. My budget is around $1000. I'm not a professional photographer...it's just my hobby. I've read reviews regarding my choices and most owners like their cams...so I was wondering which one is good for me? Do I still have to specify how I take pictures? Please tell me your experience with this cameras...and if you have something to add (It doesn't matter if it's over $1000), just add it. Thanks.

[mrmephistopheles]

Lisa has a Rebel XT and I have a 20D.
I like them both but prefer my 20D. After having used the 20D extensively, the XT feels like a toy, and becomes very unbalanced after mounting a heavier lens or a flash to it. The 20D 'sounds' like a regular SLR, whereas the XT sounds like a high end EVF - the shutter sounds much more electronically actuated.

They're both great though. Both easy to use out of the box, and have plenty of features and settings.
You can get an XT body for $700 if you look hard (we got Lisa's from Dell for that price) and you can get a 20D body for less than $1200.

If you weren't hung up on MP, you could easily buy an older Rebel body (D300) and go crazy buying lenses, then when you're ready for more MP, buy a new body.

[CrazuKoukiCrisp]

with slr's Megapixels.... don't matter so much, it's the size of the focusing screens and the type of lens you use... and i'd think you'd be better off with a 20D, they're super-nice and they still have a flash on them... I don't know too much about Nikon's cameras, but as far as Canons go, Get the 20D, it's worth the difference. I actually repair these cameras and the quality ups quite a bit between the two models.

[jobestudios]

Yeah, as far as megapixels, it only really matters if you need to print really large pictures.

Personally I shoot with a Rebel XT, I mainly use the 18x55 "kit lense", but at track events I use the canon telephoto lense.

So far it has worked out great for me, sure I'd like a 20D, but I can't justify it for what I'm doing right now, because I know if I get a 20D I'll only want a 5D, then a 1DmkII... so I am very pleased with what I have now, I barely do any photoshop work to my pictures anymore because of the quality of the photo straight out of the camera.

But that is just my canon expirence, I have heard great things about the d50 and d70, and you would be just as fine getting one of those.

http://www.accessphoto.com for a photo site that I go to.

AIM me at Jobestudios if you have any specific questions.

[TheSquidd]

Well I guess someone from the Nikon camp has to chime in.

I shoot professionally on a D70 and a D100, fantastic cameras. The D70 is a great bargain, and the lens it comes with (the 18-70DX) is tack sharp. I've used the 20D, that's a fine camera too, the megapixels are a nice feature, but I could never, ever get used to the interface on that thing. It feels like I'm using a printer or something, the controls feel nothing like that of a real SLR camera.

I would avoid the Digital Rebel (not the XT) because it has limited features, and if there's one thing I hate in photography is when a manufacturer limits a cameras features. My only gripe with the XT is it's weight, it's made of cheap plastic and is far too small. I like my cameras to be bulky, and durable. I shoot events like the Baja 1000, and am constantly getting hit by dirt clods from dirtbike riders, and I need my camera to stand up to that. So far the Nikons have taken it in stride.

The only way you can tell what camera to use is to go to the store, pick each one up and hold it in your hand. In the end, it doesn't matter what camera body you use, as long as you know how to use it.

The real debate is what LENSES to buy. Lenses are the true determinant of how your picture is going to look. I recommend the forum on www.dpreview.com before buying any lens, research it.

[P4rD0nM3]

Hmm so it's the lenses that determines how a picture will look? I'm into taking automotive shots (Makes sense since I have a 240) and I've always been an event guy.

I hope this will help, I'm also askin in photography related forums, however most of them are not car-related shots. The guy in JTuned.Com is a pretty good photographer (IMO). JObe and Squidd, your photos are very sharp and I like the interest in detail...I can see pretty much every damn detail...I envy you guys.

So a Rebel XT and a Nikon D70 is pretty much the best bang for the buck on my budget...and lenses will greatly improved the outcome of the photoshoot?

Oh and if you guys know some good automotive photography forums, please chip in too, thanks.

[boosteds13]

Don't forget, the quality of the photos all comes down to the user taking them. An experience photographer can take a better picture with a 3MP point and shoot than a noob with a dSLR. Knowing what iso settings to use and the correct filters for different types of light plays a HUGE role in how your pics come out.

[jobestudios]

As I said http://www.accessphoto.com has a nice automotive section, but if you prefer an auto exclusive forum... http://automotivephoto.com/

Read this is you are interested in what makes a lense good for the scene.
http://luminous-landscape.com/columns/composition-3.shtml

As to the Rebel XT's "cheap" plastic body, its not the same grade as a ziplock bag, its a very hard and durable plastic. Its not going to shatter if it gets hit with a rock or you drop it (although if you drop any prescision instrument, it will fuck it up, not even nikon can prevent that) it won't implode. Yes some people thing it feels cheap and small, but it is of no issue to me.

Oh and ISO should always be 50 :)

[TheSquidd]

Ok well maybe it's expensive plastic. But for something I hold in my hands 8 hours a day, that material is not what I prefer. Plus the sheer size and weight of a Nikon D100 with the vertical grip makes panning and shooting steady shots of cars going over 200mph so much easier.

Like I said though, pick one up and feel it in your hands, that is truely all that matters in respects to camera bodies. The megapixel count is negligible unless you're talking about a 6mpx vs. a 12 or 16 mpx. ISO I have found to be pretty negligible as well, the Canon guys will always bring up Nikons ISO 200 as a shortcoming but I think they spend too much time looking at 100% zoom digitals. In print, ISO 200 is invisible and 6 megapixels is just as detailed as 8 megapixels. The fact that Nikons feel like real SLR cameras is something I'd trade ISO 100 and a few megapixels for any day.

But that's just me, mostly because it's my job to shoot pictures I guess I'm a little more picky on what I put in my hands, if you're not shooting a 24 hour race with 2 cameras in your hands at all times, I guess it wouldn't make as much difference.

In summary, the body is only a small portion of the equipment. The only reason it's a big step is because whatever brand you choose, you're investing in their system. I chose to invest in the Nikon system. I love their lenses, I love their flashes and I love their business practices.

[P4rD0nM3]

Thanks for the input. Oh, guess I haven't told you guys...my first digi cam is an HP Photosmart M305! Yay. It sucks so bad.

Another question, when you take pictures and post it here or in your portfolio...do you use photoshop to edit them? Or those are all unedited pictures? Photoshop can make a crappy pic look really professional imo...but, where's your skill then...

[jobestudios]

Film photographers extensivley edit their photos in a darkroom to make them look presentable.

Digital photographers extensivley edit their photos in photoshop to make them look presentable.


There is nothing wrong with photoshopping pictures to make them look right, when you get into double/triple/quadruple exposures you will begin to understand.

Photoshop is perfectly fine.

in saying that, yes I use photoshop.

[Andrew Bohan]

i've taken some amazing pictures with my old canon powershot A60 i got for $200.

i've also seen some very terrible picture taken with expensive cameras.

then my a60 broke so santa clause brought me a canon digital rebel xt. i print like 1 out of a million of my shots, so 8mp is just fine for me. i couldn't stand the 18-55mm lens for more than two weeks, so i got a canon 75-300mm. i guess that was a pretty low end one. it was very noisy and took forever to autofocus. so i returned it and got a tamron 18-200mm lens. muuuuuuch better lens. i still think 300mm would be better for track events, but 200mm gets most of the job done.

[S13SilviaGirl]

My input, since kevin already said his piece on behalf of my camera, I like it...I like it better with his nice lenses. The XT is not the same as the 20D but for learning/getting into photograpy it rocks. Now, as far as Nikon goes, the Photographers in my old squadron preferred Nikon to Canon. The japanese photographers here in Japan that shoot for Aeronautical magazines ALL used Canon 20D's or higher, granted they also have about 20K in lenses and flashes with them, but, they prefere them.
My suggestion to you...go to stores, hold them feel them...play around with them at the counter, if you know someone with one that your interested in...ask if you can use it and if they can show you things about it. See what is easiest for you. It is all a matter of personal preference. Learn about the benifits of different size lenses, and flashes, do a lot of reasearch. We are all biased on what *we* like. Kevin and I are partial to Sony products for home electronics, yet for cameras...Canon or nothing...even down to the lenses. Go out to the stores/family/friends and see what they are shooting with.

Also, one last thing... www.popphoto.com cheap subscription and SOOOO worth it. They will teach you a lot about photography, well written magazine and won't make you feel like an idiot when you read it. :D

Hope everyone here is helping you rather than making it worse! hehe. good luck!

[ramblux]

Used equipment is your friend. Depreciation allows you to buy more equipment while everyone is busy selling off their old stuff to pick up the next cool camera or lens.

I picked up a Nikon D2H for half of its retail price after the D2X came out, and it takes better photos than my D70. Also, for the best bang for the buck, look at Sigma's HSM lenses. Since picking up my first HSM lens, I've sold off all of my Nikon lenses and replaced them with Sigmas.

[2iv0 sx]

What camera were you using when taking those pictures in your website? looks really nice

[mrmephistopheles]

What camera were you using when taking those pictures in your website? looks really nice

Who are you talking to? :duh:

[iwishiwas-all*]

cant go wrong wih nikon at all , I personally hate the cannon, becuase lenses they have suck, nikon has endless lenses and companies that make 3rd party lens too. go nikon and save yourself the trouble.

[TheSquidd]

cant go wrong wih nikon at all , I personally hate the cannon, becuase lenses they have suck, nikon has endless lenses and companies that make 3rd party lens too. go nikon and save yourself the trouble.

Almost every lens made by a 3rd party company for Nikon, has the exact same lens with a Canon mount.

www.keh.com << Best selection of low priced lenses evar!

[2iv0 sx]

Who are you talking to? :duh:
the maker of this thread...P4rD0nM3