SLR camera debate

[gleaner1]

Hey all,
My favorite type of camera's is a SLR and I think it's time to start looking for a new one. I'm looking for one that can have interchangeable lens'. My question to all is what is the best for the least amount. I don't want to spend more that $300 to $400 for the body and no more than $200 to $300 for the lens or lens'.What is everyone's opinion on who makes the best, and what is the best combo...
Thankx in advance
PLL

glooker, been there, got thru it by buying used. Your numbers probably wont work for new equipment. I picked up a mint condition used Sony a100, 10.4 megapix, with normal primary lens, 75 to 300 zoom macro lens, 4 filters, two batteries, charger, all cables, software, manual, a 2-gig card, deluxe carry case, all for 400 beans from my local buy/sell/trade shop. And it's not too old, say 1995 (correction, these came out in 2005/2006), and was well over a 1500 bean package new. Now we wont get into who makes the best DSLR, it's like arguing who makes the best detector or full sized pickup truck. Lens quality is key. I like Sony because they pioneered digital imaging, starting in the 1940's. My camera is the result of Sony and Minolta collaborating on a new DSLR design, then Sony took over the whole business. My camera body will except all of the excellent 35mm Minolta film SLR lenses which is a plus. Keep looking, I am certain you can get a good used DSLR in your money range.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[rockhound]

If you want a 35 mm camera, you can find some great deals on Ebay or pawns shops, with more lenses than you could probably ever afford otherwise. I just bough a German 35 mm SLR camera with 4 lenses, and it is more cmaera than you can buy now, unless you can afford a Leica. Yes. it is heavy, but it is built like a tank. Also it uses no battery, so you don't have to worry, when you need it to work, it will. It is manual focus but can be used manually or automatically.But you had better hurry if you want one, before people find out what kind of quality they are and the price escalates. Also the Russians build some cameras that were almost as good, but these are starting to be gobbled up by collectors,both German and Russian made 35 mm, and 35 mm SLR. And if you have a flatbed scanner, you can convert to digital after the film is processed by using the negatives or actual pictures. And you can have them developed chepaer than the ink will cost for you printer. Good luck. rockhound

 

[gleaner1]

Sorry, now I see how foolish I am I thought 'glooker meant digital. This post is so old anyway I'm sure he is by now a 100% digital man.

 

[rockhound]

If you want the best,then you have to buy a Leica camera.They only build professional cameras.But you had better save for a while, or take out a loan,because they are not cheap. rockhound

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

I would have to agree and disagree with you on the Leica brand of cameras.

They used to make only professional cameras - now they make everything from the most complicated (not a bad thing for folks like me who like to take a picture 50 different ways), to a very simple point and shoot and digitals. No longer are the days when you have to shell out 5 grand for
a Leica - now they start at about 100 bucks and go up to the thousands. (they also make projectors, etc.)

One thing I will say for them, I have seen one of their digitals, and it is surprisingly high in the pixel department. High zoom that is optical and not digital, and high in the mb department - making it great for enlargements that keep their clarity.

The company has expanded their inventory quite a bit over the last 15 years.

Beth

 

[Frankn]

I have been following Sony NEX 3&5 writeups. This camera is so small it would fit in your pocket with the 16MM pancake lens. That lens with the new tele zoom that is coming out next is just about a do all camera. To take a panorama you just depress the shutter button and swing the camera around. It takes out the blurr and stitches automatically in camera. It has an aps C image chip of 14+ MP. I think it goes up to 32000
So you can practally shoot by starlight. It came out high on resolution and color accuracy tests. These were problems in some of the old Alphas. The new lens mount has a limited selection, but more are in the works.
It doesn't have a built in flash, but I dislike them anyway. There is an optional flash. It has 2 forms of built in HD imaging. It also takes HD video but this is something else that I will probably never use.
The best price I have found is $499.99 for the NEX5 with 16MM 2.8 lens. That is at Broadway. The NEX 5 is a little smaller and has the metal body. I predict that this camera will gradually eat into the SLR market. I will watch them till spring and then make my move.

​

 

[gleaner1]

You can pick up a Leica S2 DSLR, body only, 37.5 megpix, no lenses, for a meager $22,995. I did, then I went home and hanged myself (or is it hung myself?).

 

[Frankn]

That's Leica lot of money! And try fitting that one in your pocket. LOL

​

 

[emtrescue]

You can pick up a Leica S2 DSLR, body only, 37.5 megpix, no lenses, for a meager $22,995. I did, then I went home and hanged myself (or is it hung myself?).

I'll see your leica and raise you a Hasselblad.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/671879-REG/Hasselblad_70480533.html

42 grand. Jesus. BUT it is 60 megapixels, lol.

 

[Frankn]

The big question I have to ask is why would I want to kick out 42g's and clog my computer with 60 MP images when I am producing 16"x20" fine art images with a Canon 10D that has 6MP. I produce them on a 24" HP 130 Design Jet and sell them thru galleries. The MP race only makes money for the manufactures.
It's the same as the coil race on metal detectors. 90% of the THs only need the coil that came with their detector. If you are going into it in a pro way looking for something big and deep get a two box or a PI with a rug loop coil or a GPR. I think some people just have the upgrade disease.

​

 

[emtrescue]

The big question I have to ask is why would I want to kick out 42g's and clog my computer with 60 MP images when I am producing 16"x20" fine art images with a Canon 10D that has 6MP. I produce them on a 24" HP 130 Design Jet and sell them thru galleries. The MP race only makes money for the manufactures.
It's the same as the coil race on metal detectors. 90% of the THs only need the coil that came with their detector. If you are going into it in a pro way looking for something big and deep get a two box or a PI with a rug loop coil or a GPR. I think some people just have the upgrade disease.

​

AMEN. I just thought I would throw it out there since someone brought up the Leica. I would take a quality lens with a medium camera over the reverse any day. I have a Canon myself (50D) - my first DLSR that does me just fine. And it still clogs my computer. Hmmm maybe I need an upgrade on that. lol.

 

[Frankn]

The trick is not to leave the images in your computer. I have a CD storage and retrieval system that has my over 200 Cd's filed by number. I use an old fashion looseleaf to list all images by picture name and also by subject. It's like this . I have a picture of a Bird the picture is called the inquisitor so it is listed under that, but it is also listed under bird. Each listing shows the CD#. I push the number and the CD pops up. I run the thumbnails to locate it. I have never had a CD go bad. Some discs have 100 images. I use elements and painter 9.5 software to process the images. I do a lot of reconstruction of historical buildings in my computer.

​

 

[Nikon]

That Leica S2 is nice i got to hold one once, when our Leica rep came in to the camera store i work at. Its a nice camera if you know how to use it. An expensive camera dose not mean you will get good photos. Its all in your eye, while have good lenses help. its all about the person behind the camera. I have many cameras so are cheep and some are not so cheep. so i have 3 examples one taken with an high end camera NikonD1(or it was when it was new) on an old Olympus OM2, and a cheep Nikon Coolpix.

 

[Joe Hoo?]

i had to get in on this one lol everyone has there opinions on the best camera, but one thing i have not seen anyone touch on is the film if you are using a SLR thats not digital the film your using can either make or break the pic you are taking , i have 30 plus yrs in the studio i have done thousands of families in my lifetime, i own some of the best SLR cameras a man can ever own, canon, olympus, nikon, minolta, pentax, just like a metal detector, a camera is only as good as the person behind it. i just recently purchased a Fujifilm Finepix S1800 to do portraits in my home, i am very partial to fuji film when it comes to my film cameras been using fuji for 25 plus yrs in the studio because of its richness in colors.. one does not need to spend alot of money to get a nice camera and do professional work on top of it, and this is coming from a professional, not a amateur... good luck on finding the camera that is right for you.... pic i attached is with my new fuji finepix S1800

 

[rockhound]

You are correct about the film, but what you are reallly paying for is the lens. This is what seperates a cheap camera,binoculars,scope or any other device that uses optics. The best optics in the world come out of Germany. Names like Zeiss,Leica,Swarovski, to mane a few.The more precision and distortion free a lens is, the sharper and more detailed the picture will be.These are the only lens that you can buy with phase coated and distortion free glass lenses. They are not cheap, but this is what you are paying for.The only other camera that has these lenses available are the Panasonic lumix.They buy these lenses directly from Germany for their cameras.The average person may not dee the detail in a small picture, but a trained eye can spot the difference immediately. When enlarged, this is when the distortion shows up to even the untrained eye. rockhound

 

[Joe Hoo?]

i agree rockhound on all that you said especially when it comes to enlargements one must figure this in when takin pics as well not all film will look good beyond a 4x6 print when it comes to enlargements . thanx for the learning lessons on lenses for those that do not know.

 

[lamar]

Dear group;
It's not the brand name on the camera that takes the photo, it's the person standing behind it. That being said, I use the Sony Alpha system because it's CHEAP! I can stay up with, or outshoot, any current Nikon or Canon dSLR on the market today and I've proven it. The camera is immaterial to the discussion, really. It's all about what the photographer is able to see, The camera doesn't have any idea if it's seeing an award winning shot or not. It's just a collection of parts and electronics.

I go with Sony because it's very cheap and it takes an excellent pic. It has in-body image stabilization which means that the lenses are cheaper than Nikon or Canon lenses. All Alpha mount lenses use Minolta optics, in fact a lot of Nikon and Canon lenses use the same Minolta optics.

I've heard everyone discussing lenses until I have become almost physically ill with the subject. Yet, by the same token, I've never heard of photographers disccussing something far more important than lenses, which is light control. That's correct, the world's bestest, most expensive Zeiss lens in the world cannot capture a scene if the lighting is incorrect.

And this is why light control becomes so critical to photogs. If the scene is well lit with natural or artificial lighting, or a combination of both, then there are no problems, yet those times cannot be depended upon.And that is the reason why I happen to like Sony cameras.

Minolta developed the world's first wireless remote system which used the camera's onboard flash to send out a series of ultra-high burst flash pulses to the slave units, Morse code style. The advantage of this system became immediately obvious to many photographers, because with the camera's built in flash, they could place highly portable camera flash guns around the scene and VIOLA! Instant studio!

I carry three flash guns in my camera bag at all times. I use an assortment of 50-150$ lenses but I never go anywhere without my 3 remote flash units. They are the older Sigma units with stands and I can place on the camera and use it as a conventional on-camera flash with the other two placed around the scene, or I can use it as one of the salve flashes.

To sum up, I can control the lighting in every situation I've encountered thus far and this beats the pants off of a collection of high dollar and generally worthless glass.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Nightowl 280]

The trick is not to leave the images in your computer. I have a CD storage and retrieval system that has my over 200 Cd's filed by number. I use an old fashion looseleaf to list all images by picture name and also by subject. It's like this . I have a picture of a Bird the picture is called the inquisitor so it is listed under that, but it is also listed under bird. Each listing shows the CD#. I push the number and the CD pops up. I run the thumbnails to locate it. I have never had a CD go bad. Some discs have 100 images. I use elements and painter 9.5 software to process the images. I do a lot of reconstruction of historical buildings in my computer.

​

CDs do have a shelf life . Some of my cds from the late 90s are starting to go bad from use or just wear . Since buying my D40x i have taken some 30,000+ images all in full cam fine format . A cd or dvd doesnt really do the job anymore storage wise . Add video and multiply edits and stages of edits of a image my image collection is well over 100-150k At 6-10 mb each thats alot of cds .

I personally like flash drives now with them getting so cheap and of larger size . As soon as the solid state drives become cheap ill move to them im sure .

 

[lamar]

i agree rockhound on all that you said especially when it comes to enlargements one must figure this in when takin pics as well not all film will look good beyond a 4x6 print when it comes to enlargements . thanx for the learning lessons on lenses for those that do not know.

Dear Joe Hoo;
A 35mm negative will blow up to about the size of a standard indoor theater screen, because 35 mm film was originally invented by Thomas Edison to be used as movie film.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

i agree rockhound on all that you said especially when it comes to enlargements one must figure this in when takin pics as well not all film will look good beyond a 4x6 print when it comes to enlargements . thanx for the learning lessons on lenses for those that do not know.

Dear Joe Hoo;
A 35mm negative will blow up to about the size of a standard indoor theater screen, because 35 mm film was originally invented by Thomas Edison to be used as movie film.
Your friend;
LAMAR

35 mm was meant to be sean from a distance when you compare it to movies.....A 35 print blown up will start to show the silver particles in it long before you get it blown up that large.

I also use to have my own lab, I started when I was in the Air Force Intelligence Division in 1968, we had the best lab money could buy. I did not print anything smaller then 8x10

Personally I would go with the Canon Digital Rebel XT myself.....