Cam suggestions?

2008-07-03 03:18:30

#1

Ecilop Murof: I HOP OUT DA BEEEED..; +167|6244|loves Stimey <3 |

I'm planning on getting a digital cam for my birthday which is on the 29st August.

I have a budget of around 1k dollars, 12mp should be enough for the cam.

I have no idea which cam I should get though. Canon, Nikon or other big brands peferably.

Therefore I ask you, maybe you got a cam or can suggest me one, good suggestions will be 1+ed lol

2008-07-03 03:37:51

#2

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7150|Espoo, Finland

You're talking about digital SLR, right?

It's hard to find a quality camera with 12mp with that budget. MP doesn't matter as much as other aspects in image quality. (8mp+ of course)

If you're new to photography I would suggest the Canon EOS 40D. Good camera for a starting photographer which has many advanced functions as well. Make sure to check the viewfinder though, I'm not sure if it has the same shitty one the 'rebel' series do (e.g. 350D, 450D)

Look into some Nikon models as well. I don't have much experience with them but my brother is a die hard Nikon fan and the cams I've tried have been awesome!

Keep in mind that you might have to buy an objective for the camera if you can't find a suitable kit.

2008-07-03 03:37:52

#3

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6958|N. Ireland

1K USD?

It isn't so much the camera that you are interested in but the lens that it comes with (or that you will buy). For instance, my brother's Nikon D50x is about £250 (base), but his lenses add up to about £500.

Last edited by kylef (2008-07-03 03:40:21)

2008-07-03 03:41:57

#4

Ecilop Murof: I HOP OUT DA BEEEED..; +167|6244|loves Stimey <3 |

Gawwad wrote:
You're talking about digital SLR, right?

It's hard to find a quality camera with 12mp with that budget. MP doesn't matter as much as other aspects in image quality. (8mp+ of course)

If you're new to photography I would suggest the Canon EOS 40D. Good camera for a starting photographer which has many advanced functions as well. Make sure to check the viewfinder though, I'm not sure if it has the same shitty one the 'rebel' series do (e.g. 350D, 450D)

Look into some Nikon models as well. I don't have much experience with them but my brother is a die hard Nikon fan and the cams I've tried have been awesome!

Keep in mind that you might have to buy an objective for the camera if you can't find a suitable kit.

I've seen 12 mp cameras for 890 dollars, so I think it might be possible to find a good 12mp camera. I don't really know bout the camera you sent me, but thanks for the suggestion.

Lol at your brother btw, and thanks for the reply 1+

kylef wrote:
1K USD?

damn caps

Yes

2008-07-03 04:02:08

#5

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7150|Espoo, Finland

Really, the amount of pixels doesn't mean that much. Just compare a 10mp pocket camera picture to a 8mp SLR pic and you know what I'm talking about. There are big differences in SLR image qualities too, but generally you can't go too wrong with Canon or Nikon.

A good idea would be to find a magazine with an in depth review of digital SLR cameras in that price range. (unless we have some real expert on this site )

2008-07-03 04:05:54

#6

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7150|Espoo, Finland

kylef wrote:
1K USD?

It isn't so much the camera that you are interested in but the lens that it comes with (or that you will buy). For instance, my brother's Nikon D50x is about £250 (base), but his lenses add up to about £500.

You need a good body to benefit from a good lense. A bad cam is bad even with a 10k objective.

2008-07-03 05:59:12

#7

Ultimatrox: Member; +38|6698|Netherlands

Unzip pants and fap fap fap..

oh wait, you're not talking about a webcam

2008-07-03 06:01:50

#8

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6958|N. Ireland

Gawwad wrote:
kylef wrote:
1K USD?

It isn't so much the camera that you are interested in but the lens that it comes with (or that you will buy). For instance, my brother's Nikon D50x is about £250 (base), but his lenses add up to about £500.
You need a good body to benefit from a good lense. A bad cam is bad even with a 10k objective.

An alright body, say a Nikon D40 / D50 with some decent lenses can make some great shots. I think the base D50 is about $400, but here's a case in point.

2008-07-03 06:19:35

#9

Ecilop Murof: I HOP OUT DA BEEEED..; +167|6244|loves Stimey <3 |

kylef wrote:
Gawwad wrote:
kylef wrote:
1K USD?

It isn't so much the camera that you are interested in but the lens that it comes with (or that you will buy). For instance, my brother's Nikon D50x is about £250 (base), but his lenses add up to about £500.
You need a good body to benefit from a good lense. A bad cam is bad even with a 10k objective.
An alright body, say a Nikon D40 / D50 with some decent lenses can make some great shots. I think the base D50 is about $400, but here's a case in point.

The pictures look good.

Still, I want to be sure that I wont have to change the cam every two years and I'll probably need a good resolution for editing with PS.

2008-07-03 06:25:08

#10

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6958|N. Ireland

If you are serious about photography, get off PS and get on Lightroom

2008-07-03 06:27:24

#11

Ecilop Murof: I HOP OUT DA BEEEED..; +167|6244|loves Stimey <3 |

kylef wrote:
If you are serious about photography, get off PS and get on Lightroom

brb dling

2008-07-03 07:06:57

#12

elmer_42: Sanford and Son; +22|6366|California

Almost every photographer I ever knew said that they spent more money on lenses than cameras. Seriously. Granted, they had like 5x the lenses, but still. You should always get good glass. That said, if you're just getting into it I would just screw around with a cheap SLR until you feel ready to buy a nicer DSLR. If you keep it to one brand, you may even be able to transfer the old lenses to the new camera.

NOTE: The advice above comes from some jackass on the internet who may or may not know anything.

2008-07-03 07:22:41

#13

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7066|132 and Bush

elmer_42 wrote:
Almost every photographer I ever knew said that they spent more money on lenses than cameras. Seriously. Granted, they had like 5x the lenses, but still. You should always get good glass. That said, if you're just getting into it I would just screw around with a cheap SLR until you feel ready to buy a nicer DSLR. If you keep it to one brand, you may even be able to transfer the old lenses to the new camera.

NOTE: The advice above comes from some jackass on the internet who may or may not know anything.

Exactly where I was about to go. My lens for my Xti was almost 1k . The lens makes all the difference.. almost all DSLR's are competitive now.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-07-03 07:24:36

#14

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6958|N. Ireland

Kmarion wrote:
Exactly where I was about to go. My lens for my Xti was almost 1k . The lens makes all the difference.. almost all DSLR's are competitive now.

Right now, I'm more interested in some webcam astronomy action from you!

2008-07-03 07:27:14

#15

zeidmaan: Member; +234|6880|Vienna

From my limited experience I can tell you that MPs are not the main ingredient in good photos.
Most important thing is that your camera allows manual settings of all possible options. Specially if you want to do more that take "medium shoots" of people. If you want to go even more "pro" than buy a camera that can mount special lenses and what not ( )

2008-07-03 07:28:15

#16

Benzin: Member; +576|6463

I would just buy a Canon Powershot. That whole line of cameras kicks ass. I'm also looking at the Sony DSC W120/130.

What the hell are you going to be taking pictures of that you need 12mp???

2008-07-03 07:35:28

#17

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7150|Espoo, Finland

CapnNismo wrote:
I would just buy a Canon Powershot. That whole line of cameras kicks ass. I'm also looking at the Sony DSC W120/130.

What the hell are you going to be taking pictures of that you need 12mp???

You do understand that photography is a hobby where you try to take as good pictures as possible?
Point and shoot cameras don't really offer much options.

2008-07-03 18:43:46

#18

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7066|132 and Bush

kylef wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Exactly where I was about to go. My lens for my Xti was almost 1k . The lens makes all the difference.. almost all DSLR's are competitive now.
Right now, I'm more interested in some webcam astronomy action from you!

My original webcam wont work with Vista (very old). I bought a new one and I am having trouble removing the lens. I need a tiny screwdriver. I'm about to take a hammer to it .

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-07-04 01:47:08

#19

Ecilop Murof: I HOP OUT DA BEEEED..; +167|6244|loves Stimey <3 |

I've bought 2 magazines now, reading all of it (both magazines have DSLR's tests)

I'll report back when I know more

2008-07-04 04:13:04

#20

Ender2309: has joined the GOP; +470|7036|USA

kylef wrote:
1K USD?

It isn't so much the camera that you are interested in but the lens that it comes with (or that you will buy). For instance, my brother's Nikon D50x is about £250 (base), but his lenses add up to about £500.

its both. if your lens is shit and your base is shit your photos will be shit. all in all the lens is the most important aspect, correct.

for 1k USD your best bet is a rebel Xti (i think they call them 350Ds across the pond) with a good 30-70mm lens with a standard aperture across the zoom.

edit: kyle: all pros will tell you to take photoshop over lightroom. lightroom is just a watered down version of photoshop that removes all the extra tools. it all removes a lot of control from the user. it does have some advantages over photoshop, but photoshop is generally more intelligent as a program than lightroom is.

Last edited by Ender2309 (2008-07-04 04:16:04)

BF2S Forums Cam suggestions?

Gawwad wrote:

kylef wrote:

kylef wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

kylef wrote:

kylef wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

kylef wrote:

kylef wrote:

elmer_42 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

kylef wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

kylef wrote:

Board footer