DSLR question

Spiffyguy

Spiffyguy

New member
I am slowly looking at getting a DSLR. I have been looking at the Canon XSI right now. One feature my wife want is the ability to shoot while looking at the view screen and not he view finder. I don't really think any of them come with that ability. So I figured I would ask here if anyone knew a model that had that ability.

Thanks
Spiffy
 
Excellent and thanks for the quick response. Is there other makes that have that feature just so I know what to research.
 
Many of the very newest DSLRs have it. Canon is the market leader so that's the brand that gives you the most options. Honestly, every brand currently available will make excellent images when used properly with a good quality lens.

I use Canon because I believe that it's the best solution but that's just my opinion.


Cheers
 
The Canon XSi and my own Canon 40D both offer "live view" per your wifes request. I think she will be less than pleased though. This is not a point and shoot camera. This is not a look at the LCD and let a computer recognize where everyones face is and whether or not they are smiling camera. This is not a extend your arms a foot in front of your face while you make eye contact with your subject kind of camera. DSLRs (regardless of company) are designed with the full intention of using the viewfinder. Not using the viewfinder IMO is down right silly and once you buy a DLSR you will see why. There are two uses I have found for live view.
A. Macro work: The camera is mounted securely on a tripod. I use the "10X zoom" feature for pinpoint MANUAL FOCUS accuracy when DOF must be spot on.
B. Big crowds: I hate this, but sometimes (when I was shooting Rudi Giuliani for instance) you just have to hold the camera way above the head of the guy in front of you. I made sure all my exposure settings were right (this is a time for manual mode), I set the FPS to 6.5/second, I then switched to live view and made sure my "zoom" was right and the mayor was in the frame nicely. I then switched OFF live view and held the shutter down listening to the cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-cli-click.

There is no auto focus in live view, everything is manual.
 
forget the live view and go with a nikon, best glass on the market especially for the price. d60 or if you have the cash go with the d300,
 
*Technically* there is autofocus in live view, but its not what I imagine the OP's wife would hope for. The camera has to turn live view off, focus while you look at a black screen, and then turn live view back on. I can't even find a good use for it and I shoot every day. Realistically speaking, there is no Live View autofocus.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12899323#post12899323 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by osprey77
forget the live view and go with a nikon, best glass on the market especially for the price. d60 or if you have the cash go with the d300,
Click to expand...

Not exactly. Nikon "consumer" glass is better than Canon but Canon wins once you start buying real lenses. Just glance down the sideline at any sporting event. ;)
 
yeah that is good to know. I personally would be using the viewfinder, but if she was to use it the feature would need to be there. so it is my starting point and it will keep the peace :) and let me buy the camera. I had my eye set on the rebel, then the XTI and now the XSI. Now that I am approaching the purchase I am starting to look around at other cameras and compare the features. I don't know a ton about camera but I am learning.

I borrowed a 10D from my friend and has some good results messing around. My time was limited, but I had a good time. I did not like the small LCD on the 10d and I found the auto focus to be a bit off on alot of my pics. That may be lens related though. So my only experience is with the Canons. If there is another model to check out let me know. I plan on make a few trips to the camera store soon.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12899323#post12899323 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by osprey77
forget the live view and go with a nikon, best glass on the market especially for the price. d60 or if you have the cash go with the d300,
Click to expand...
Mmmmm I don't want to fight but I strongly feel Canon has better glass. It was one of my principle reasons for choosing Canon over Nikon in the first place. See my hour old post here on a simple Canon vs. Nikon discussion: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1425960

My point is, the Canon Xsi is a heck of a camera. It can take amazing photographs but convenience is the downfall of the DSLR. That is where Powershots and Cybershots come in. You can legitimately say to her live view exists but in reality...its just not at all what she will be used to.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12899323#post12899323 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by osprey77
forget the live view and go with a nikon, best glass on the market especially for the price. d60 or if you have the cash go with the d300,
Click to expand...

In most of the quality glass available IMHO (take note folks...I am saying in my OPINION) Nikon and Canon have the best quality glass around. I don't consider one to be any better than the other.

Now then, where there are differences (again, IMHO) are several points. 1) Canon has more selection and variety available (ie if you want a 70-200 lens in Nikon you only have one, maybe 2 options and both are expensive....with Canon you have like 3 or 4 and the price points vary because the f-stop values vary). Nikon has a fairly tight line...if you want it Nikon these are your choices and that is that unless you want to go 3rd party. 2) Canon has more Image Stabilized options and has for a longer time. Nikon is trying to catch up but isn't in any hurry. 3) and in my opinion, the biggest reason you see more Canon is because Canon's long primes (what many refer to as the high quality pro glass...let's say 300mm and greater) are CHEAPER price-wise by hundreds to thousands of dollars compared to Nikon glass.

The only other reason many sports shooters have used Canon for decades, and still do, is because of Canon's better performance with higher ISO. Nikon has only released one camera recently (the D3) that can even compete seriously (the D2X was great but still not quite there) with Canon's line-up of like 3 or 4 heavy pro bodies.

I've pondered switching from Nikon to Canon once or twice. Primarily because I find myself needing a little longer reach and recognizing I'll never be able to afford my dream lens (the Nikon 200-400mm zoom which has a nice tag of $5,000 to it). However I've played with the Canon cameras and with the Nikon and I always find myself going back to Nikon because I like the "feel". Canon has solid gear and I will never say ill of any of it. But I will say that, *for now* (things could always change in the future), Nikon is my choice time and time again.

Happy Shooting to one and all!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12904631#post12904631 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by VoidRaven
Nikon has only released one camera recently (the D3) that can even compete seriously
Click to expand...


Nikon finally figured out that the key to low noise at high ISO was the CMOS sensor.
 
Not trying to dive into the Canon/ Nikon debate but IMHO Nikon offers the folllowingngs that are unmatched by Canon:
-Entry level Nikon DSLRs are built and feel much better than Canon. Does an entry level DSLR have to feel so cheap eventhough it costs sometimes more than 1000 USD?
-Nikon cameras usually weigh more and are bigger than their equivalent in Canon To some this is an advantage as it offers much more stability.
-Nikon non pro and especially kit lenses are reputed to be of much better quality and built than the canons. I read many complaints on the kit lens of canon and see a lot more pics taken with Nikon kit lenses (especially 18-70) which are a lot better.
- Not really familiar with the Canon lens lineup but I don't think it offers much more variety than Nikon.
-The best high ISO low noise performer today in the non pro camera is the D300.
-Some would say this is bad (Marketing wise) but Nikon offers a non pro body (D300) that beats it's older and 2nd in line Pro Body (D2XS) in many aspects and many pros are using the D300
-Nikon Creative lighting system CLS beats Canon and allows you to have a wireless controlled studio controlled by a single Nikon flash.
-Nikon oldest lenses will all work on the new bodies (some might not autofocus but will still be usable)
-Regarding the white and black lenses at sport events I have read somewhere that canon has a much better marketing strategy on lenses that will appear on TV, I also heard on many occasiosn that in some coutries they will lens you lenses for free if you have a photographer pass to major events...
Disregarding all of the above both offer top notch quality and it's the man holding the camera that will have the most effect on the picture quality.
 
I didn't mean to open a Canon vs Nikon can of worms. Sorry about that. All this information is certainly helpful. I am in a good place in that I don't own any decent camera equipment, so I am at the choice stage. Once you get rolling it is hard to switch. My dad has a large number of lenses and such but he started with Nikon so that is the road he is on. It would be too expensive for him to switch. He gets some great pictures too. I am sure either brand will fit my needs. I will certainly look into the live view deficiencies for my wife just too make her happy.

Since I am not a pro I will not be after the crazy expensive lenses. I did read an article that showed some dramatic differences with the Image stabilization lenses. Since I am just learning about cameras are there any negatives to these types of lenses and are they available for all brands or just Canon?

Thanks for the info
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
Not trying to dive into the Canon/ Nikon debate but IMHO Nikon offers the folllowingngs that are unmatched by Canon:
-Entry level Nikon DSLRs are built and feel much better than Canon. Does an entry level DSLR have to feel so cheap eventhough it costs sometimes more than 1000 USD?
Click to expand...
Canon swapped sturdy metal frames for "cheap" plastic on their entry level cameras. While I don't like how the Rebel's feel, the purpose is to drive down cost. Your trading how the camera feels for better performance on a dollar for dollar basis. My 40D is built like a tank, one step up from the Rebel series.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-Nikon cameras usually weigh more and are bigger than their equivalent in Canon To some this is an advantage as it offers much more stability.
Click to expand...
Only on the very basic cameras. I have never heard anyone refer to a 40D without a grip as "light". With a grip attached the camera is a beast. The OP's wife would very much appreciate the lightweight Canon Rebel as it won't shape her forearms like that of a gorilla.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-Nikon non pro and especially kit lenses are reputed to be of much better quality and built than the canons. I read many complaints on the kit lens of canon and see a lot more pics taken with Nikon kit lenses (especially 18-70) which are a lot better.
Click to expand...
The kit lens complaints no longer hold clout. The 18-55 has been updated is now a completely redesigned 18-55 IS. The glass in the lens and everything else about it has been changed for the better. Lenses are the top priority in DSLR cameras. If you aren't going to change lenses, honestly why are you even buying one? If you aren't going to get high-quality lenses...save yourself the trouble and buy yourself a PowerShot or Cybershot. DSLR photography is likely not for you. This is an expensive hobby and a DSLR stuck on automatic mode with a kit lens is a terrible waste of money whether Canon or Nikon. A G9 would have been a much better choice...it was made for people like you.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
- Not really familiar with the Canon lens lineup but I don't think it offers much more variety than Nikon.
Click to expand...
Canon has tons and tons of very high to super high quality lenses to choose from. This was my primary reason for not buying a Nikon.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-The best high ISO low noise performer today in the non pro camera is the D300.
Click to expand...
The 40D is nearly equal up to ISO 1600, the D300 may be slightly better at ISO 3200 and while it has poor performance, offers ISO 6400. The 40D costs $500 less.
The 5D is slightly better and costs $500 more.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-Some would say this is bad (Marketing wise) but Nikon offers a non pro body (D300) that beats it's older and 2nd in line Pro Body (D2XS) in many aspects and many pros are using the D300
Click to expand...
Many pros are using the 40D and 5D. The 40D is just a hair under NFL standards, but is very popular in other professional applications. A 5D with 24-70 f/2.8 and a 40D with 70-200 f/2.8 are common sights with wedding photographers. A friend of mines shoots the NBA with 1DMkIIN and 40D.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-Nikon Creative lighting system CLS beats Canon and allows you to have a wireless controlled studio controlled by a single Nikon flash.
Click to expand...
Canon can do the same thing.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-Nikon oldest lenses will all work on the new bodies (some might not autofocus but will still be usable)
Click to expand...
With a simple inexpensive adapter, you can use Canon's oldest lenses on the new bodies. There are so many exceptional new lenses offered by Canon, I only use the adapter for one. Found abandoned in a garage, a 1000mm f/8.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
-Regarding the white and black lenses at sport events I have read somewhere that canon has a much better marketing strategy on lenses that will appear on TV, I also heard on many occasiosn that in some coutries they will lens you lenses for free if you have a photographer pass to major events...
Click to expand...
I think I can safely say 80-90% of professional sports photographers shoot Canon. Check the sidelines at any football, basketball, soccer, baseball, or other professional sporting event. From the NFL to my high school stadium its Canon, Canon, Canon. Is this because they have a better marketing strategy which makes their lenses appear on TV? No...they have a better manufacturing strategy that attract people who make money taking photographs.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12905149#post12905149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maroun.c
Disregarding all of the above both offer top notch quality and it's the man holding the camera that will have the most effect on the picture quality.
Click to expand...
You can do well with either.
 
Last edited:
I think I can safely say 80-90% of professional sports photographers shoot Canon.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those long, fast, IS lenses that Canon makes rock! I have the 70-200 f2.8. It's fantastic! But, I'm not sure the OP is looking for advice on sports photography.... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
NanoCube 24DX Goals...Advice
Replies
1
Views
395
griss
griss
E
Neptune DDR diy question for AWC
Replies
3
Views
632
Reefing102
Reefing102
B
Getting back into reefs after a decade away.. Questions
Replies
3
Views
1K
Dustin07
D
Reefing102
Serious Reefs Ad
Replies
3
Views
502
Reefing102
Reefing102
C
High Zinc in ICP Test & Switching to ATI Essentials – Need Advice
Replies
17
Views
2K
Reefing102
Reefing102
Back
Top