• The "Which camera is right for me?" thread V2 - Get a used Rebel
    1,690 replies, posted
[QUOTE=The Un-Men;31476915]The guy doesn't give a fuck about statistics and technical lists. He wants to have good quality for his snapshots, he'll be fine with a high end p&s. Also as a d3100 owner I have been very unsatisfied with the ergonomics, handling, speed, and lens compatibility. I had to find out it doesn't compare well to the other's entry level cameras the hard way.[/QUOTE] That's the complete opposite of what I heard of the 3100.. hmm Interesting.
3100's output is great. Sure the camera is really light, but it feels OK in my hands, if a little plastic because I'm used to my larger, heavier cameras. The 3000 was the one that was bitched about by that one enthusiast/critic everyone loves
What stopped me getting a Nikon camera was that they're tiny. Even the D7000 felt way too small.
Oh the d3100 does have good quality, I'll give you that. Doesn't mean it's any nice to handle, or that you can't get the same, or better results with the other ones. I guess I'll do a little review of the things that really feel lacking on 'em Nikon entry level camuhras.
Might get my girlfriend a 550D seeing as she won't need the extra buff of video support and the screen-shit, thoughts?
[QUOTE=MoarFunz;31477506]Might get my girlfriend a 550D seeing as she won't need the extra buff of video support and the screen-shit, thoughts?[/QUOTE] Isnt the 50D better in almost every way but video?
Is it? I read through the thread and there's lots of recommendation for newbie to hit on with the 550D
[QUOTE=MoarFunz;31477559]Is it? I read through the thread and there's lots of recommendation for newbie to hit on with the 550D[/QUOTE] I'm no pro but I saw DigitalRev's 550D vs 50D comparison video, and the only thing the 550D was better for was the video capability - 50D had better controls, sturdier body etc. 50D was like 3 megapixels less but that shouldn't matter too much
Fuck the 50D page at the website of the store is bugged out, no prices nor details... [editline]2nd August 2011[/editline] Could you link me to DigRev's versus vidya about these two?
[QUOTE=MoarFunz;31477696]Fuck the 50D page at the website of the store is bugged out, no prices nor details... [editline]2nd August 2011[/editline] Could you link me to DigRev's versus vidya about these two?[/QUOTE] here you go [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOcJaHX8x4c[/media]
If you don't need video, and don't care about MP. Get the 50D, it's a different level camera compared to the 550D/T2i, although the 550D is newer. Canon goes like this, xxxxD, xxxD, xxD and then xD in terms of the targeted market.
Kai has to get a better microphone for his videos, I can't stand all the noise.
[QUOTE=pure.Joseph;31477760]If you don't need video, and don't care about MP. Get the 50D, it's a different level camera compared to the 550D/T2i, although the 550D is newer. Canon goes like this, xxxxD, xxxD, xxD and then xD in terms of the targeted market.[/QUOTE] yeah 50D is better xD [editline]d[/editline] see what I did there?
Alright watched the video, 50D's control kinda put me off but it's not my camera after all, I'll check the prices on both and see what should I go for. [editline]2nd August 2011[/editline] 50D's more expensive - 550D it is then.
[QUOTE=The Un-Men;31476915]The guy doesn't give a fuck about statistics and technical lists. He wants to have good quality for his snapshots, he'll be fine with a high end p&s. Also as a d3100 owner I have been very unsatisfied with the ergonomics, handling, speed, and lens compatibility. I had to find out it doesn't compare well to the other's entry level cameras the hard way.[/QUOTE] I (almost) entirely disagree with the second half of your post. The ergonomics and handling seem fine, though I can see why it might be slightly uncomfortable only if you have large hands. I'm not sure what you mean by speed. Shutter speed is shutter speed, high ISO performance is actually very nice on the D3100, autofocus speed is all in the lenses with AF-S. I'll give you the point on lens compatibility, though - the lack of autofocus on old lenses is annoying but Nikon has enough AF-S lenses that it isn't really a problem. Frankly, I've used Canon's entry levels and they just don't do it for me at all. But then again, it's pretty well agreed that since most of the major brands are very similar in quality, the real factor in camera purchase should be what layout and feel works best for you. Perhaps you just aren't a Nikon guy?
Hey guys, I'd like to ask you all a question I've been mulling over (As a newbie) It seems that at the moment Nikon produce the higher-spec bodies (In terms of colour depth, EV, features, etc) but Canon seem to produce higher quality glass. Now, I was wondering, how important is the lens to the bodies in digital cameras? (I know with film the lens is far more important) and would a higher quality lens of a Canon produce 'better' quality images (Say, a 60D) against a cheaper lens with a Nikon body (Say, D7000) that has 'better' stats. Where does the meet off point begin and end?
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;31479724]Hey guys, I'd like to ask you all a question I've been mulling over (As a newbie) It seems that at the moment Nikon produce the higher-spec bodies (In terms of colour depth, EV, features, etc) but Canon seem to produce higher quality glass. Now, I was wondering, how important is the lens to the bodies in digital cameras? (I know with film the lens is far more important) and would a higher quality lens of a Canon produce 'better' quality images (Say, a 60D) against a cheaper lens with a Nikon body (Say, D7000) that has 'better' stats. Where does the meet off point begin and end?[/QUOTE] There's a DigitalRev comparison video showing good camera/crap lens vs starter camera/camera L-glass, I'll dig it up in a bit if you don't want to find it. They've also got a lot of "pro photographer, cheap camera" and "pro camera, noob photographer" videos. Long story short, Good glass is really helpful, as is knowing what you're doing with the camera. The body enables a little extra control/processing/size and gives a good photographer the extra edge, but between money in lenses or in a good body, I'd have to say invest in good glass. The sharpness of a good lens can help a lot more than an extra few megapixels.
[QUOTE=Skyhawk;31479085]I (almost) entirely disagree with the second half of your post. The ergonomics and handling seem fine, though I can see why it might be slightly uncomfortable only if you have large hands. I'm not sure what you mean by speed. Shutter speed is shutter speed, high ISO performance is actually very nice on the D3100, autofocus speed is all in the lenses with AF-S. I'll give you the point on lens compatibility, though - the lack of autofocus on old lenses is annoying but Nikon has enough AF-S lenses that it isn't really a problem. Frankly, I've used Canon's entry levels and they just don't do it for me at all. But then again, it's pretty well agreed that since most of the major brands are very similar in quality, the real factor in camera purchase should be what layout and feel works best for you. Perhaps you just aren't a Nikon guy?[/QUOTE] I actually love the button layout on the higher end Nikon models. But there is something about the d3100 that feels so uncomfortable and clunky... There are only two customizable buttons, one of which is too close and feels the same as the flash button. You can only set it to change WB, ISO, or quality at once, and if you need to change the custom setting you can't just go to the WB, ISO, or quality menu and tell the camera to use the button to change it. Noooo, instead you go to a huge, unnecesary, unorganized menu, and try to find the button settings. Video and Live View are poorly implemented. I wasn't expecting much from those two features but shit son! They are really frustrating. Now, I have normally sized hands, but the d3100's grip can't fit them... not even my sister's! Something I noticed just yesterday, after finding my old cheapo bridge camera is that it has a better designed grip, and is more comfortable to hold. And how is it not absurd for Canon to have better Nikon lens compatibility than Nikon entry level cameras? Another thing is, so much buttons could have better functionality. If you underexpose even by a 1/3 of a stop, a ''?'' sign will start blinking on the screen. If you press the ''?'' button on the back, the camera will warn you ''Subject is too dark. Use on board flash for better results'', even on manual mode, as if you were still on Guide mode. You can't disable the blinking, or assign an useful function to the ''?'' button. That's what really gets me. The meter fucking loves to blow highlights, it's just so unreliable I get normal results only after setting exposure compensation to -1EV, give or take. And I'm not talking about high dynamic, contrasty scenes; the meter will blow the highlights whenever it pleases. [editline]1st August 2011[/editline] Oh and compare it to something like a k-r. At the same price, it has a much, much better screen, less shutter lag, a slightly better viewfinder, green button (google that shizzle) and most importantly, a focusing motor (not to mention the SR system). How does Nikon justify the lack of focusing motors in their entry level cameras?
[QUOTE=Alcapwne;31474032]I'm in a bit of a dilemma - I'm quite into photography which I recently started having bought a Pentax ME Super, but I've always wanted to get into film making too, and I'm probably gonna get a camcorder (the Sony CX130E) in a couple of days for my birthday. However, if I like photography a lot, which I think I might, I will probably invest in a DSLR sometime, and the video capabilities of even something low-end like the 550D are insane - the depth of field and different lenses makes it probably better than the kind of camcorder I'm looking to get. Are there any downsides to DSLR video? I can probably get a 550D kit for about £450, and the camcorder I'm looking to buy is £260 so there is a lot of price difference, but I might be willing to pay that if it's a much better alternative. Can anyone shed some light on this? Thanks[/QUOTE] The 550D is the perfect DSLR for your filming purposes, plus if you don't mind a little firmware update give [url=http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Unified/UserGuide]MagicLantern[/url] a shot. I'll just post the feature list here so you can get a glimpse of what I'm talking about. • Audio: disable AGC and digital filters, audio meters, manual audio controls, selectable input source (internal, internal+external, external stereo, balanced), audio monitoring via USB. • Exposure helpers: zebras, false color, histogram, waveform, spotmeter. • Focus tools: focus peaking, zoom while recording, trap focus, rack focus, follow focus, focus stacking, focus graph, zoom in Face Detect mode. • Movie helpers: Bitrate control (QScale or CBR), movie logging (Exif-like metadata), auto-restart after buffer overflow or 4 GB limit, time remaining display, clean LiveView display without any overlays, change movie position on the mode dial. • Cropmark images: user-editable overlays to assist framing and composition. • Fine control for ISO, Shutter, Kelvin white balance and other image settings. • Remote release with LCD face sensor and audio trigger, without extra hardware. • Bracketing: exposure bracketing, focus stacking. • Timelapse: intervalometer (for photos and movies), silent pictures without shutter actuation; integration with bracketing. • Astro- and night photography: bulb timer for very long exposures (up to 8h). • Info displays: focus and DOF info, CMOS temperature, shutter count, clock. • For strobists: flash exposure compensation from -10 to +3 EV. • Power management: Turn off display in LiveView mode; quickly adjust LCD backlight level. • Fun stuff: slit-scan pictures. [QUOTE=Alcapwne;31474405]Yeah I saw a video explaining that, but I basically wanna do like harry potter fight scenes with special effects and all and that sort of thing, is running at each other 'very high speed'?[/QUOTE] Just a little hint here: [url=http://gizmodo.com/5826778/]The Canon 5D Mk II Has Made Itself a Home in Hollywood[/url]
+1 for the guy about the Canon HDSLR's. Very awesome cameras for cinematography. Love both the 7D and the 5D mark II. And well, Canon's lower-end everything is pretty garbage compared to Nikon's which has the best bang for buck. But in terms of glass, I honestly still prefer the look and feel of Nikon's glass even though I'm a Canon guy. Canon has a wide variety of lenses for just about anything and most of them have good bang for buck as well, like the 50 1.8 85 1.8. Still prefer Nikon's Zoom though. It really depends on what you want to look for. Nikon has very accurate color reproduction, and in my honest opinion, I think for canon's its more of, ( raping in photoshop ) They each have their pro's and Con's it really depends on what you want. Nikon just works, canon is latest in technology.
[QUOTE=pure.Joseph;31482197]... And well, Canon's lower-end everything is pretty garbage compared to Nikon's which has the best bang for buck. ...[/QUOTE] I don't quite know what you consider as lower-end ( < 450D / 500D ? ) but everything above that is perfectly fine for beginners. Plus in terms of shooting videos Canon does the better job.
[QUOTE=The-Stone;31482323]I don't quite know what you consider as lower-end ( < 450D / 500D ? ) but everything above that is perfectly fine for beginners. Plus in terms of shooting videos Canon does the better job.[/QUOTE] Kiss X's aka xxxxD's. the 550D is a really nice camera to begin with. I'm not bashing either companies. I started out with a D5000 and moved my way up to Canon's stuff Just for video and what not.
[QUOTE=The Un-Men;31480437]Hatin' on the D3100 like a bawss.[/QUOTE] You know what? I entirely agree with your points, but I guess they just don't bother me. To each his own, eh?
I decided to get a Sony TX10, I am getting it earlier before my birthday so I can learn it a bit more.
Just looking for an opinion, I'm thinking about buying another camera (I have 3 SLRs from my grandparents that I use as much as I can) and I wanted to know which would be more fun/interesting to get; a rangefinder camera, a medium format TLR, or a DSLR. Right now I'm kinda between the two film cameras, as that's what I currently use, and I'm waiting to go back to school to check out the DSLRs the library has for loan. Input?
I'd say DSLR, I'm no fan of film.
All of those three would be pretty fun, but it depends on what you enjoy doing and what you value in photography. DSLR if you're into a wide range of things, and would like to continue your work with SLR's but with greater degrees of freedom. Medium Format if you value pixel-per-pixel quality over convenience and ease of use (And your wallet, in some cases) Rangefinders are a great offshot to the SLR range. I don't know much about them, but I would love to play with one myself.
I think I'm gonna write up a thread about all the different types of film, cameras, formats, etc
Would one of these be a good remote flash trigger? Does this come with both the transmitter and receiver? [url]http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Yongnuo-RF-603-Flash-Trigger-Canon-1000D-550D-500D-/160616016049?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item256575e8b1[/url] I've got a 550D using a 430EX II.
The Yongnuo RF-603 from the reviews I have read are pretty reliable. They work as transceivers so you don't need a specific transmitter and receiver, any two units will work together and you get two in the box. The camera specific listings are for the shutter release cable so you can use them as a remote control too.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.