Recommendation for nature photography

[shutterfly]

Need advice here.

I am considering getting a Pan FZ10 or a D70/300D together with a 70-300 consumer grade lens. Which one can I get a better image quality and is more recommended for telephoto nature shots? I heard that consumer telephoto lenses are optically inferior.

THANKS.

 

[juste_millieu]

D70 is very "hot" now. Seem like it is better than 300D
Image quality+function is better than 300D

U can find alot of "news" on this 2 digital camera in this forum. Just search it.

 

[Virgo]

D70 is very "hot" now. Seem like it is better than 300D
Image quality+function is better than 300D

U can find alot of "news" on this 2 digital camera in this forum. Just search it.

What is better is the photographer, not the camera. I've seen 300D photos better taken than the D70, and vice versa. It's the man behind it that controls it, not the camera itself.

See these pictures for yourself. They're taken only using the Canon G3.
http://www.pbase.com/kimr55760/minnewawaarea

My advice to newbies is this: don't just go into a super good camera, thinking you can take excellent pictures with it. Remember, it's YOU who take control of the cam, not the other way round. Of course, if you have the money to throw, one cannot stop you, but think very carefully before you commit. Camera and photography is a lifetime thingy. Make sure you know your stuff first.

I've seen numerous newbies spending lots of money on DSLRs. In the end, they blame the cameras for not being able to output their desired shots. What I suggest for newbies is to get a point and shoot first, like the G3/G5, with rooms for you to explore. Take 2-3 years to familarise yourself with the camera and techniques, then move in to DSLRs and lenses. By then, you can save yourselves a lot of questions on what to buy, since you already know the basics.

May sound harsh, hope everyone don't mind. I'm just speaking from my heart. :sweat:

 

[khairi]

What is better is the photographer, not the camera. I've seen 300D photos better taken than the D70, and vice versa. It's the man behind it that controls it, not the camera itself.

See these pictures for yourself. They're taken only using the Canon G3.
http://www.pbase.com/kimr55760/minnewawaarea

My advice to newbies is this: don't just go into a super good camera, thinking you can take excellent pictures with it. Remember, it's YOU who take control of the cam, not the other way round. Of course, if you have the money to throw, one cannot stop you, but think very carefully before you commit. Camera and photography is a lifetime thingy. Make sure you know your stuff first.

I've seen numerous newbies spending lots of money on DSLRs. In the end, they blame the cameras for not being able to output their desired shots. What I suggest for newbies is to get a point and shoot first, like the G3/G5, with rooms for you to explore. Take 2-3 years to familarise yourself with the camera and techniques, then move in to DSLRs and lenses. By then, you can save yourselves a lot of questions on what to buy, since you already know the basics.

May sound harsh, hope everyone don't mind. I'm just speaking from my heart. :sweat:

I do agree with Virgo. It's HARSH reality. I too started of with a point and shoot cam...only later switching to SLR for more flexiblity.

For Newbies venturing into digital, if you got the cash I do not see any reason why you should not get a DSLR. However, if you need the space to venture and explore at a 'friendly' pace...a good point and shoot DG Cam with manual override will do you much good.

On the day i decided to try digital (which was a year ago), I bought myself a 2nd hand Canon A20...after learning abt it, I upgraded to the A80.

Photography is abt ideology, time & space. Not really so much abt the cam. The cam only gives you flexibility of your preference.

 

[shutterfly]

Thanks for the advice here... but can someone help answer my question.

 

[Virgo]

Thanks for the advice here... but can someone help answer my question.

Depending on budget really. If you're a newbie and just going into photography, the FZ10 is good to start with. It's lens is good, with lots of optical zoom: 12X! Leica is well known for it's lenses. You may want to read the review at: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/fz10.html

If you have the extra cash, go with the DSLR, but be warned that there's always a steep learning curve for DSLRs, and a lot of money will come after that for lenses and other accessories.

Recommendation: Go for a good prosumer first, if budget is a concern. You can upgrade later when you have enough cash.

 

[shutterfly]

How does a prosumer cam like Z10 compared to a DSLR with consumer lens in term of image quality?

 

[snowspeeder]

Perhaps I can answer this question. In my case, because I have a limited budget (not being able to afford lenses), I bought a prosumer camera instead of a DSLR. The Sony F828.

Its a good prosumer camera that gives me the flexibiilty to take the shots I can imagine. Recently went on a photoshoot with a fellow CS member who uses a D100, and from my observation, he was quite impressed with the photo quality of the prosumer.

So there you have it, its more important as to what you feel most comfortable with.

 

[shutterfly]

Ic. Seems like you need a really good and expensive lens in order to get the best out of a DSLR.

Perhaps I can answer this question. In my case, because I have a limited budget (not being able to afford lenses), I bought a prosumer camera instead of a DSLR. The Sony F828.

Its a good prosumer camera that gives me the flexibiilty to take the shots I can imagine. Recently went on a photoshoot with a fellow CS member who uses a D100, and from my observation, he was quite impressed with the photo quality of the prosumer.

So there you have it, its more important as to what you feel most comfortable with.