The Observation Deck

So I'm finally at the point that I'm ready to take the plunge and upgrade to a Digital SLR. So far, I think I'm leaning towards the Canon Digital Rebel XTi, but I wanted to see if anyone had any other great suggestions I should check out.

IMO, Skip the Canon and go for Nikon D50. The D50 has been replaced by the D40, so you should be able to snag it for pretty cheaply (around $500). It's a metal chassis surrounded by a polycarbonate casing, making it much more durable than the Rebel (which is plastic). Nikons are generally much more reliable than Canons, at least in my own experience.

Both Jim & I vouch for Nikon, while Ivor is a Canon guy.

go with the canon.
if you ask jim and david they'll sell the nikon.

i've had my canon for a few months now and i'm extremely happy with it. I started off with an olympus, but switched to canon.

check out www.dpreview.com
they'll have every answer to every question you can imagine.
I originally looked at the XTi, great camera, but when I went to Dodd's camera to try it out....it was tiny! I'm used to a bigger body.

you won't be disappointed with pictures, trust me!

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos400d%2Cnikon_d50&show=all


side by side comparison with specs and everything between the D50 and XTi.

Nikon's digital cameras are known for their grainyness... canon's are almost spotless!

Thanks to both of you for the feedback. I'll take a look at some reviews and check out the Nikon as well.

I'm not a in a huge rush to pick one up, but I'd like to get one before the full onset of Spring.

Honestly, I don't think you could go wrong with either one, though I'm partial to the Nikons...

For the price, the Olympus e-500 dual lens set is good deal. I just got it at x-mas and haven't had much time to play with it, but I have been impressed so far. I highly recommend Dodd Camera, very helpful folks.

I love my Nikon SLR even though its not digital. I received a Sony DSC-H2 for Christmas and it takes great photos, but I plan on upgrading to a Nikon Digital SLR shortly.

There's more to digital than meets the eye, in a number of ways.

First, maximum megapixels might not be the best for you, depending on a few other factors.

Do you have an ink jet printer? These can soften the digital image up a bit with their spray-painted images, and this can actually be a good thing.

A laser-printer can almost make a high mega-pixel camera's images too sharp, in my opinion.

A non-SLR will let you see the image as you shoot. With an SLR, you are blind at the moment of exposure. That's why, for photojournalism, Eisenstaedt (and Rice) generally used Leica rangefinders. (although I did use Nikon SLRS as well)

Non-SLR's are often cheaper, but may be more limited with lens choices.

My digital camera is an older Olympus non-SLR with about half the mega-pixels of most of your new ones, but the lens quality allows professional reproduction, (most recently of my toilet in the paper) :-)

You might require a stabilized image if you are a camera-shaker. Digital models sometimes blur with handheld shots, unless they are kept quite still. A friend uses a monopod to help him with his picture-taking.

Do some reading and compare prices, features, and discontinued models.

Good hunting!

I started off with the olympus e-300

love the thing to death

gary, for blurryness... you increase the ISO (or ASA for you film folks). this can be done easily by pressing a button.

The higher the ISO..the greater the grain/noise.

nikon's have very high noise. I was looking at nikon for my new camera but quickly decided that the lower end canon slr is better in noise than the high end nikon slr.
might not be a selling point for the average shooter...but in low light conditions it's a big plus. Also, Canon's flashes are more powerful than nikons.

When you're shooting sports and the subject is running full speed, you need high ISO to stop action. Another plus is my canon goes up to 3200 ISO...nikons only go up to 1600 unless you cough up a ton of money. And the noise is so visible, the Canon ISO of 3200 compares to nikon's 800 ISO.

Never buy a camera just by megapixel. unless you're going into a business where you're making huge prints (3ft+) you don't need anything above a 7 megapixel camera.

my cameras only have 8. but i wouldn't trade them for the world!

The thing I've noticed about Nikon is that if you want something comparable to a competitor, you're usually going to pay more.

Case in point: The D80. IMO, it blows away the Rebel and 30D.

FWIW

Bryan,

what kind of photography will you do with the new SLR?

Bryan Schwegler wrote:So I'm finally at the point that I'm ready to take the plunge and upgrade to a Digital SLR. So far, I think I'm leaning towards the Canon Digital Rebel XTi, but I wanted to see if anyone had any other great suggestions I should check out.

Bryan

I have been a Nikon abuser since the age of 16 when I cut grass to buy my first Nikormat. I love Nikons own many, last count 2 digitals, D70 and 990, Three Nikormats, 3 Fs, 2 Nikonos.

That said I am disappointed with the battery doors as of late. The camera is sturdy and feels like an SLR. But the latch is made of very thin plastic where metal would have been better. I have broken one on the 990. While only $60 and 30 days to repair, for some that would be 30 days without the camera. But I do like it.

One question I might ask is why an SLR?

My 990 shoots excellent photos with very little thought process. Point click and great photo. Bill Davis who has photos online, another Nikon fan has a new Coolpix and prefers that to lugging around an SLR. I agree, even when shooting film I always carried a pocket Rollie, for the quick shot.

As Ivor asked, what do you want to shoot?

Family fun photos?

Skip the SLR. Get a good digital point and shoot pocket camera. It will proved more hours of fun, than the SLR, which are now more complicated than film cameras ever were.

Color?

One thing I have noticed is that different brands of cameras, lean towards different ends of the color spectrum. It seems that Cannons shoot warm, Nikons cool, Olympus captures greens like grass better, etc. Maybe not a huge point, but one worth considering.

Pixels

All cameras that you purchase now have as many pixels as you will ever need. My graphic companies produces large format prints. That range from printing Ivor's 11 x 14 to 8' by 8' prints for store displays, the side of trucks even wallpaper for a room. The software we use to run those printers require very little dpi. My Nikon 990 which is a 2.1 mega pixel camera produces beautiful 2' x 3' posters.

Most 8 mega pixel camera buyers will ever use more than a medium setting if they are not professional.

One of my credos in life, "if you are not billing you better be having fun." Apply to cameras. While the SLR is nice, so is the pocket camera. If you are shooting fun low pressure stuff, a pocket Cannon, Nikon or Olympus will produce great results.

Enjoy life, enjoy the images.

If you are thinking used, drop me a line. I know many in the business, we are all slaves to technology, and moving up the line. So there is usually a good something or another for resale.

When you get do not forget to start your photo blog!

Hope it helped.


.

Wow, what an amazing amount of advice and knowledge in this thread. Thank you all!

Gary: I agree, the megapixel myth ranks right up there with the megahertz myth. More does not always equal better. I actually read an intersting article recently that premised at a certain point, photos will start looking worse as the megapixels get higher.

As for printer, yes, I have an inkjet. Not only do laser's not print photos well, but overall, for personal use I think they're much more expensive for color.

Ivor: To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what I'll shoot other than people, places, and things. Alot just depends on what catches my eye. I just want to have the extra versatility of an SLR over my point and shoot camera.

Jim: I've got a greaet Kodak V550 point and shoot that I absolutely love. However, the digital SLR gives me a greater range of flexibility, settings, and options. At times I've felt limited by the P&S camera.

And definitely, I'll be setting up a photo blog.

Bryan Schwegler wrote:Jim: I've got a great Kodak V550 point and shoot that I absolutely love. However, the digital SLR gives me a greater range of flexibility, settings, and options. At times I've felt limited by the P&S camera.

And definitely, I'll be setting up a photo blog.

I have been reading good things about Kodak's cameras, just never had a chance to use one.

I have an article in my office I will try to find a link to, for you, but megapixel is about to be a term no longer used in the industry. A man that worked for Texas Instrument, has come up with a process that is as close to continuous tone as they think anyone can come. The descriptions was imagine one megapixel cut up by over a thousand.

I believe the high end LEAF camera backs for Hassleblad, Nikon and Cannon are already using this technology.

LEAF was the company that broke the barrier on Black and White film, where their camera backs actually surpassed B&W film in what it could capture.

Look forward to the blog, but start with the Kodak, I'd love to see some shots.


.