moving on to SLR

[quinton]

Hi,
I've been doing digital photography for a while, but now I want to move beyond and try my hands on an SLR.

Since DSLRs are too expensive, was wondering if any could recommend me some good SLRs that I could probably continue to keep using for awhile to come. thanks in advance.

 

[Adam Goi]

Hi quinton.

What's your budget? For starters, you may wish to consider EOS 300V or EOS 30/30V ...

 

[hazmee]

What about a fully manual SLR like the Nikon FM2? It should be fun too.

 

[quinton]

honestly, I am not so sure about the budget yet.
I've seen SLRs selling at anywhere from $200-1700. mking me wonder what makes such great differences in price, since after all all are SLRs.

hazmee, wat's the difference btw a full manual SLR and whatever else is the norm?

i saw a nikon F3 that seems quite appealing, but i honestly do not know enough about SLRs to make an informed decision as to which is a good buy.

 

[quinton]

btw, I currently am using a panasonic fz10, tt's a 4.2MP, 12x optical zoom cam that allows full manual exposure of f2.8 to a max f8 aperture and shutter speed is from 8s-1600s. So my SLR has got to have features that my digital cam can't do, coz I already starting to feel limited by my digi cam after just 4 months of using it, tt's why I'm thinking of moving to the SLR range.

 

[Firefox]

btw, I currently am using a panasonic fz10, tt's a 4.2MP, 12x optical zoom cam that allows full manual exposure of f2.8 to a max f8 aperture and shutter speed is from 8s-1600s. So my SLR has got to have features that my digital cam can't do, coz I already starting to feel limited by my digi cam after just 4 months of using it, tt's why I'm thinking of moving to the SLR range.

The minimum shutter speed is actually 1/2000s... Available only at F8.
Heh.. Guess you didn't explore enough ay?

If you need a (D)SLR that can out-do the FZ-10 in terms of absolute features, be prepared to spend a fair bit.. At least more than what you paid for your FZ-10 package anyway..

My advice is to save up more and go for a DSLR since you're already on digital..
Film doesn't allow you to explore for free... Every shot you take to test out stuff is one exposure on the roll gone.. And it doesn't have exif info like a digital so you've got to take down notes while you're trying out the camera.

If you really want to get an SLR, I'd recommend something like the EOS-30 or EOS-A2 (EOS-5).. They're relatively cheap in the Buy/ Sell forums..

 

[jeff49er]

Hi quinton.

What's your budget? For starters, you may wish to consider EOS 300V or EOS 30/30V ...

Good choices :thumbsup:

 

[LittleWolf]

honestly, I am not so sure about the budget yet.
I've seen SLRs selling at anywhere from $200-1700. mking me wonder what makes such great differences in price, since after all all are SLRs.

The differences are brand name, age, condition, features, and gimmicks.

With most digital SLRs, the image sensor is an integral part of the camera, so the choice of camera is important. A film SLR is for the most part a lighttight film box; the image quality depends on the lens and the film (and a cheap SLR can use the same film and lenses as a high-end SLR), so the choice of body is not quite as important.

If you can do without autofocus, multiple exposure programs, and other amenities, an older or OEM'd SLR (Minolta for example licensed some 80's SLR designs to various manufacturers that may still be sold today) in good condition can be an excellent choice if you don't need all the gimmicks. Cameras from the pre-autofocus age tend to be built better (no "plastic fantastic") and can last a lifetime. The viewfinders of most traditional SLRs are also much better than those of many contemporary SLRs.

The downside of older camera systems is that you are mostly confined to the second hand market and cannot go on accessory shopping sprees that easily. This may cost you bragging rights in clubsnap. Also, if you are in more challenging kinds of photography (sports, wildlife), the automatic features of more modern cameras (e.g. autofocus) can be very useful.

 

[whoelse]

The differences are brand name, age, condition, features, and gimmicks.

With most digital SLRs, the image sensor is an integral part of the camera, so the choice of camera is important. A film SLR is for the most part a lighttight film box; the image quality depends on the lens and the film (and a cheap SLR can use the same film and lenses as a high-end SLR), so the choice of body is not quite as important.

If you can do without autofocus, multiple exposure programs, and other amenities, an older or OEM'd SLR (Minolta for example licensed some 80's SLR designs to various manufacturers that may still be sold today) in good condition can be an excellent choice if you don't need all the gimmicks. Cameras from the pre-autofocus age tend to be built better (no "plastic fantastic") and can last a lifetime. The viewfinders of most traditional SLRs are also much better than those of many contemporary SLRs.

The downside of older camera systems is that you are mostly confined to the second hand market and cannot go on accessory shopping sprees that easily. This may cost you bragging rights in clubsnap. Also, if you are in more challenging kinds of photography (sports, wildlife), the automatic features of more modern cameras (e.g. autofocus) can be very useful.

What LittleWolf said is spot on. If want, get a manual everything, do-it-yourself photography since your previous camera shd do everything more or less in auto.

 

[detrop]

btw, I currently am using a panasonic fz10, tt's a 4.2MP, 12x optical zoom cam that allows full manual exposure of f2.8 to a max f8 aperture and shutter speed is from 8s-1600s. So my SLR has got to have features that my digital cam can't do, coz I already starting to feel limited by my digi cam after just 4 months of using it, tt's why I'm thinking of moving to the SLR range.

welcome to the SLR side. Choose your destiny. choose jedi or the dark side?
k nuff with the nonsense...

film slrs would definitely have more edge over prosumer dgcam like yours, that will of cos, depends on the budget too. trust me, once you got your 1st set of camera, you'll want more this and that and the list can go on as far as your own limit.

wat kind of camera you choose should complement wat u wanna shoot... some other ppl might haf told u this.. but this would b 1 very good determining factor fr u.

since im frm dark 'nikon' side, i'd recommend a nikon fm2n or fm3a for manual focus cam. these 2 would haf the balance of the technology you need and the practically limitless capabilities as far as creativity level is concerned.

auto-focus camera frm nikon that is unusually good fr starters like us is nikon F80. once you wanna upgrade, you could choose over f100, f5 or even f6.

lenses: you'd probably b better off with a travelling lens that gives you the range frm something like 24/28mm to at least 70mm or slightly more. this zoom range only gives you abt.. 3x or slightly more depending on your choice of lens. not much eh? dun worry, you can get a telephoto lens if you must. but that would cost ya another hundreds to get some decent ones, or some thousands if ur aiming fr good ones. macro? yes we do haf macro lenses too. choice frm 60mm, 105mm, 200mm or the zoom 70-180mm. in lenses.. the max aperture is usually f/22 though, some lenses can reach to over f/32.

ISO would depends on the film used. there are many options over wat kind of film to choose n the speed for the occassion.

fr the specs of the cameras n lenses, do visit nikon's sg website

for reviews, there are many kind ppl here who can testify fr ya.

hope my blabbering helps.

 

[fotoudavid]

go go go, join the slr side, you will enjoy more...........

 

[erictan8888]

not an expert, but like to share something here.....

i moved from a SLR to a DSLR and really enjoy the technology of digital.....
the immediate feedback allows me to know what mistakes i have made when shooting and also to keep shooting and reviewing until i know what is the right setting for a certain environment.....

this exploring and learning has really been very educational.....
and the post processing part is also getting fun...... hard and troublesome to some, but i love choosing and looking over my shots and picking the best and then processing them....

its like you have more control over your pics now..... over how you want to process them, how much you want to sharpen them etc.....

i am not saying film is no good........ for me, where cost is an issue and also skills limited.. or should i say, no skills, shooting digital has really been very impt for me....

shooting and having immediate feedback..... all for free, without developing any single pics until you get it right is very helpful....

some might say that film lets you learn the true way of shooting.... without needing to review your every single shot..... but i personally feel that is for the more intermediate... for me, a total newbie... digital is the way to go....

if you find that you can wait, why not save up and get a digital.....
just sharing my opinion.....

cheers

 

[detrop]

eric got a pt too... i was actually using a CP5700 till i took a fulltime course and switched to film. this switch actually made it easier fr me. now im shooting both digital n film. so dun throw away ur dgcam eh.

 

[code]

given the fall in prices recently for SLR, you may want to consider getting semi-pro or pro bodies at a bargain. They cost around $700-900 now (considering that they cost 3 times as much when first released).

 

[wahidkarim55]

Hi Bro.
I want to let go my SLR, its purely manual Yashica FX3, with renowned Carl Zeis Lens and Cosina Zoom 28-80mm, sadly willing to let go for $500 fix...

condition 10, pls see WTS coloumn. pls sms me 90071046 :cry: yashica
[QUOTE=quinton]Hi,
I've been doing digital photography for a while, but now I want to move beyond and try my hands on an SLR.

Since DSLRs are too expensive, was wondering if any could recommend me some good SLRs that I could probably continue to keep using for awhile to come. thanks in advance.[/QUOTE]

 

[Kecak]

Your choice of manual focus SLR or autofocus SLR depends on what you like to shoot for. Both have their ups and downs. I own both types.

A think good about manual SLR is that you don't have to worry about the batteries dying on you. They last for a very long time. Its just two small button batteries and its very small and light to carry spares. Since its manual, you can really 'feel' the camera and feel in control. The down side is, you can forget about shooting candids or events. Manual focusing takes time. Also, flash photography would be a pain as well. The flash head does not automatically adjust its beam according to your zooming. But if you are shooting landscape or travel, its a way to go. A good manual SLR will cost more than an autofocus SLR. I recommend a FM3a or used FM2.

For autofocus SLR, I recommend F80.

If could could only have one choice, safest bet is to go for an autofocus SLR.

 

[edlye]

[rest of post deleted for brevity]... The down side is, you can forget about shooting candids or events. Manual focusing takes time.

Have to correct a misconception on the 'slowness' of MF lens or manually focusing your AF lens. Very fast composures and shots can be achieved for candids using the hyperfocal distance technique. All you have to ensure is that your subject is beyond the set focusing distance for acceptable sharpness before bringing the camera up, compose and release shutter.

 

[whoelse]

Boss, mechanical camera lah. There are many electronics manual camera that need battery la-de.

Your choice of manual focus SLR or autofocus SLR depends on what you like to shoot for. Both have their ups and downs. I own both types.

A think good about manual SLR is that you don't have to worry about the batteries dying on you. They last for a very long time. Its just two small button batteries and its very small and light to carry spares. Since its manual, you can really 'feel' the camera and feel in control. The down side is, you can forget about shooting candids or events. Manual focusing takes time. Also, flash photography would be a pain as well. The flash head does not automatically adjust its beam according to your zooming. But if you are shooting landscape or travel, its a way to go. A good manual SLR will cost more than an autofocus SLR. I recommend a FM3a or used FM2.

For autofocus SLR, I recommend F80.

If could could only have one choice, safest bet is to go for an autofocus SLR.

 

[user111]

buy a used 10d

prices are quite affordable nowadays

 

[sORe-EyEz]

i was once considering D-SLR too, but i'll wait 4 them 2 improve bit here-&-there, & dip it's $$...

i m very happy w/ my film Canon EOS 300X, will use it till it 'die' on me.:bsmilie: got 2 2nd hand lenses to keep costs down...

but go D-SLR if u shoot alot. saves $$ on developing film...