Digital SLR Cameras?

[hech54]

Who owns one and why did you choose the one you bought? There are some HUGE MEGAPIXEL monsters out there right now and I've been considering buying one for quite a while. I'm not exactly sure about the megapixels though. Sure an 8mp camera will give you a HUGE picture....but what features in a camera make it a BETTER picture....not just a BIGGER picture?
I have a feeling more megapixels don't automatically make it a "better" picture.

[Grimey]

I don't have one myself, but i've been loking into one. I've been looking at this site: http://www.dpreview.com/ it's got tons of information about every kind of camera.

[joecav]

I agree...dpreview.com is a great place to ask this Q.

[hech54]

Nice site...thanks for the tip. I enjoy reading other peoples comments about the cameras most of all...not so many "technical" terms that I haven't learned yet..

[Capmaster]

My digicam isn't an SLR, but I have a friend in Sweden who has the Canon Digital Rebel (300D) and he's nuts about it. 6MP but more important than the megapixel count is the sensor and the optics.

[vitualis]

Unless you want to go for a professional quality digital SLR, both the Canon 300D (aka Digital Rebel) and the Nikon D70 are fantastic cameras.

IMHO, if you haven't ready chosen a system (i.e., you don't already have Canon or Nikon equipment) then the Nikon D70 is arguably the better camera (though it does cost a little bit more -- but its kit lens is much superior to the Canon kit lens).

Both these SLRs are 6 MP models but they can create far better pictures than any of the 8MP non-SLR "prosumer" models based on the Sony sensor.

Regards.

[hech54]

All of my cameras are Canon's but I'm not married to them. Is the Digital Rebel too consumer friendly? - i.e. - not enough manual control?

[The village idiot]

Well, if you have Canon AF lenses that will work with the D-Rebel, that would kind of make it the best choice. And in that case save yourself some money and buy the body only, not the $899 kit. Unless there is a reason that you want to buy new lenses, then the nikon makes more sense. There are several companies making digital SLRs that use a Nikon body.

[hech54]

Did I mention?....my luck as usual...my SLR is a Minolta.

[vitualis]

The Canon doesn't allow the degree of manual control you would probably expect from an SLR.

You can apply that hacked Russian firmware that sort of give it the abilities of the 1D (or was it 10D? -- sorry, but I don't follow up with Canon cameras all that much) but (IMHO) you shouldn't have to void your warranty for those features.

The Nikon D70 in many ways is actually SUPERIOR to even the D100 which is fantastic considering the price point.

Regards.

[rhegedus]

I'm thinking of getting one too. Narrowed my choice down to the Pentax *ist D.

Now it's just a question of saving the ca$h

[lordsmurf]

Megapixels don't mean anything. The most important part of the photo is the clarity and depth (which is controlled more by quality glass lens than anything else) and the person behind the camera. You have to know how to expose the "film" also.

I still use a Nikon D1 professional SLR. It "only" gets 2.74MP, but many photojournalists still use these (unless you're working for some huge paper) and many of those full-page AP photos that look so great use these same cameras.

The D1 ran me about $4k years ago ($5k was new, got mine used) and I have Nikkor lenses, which also run about $2k apiece. I have a few Tamrons too, about $1k each.

I recently saw a really, really dumbass explanation of MP in Maxim a while back. I wrote to the photo editor and asked him who wrote that complete garbage. It surely was not a photographer, and I can only guess a clueless intern/techie wrote it. They confused printer resolution with MP. Totally retarded.

So having 8MP and 6MP doesn't mean much. Not unless you stick it in a high grade SLR with hige grade lenses. The D2H and D1X can run circles around my camera now, but things like the D70 are slow, and lots of those Canon systems have hellacious shutter lag.

The D70 and D100 are low-leagues to me. While I've used them, I feel like I'm using a cheaper camera compared to the D1. When it comes to digital SLR cameras, Nikon long ago beat the snot out of Canon. The high-level Canons are just as nice as the Nikons, but the next level down is like SLR version of trashy consumer digital cameras.

The most important 3 things to note are this (for me):
== 1) shutter lag - you want something that take the photo the EXACT instant you hit the shutter release
== 2) field of view.... this is NOT a problem ... the CCD is smaller than 35mm, so it tends to "crop" the image as compared to a 35mm camera. The benefit is your 200mm lens becomes a 300mm lens. The curse is your wide angle becomes not-so-wide (so buy a 15mm to get back your 24mm range).
== 3) consecutive images ... both continuous shutter of the camera, as well as cache timing of the digital computers.

Having a full-view LCD on back would be nice. The D1 does not have this. The D70 and D2H do.

I'd save your pennies for the D70 myself. The Digital Rebel is a piece of junk, much like all the other cameras to have once held the Rebel name.

There are always smaller cameras like Pentax and Sigma and Minolta, but you'll have to settle for their in-house optics or 3rd party optics which are not as great as the hailed EOS or Nikkor lenses.

Most people cannot visibly see the difference between ISO 50 slide film prints and 800 ISO negative prints. If you're one of these people, you will NEVER see the difference between 3MP and 8MP. Unless you're printing large that full broadsheet (which is max size of the traditional newspaper), you'll never see the real benefits of 8MP over 3MP. If you want to make nice 8x10 images off your fancy new "photo-quality" inkjet (or even take them to the photo lab in town for "real" prints) you will NEVER see a different after you surpass the 3MP threshold (as long as the lenses and exposures were good).

There's lots of things to consider with moire patterns and digital ISO also, things most people never realize.

[The village idiot]

Anti-Alias (low pass) filter on the D-Rebel also rated as a little to "aggressive" causing the images to be a little softer.

[stiltman]

== 1) shutter lag - you want something that take the photo the EXACT instant you hit the shutter release.

That's one thing I HATE about my Nikon coolpix 4300.

push the button and wait and wait and wait....everyone sits down....Flash

Longest 1 second I ever go through (1 second is suppose to be what it takes, but to me it takes a lot longer)

[troyvcd1]

So how slow is the D70. i have never read anything but good reviews about this camera and never anything about shutter lag. I also can not live with any shutter lag. How would the d70 compare with the d100 in this aspect.

[vitualis]

So having 8MP and 6MP doesn't mean much. Not unless you stick it in a high grade SLR with hige grade lenses. The D2H and D1X can run circles around my camera now, but things like the D70 are slow, and lots of those Canon systems have hellacious shutter lag.

Can't comment on the Canon systems, but the Nikon D70 doesn't have any shutter lag beyond what you would expect from a film SLR. If you mean "slow" insofar as for sports photography, then yes, the D70 is probably insufficent and something like the D2H would be hugely better.

The D70 and D100 are low-leagues to me. While I've used them, I feel like I'm using a cheaper camera compared to the D1.

They are cheaper cameras!

The most important 3 things to note are this (for me):
== 1) shutter lag - you want something that take the photo the EXACT instant you hit the shutter release
== 2) field of view.... this is NOT a problem ... the CCD is smaller than 35mm, so it tends to "crop" the image as compared to a 35mm camera. The benefit is your 200mm lens becomes a 300mm lens. The curse is your wide angle becomes not-so-wide (so buy a 15mm to get back your 24mm range).
== 3) consecutive images ... both continuous shutter of the camera, as well as cache timing of the digital computers.

The D70 is excellent for speed for the amateur SLR enthusiast. It has no start up time (unlike the Canon 300D) and no shutter lag (no worse than any consumer film-SLR anyway). The kit zoom lens is reasonably wide and you're not going to get a wider view without spending big money or getting a specific wide lens (or BOTH).

Regards.

[holistic]

Megapixels don't mean anything. The most important part of the photo is the clarity and depth (which is controlled more by quality glass lens than anything else) and the person behind the camera. You have to know how to expose the "film" also..........

Agreed . I am very happy with my 'old' Canon G1. I will put it against some of the cheaper 5.0MP cameras selling today for picture quality.
If I am not using RAW mode it is in the highest quality JPEG setting when doing 'point -n- click'.

][

edit :

and lots of those Canon systems have hellacious shutter lag.

Yep agreed - but i compensate. Not a camera for the F1 race track that's for sure but good for kids/scenery.