Looking for a new camera

littleFella · 08-22-2006, 08:33 PM

So far I'm inclined towards Nikon D50. Anybody has any experience with it? Any other rec's? (not looking for a slim, fully auto kind). Doesn't have to be an SLR though.

joecacia · 08-22-2006, 09:04 PM

I am sorry I could not help, but I know a friend who use Nikon D70 Digital, a little expensive, but I know it is a great one.

Features:

6.1-megapixel resolution for 3008 x 2000-pixel images and
photo-quality poster-plus sized enlargements

Includes Nikon's 18-70mm Nikkor lens created for this camera's
DX format CCD

1.8-inch LCD screen; built-in pop-up flash; shoot JPEG, TIFF, or
RAW

Store images on CompactFlash type I/II memory cards; Microdrive
compatible; no memory card included

Powered by a rechargeable lithium-ion battery pack (included
with charger); connects via USB 1.1

littleFella · 08-25-2006, 06:24 AM

thanks joecacia.
I decided to go for this Olympus

**Cricket** · 08-25-2006, 06:25 AM

Nice choice you made there. I have heard some excellent comments about that camera from others. I hope you will show us your results with it soon!

littleFella · 08-25-2006, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cricket

Nice choice you made there. I have heard some excellent comments about that camera from others. I hope you will show us your results with it soon!

I read a lot of good reviews on dp forum about this thing. It is probably an overkill for my photo skills but what the heck - the price is right and it's only $850 CDN.

Oh, that thing has a vibrator built in

. (supposed to shake the dust particles off the photo sensors).

**Cricket** · 08-25-2006, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littleFella

I read a lot of good reviews on dp forum about this thing. It is probably an overkill for my photo skills but what the heck - the price is right and it's only $850 CDN.

Oh, that thing has a vibrator built in

. (supposed to shake the dust particles off the photo sensors).

Yup! They got together with Sony and added that feature to this one now too. I have heard nothing but good things about that feature.

Edit: It was Minolta that got together with Sony for the feature. Either way it appears to be an awesome feature. I would love to try it.

joecacia · 08-25-2006, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littleFella

thanks joecacia.
I decided to go for this Olympus

This is a great one, nice choice as well.

Sketch · 08-25-2006, 06:43 AM

I guess I'm a little too late. But I have had used the Nikon D50 (Or maybe a D60?) a few times. Its a pretty good camera. Its the only digital SLR that I've used so I guess it would be hard to compare against any others.

You'll have to post some shots once you've had a good play around with it.

DaveyBoy · 08-25-2006, 06:57 AM

My cousin's fiance has just bought a D50 and it's a very nice camera. It sits wonderfully in the hands and is a decent weight.

Come to think of it, I think Heather has it or a similar one.

I'm after a Sony Alpha A100 soon, i'm off to America in a month and they are 150 pounds cheaper there so I might pick one up with a minolta 400mm lens too. Pretty excited

littleFella · 08-25-2006, 07:02 AM

I was looking at D50 too. Great reviews and such. Even better than entry level Canon SLRs, but it comes with just basic lense. Since I dunno much about SLRs I opted for the Olympus kit assuming the package contains just the right stuff, including the big a$$ lense. Well, I need a larger memory card, but that's about it. Maybe a second battery.

Oh, based on dpreviews, Sonys and Kodaks are said to have the least effective anti-shake mechanisms?

DaveyBoy · 08-25-2006, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littleFella

I was looking at D50 too. Great reviews and such. Even
Oh, based on dpreviews, Sonys and Kodaks are said to have the least effective anti-shake mechanisms?

They always say stuff like that but it's going to be tiny tiny tiny differences. Like they measure focus times and start-up times in milliseconds lol.

littleFella · 08-25-2006, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveyBoy

They always say stuff like that but it's going to be tiny tiny tiny differences. Like they measure focus times and start-up times in milliseconds lol.

True. There ain't one camera that does it all 100% perfect.
As for speeds, I like my camera to be as fast as possible. Start up time may not be critical but focus time might. I lost a ton of potentialy interesting shots cuz of the little itsy bitsy speed issues.

I'd like to catch the damn Niagara Falls water (and other falls in the area) without smudges. Like the drops of water you posted. Whenever I took a shot with 1/1000 sec shutter speed (all that my Minolta Z1 allowed) moving objects were not as good as I wanted them too be. Luckilly, my daughter broke the Minolta so I have an excuse to spend a buck or two ona new one.

DaveyBoy · 08-25-2006, 07:44 AM

haha yeah shutter speed is definitely important, you do need an SLR for those top end speeds, 1/4000 i think most of them are. Saying that, those drops i took wasn't on 1/1000 it was less i think.

Focus times on dSLRs and top end compacts are minimal, i know that mine is constantly focusing as you move the cam around.

littleFella · 08-25-2006, 08:10 AM

yeah, I goofed I guess. Ineed, startup speed is not as important as shutter speed.

DaveyBoy · 08-25-2006, 08:25 AM

that sony alpha one starts to focus as soon as u place ur eye up to it, clever stuff.

James-A · 08-26-2006, 03:40 AM

That's cool.
Nice choice.