Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 45

Thread: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

  1. #21

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by VKMobile View Post
    so.....Seems like Sony has much better offering now for the A300 & A350. I browsed through some review and seems like the difference is just the numbers of pixels right? What other brands is comparable or much better with the same entry level range? Besides the body itself, what other equipments shall I also take into consideration as I never really got a chance to play around with SLR b4.

    May wish to try out events shootings, capturing people's expression in the most natural way. Not into shooting chioboo with artificial poses hehe.....

    I always have this funny question in mind, is the body more important or the lens? Or other accessories/equipments? Oh yah, how long do you think a new camera can last b4 it's considered an "antique" to the technologies? Long long time ago......non Digital SLRs can really last for decades right? hehe....

    So what say you?!
    1) not familiar with specs of sony cams, but i do think that most offerings on the market today are pretty solid.. if you are talking about body alone. the improvement made is generally hand in hand for all brands. what you do need to take into account is the direction each brand is taking, the lens system and options each brand has, the crop factor, and the flaws that you can handle and those that you cannot.

    2) what is more important? both are equally important. i have seen shots from d70s winning international competitions still. i think it depends on what shot you are talking about. if you are doing landscapes, then frankly almost every dslr which can meet your megapixel rating has had decent image quality since a long time ago, if you stay at low iso.. which you will for most landscape photography.

    for sports of course it is another story since iso comes into play etc. a camera only works because it has a sensor (in the body) and a lens. my advice is to buy into a system where you have faith in, like the feel of, and everything else will fall into place. in the past perhaps one could say that certain brands had stronger offerings of lens system compared to others.. but today with the proliferation of anti´-shake technology in-body, along with the fact that there are third party options available for most, if not all brands.. then i guess it is not hard to see that you probably do not have to be concerned about all that jazz.

  2. #22

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Actually, to be fair....its not very true that DSLR is not equals to prosumer.

    Basically consumer/prosumer/professional refers to the target group of users, not a specific type of camera la.

    Eg. a Nikon D40/D60, I won't call it a professional camera just because its a DSLR, it would fit the criteria of a prosumer, along with Sony F828, F707, and all those non-interchangeable DSLR-lookalikes.

    For this, most western photog magazines describes this correctly and they label Canon 40D, Nikon D80 etc. as prosumers.

    They would then label Nikon D40, Canon 350D, 400D and Point-n-shoots as consumers.

    Its quite correct actually.

    Actually for professionals (as in a real professional full-time photographer), a D80, 40D, etc. can hardly be considered a professional camera. While a 1Ds, D3 and borderline perhaps D300 can be considered pro cameras. (ie. full metal body, and other features, backward lens compatibility, special/pro accessory compatibility....).
    Last edited by melvinchen; 9th June 2008 at 05:48 PM.

  3. #23

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Let me chip in too:

    1. Beginner with some knowledge of photography

    You probably know what you like to shoot more already. Tell us more.

    2. Brands

    You already have a preferred brand, Sony. Hmmm. Stick to it and fully explore the potentials of the cam?

    3. Body vs lens

    It depends on pt 1 actually. First, your skill level should be able to match the body. Are you well to do, able to afford good bodies + lenses? If you're exploring, I'd suggest getting a decent entry level and kit lens to play around first. After that, explore what you feel is lacking, and from there, know whether you are limited by your lenses (in terms of IQ, aperture or focal length) or your cam body (in terms of AF points, continuous speed, ISO etc)

    It's a lot of exploration, but that's what make it double as fun as well

  4. #24

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    I think a Canon 450D or Nikon D80 will be good for you.

    Sony DSLR..unfortunately only looks good with all their alpha branding. Performance-wise, noise levels etc. are all inferior to Canon/Nikon, its a proven on all reviews and lab tests.

  5. #25

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by melvinchen View Post
    Sony DSLR..unfortunately only looks good with all their alpha branding. Performance-wise, noise levels etc. are all inferior to Canon/Nikon, its a proven on all reviews and lab tests.
    but you neglect to mention the fact that sony camera bodies are excellent value for money. much more bang for the buck. fact is fact, sony (along with many other less popular brand cameras, e.g. pentax, olympus) has in-body shake reduction as well. not a must-have, but good-to-have. one could also say that about noise levels too.

    if you must present a view on a brand, at least be objective, lest others see it as an attempt to justify your own decision when buying.

  6. #26

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by melvinchen View Post
    I think a Canon 450D or Nikon D80 will be good for you.

    Sony DSLR..unfortunately only looks good with all their alpha branding. Performance-wise, noise levels etc. are all inferior to Canon/Nikon, its a proven on all reviews and lab tests.
    "As proven on ALL"? You also conveniently forget to mention that Nikon uses Sony sensors.

    As for your sadly mis-informed statements:

    A700: beats the 40D and swaps wins with the D300 in the ISO noise test for Gray, Black and chroma luminance noise:
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra700/page17.asp

    It absolutely trounces the 40D and D300 in USB transfer speed.

    The A700 has the highest absolute and extinction resolutions compared to the 40D and the D300.

    And let's not forget HDMI, built-in image stabilization (where are the canon and nikon IS 500mm primes?), DRO and fantastic LCD screens (the Canon 40D one is horrible).


    So please tell me again... where is it "Performance-wise, noise levels etc. are all inferior to Canon/Nikon, its a proven on all reviews and lab tests" other than in your imagination?

    Please stop spreading uninformed rumors. Know your facts before opening your mouth.
    Alpha

  7. #27
    Senior Member Galdor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Planet Gaia
    Posts
    9,544

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    "As proven on ALL"? You also conveniently forget to mention that Nikon uses Sony sensors.

    As for your sadly mis-informed statements:

    A700: beats the 40D and swaps wins with the D300 in the ISO noise test for Gray, Black and chroma luminance noise:
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra700/page17.asp

    It absolutely trounces the 40D and D300 in USB transfer speed.

    The A700 has the highest absolute and extinction resolutions compared to the 40D and the D300.

    And let's not forget HDMI, built-in image stabilization (where are the canon and nikon IS 500mm primes?), DRO and fantastic LCD screens (the Canon 40D one is horrible).


    So please tell me again... where is it "Performance-wise, noise levels etc. are all inferior to Canon/Nikon, its a proven on all reviews and lab tests" other than in your imagination?

    Please stop spreading uninformed rumors. Know your facts before opening your mouth.
    Whoa, cool it bro. Dun have to stoop to other's level. Wise ones will do proper research and make wise choices. Afterall, one man's meat may be another's poison.
    Last edited by Galdor; 9th June 2008 at 11:10 PM.
    Minolta. Konica Minolta. Sony

  8. #28

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Galdor View Post
    Whoa, cool it bro. Dun have to stoop to other's level. Wise ones will do proper research and make wise choices. Afterall, one man's meat may be another's poison.
    Nah, I'm cool. I just prefer to actually use facts rather than make extremely uninformed blanket statements that might misguide newbies.

    And I didn't stoop to his level. I actually used facts.
    Alpha

  9. #29
    Senior Member Galdor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Planet Gaia
    Posts
    9,544

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    Nah, I'm cool. I just prefer to actually use facts rather than make extremely uninformed blanket statements that might misguide newbies.

    And I didn't stoop to his level. I actually used facts.
    That's good.
    Minolta. Konica Minolta. Sony

  10. #30

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    A700: beats the 40D and swaps wins with the D300 in the ISO noise test for Gray, Black and chroma luminance noise:
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra700/page17.asp
    you have to read not just looking at the graph, a quote from them:

    Overall the DSLR-A700's performance trails both the Nikon D300 and Canon EOS 40D although does seem better than the Olympus E-3. What's clear is that Sony are using a fair amount of luminance noise reduction (too much) but probably not enough chroma noise reduction.
    its easy to remove noise, any image editor could do that, at the expense of details...
    Last edited by kurtlim; 9th June 2008 at 11:44 PM.

  11. #31

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by kurtlim View Post
    you have to read not just looking at the graph, a quote from them:


    its easy to remove noise, any image editor could do that, at the expense of details...
    Yes, but considering DPR is known for their pro-C-and-N bias in the comments, I prefer to look at the hard numbers. And detail-wise, the A700 has similar levels as the D300 (same sensor after all) but the A700 manages to maintain tones better, while the D300 has better pixel detail. When reduced in size or printed out, maintaining color tones helps just as much as maintaining per-pixel detail. So it's more of a draw.

    And all sensors (including the canon) actually perform some level of noise reduction.
    Alpha

  12. #32

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by melvinchen View Post
    I think a Canon 450D or Nikon D80 will be good for you.

    Sony DSLR..unfortunately only looks good with all their alpha branding. Performance-wise, noise levels etc. are all inferior to Canon/Nikon, its a proven on all reviews and lab tests.
    just meet a photo who shoot for a living last night at the esplanade..an ex canon 1dm2n user......comment A350 with kit lens 18-70 beat his 1DMK2N with the 16-35mm mk2 combo in term of sharpness at inifinity......in fact it bother him so much, he went on to buy an a700 and proceed to sell off his 1DMK2 and canon lenses, when he try out the af focusing of both
    A700 and 1DMK2 at a black low contrasty object. The A700 manage to acquire af lock whereas the 1 series hunts.....

    noise wise...he had compared the 40D,D300 and A700, accordlingly to him... the noise ctrl among the three is no worse than each other....he pick the alpha in the end , as the af perfomance trouce his 1 series,plus the Anti shake technology, he confident of getting shake-free pic with a700 at a lower iso with longer exposure time (good for capturing ambient light) than with his previous camera
    the number of keeper shots he had with virtually every wide angle lenses he had (cz16-80 and cz24-70)beat his 1dmk2n with the 24-70L and 16-35L
    头可断,血可流,倩女不可不追求 carpe diem,when in doubt, hoot first,apologise later:p GALLERY

  13. #33

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    below taken with A700 at iso 1600-2500....in a rather challenging lighting whereby flash is not allow




    头可断,血可流,倩女不可不追求 carpe diem,when in doubt, hoot first,apologise later:p GALLERY

  14. #34
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    CCK-Yew Tee
    Posts
    1,693

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by eow View Post
    just meet a photo who shoot for a living last night at the esplanade..an ex canon 1dm2n user......comment A350 with kit lens 18-70 beat his 1DMK2N with the 16-35mm mk2 combo in term of sharpness at inifinity......in fact it bother him so much, he went on to buy an a700 and proceed to sell off his 1DMK2 and canon lenses, when he try out the af focusing of both
    A700 and 1DMK2 at a black low contrasty object. The A700 manage to acquire af lock whereas the 1 series hunts.....

    noise wise...he had compared the 40D,D300 and A700, accordlingly to him... the noise ctrl among the three is no worse than each other....he pick the alpha in the end , as the af perfomance trouce his 1 series,plus the Anti shake technology, he confident of getting shake-free pic with a700 at a lower iso with longer exposure time (good for capturing ambient light) than with his previous camera
    the number of keeper shots he had with virtually every wide angle lenses he had (cz16-80 and cz24-70)beat his 1dmk2n with the 24-70L and 16-35L
    Of course sharper... bro u are comparing a CCD with a C-mos sensor. Even my D200 is very sharp in normal lighting conditions but cant say the same in lowlights...

    Also how came no one mention about fujifilm S5 pro?

  15. #35

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by -ReignOfComputer- View Post
    prosumer is the grade of dslrs between consumer(entry-lvl) and semi pro
    examples are the nikon d80,canon 40d
    power man!

  16. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Lentor
    Posts
    538

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    You've got another one to compare now :P 1000D

  17. #37
    Member fv18m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North of S'pore
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Well, I think this has been debated til death. Set off with a budget in mind. Look at the brands you like, or colour reproduction of various brands if you have friends who own different brands. Else, just pop by the showrooms to "test drive". Then try to imagine what you will be shooting from the get go, until 2 - 3 years down the road. Proceed from there to do some research into lens, and see which brand offers lenses you're most likely to use (and is affordable at this point in time).

    From there on, just follow through. When one makes the decision based on one's knowledge, one is unlikely to go wrong most of the time. Why?? Cos even if one starts to go wrong, one will usually consol oneself...
    The DIFFERENCE is not in the "Cue", it is in the SKILLS...

  18. #38

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by stjustin View Post
    power man!
    Power?? Very powerfully incorrect.
    Alpha

  19. #39

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    Yes, but considering DPR is known for their pro-C-and-N bias in the comments, I prefer to look at the hard numbers. And detail-wise, the A700 has similar levels as the D300 (same sensor after all) but the A700 manages to maintain tones better, while the D300 has better pixel detail. When reduced in size or printed out, maintaining color tones helps just as much as maintaining per-pixel detail. So it's more of a draw.

    And all sensors (including the canon) actually perform some level of noise reduction.
    in that case, can I say the same to you since you are pro-S judging by your posts?

    as I said earlier, A700 achieve lower noise level on the graph by applying more noise reduction--at the expense of details. thus you shouldn't judge their review by graph alone. if you do not trust their review, you shouldn't have quote them in the first place, right?

  20. #40

    Default Re: Entry-level DSL, which camera to kick start with?

    Quote Originally Posted by kurtlim View Post
    in that case, can I say the same to you since you are pro-S judging by your posts?

    as I said earlier, A700 achieve lower noise level on the graph by applying more noise reduction--at the expense of details. thus you shouldn't judge their review by graph alone. if you do not trust their review, you shouldn't have quote them in the first place, right?

    I quote their hard data when coming to conclusions, and try to ignore the comments.

    As for the "expense of details", yes, there's a minor loss of per-pixel details, but it maintains the tonal details better. So it's up to you which is more important.... For resizing or printing, tonal details matter more to me personally.
    Alpha

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •