What's a good digital camera....

[steveoutlaw]

I've come to realize a lot lately that my digital camera is a piec of @#$%! I'd like to get a nice camera (for family and fish photography) but don't want to spend $1000. I see all the nice pics of tanks and livestock and know that my camera can't do that. What camera's do you use, and how much were they?

[Almon]

I got the least expensive Digital SLR I could find, because I'm really just learning. The Canon Rebel XT for $550. It gives me all the flexibility that I need and was less than a mortgage payment.

[Brian Ward]

One of the best entry-level dSLRs on the market right now is the Nikon D40. There have been several revisions and updates (D40x and D60) but all the reviews conclude that the D40 is still a better camera for the money. Look for a kit that comes with a VR lens. The 18-55 lens that is in most of the bundles is OK but you'll find yourself wanting another lense. The 70-200 is also a very popular lense and you'll probably find this one more useful. Ritz actually has one of the best prices on this model and you can get a lot of excellent advise from the people in the store. This is the package I would recommend:

 

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/SLR1172.htm

 

You'll notice the price jumps quite a bit when you add the 55-200 VR lens. (VR stands for vibration reduction. Well worth the money.) Just like with reefkeeping, no matter what you paid for your tank itself, that was by far the cheapest part of the hobby - with photograhy, the camera body is by far the cheapest part - it's the lenses you'll end up spending a fortune on.

 

Let me know if you have any questions.

[Highland Reefer]

One of the best entry-level dSLRs on the market right now is the Nikon D40. There have been several revisions and updates (D40x and D60) but all the reviews conclude that the D40 is still a better camera for the money. Look for a kit that comes with a VR lens. The 18-55 lens that is in most of the bundles is OK but you'll find yourself wanting another lense. The 70-200 is also a very popular lense and you'll probably find this one more useful. Ritz actually has one of the best prices on this model and you can get a lot of excellent advise from the people in the store. This is the package I would recommend:

 

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/SLR1172.htm

 

You'll notice the price jumps quite a bit when you add the 55-200 VR lens. (VR stands for vibration reduction. Well worth the money.) Just like with reefkeeping, no matter what you paid for your tank itself, that was by far the cheapest part of the hobby - with photograhy, the camera body is by far the cheapest part - it's the lenses you'll end up spending a fortune on.

 

Let me know if you have any questions.

 

 

 

 

Add a fast closeup lens (maybe a 50 mm) to this camera and you are set for reefing pictures.

Edited April 10, 2008 by Highland Reefer

[steveoutlaw]

Are the coolpix cameras any good? They are a lot less expensive.

[Highland Reefer]

Are the coolpix cameras any good? They are a lot less expensive.

 

 

 

I have the CooPix 990 and luv it for regular pictures. Trying to get closeups is a bit of a challenge. The lens are not fast enough without supplementing and the colors don't come out right. In other words, you can not set your shutter speed fast enough to stop the action and still get enough light through to get a good picture. There are a lot of settings you can play with, but I have not found one that works well for marine photography. The lens selection is terrible! If you want to get good marine pictures and closeups, you are going to have to put out some more $$$$.

Edited April 10, 2008 by Highland Reefer

[Brian Ward]

The coolpix is a good point-and-shoot model. Not good for high quality reefing pics since the lens isn't big enough. But it's great for family photos, vacation shots, and being very portable so you always have it with you.

[ErikS]

Are the coolpix cameras any good? They are a lot less expensive.

Let most any purchase it's a matter of buying what meets your needs.

 

Steve's Digicams

 

DPReview

 

For 90+% of the population a digital SLR is a waste of money - given 90% of the functionality can be found in a "mega-zoom" from various makers.

 

Also - it ain't the arrow, it's the indian

[Brian Ward]

 

 

 

Add a fast closeup lens (maybe a 50 mm) to this camera and you are set for reefing pictures.

 

 

 

 

50mm prime lens... add on $350

 

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/54153586...enses-for-nikon

[Highland Reefer]

Brian is right go with the Nikon D-40. You can get great lens for it as you get more money. Going cheaper will not get you what you want for serious pictures. Just remember that the speed of the lens you are using will be very important. In my opinion, buy one lens that is as fast as you can afford, which will let the most light through for nautral colors and not flash supplemented colors. Forget the zoom lens to start with. Just my two cents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

50mm prime lens... add on $350

 

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/54153586...enses-for-nikon

 

 

 

 

I like it. That's all you need! Forget everything else.

 

 

 

Brian,

 

What does the D-40 cost with that lens? I want one.

Edited April 10, 2008 by Highland Reefer

[onux20]

Are the coolpix cameras any good? They are a lot less expensive.

I agree completely with Cliff and Brian about the coolpix. We have one and it takes GREAT pictures of our daughter. However, when I tried to get some quality shots of the tank

[Highland Reefer]

I'm sure if you shop online carefully, you can get a better price than Ritz. Maybe not? Sounds like Brian has been doing a lot of research on this subject.

Edited April 10, 2008 by Highland Reefer

[ErikS]

I see all the nice pics of tanks and livestock and know that my camera can't do that.

Are you sure?

 

Remember - a disposable in Gadget's hands will turn out better pictures than 90% could ever do even with the best equipment. Much like golf - it ain't the arrow it's the indian.

 

FWIW - In lens image stabilization (vibration reduction or whatever each brand call it) is the ultimate in cr*p, near worthless. At best it might, big might, get you 1 - 2 stops..............AND bonus points for that you'll pay significantly more for the lens (an IS lens that is).

 

Either go with it in body or skip it entirely.

 

And if you're just looking for casual pics them check the Panny line of "mega-zooms" (or really the panny line in general). Very versatile & won't break the bank. Panny pioneered the IS (optical vs digital) - most of their line has it.

 

Name me one thing you want to do that THIS camera won't..................then you can talk about an SLR.

 

(no, I do not own one - no dog in this fight)

Edited April 10, 2008 by ErikS

[Brian Ward]

I'm sure if you shop online carefully, you can get a better price than Ritz. Maybe not? Sounds like Brian has been doing a lot of research on this subject.

 

 

 

Ritz actually has the Nikon at a really good price. As far as reputable dealers go anyway. They match up with Penn and JR and beat Best Buy.

 

I almost bought one a few weeks ago with my AmEx points. Fact of the matter is I don't really need it right now, esp since I'm starting grad school so it's better for me to wait.

 

The Nikon D40 with the 18-55 lens (you can't get it without at least that one) is $500 and Ritz is offering a $50 gift card with purchase - so it's really only $450. Use the $50 to pick up another lens or a better lens cover (you should buy a good lens cover for each lens you own).

[Highland Reefer]

 

 

 

Ritz actually has the Nikon at a really good price. As far as reputable dealers go anyway. They match up with Penn and JR and beat Best Buy.

 

I almost bought one a few weeks ago with my AmEx points. Fact of the matter is I don't really need it right now, esp since I'm starting grad school so it's better for me to wait.

 

The Nikon D40 with the 18-55 lens (you can't get it without at least that one) is $500 and Ritz is offering a $50 gift card with purchase - so it's really only $450. Use the $50 to pick up another lens or a better lens cover (you should buy a good lens cover for each lens you own).

 

 

--------------------------------------------

 

Brian,

 

Is the 18-55 lens fast enough for reef pictures?

[Brian Ward]

Are you sure?

 

Remember - a disposable in Gadget's hands will turn out better pictures than 90% could ever do even with the best equipment. Much like golf - it ain't the arrow it's the indian.

 

FWIW - In lens image stabilization (vibration reduction or whatever each brand call it) is the ultimate in cr*p, near worthless. At best it might, big might, get you 1 - 2 stops..............AND bonus points for that you'll pay significantly more for the lens (an IS lens that is).

 

Either go with it in body or skip it entirely.

 

And if you're just looking for casual pics them check the Panny line of "mega-zooms" (or really the panny line in general). Very versatile & won't break the bank. Panny pioneered the IS (optical vs digital) - most of their line has it.

 

Name me one thing you want to do that THIS camera won't..................then you can talk about an SLR.

 

(no, I do not own one - no dog in this fight)

 

 

 

There is definitely truth in it being the indian not the arrow. But the arrow helps If you're not a good photographer and you don't put in the time to learn about it and practice you'll never get good shots because you'll never understand what all the functions of the camera do and most importantly, how to use them.

 

As far as the IS or VR - the people I've talked to love it. I haven't used it so I don't really know. Depending on what you're doing 2 stops can make a huge difference in your photo.

 

The mega zoom lenses are great for taking on vacation, trips, etc because you only need to carry a single lens. The image quality isn't as good as picking THE lens to get the shot you're looking for but the convenience outweighs the photo quality in this case.

 

The Panasonic camera looks nice and gets good reviews. It's a bit slower than an SLR, framing the shot is a little different, and you don't have long-term flexibility where you can grow into the camera. For about $150 more you can get a camera that gives you many more options and will grow with you. The Panasonic is still good, just a very different purpose.

[Highland Reefer]

 

--------------------------------------------

 

Brian,

 

Is the 18-55 lens fast enough for reef pictures?

 

 

bump

[Brian Ward]

 

--------------------------------------------

 

Brian,

 

Is the 18-55 lens fast enough for reef pictures?

 

 

As I recall, yes. You will still need a tripod. The max. shutter speed is 1/4000 sec. That is basically fast enough to stop a hummingbird's wing. The shutter speed is more a function of the camera than the lens - though some lenses will block out available shutter speeds in the camera. I'm not sure you're going to get the zoom you're looking for out of it to take very close-up fine detail corals pics, so I'd recommend getting the 70-200 to go with it. Also, if you're taking tripod shots you can save the money on the VR.

[Highland Reefer]

$450.00 for the D-40 (including an adequate lens to start) & $350.00 for the fastest lens = $800.00

 

I paid over $1,000.00 for my Coopix 950 & additional lens they offered, when I bought it years ago. I would think if one can afford that price, then they would have the best of all the worlds for reefing & what have you. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

Edited April 10, 2008 by Highland Reefer

[Gatortailale]

my post from camera package deal thread - see post o

 

1) check out kenrockwell.com - he does lots of reviews on cannon & nikon stuff -143gadgets turned me on to this website.

 

 

 

see his page here for recommendations: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

 

 

2) Make sure you are buying USA warranty goods. There are a lot of grey market stuff out there as Ybenormal points out.

 

cannon & nikon both good - but before you buy a package with like 4 -5 lenes, you should play with them at a local shop or borrow if you can from members here - or read what a pro like rockwell says about lens.

canon reviews

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/index.htm

nikon reviews

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/index.htm

 

I got a nikon d70s refurbished from adorama and over 5,000 pics and works fine. I got the mac camera extended warranty for like $35 bucks. - I posted somewhere on this forum about camera I got. Adorama called me after order to verify shipping addy and that I made order

[Highland Reefer]

my post from camera package deal thread - see post o

 

 

Craig,

 

How much money are we talking here with a fast lens?

[Gadgets]

 

WOW!!! Great posts everyone!!! You all are a well-informed group! Looks like I don't need to post.

[vaironman]

Steve: Pls. allow me to chime in and have a question for the group.

 

All,

 

I have an old Nikon N70, which I like very much. It purchase a very good Nikon lense f1.8 or f2.8 70mm - 200mm something like that. I read Craig's post yesterday, as well as everyone on here. I am very much leaning toward a Canon G9 or getting a Nikon D40.

 

Can I reuse my old lense from the N70 on this new D40 if going SLR route?

 

Thanks everyone,

 

KLee

[Gatortailale]

 

Can I reuse my old lense from the N70 on this new D40 if going SLR route?

 

Thanks everyone,

 

KLee

 

 

I believe the D40 is DX format for auto focus - meaning there is no drive pin - it's all digital connection that body tells lens how to focus.

 

IF you want to use your old lenes that are "auto" focus, then you need to get a Nikon body that has a drive pin - like D 70, D 80, D 100, D 200, D 300 series - You will have to read specs - but my understanding is the D 40 and 40x do NOT have the drive pin - Main reason I got the refurbished D 70s was it had the drive pin IF I ever wanted to get used nikon lens.

 

 

COSTS - you

 

143gads can tell you more on the "speeds" of lens - but you can get a 1.8 50mm lens for $109 + shipp here: http://www.adorama.com/NK5018AFDU.html

 

I spent the mega extra on a 18-200 VR and love it for good all around lens of wide to decent zoom. My 50mm is nice as well, but I rarely use it cause I like ability to adjust zoom with the 18-200.

 

Most nikon body for DSLR going to be $499 and up - unless you find a factory refurb. I got my D70s refurb. for $525+ ship. Taken over 5,000 shots and no problems.

 

for one with drive pin - get the D 80 new for $729 (or less).

 

 

I love the .3 second from slep to taking photo and the D70 has a great flash sync speed and good shutter speed specs and the noted drive pin option above.

 

But as mentioned by me a few times in posts in this forum - look at Ken Rockwell's pages - he explains specs of nikon and canon in easy to understand details and tells his opinion on how good or bad they are. He has done tests of DSLR vs. point & shoot and said pic same, but if you want speed and bring certain aspects of phot to life, then get dslr. See $150 vs $5000 camera test : http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-500...llar-camera.htm and the why your wife wants you to buy a fancy camera: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/wife.htm

 

in the end, its the person taking the photos, not the camera that matters ....... but a good one helps a lot

[ErikS]

As far as the IS or VR - the people I've talked to love it. I haven't used it so I don't really know. Depending on what you're doing 2 stops can make a huge difference in your photo.

I have nothing against IS - what I said was IS in the LENS is cr*p = don't bother. You end up paying a 30 - 50% premium for the lens. IS in the BODY is better, then you can use all lenses that fit the body & have IS.

 

I'll quote from the link -

 

The only reason to pay more is to get Image Stabilization for hand-held shots of non-moving subjects in dim light without flash.

 

Not exactly the most common scenario. I would add that it is also useful at the long end of telephotos, 300 & up, even in daylight.

 

It's a bit slower than an SLR, framing the shot is a little different, and you don't have long-term flexibility where you can grow into the camera. For about $150 more you can get a camera that gives you many more options and will grow with you. The Panasonic is still good, just a very different purpose.

Street is $299 - closer to $200 more..............and the Panasonic is FASTER. Kit lens on the Nikon is a moderate performer - 3.5 - 5.6. The Panny is 2.8 = faster. And that $200 is with the kit lens which won't be very good for tanks or portrait work (family style "people" shots). We'll need another lens for that......up goes the price again.

 

As for "grows" - anyone who "masters" all the features of that Panny or "out grows" it will be a very dedicated photographer................and the OP said "for family and fish photography".

 

I spent the mega extra on a 18-200 VR and love it for good all around lens of wide to decent zoom. My 50mm is nice as well, but I rarely use it cause I like ability to adjust zoom with the 18-200

Which is exactly what happens with 90% (guess) of the DLSRs sold - one lens get stuck on them because it works very well in most situations.

 

I have nothing against DLSR's, my only point is that for the vast majority (I'd wager over 80%) of people they are simply a waste of money. There are many "pro-sumer" cameras that would fit their needs far better.

 

But then many like to buy this stuff because of the cool factor, like having one meant some level or seriousness.............hasn't changed a bit in some 30 years.

 

Good reading on those links I like his point. Some more technical information -

 

Tech Pages

 

Pay attention to August 2007 - what do you mean it's not a full color sensor Or that the current highest full color sensor is 4mp? Egads, that can't be right.