-
XENNEC Camera Bags GIVE AWAY - SHARE & TAG your Friend to WIN one XENNEC Stylish bags. Visit this thread thread for more information.
- Status
yes. played with it at Cathay Photo this afternoon - very nice.
first impressions - very small and light like toy camera but sturdy construction. AF is very fast and accurate. shutter sounds real nice.
its a bit too small for my hands tho, and at a glance looks like an oversized digicam.
seems to be popular even tho just launched - in one hour at CP, saw at least 2 sets (SLR + lens kit) being sold.
first impressions - very small and light like toy camera but sturdy construction. AF is very fast and accurate. shutter sounds real nice.
its a bit too small for my hands tho, and at a glance looks like an oversized digicam.
seems to be popular even tho just launched - in one hour at CP, saw at least 2 sets (SLR + lens kit) being sold.
Originally posted by erwinx
unless of course you're buying a cheap body and spending the additional money on a decent 28-70 f2.8.. then I wholeheartedly agree to avoid packages where they dump an inferior lens on you that you're not going to be use after 1 year anyway
unless of course you're buying a cheap body and spending the additional money on a decent 28-70 f2.8.. then I wholeheartedly agree to avoid packages where they dump an inferior lens on you that you're not going to be use after 1 year anyway
I'm interested to get the cheapest body kit with a 50f1.8 to learn. So far EOS66 (only available with kit) + 50/1.8 cost about $500++
On a budget, can spend max= $600!!!
On the other hand, F55 comes with a 28-80/3.3-5.6 kit and a better grip than EOS66 for $499....
Hmm... still undecided....
Originally posted by erwinx
unless of course you're buying a cheap body and spending the additional money on a decent 28-70 f2.8.. then I wholeheartedly agree to avoid packages where they dump an inferior lens on you that you're not going to be use after 1 year anyway
unless of course you're buying a cheap body and spending the additional money on a decent 28-70 f2.8.. then I wholeheartedly agree to avoid packages where they dump an inferior lens on you that you're not going to be use after 1 year anyway
ya .. 2nd hand .. saw some1 selling EOS 300 + some accessories for $650...
see ad http://classifieds.singnet.com.sg/details.cfm?id=51
--
Have the EOS 300 (body) QD version with BP-200 vertical grip for sale at $420 and Canon EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM lens for sale at $280. Take both for $650. Still in exellent condition with box and manual. Seldom use as it is my backup camera. Always kept in dry box.
--
see ad http://classifieds.singnet.com.sg/details.cfm?id=51
--
Have the EOS 300 (body) QD version with BP-200 vertical grip for sale at $420 and Canon EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM lens for sale at $280. Take both for $650. Still in exellent condition with box and manual. Seldom use as it is my backup camera. Always kept in dry box.
--
As above. Frankly, $600 is enough to get you started. No, it's not tight. It's tight if you want to buy an F100 or an EOS1v, or even an F80 or EOS30. But you really don't need any of those cameras to start out. Nice to have, but not essential by any stretch of the imagination. It's a bit like learning to drive. You don't need a new car, and you don't need a 1.6l saloon to learn to drive, nor a 3.0l beemer. Nice, but not the end of the world certainly if you don't.
Price of camera has no direct correlation to the worth of the pictures it produces. Sad to say. Over here where I am, when the average person talks about using cheap, no name equipment like lenses, they mean cheap, no name lenses. Not Sigma, Tokina and Tamron. Stuff you would never even have heard of. A lot of the people I know are lucky if they get a modern camera from a current line. Far more usual are the Canon F1s, Nikon FMs, Olympus OM10s. Occasionally the Pentax MZ50, the Canon EOS 500n, the Nikon F60. And the fact is, a lot (but not all) of these people take excellent pictures.
There are two main points I am trying to get across. One is that the camera is just a tool, and the most important part of the picture taking process is you. Learn to forget the bells and whistles, and start to see. Second, modern technology has made it such that the average $400 camera now has more bells and whistles than even the best cameras from 10 years ago. I'd like to think they were taking brilliant photos 10 years ago.
You're better off catering wisely with your $600 than just buying the best there is out there for that price. For starters, as a photographer you will better appreciate having a good camera bag, a decent tripod and a cable release. That will knock off more than you imagine, and a lot of people skimp on this section or completely forget to take it into account. Don't. And if you're new to the photo industry, these cost more than you think they will.
And don't forget film either. I know of some photographers who will throw $1500 at a new lens, but balk at spending $$$ on film and processing. You will be a FAR better photographer with a $200 lens, and $1500 of film costs, than vice versa. The above also applies for camera bodies. However, I do admit that you will have a far newer and more fancy camera outfit to admire if you go the other way.
I can't recommend anything specific, but IMO searching for a good second hand deal is an excellent way to go. Preferably have someone who knows something about cameras give you a hand, otherwise you have to be very careful. Otherwise you have to be cautious because as with any second hand business there are a lot of sharks out there.
Good luck!
Price of camera has no direct correlation to the worth of the pictures it produces. Sad to say. Over here where I am, when the average person talks about using cheap, no name equipment like lenses, they mean cheap, no name lenses. Not Sigma, Tokina and Tamron. Stuff you would never even have heard of. A lot of the people I know are lucky if they get a modern camera from a current line. Far more usual are the Canon F1s, Nikon FMs, Olympus OM10s. Occasionally the Pentax MZ50, the Canon EOS 500n, the Nikon F60. And the fact is, a lot (but not all) of these people take excellent pictures.
There are two main points I am trying to get across. One is that the camera is just a tool, and the most important part of the picture taking process is you. Learn to forget the bells and whistles, and start to see. Second, modern technology has made it such that the average $400 camera now has more bells and whistles than even the best cameras from 10 years ago. I'd like to think they were taking brilliant photos 10 years ago.
You're better off catering wisely with your $600 than just buying the best there is out there for that price. For starters, as a photographer you will better appreciate having a good camera bag, a decent tripod and a cable release. That will knock off more than you imagine, and a lot of people skimp on this section or completely forget to take it into account. Don't. And if you're new to the photo industry, these cost more than you think they will.
And don't forget film either. I know of some photographers who will throw $1500 at a new lens, but balk at spending $$$ on film and processing. You will be a FAR better photographer with a $200 lens, and $1500 of film costs, than vice versa. The above also applies for camera bodies. However, I do admit that you will have a far newer and more fancy camera outfit to admire if you go the other way.
I can't recommend anything specific, but IMO searching for a good second hand deal is an excellent way to go. Preferably have someone who knows something about cameras give you a hand, otherwise you have to be very careful. Otherwise you have to be cautious because as with any second hand business there are a lot of sharks out there.
Good luck!
- Status