So I want a camera that I can take really great shots with. I drive around in a convertible, and I see some amazing shots that I would love to grab.

I'm looking at the D80, D50 simply due to the cost.
I really haven't look at the Canon cameras...but the Rebels are nice in my previous experience.

TWW enlighten me.

9/18/2008 12:14:14 AM

D60 or XSi both excellent DSLR for <$700

9/18/2008 12:34:26 AM

see also:
/message_topic.aspx?topic=391741

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 12:40 AM. Reason : .]

9/18/2008 12:40:21 AM

Good Glass (lens) > Good Body

9/18/2008 1:48:11 AM

Are you going to leave it in "P" mode and let it take flash pictures at the maximum end of the zoom length? Do yourself a favor and buy a good point and shoot. There are plenty of people in the world with e-peen cameras that can't use them.

http://www.dpreview.com/

9/18/2008 10:02:01 AM

are you SURE you want a DSLR? i'm certainly not knocking them, but "i want a camera that i can take really great shots with" doesn't strike me as a good reason to spend ~$700-1000 when you could do the same thing for $300 at 10% the weight and 20% the size

now, before people berate me for saying "the same thing", let me qualify the statement by mentioning that i'm talking about in reference to point and shoot photography...it doesn't sound like he's going to be doing anything where a DSLR will be of significant benefit

spend $250-300 on a camera with quality glass (leica and zeiss are my favorite), 10-12x optical zoom (or 18x, if you want to go with something more SLR-like), and image stabilization (IMO, your only options here are canon and panasonic)

as a panny fanboy, let me recommend:

DMC-FZ28 (~$300, 18x optical zoom, 10mp, 0.28cm2 sensor)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmcfz28.asp

DMC-TZ5 (~$250, 10x, 9mp, 0.28cm2)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmctz5.asp

since the sensors are the same size, you'll get the same image, despite the technically larger output of the FZ28...the FZ28 also has the ability to shoot in RAW format and allows for manual settings like exposure, focus, etc (though i don't think manual focus is mechanical, which i don't like)

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 10:52 AM. Reason : .]

9/18/2008 10:30:56 AM

^I concur about getting an SLR-like camera (aka advanced P&S), except I'm a Canon/Sony fanboy (for cameras), I have a Sony DSC-H5 (very similar to the H50) and I LOVE IT, I can do about 80% of what a DSLR can, and with an adapter ring, I can use wide angle, tele, macro lens and filters

Sony DSC-H50 9.1MP - $360
15x optical zoom / 3" LCD / 9-pt AF / optical image stabilization
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0802/08022502sonyh50.asp
http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Sony-DSC-H50-B-9-1-Megapixel-Digital-Camera-Black-DSCH50B/sem/rpsm/oid/206004/catOid/-13062/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do

Canon PowerShot SX10 IS 10MP - $399
20x optical zoom / 2.5" LCD / optical image stabilization
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091703canon_sx1is_sx10is.asp
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Powershot-SX10IS-Digital-Stabilized/dp/B001G5ZTZO/

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 11:37 AM. Reason : ,]

9/18/2008 11:28:57 AM

^ out of those two, the only one that's comparable in image quality and features to the pannys is the sony...the canon's glass isn't anything special (the sony uses zeiss), and the sensor is smaller than any of the either three...those are deal breakers, IMO

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 11:40 AM. Reason : .]

9/18/2008 11:40:22 AM

i changed the canon on you, i realized the S5 was the older model the newer S10 has the same 2.3" CCD as the panny's and sony, the S1 in fact has a CMOS sensor.

9/18/2008 12:13:39 PM

^ WELL, NEVERMIND, THEN

i still hold firm on the quality glass issue, though...the vast majority of shooting won't show the difference, but macro-style shots and shots taken at the full extent of the optical zoom will definitely be better in the cameras with quality glass

as for CCD vs. CMOS, i won't profess to have any extensive knowledge...i know that a few years ago saw CCD for being superior in terms of quality and noise (especially in low-light situations), but i also know that things have changed...i'd say that, without any research, they're about equal with each coming in ahead, depending on the benchmark

CCD used to use more power than CMOS, and while i think that still holds true, it's not that significant anymore...CCD cameras also used to be cheaper, and while i think that's still the case, it's not by any large margin

9/18/2008 1:41:00 PM

CMOS has better color reproduction i think, nearly all high-quality SLR use CMOS, not sure how a low-end CMOS camera compares though, i doubt anywhere near as good.

9/18/2008 2:10:50 PM

http://ericfossum.com/

that's the guy that invented CMOS imager technology... really nice guy I met him personally this summer b/c of what I was working on...

CMOS originally came about b/c Dr Fossum needed cheap sensors for what they were working on... they have been matured through cell phone camera's and now, with feature size shrink, have found their way into SLR's.

CCD uses the entire pixel space to collect light.

CMOS uses MOST of the pixel space to collect light but not all of it in todays technology... (what I was working on it were 100% fill factor CMOS designs using 3D circuits)...

so CMOS aren't as sensitive as CCD but as the pixels sizes have shrunk below the diffraction limit of light, the incident light can be collected by several pixels and averaged (or something very similar to that... I'm not looking it up)...

CMOS is lower power b/c pixel rows or columns can be directly read out instead of having to do shift operations to get the array out which is the entire purpose of CCD technology, this also gives way to higher speed circuits. Very sensitive stuff still tips it's hat towards CCD... but higher speed stuff goes CMOS



[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 2:51 PM. Reason : CMOS imagers came from crappy camera phones and have matured with moore's law]

9/18/2008 2:46:47 PM

FWIW, the panasonic DMC-TZ5A is on sale for $170 at dell...i think you'd be hard pressed to find a camera of that quality and features at or around the same price (it also takes HD video at 30fps)

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?cjsku=A1622413&sku=A1622413

9/19/2008 8:38:43 AM

I'll sell you a 2 day old Canon S5 IS... but you gotta pay shipping from Australia. probably $40.

Canon sent it to me to replace my old S1IS which broke and was under recall. great camera and the S5IS has gotten excellent reviews.

9/20/2008 8:58:13 AM

Im a complete camera noob, can any explain the difference between a regular camera and a slr along with their applications. Thanks for the help.

9/20/2008 12:03:58 PM

I take it back. I picked up a D40 cheap today and its freaking awesome. its fast, responsive, i can actually see clearly and accurately through the view finder, feels solid, nice shutter feel/sound. oh yes.

/dslr noob

9/21/2008 1:14:05 AM

i have a sony dsc-h7 and i love it, takes great shots once you learn how to play with the settings and adjust them to fit your needs. i was sort of in the same boat too, trying to debate between SLR and SLR-like, glad I went with the H7, saved about $400 in the process and I'm completely satisfied with the quality I'm getting.

9/22/2008 12:42:03 AM

G10 was announced this week. 15MP for $499 isn't bad considering the G9 is pretty nice P&S.

9/22/2008 2:53:02 AM

^ but the sensor is the same size, so 12mp vs 15mp doesn't really MEAN anything, since the overall quality of your image isn't any better...also, they dropped from 6x optical to 5x (IIRC), so i don't really know what's so great about it...i haven't gone over the specs extensively, so maybe there's something really great

9/22/2008 10:19:18 AM

All sorts of wild stuff dropped at Photokina 2008 this week, might wanna wait. Micro Four Thirds gonna be hot.
http://www.engadget.com/tag/photokina/

9/22/2008 12:21:03 PM