Help pick a camera

My suggestion

Body - $500
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542177-REG/Canon_2756B001_EOS_Rebel_XSi_Digital.html
Canon 50mm f/1.8 - $90
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002BA_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html
Canon 100mm f/2.8 - $490
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/194451-USA/Canon_4657A006_100mm_f_2_8_USM_Macro.html
Nice tripod and head - $274
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...gen_Imaging__055XPROB_Tripod_Legs_Black_.html

Total: $1354

Ebay Kit
Body - $500
50mm f/1.8 - $90
Camera Bag - $50
1x 8 gig secure digital SD card - $20
A bunch of stuff you'll wish you never bought - $340

Hey - that is almost exactly the difference of the "good stuff" package above!
 
Thanks Titusvile. Appreciate the feedback!

It's interesting how you broke down the package and critiqued every aspect. I very much appreciate that!! I wouldn't know the difference between those lens and other extras versus any other lenses and such. In the end it's clear how these packages can look great with all they throw in yet most of it is useless junk.

Will this Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens be a good "overall lens" for general pic taking? Would it be good for full tank shots and fish pics?

Is there a difference between SLR and DSLR?

What will the difference be between what you laid out versus what the G10 can do? I'm assuming there is an immense difference, especially the fact that the camera body and other optional lenses leaves me endless possibilities.

Jeremy
 
SLR stands for Single Lens Reflex. It basically means light enters through the lens, bounces off a series of mirrors, and exits at the eye piece. This way you are looking straight down the barrel of the lens itself. When you press the shutter button, the mirrors reflex re-routing the light to either film (SLR) or a digital sensor (DSLR). The D in DSLR stands for Digital.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a good overall lens. 50mm gives the perspective that you see with your own eyes. This is not to say that you will see corner to corner like your eyes (that is 17mm). It means that everything will look the same size in relation to eachother whether you are looking through the camera or not.
The 50mm f/1.8 feels like it is made of Legos. Build quality all but sucks and you may think it could fall apart in your hands. That aside, it takes a good picture and will be a great lens to start with. Being a 50mm lens, it cannot zoom in and out. You will have to zoom with your feet. I think this is actually good for a beginning photographer as you may never learn this skill with zoom lenses.

This setup (specifically the 100mm f/2.8 lens and tripod) will allow you to take unreal closeup just like you see everyone else displaying on these boards. The 50mm f/1.8 will help with fish pictures. The auto focus speed is not anything to write home about, but it is a lot better than the 100mm f/2.8. The 50mm lens will also (likely) cover your full tank shots and general walk around shooting.

The price tag is over 3x what the G10 runs, but I think this setup can do just about everything you want (for your tank). It will outperform by a large enough margin to be worth the cost IMO.
 
One other thing that is importiant. Don't expect this stuff to make pictures like you see displayed right away. You are going to have to do a lot of research, ask a lot of questions, and practice practice practice practice before you will learn how to use this equipment effectively.

With this setup you will have the proper tools to enable you to do the job. Just because you have $10,000 worth of tools in a toolbox doesn't mean you can rebuild an engine. It is true that you can't rebuild an engine without the proper tools....but they won't do you much good without a sharp mind.

I think those who say, "The equipment doesn't matter, you can take one just as good with a $5 disposable", are idiots. I think those who say, "If you spend $10,000 on equipment it will automatically reflect on your image", are idiots. You have to have the equipment to do the job and you have to have the knowledge to use the equipment.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14538170#post14538170 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TitusvileSurfer
One other thing that is importiant. Don't expect this stuff to make pictures like you see displayed right away. You are going to have to do a lot of research, ask a lot of questions, and practice practice practice practice before you will learn how to use this equipment effectively.

With this setup you will have the proper tools to enable you to do the job. Just because you have $10,000 worth of tools in a toolbox doesn't mean you can rebuild an engine. It is true that you can't rebuild an engine without the proper tools....but they won't do you much good without a sharp mind.

I think those who say, "The equipment doesn't matter, you can take one just as good with a $5 disposable", are idiots. I think those who say, "If you spend $10,000 on equipment it will automatically reflect on your image", are idiots. You have to have the equipment to do the job and you have to have the knowledge to use the equipment.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely and hear exactly where your coming from. I expect to have a significant learning curve that will be reflected in the quality of my pics. I'm willing to learn and put the effort in it to make the buy of a DSLR worth while.

Thanks.

Jeremy
 
So Jeremy.. have you decided which one to purchase?

The whole P&S vs. DSLR argument doesn't make sense.. these two kinds of cameras cater to different situation, budget, and target audience. One is NOT better than the other.

When I go to, say a formal company get-together, I don't take my huge DSLR rig.... I take my Point-and-shoot. Whereas when I'm hiking alone, I take my whole rig! It's all about what you will use them for!

The ultimate strength of dSLRs is flexibility and options that let you capture the exact emotion that you visualize. Most of the time this is not possible with a p&s with its very limited controls. For instance, if I want to show subject motion I expose at f/11 and 1/20 while panning the shot... this is extremely difficult (if it's even possible) to do with P&S!

By the way, don't get intimidated with DSLR's.. technically, they are just little boxes that record light ;) Moreover, most have Program modes which is basically a point-and-shoot mode. You can use this mode in the meantime while trying to learn the nuances of the camera.

Get out and start making photographs already!
 
Actually I have to say I took my 40D, 24-70, and 580exII to the NASA Formal Christmas Dance. Admittingly it spent most of the time in the truck under a blanket, but made a 45 minute or so appearance. That said I agree with your analogy, just playing devil's advocate.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14547643#post14547643 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by xtm
So Jeremy.. have you decided which one to purchase?
Click to expand...

Haven't entirely made up my mind yet but I'm leaning towards a DSLR and a macro lens. It will be several months before I have enough money for anything so in the meantime I'll be spending time doing research and learning a bit more about photography.

The reason I'm leaning more towards the DSLR is becuase of it's significantly better quality of close up shots (with a macro lens). I also like the idea that it will take good shots in low light becuase some night shots of critters (or polyps), that don't come out during the day, will be very nice to capture (from what I've read, most P and S cameras gain significant noise at higher ISO's and I'm under the impression a DSLR has a much higher IQ at higher iso's). I already have a P and S of fair quality for my general pic taking for vacations and such, so the DSLR will be primarily intended for close ups in very intense 20K lighting and occasionally low light.

Jeremy
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14536446#post14536446 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jlinzmaier
I plan to sell corals in the future and a quality pic can go a long ways for coral sales. That's why I want a quality camera for close up pics of my corals. It's not just because I want to blow some money on a camera!!

Can a DSRL body take decent pics - yeah that's a silly question now that I look back on it, however remember I'm not a photographer and lots of this stuff is quite foreign to me and I may ask a silly question here or there as I'm learning. Bear with me.
Click to expand...


You don't need to spend $1500 to take pics for a web commerce site. Today's P&S can take a perfectly acceptable macro, even a "good" one (I would rate "good" higher than "decent"). There are a handful of nice P&S out there for < $200 that will get the job done. From a business perspective the question isn't how long will it take to make back the cost of the camera, it's how long will it take for the DSLR to net the $1300 price difference back? Rhetorical questions obviously. Realistically you won't quantify the difference in sales generated from images from cameraA vs. cameraB, but common sense dictates that it'll take a long, long time to net back $1300 in increased sales simply from using a DSLR vs. P&S.

If you were planning to sell prints of your photos then the conversation would be totally different.

If you're planning to become a photographer as a hobby or profession then *maybe* the conversation would be different, depending on how you want to display your photos.

If you're just set on buying a DSLR, that's another story. I'm not going to talk you into it, I don't see the point. If you want one get one, but I definitely don't think that you need one.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14552033#post14552033 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mothra
You don't need to spend $1500 to take pics for a web commerce site. Today's P&S can take a perfectly acceptable macro, even a "good" one (I would rate "good" higher than "decent"). There are a handful of nice P&S out there for < $200 that will get the job done. From a business perspective the question isn't how long will it take to make back the cost of the camera, it's how long will it take for the DSLR to net the $1300 price difference back? Rhetorical questions obviously. Realistically you won't quantify the difference in sales generated from images from cameraA vs. cameraB, but common sense dictates that it'll take a long, long time to net back $1300 in increased sales simply from using a DSLR vs. P&S.

If you were planning to sell prints of your photos then the conversation would be totally different.

If you're planning to become a photographer as a hobby or profession then *maybe* the conversation would be different, depending on how you want to display your photos.

If you're just set on buying a DSLR, that's another story. I'm not going to talk you into it, I don't see the point. If you want one get one, but I definitely don't think that you need one.
Click to expand...

Show me some quality "macro" pics of corals (under intense 20K light) taken by a $200 p and s. Then print them out on an 8X10 and tell me what they look like. I don't think a p and s can produce the quality I'm interested in, but I'd sure like if you could prove me wrong with some great pics (especially from a $200 range camera). Honestly some of the coral pics posted on different websites are pathetic and quite obviously have been manipulated to make the colors pop. If I'm selling corals I want realistic photos of true color becuase I want to accurately represent what I'm selling. Customers will appreciate that and if anyone has bought a coral based on a "manipulated" pic and has been disappointed when they see the corals real color then you'll know exactly what I mean. It may cost me more initially, but I believe in good business, not just sales.

Jeremy
 
First off, I'm not going to print anything and tell you how it looks. There is no sense in that. You don't need a DSLR to make 8x10 prints (and why do you need prints?). You certainly don't need a DSLR to practice good business! And honestly you don't need extreme macro shots to sell corals. Not many buyers care what a single acropora polyp looks like.

I don't believe that you need a DSLR, but I DO think that you want one and you want someone to talk you into it. There's nothing wrong with wanting one, but if it's the case just say so, because if anything I'm trying to talk you out of it.



I snapped a quick shot of my wife's nano cube just now with her P&S. The camera is a Canon SD870 IS. Costs around $170. There are certainly better cameras out there now for about the same money, if your budget allows $300 or less then you have many more options. The second shot is from my Canon 40D with 50mm/1.8 that I have posted on RC several months ago.

P&S:
<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3394/3334324994_331489811b_o.jpg" width="800" height="600" alt="rics" style="border:4px #000 solid;"/>


DSLR:
<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3073/3023043939_9af9b24588_o.jpg" width="900" height="600" alt="2008-11_1229 600x900" style="border:4px #000 solid;"/>



Just for fun, here's a pic of the same tank from years ago. Shot with Canon G3. The Gx series are great P&S, but more $$$.
<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3293/2940151350_4dc2d6118f_o.jpg" width="600" height="400" alt="0124 sand02 600x400" style="border:4px #000 solid;"/>

I didn't put any effort into producing a usable photo in either of these shots. I walked up to the tank, swiped the glass a couple of times, pointed and shot (ok with the 40D I had to make a few manual camera settings). With a little effort on my part either camera could have produced a better image. The P&S is more saturated, probably because the average user would prefer that photo right from the camera, whereas the DSLR user is likely to post process. The exposure is better on the DSLR. In this case the more accurate photo is actually from the P&S from a color standpoint. My point is this - if I was selling these rics, would one image sell and the other one not sell?
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14552538#post14552538 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mothra
First off, I'm not going to print anything and tell you how it looks. There is no sense in that. You don't need a DSLR to make 8x10 prints (and why do you need prints?). You certainly don't need a DSLR to practice good business! And honestly you don't need extreme macro shots to sell corals. Not many buyers care what a single acropora polyp looks like.

I don't believe that you need a DSLR, but I DO think that you want one and you want someone to talk you into it. There's nothing wrong with wanting one, but if it's the case just say so, because if anything I'm trying to talk you out of it.



I snapped a quick shot of my wife's nano cube just now with her P&S. The camera is a Canon SD870 IS. Costs around $170. There are certainly better cameras out there now for about the same money, if your budget allows $300 or less then you have many more options. The second shot is from my Canon 40D with 50mm/1.8 that I have posted on RC several months ago.

P&S:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/30740619@N08/3334324994/" title="rics by Dinardi Family, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3394/3334324994_331489811b_o.jpg" width="800" height="600" alt="rics" style="border:4px #000 solid;"/></a>


DSLR:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/30740619@N08/3023043939/" title="2008-11_1229 600x900 by Dinardi Family, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3073/3023043939_9af9b24588_o.jpg" width="900" height="600" alt="2008-11_1229 600x900" style="border:4px #000 solid;"/></a>


I didn't put any effort into producing a usable photo in either of these shots. I walked up to the tank, swiped the glass a couple of times, pointed and shot (ok with the 40D I had to make a few manual camera settings). With a little effort on my part either camera could have produced a better image. The P&S is more saturated, probably because the average user would prefer that photo right from the camera, whereas the DSLR user is likely to post process. The exposure is better on the DSLR. In this case the more accurate photo is actually from the P&S from a color standpoint. My point is this - if I was selling these rics, would one image sell and the other one not sell?
Click to expand...

I entirely agree with you. I wasn't asking for some examples to be a smart ***, I just wanted to see an example of the point you were trying to make. I think you did an awesome job with both pics and I personally wouldn't be able to tell which one was taken with a p and s and which with a DSLR.

I have a Kodak dx7630 (I believe I paid around $450 3-4 yrs ago) and I certainly can't take pics that close up with that much detail. When I bought my camera I was under the impression it was a top of the line p and s (at that time) and I'm assuming it is still comperable to the quality of the $200 cameras your speaking of. Maybe it's just me and I'm not taking the pics correctly. Until I actually saw the pics you posted I would have never in a million years guessed that a p and s could take that nice of a close up pic. I read through several G10 threads and didn't see any examples of close ups with that much detail. That's the perspective I'm coming from.

The reason I indicated that printing a pic out would be worth while is, becuase with my camera I can print 4X6 pics great but try to print an 8X10 and I seem to get an extreme amount of fuzz/noise. The reason I'd like to print out 8X10's, is to take them to frag swaps to highlight the mother colonies. Not just to hang on the wall. If I want to see my corals I just go look in the tank!

I truly do appreciate your efforts to guide me to the right choice. Thank you! Again, I'm not trying to be difficult, merely basing my opinion on what little experience I have with photography and what info people have posted on this thread. That's obviously not a lot of info to go on and that's why I'm appreciative that people like you will take the time to prevent photography dummies like myself from wasting money. Trust me, I'd rather buy corals with the extra money!!

Jeremy
 
I just edited my last post and added a pic from our now dead and gone G3.

Today's $200 8-12mp P&S has the resoultion to print 8x10, albeit more noise than an average DSLR setup. A little post processing can correct white balance, reduce noise, and improve sharpness which can result in some pleasing 8x10 prints if you've done a good job on your part. A DSLR at same resolution with even a basic lens will almost always be better.

A note on my photos posted above: That's about as good as I can do with our P&S. If I put it on a tripod, used a timer, turned off the pumps, and tinkered around with settings I could have produced a better image, but not leaps and bounds. The same effort with the DSLR would be better realized. I could have also thrown a better lens on there, which you can almost always do with the DSLR - but at some astonishing costs!


I think I'm pretty much done making my point, and just trying to be helpful. No hard feelings meant or taken. In closing I'd add that 3-4 year old camera is not going to cut it today. A 1 year old camera is old news ;) The technology has come so far it's pretty amazing. My advice - go to dpreview.com and read a bunch of reviews, put some weight on macro capability. Some recent sub $200 cameras that I've read a little about are:

Fuji J150w
Panasonic FS5
Olympus FE-370
Pentax M50
Canon A100 IS
Kodak Z1285
Nikon S500

I don't know much about any of them though :)

Good luck :)
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14553000#post14553000 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mothra


I think I'm pretty much done making my point, and just trying to be helpful. No hard feelings meant or taken. In closing I'd add that 3-4 year old camera is not going to cut it today. A 1 year old camera is old news ;) The technology has come so far it's pretty amazing. My advice - go to dpreview.com and read a bunch of reviews, put some weight on macro capability.



Good luck :)
Click to expand...

Thank you again. My impression of p and s cameras was weighted heavily on my experience with my dx7630. It's obvious that it's simply time for a newer model but not necessarily a DSLR. I truly had no idea that close up shots of such clarity with limited interference from intense and/or 20K lighting could be taken by a p and s. In comparison to what pics I've seen from newer p and s cameras the link that nickb posted shows pretty poor quality pics "IMO".

You have just saved me a significant amount of money and I appreicate you being so adament and taking the time to make your point!!

Jeremy
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14553125#post14553125 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jlinzmaier


You have just saved me a significant amount of money and I appreicate you being so adament and taking the time to make your point!!

Jeremy
Click to expand...

I guess if I'm ever in Stockton I'll have to buy you a drink with the money I've saved!!

Jeremy
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14553125#post14553125 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jlinzmaier
It's obvious that it's simply time for a newer model but not necessarily a DSLR. I truly had no idea that close up shots of such clarity with limited interference from intense and/or 20K lighting could be taken by a p and s.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I have been saying the whole time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

raidendex
Fixing White Balance
Replies
2
Views
559
wvned
wvned
S
AI Blade Grow and Glow help
Replies
5
Views
2K
Sermanley
S
C
Help with fish illness diagnosis
Replies
4
Views
510
Dr. Reef
Dr. Reef
A
FS: Leemar Tank w/ Stand
Replies
0
Views
584
AQUA951
A
_divad
Black Box Light, Tunze Osmolator Nano, Marinepure Large Block, Eshopps External Overflow, Jebao RW-8(x2) & RW-15, Milwaukee Lux Meter.
Replies
4
Views
538
_divad
_divad
Back
Top