Camera Heads...
 

Nikon D5000 Review...I am getting the itch to cop a better DSLR and
while I am sort of a Canon fan, this new Nikon is quite a pkg., for the
dough, imo. Scroll down and see it compared to D60/D90. Sort of like
a new X5 for 25% less than a "regular" new X5. What am I missing?

Any opins from the photo savvy, are appreciated.
BR,mD

Nikon D5000 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

This statement in the review:

"Like the baby Nikons, the D5000 doesn't have an autofocus motor built into the body but does gain a tilt-and-swivel LCD."

That limits the lenses that you can use.


Pass.


Check out the Canon 500D.

I will agree with gresch about the autofocus motor. If you still would want Nikon on an entry level price, I'd look at the D80. It's getting to be older, but is still very nice at an an affordable price.

As you saw from the review, the D5000 has all the essential characteristics of the D90 except for the in-body autofocus motor. What this means in Nikon terms is that you'd have to use the AF-S lenses ('S' stands for Silentwave motor) which have the autofocus motor built into the lens. MOST of the Nikon lenses are now AF-S. Many of the remaining AF (non AF-S) lenses are carry-overs from the film cameras and you wouldn't want to use those anyway.

At this point I would not consider the D60 or D80. The D5000's low light capabilities (like the D90), the EXPEED image processing system and CMOS sensor make this a better camera.

I suggest you go to a store and hold the D5000 and Canon in your hands. Its one thing to read specs, what you don;t see on paper is how comfortable (or not) the camera is in your hands. Its a personal thing... I like the feel and ergonomics of the Nikons over the Canons.

What lens is being offered with the D5000? The 18-105mm AF-S should suffice if you wanted one lens. They might want to sell you the 18-55mm AND the 55-200mm AF-S.

I don't think it has all the essential features of the D90. I am not so worried about the focus motor, but the screen resolution is way down on the D5000 (D90 has 3" 920,000 pixel vs 2.7" 230,000 pixel articulating), and there aren't two control dials so you will find yourself using the menus more. It may be fine for some, but that would be a nuisance to me. D5000 also doesn't get the pentaprism viewfinder, or the larger battery.

I wouldn't look at the D60 or D80. I looked at the D300 but it was too heavy for me. Incredible camera, but I wouldn't use it as much.

Leaving aside the Canon/Nikon debate, I would look seriously at the D90. The good news is that there are a lot of very good cameras out there to choose from right now.

Camera Heads, Again...Long Wonderment...
 

I need to resurrect this thread...
My budget Konica-Minolta 5d bit the dust this past week; natch,
while the Granddaughter was here. :(

Everything works on it with the exception of a little item called lack
of shutter release. :rolleyes: Some GOOG'ng of the problem
turned up pages on the same issue, and even the new Sonys
are afflicted, (Sony bought the KM brand, body, and "technology").

If it was a Sony, they replace the body or fix it...my KM is only
2 years old but the warranty is gonzo and they, and other joints,
want $200-$350 to fix it, lowballing I am sure. Thus, I am seriously
in the hunt for a new DSLR.

I have been pouring over reviews, side by side comparos on DP Review,
etc. My eyes are glazed and my brush cut hurts...:confused:

I am not tied to any lens system, as I was using my old Minolta and Sigma
film cam lenses on the K-M 5d body.

I want a very good body and a couple of lenses: 17/18-55 or so, and
a 35 or 55-135 med tele. I don't think the most pixels is the deal; I do
think the best CCD/imager is the deal. I shoot 95% AV or manual. Most
of the high ends have gizmos/settings of which 90% never get used by
even the pros, imo. I know photography. I've been shooting for 55 years.

I have a budget of $2Gs max, but would prefer less than that. I am not
looking for a great body with a 55mm kit lens and, get more lenses "later".
I want a very good body, couple of very good lenses, and I'm good to go.

I am EOS'd and Nikon'd to a pulp...I really don't have a fave at this point.

If you have seen any of my stuff, you know I do views, close-in, and
occasionally snap shot stuff. The opins earlier in this thread got me
pointed in the right direction, but the more I dig, the more I am conflicted.
I really don't have a source to go hold them in hands, as I am hours away
from any still standing "camera store".

Any and all opins are welcome, but save your fingers if you want to pitch
a rig that is more than $2Gs.
Thanks,
Ol'UncleMotor

Well, might as well start off the Nikon/Canon debate. I like Nikon, and having said that, there are some very good Canon cameras out there as well.

At that budget, I would be looking at a D90, with one of the better kit lens, and a second lens. You can get a package with the D90, an 18-105 VR, and a 70-300 VR, for $1800 complete with chargers, memory cards, etc. Those aren't the lenses I would necessarily pick, I like my 18-70 and my 80-200 F2.8 ED, but the latter would blow the budget. Benefit of the D90 is the D300 sensor, and other features over the D5000 (as listed above in this thread).

Good luck whatever you choose, and as you know, it is the photographer more than the equipment.

D300:thumbup: if not then the D90:thumbup:

colour capture, effective pixel range and the noise reduction is better in the Nikon then the Canon.:dunno:

i thought you might like this pic even though it`s on an old camcorder memory stick taken with a shaky hand

Beautiful camera. I almost got one.

Which kills the D300 option. Best part of the D90 is, you get many of the features of the D300 without the cost or weight.

Yes, 2 pounds before lens and the price of the D300, put it out of my consideration;
even if it was less expensive, I don't need that size/weight for a cam. I lugged an
8 x 10 Calumet View Cam for a few years and, my bro-in-law's Mamiya 6x9 film
cam, and those kinds of weights are not practical, imo.

I am very surprised that the Nikon D5000, which I was really liking, (even w/out
the in-cam stabilization), has IS0 200 for its lowest setting. Jeeshh.

I was smitten with the size/price and the electronics are right up there, specs-wise,
of the D5000, but I think that IS0 setting is a squasher.

This is tougher than shopping for a new car, in some ways. I think it may be the
last big buck DSLR I buy, body-wise. It's driving me crazy. :yikes:

Canon 450D is your other option within your budget.

The thing is though:

You like Cameras

You take a good few pictures

it seems to me you live in area that you can take some cracking pictures .

You say it's your last big camera purchase.

Well make it a good purchase spend a bit more and get yourself the D300 and a decent Tripod.

You can build up on the lenses.

Sigma are often better than Nikon now for their lenses.

Weight of the D300 is not that bad I use ours:cool: and it has the battery pack on and when the big telephoto lens is on it can be heavy but still usable.

Fiona,
Good points...but you are much younger, probably in better shape/easier on the
eyes, and stronger than I am. ;)

Side by side comparos of 3 Nikons...
I must be missing something here.

And, ISO 200, effectively, in all 3?!
Maybe they cover the higher ISO
via the CCD/image processor.

Digital Cameras Side-by-Side, 3 cameras: Digital Photography Review

Not trying to"buy" on specs alone, but it looks like the GM cars of the
'80s, package-wise, and price spread wise...

I need a nap. ;>)

EDIT: The DP Site is currently "off the air". :confused:

I'm going to make a Canon recommendation, not because I think it's better than Nikon but because I'm more familiar with the Canon lenses.

EOS 50D with the 17-85mm IS USM zoom (do not get the standard 18-55 kit lens). Around $1500.
2807B012 Canon EOS 50D Digital SLR Camera Body Kit, 15.1 Megapixels, Black with EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM Image Stabilized Lens - USA Warranty

Add one of the 4 available 70-200 L tele-zoom's later and you are golden.

If you are interested in HD video then the new Rebel T1i is an option as well. Same lens reco applies.

MD -

For 2K, I'd run with a D90, SB-400 flash, Flip-It Bounce Card, 18-55 and 55-200 lense.
I love wides - have a 12-24 2.8, but if you don't feel like you want/need the wide range,

I would most def. recommend the 35mm 1.8G Prime Lense.

Gd Luck.

I'm no camera buff but this is at the top of my list.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned it.
I know some of you pros will have an opinion
but David if you can open that wallet of yours a bit more
this might be the ticket.

Canon Digital Learning Center - EOS 5D Mark II: Laforet on Reverie

David,

Canon 50D with 28-135IS $1279
Canon 70-200 F4 $629

total $1908

I'm looking, trying to sort it out, and have the Jones on my back...

Thank you for all the good opins. I don't usually wring hands, or
ask a dozen people "should I buy this stock". This is more
worrisome than picking out a new car.
Thank you, Maties.
Ol'UncMtr

G/R, Thanks for the link...we don't have a Costco anywhere near us, here on the mtn, so we don't "belong" to it.

At the risk of dragging this thread out ad infinitum, I have settled on Canon, but
undecided on the species. The 40D gets my eye, even slightly more than the
50D...I was hunting around for more info/opins on the net, vis a vis your comment
in another thread, on the 40 vs 50:
"The 50D has 15MP the 40D has 10MP, but the pixel density is different so some people like the 40D better" ...

Do you have a source or forum that came from?

I am really after the 17-85, as I like/shoot 17/18 mm focal length often.
Thank you. mD

David - That comment is all over Dpreview. It's the biggest comparison between the 2 bodies. I have both the 40 and 50, but not by design. I was trying to get the flash fixed on my 10D but it was too expensive compared to the value of the body, so I stumbled upon Canon's Loyalty program and picked up a 50D for $629. (I'm not a camera whore :)) Anyway, here's a summary of the differences between the 2:

Specific to your question about pixel density:
Canon EOS 50D Review: 20. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review

And this one:

Canon 50D versus Canon 40D

Here's what is new compared to the 40D:

Canon EOS 50D Review: 3. What's New: Digital Photography Review


The biggest differences for me are the better seals (I'm not too particular about where I take pics, and if it's raining or I'm at the beach, the better weather sealing the better), and the new feature that lets you adjust focus on a lens by lens basis instead of having to send it to canon.

Keep in mind that the 17-85 lens that you're looking at is only F4 at it's widest, so using it indoors will probably mean pushing the ISO a bit, but both the 40D and 50D have incredible IQ with higher ISO settings, compared to my old 10D it's night and day. Until I got the 40D, I wouldn't shoot above ISO100 on the 10D, now I have no issues with going as high as 800 if I'm in a low light situation. I have a 17-40L F4 that is on the camera more than any other lens, and now I can use it indoors with the higher ISO useability of the 40D and 50D. It's also breathed new life into the 28-135IS.

You'll probably want an extra battery or 2, Digital Camera Batteries Chargers Memory Cards Readers is the place to buy them, their "knockoffs" work great and are 1/3rd the price of the OEM's. The other good thing about the 40/50D is that the pop up flash is now at a higher elevation when it's popped up, so the lens hood doesn't cast a shadow anymore (but be careful to check before you take that once in a lifetime pic ).

I also put one of these on my cameras, it's an eyepiece extender so you don't have your face smashed up against the back of the camera, it's good for people with glasses as well I'm told. You do have to be a bit careful with it though, I've knocked a couple off, and lost 1.

Canon | EP-EX15 Eyepiece Extender | 2444A001 | B&H Photo Video

All of that being said, trying to find a new in the box 40D right now is tough, the only place that has them is adorama. The listing doesn't say refurb and it includes the lens you want for $1099. NOTE: I just called and it's new in the box, the rep said you can call him direct x2276 :)

1901B010 Canon EOS-40D Digital SLR Camera Body Kit with EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM Image Stabilized Lens - USA Warranty

The comparable 50D kit is ~ $300 more:

2807B012 Canon EOS 50D Digital SLR Camera Body Kit, 15.1 Megapixels, Black with EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM Image Stabilized Lens - USA Warranty

R/G,
Thank you very much for those links...I've been reading DP closely, but I must have
tunnel vision, or lack of "focus" in my info/rationale quest. :rofl:

I've gotten the green light from the CEO, I have the fever, you know how it is. ;)
Thank you again, for your, and other good posters efforts in giving me a hand. :thumbup:
Best Regards, TheOl'ShutterBug

Anytime.

So which one are you getting? the 40 or the 50?

:popcorn:

R/G,
I'm torn...I haven't plowed through all the links you gave me, yet.
Probably the 50, though the 40 is not slouch, but the $ diff is
negligible. Funny how the 500D has practically the same specs as the
50D, for a lot less dough. I know it's a "cheaper" body...but, these
cam mfg'rs flood the channel with a dizzying array of nearly the same
species.

Digital Cameras Side-by-Side, 3 cameras: Digital Photography Review

I agree at first glance the differences between the 500D and 50D are very similar. I found this comparison on dpreview which sums up the big differences. So when you're trying to get those hummingbird pics, the 50D is going to be your best friend.

__________________________________________________ ______

The key differences between the 50D and T1i isn't about image quality rather being more likely to capture the image you want.

The 50D is much faster; 6.3 frames per second over 3.4

Much brighter, larger viewfinder as the 50D uses a Pentaprism rather than Pentamiror

50D offers 2 complete user configuration settings which can be accessed instantly via the mode dial. An example of usage; he's at a motorsports event and 1 configuration wold be for AIservo tracking the cars while the other is for shallow depth of field oneshot cacdids as a famous driver might just be walking by.

The controls to change settings is much easier to change as well as faster.

The 50D focus screen can be changed i.e. to one with a grid for easier alignment

The AF system is much faster and more accurate as well as having 9 Cross type AF points rather than just 1. The 50D centre AF point is a cross and X style for added accuracy.

The 50D AF sensors are also much smaller so you can more specific about the focusing spot.
ie. T1i

RIF my friend, he doesn't have a costco membership as they don't have any by his house :)

:)
This is online offer, so any of mD's friends can help him. My Mom doesn't have Costco membership either, but has tons of Costco stuff in her house. Thanks to her friends and kids. ;)

See post #20 :) Already suggested.

btw- If youi're not a Costco member, you pay more.

Try broadwayphoto.com. They are selling a Canon 50D body for $989 only. I think that is a very good price. I just sold my Canon Rebel XTi yesterday...I have my eyes on the Canon 50D as well and may pull a trigger soon on my new upgrade.

Their lifetime rating on reseller ratings is 1.5 out of 10.

Broadway Photo / A&M Photo World, Regal Camera, Prestige Camera, Preferred Photo, Royal Camera, bway - broadwayphoto.com - Reviews, Ratings and Prices at ResellerRatings

I highly recommend that you do NOT buy anything from them, they are a known scam company. The body will cost you $989, but it will cost you another $400 to get the battery, strap, sw, body cap etc.

Stick with the reliable places like b&h, 17th st photo (17photo.com) adorama, onecall, frys, newegg and buydig.

Thanks for the warning...I will definately stay away from that store. I was very close to order one but decided for the Canon 7D to come out first.

I really like the fact that my Canon Rebel is light weight. Most of the other bodies weigh a lot more.

I know that Canon & Nik makes better bodies than the Rebel XSI but the but the weight is a real factor to me and the lower cost is also a plus.

D90 with a 18-105 Lens or better. Invest in lens..change bodies. I need to send you a link of camera comparisons and the extensive tests that were run against them for IQ, contrast etc and D90 was right up there. It was NOT a dpreview link. I have used the D90 and was impressed with the picture quality.

Btw, I am using neither a Nikon nor a Canon.

Been looking for a SLR for a while - got inspired by this thread - so went to Best Buy and bought a Canon 50D. The weight takes a while to get used to. I am very much a novice photographer but liking the camera so far. Its taking good pictures and have enough default dummy modes so that I cant get in too much trouble.

The whole thing ended up costing ~$2100 (including sales tax). For that I got the camera kit with the 28-135mm lens, a carrying bag with an extra battery and a UV filter, a circular polarized filter, a 8gb 200x CF card, a CF card reader and 4 years extended warranty.

Anywho - here is a picture - remember - I am no expert - but its way better than what I could have done with my Powershot.

Wow the hair on yours is the same color as on my pussy. :wow: er maybe I should rephrase that, Your cat looks very similar to mine and she also likes to scratch the leather furniture as well just like yours by the look of your chair.

I assume your cat is female looking at the hair, what's the name.

Hehe :) She is a Norweigan Forest Cat, named River. The chair is indeed scratched up - but the leather is naturally crackled as well, so its not as bad as it looks.

I've bought three Nikons from these guys..gave wife D90 for Christmas last year..IT IS AWESOME!!! They put the stupid packages together and it doesn't pay to not take all the crap included...but i thought this was a good price and package.

MD, have you made a purchase?

You're a very brave man buying from a brooklyn based camera store. Are they an authorized Nikon dealer? If not, good luck getting your camera fixed under warranty if it breaks. just sayin'

How nice of them to not charge you for what comes with the camera from Nikon :bustingup and yet, list it on the invoice. :rolleyes:

Yeah, they list a lot of std stuff, but the price for the body and lenses, two batteries, and two 8gb cards was still less than I could find anywhere....The body and lenses are all US warranted (you do have to ask for that or else you get non-US stuff), been down that road before and have learned, but never had a problem...third Nikon, bought three other Sony's as well from them..guess I've been lucky so far.

After much hand wringing, a plethora of PMs back and forth with Gresch/Thunder, and lots of reading/debating, I await delivery
of a Canon 40D with 17-85 USM IS lens, etc.
1901B010 Canon EOS-40D Digital SLR Camera Body Kit with EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM Image Stabilized Lens - USA Warranty

I am also shopping hard for the Canon 10-22 USM lens, too, as I got
quite used to my old Sigma 17-35 film lens. $700 for the lens, plus
lens shade, and an occasional multi-coated UV filter for protection,
is some serious-azz expense for a hunk of glass, however. :yikes:

Thanks to all that offered opins, ideas and comments...the 50D has
some FABs over the 40D, but vice versa. The other Canons "above"
the 50D were out of my budget/needs/desire range. As to the Nikon
vs Canon debate, it is a good arm wrestle, but in the end I decided
Canon and then worked on narrowing it down among 40D, 50D, 500D
and 5D, et al.

I am still pizzed that my budget Konica-Minolta 5d body, less than 2
yrs old, (used with my old film cam lenses), went kaboom. Even more
pizzed that Sony,UsuallyNoBaloney who bought K-M, would not even
blink on some accommodation on repair, as all the Sony DSLRs, even
the top end, suffer the same fault sooner or later.

NEway, I await the FedEx guy, if he can find our house here on the mtn.,
and look forward to dropping more dough on new lenses & stuff, :rolleyes:.

But, as much as I shoot/love photography, I am glad I was pushed into
a newer cam system.
BR,mD

Congrats on getting the new rig. You'll like the 17-85, I have that lens and I just bought one for my niece who got a XSi for her birthday. Looking forward to seeing more pics from the mountain.

I just picked one up, a Canon 50D with 28-135mm IS lens. I went from a Rebel XTi to this 50D, it is a huge leap for me...:D

Wow....this is a great camera. I've owned and used several Canons P&S and Rebel XTI) and a couple of Nikons (P&S and Nikon N55) over the years and I think this is the fastest camera I've ever used. The 3.0" LCD screen has beautiful resolution and can actually be used to get a feel for how you're pictures look, it's as clear as a computer screen. Most of the menu functions are easy to find and change on the fly, which is nice and I like. This is a very very smart camera so for those who don't like to use manual settings the creative feature is nice as you can instantly control your apeture and shutter speed as well as get a screen capture before you take a shot to see what it looks like.

The 50D is very intuitive, not the least bit indimidating, and surprisingly easy to use considering the more advanced features Canon has put into it. I have not spent a lot of time learning all that this camera can do yet, but I am encouraged by the camera and it practically asks you do learn more about it...it wants you to take great pictures.

Here are a couple of shots from my new Canon 50D w/ 28 - 135MM kit lens.

MD did you get the Canon?

B/B...Yes, it came from Adorama in about 2 days, with "regular"/free shipping.
Very good service from them, with email updates, and quick delivery.

I have ripped off a few hundred shots, getting to know it...it seems to be well
put together, easy to use, etc. (Canon 40D, EFS 17-85 Is Lens, Iso 100, Av)

I am not overwhelmed by pic quality, thus far, however. Maybe I was expecting
too much, but I have yet to "see" a considerable diff. between my old budget
KonicaMinolta 5d with film lenses to this new 40D. I don't do lens tests or anything
scientific; I am just using my eyes on my higher res lap top screen. Subjective I
realize, but I've been looking at photos, rigorously, for 50+ years.

The "snap shot" distance pics are fine...the longer range landscape/view shots
seem a little "soft" to me, in comparison. Not disappointed yet, as it has been
very, very foggy, misty and "unclear" here the past week. We shall see...

It does have a few settings Nits, but I am pouring through the manual to discover
how to get it going like "I like"/am used to.
That's my initial 50Cts non-tech review.
BR,mD

MD - on the soft shots, either increase the in camera sharpening or apply some unsharp mask in Photoshop.

Saturation and sharpening are cranked up in p&s cameras and cranked way down in DSLR's, so you need to adjust afterwards or crank it up in camera on your 40D. It is very rare that I don't post process the pics from the 40 or 50.

G/R...I haven't discovered the "sharpening" adjustment, yet. I did set an
internal pic "setting" to "landscape", which supposedly offers the sharper
setting(s), and they look ok, but not the razor stuff I even got with my
cheapazz old KM. So far shooting at Iso 100, medium f stop, not racked out or in,
to extreme zoom focal lenghts. I don't have PS...

Not done fiddling or, shooting/evaluating yet, but so far, as Peggy Lee said,
"Is that all there is?"

For best results, these cameras need to be shot at full manual (for most of the shots). let's see some sample pics.

On my 50D (should be the same on the 40D) you can manually adjust sharpness by going to picture style (IE standard/landscape/portrait.. etc) and then press Info to further adjust sharpness.

Having said that - alot of my pictures do have a hint of softness - so far though I have just attributed that to not knowing the camera and lenses fully. Some of the pics though turn out razor sharp so it is definatly my fumbling that is the cause :)

-Gresch, I found that alt menu in my handy dandy manual...I'm woikin' on it,
to see what effect it has. We are fogged/misted in up here. It may be a day
or so.
-MiCkEy: I shoot 95% of my stuff, (for the past dozen years), on AV or
Manual. Some initial pics are coming...
-Ravenheart: don't give up. I won't either, but am surprised it comes so soft
outta the box, or on the landscape (sharper) setting. Who in the hell spends
this kind of dough for romantic/softer edged stuff than my 6 yr old Canon S50
pocket cam gives.

Being somewhat facetious, though somewhat underwhelmed, thus far.
BR,mD

All DSLR's produce soft pics on purpose. It's by design so that you can process them any way you like after you've taken the pic. The logic being that if it's done in camera, you can't "undo it". On P&S cameras, the sharpening and saturation is cranked way up, so all pics come straight out of the camera very sharp and over saturated, and people have become accustomed to it.

Softness and low saturation are the 2 most common "complaints" of new DSLR owners. I was the same way when I bought my 10D, but a quick tutorial on unsharp mask in PS and a little "levels" and "curves" in PS and I was good to go. It also has to do with allowing you to adjust the settings to optimize the pics for printing on whichever photo printer you have, as they're all different.

one other thing, you can buy photoshop elements for under $100 instead of buying the full blown app, and it will allow you to sharpen and saturate the pics to your personal likes.

The 40 and 50 also allow you to maximize both in the camera settings, you might want to check that out as well. But remember, once you take the pic in JPEG format with the settings cranked, you can't undo them.

Hope this helps...

Did a few shots with sharpness set to max (7) - these are two different lenses - the first picture being a fast standard zoom and the second picture being a telephoto zoom. Both are cropped, not resized. I'd be curious to see if these are considered soft?

raven - can you post the EXIF data? The 2nd pic in particular looks OOF, and i'm thinking it's motion blur not softness. It's also tough to see what point the camera picked up the focus. you have a few objects in the pic, foreground and background, and they're far away from each other, so getting everything in focus is almost impossible. Also, if you used a slow shutter and low aperture (2.8?) the DOF will be very shallow, resulting in OOF areas, i.e. the bokeh will be big.

First picture is f/5.6 - the second at f/7.1 - both pictures were taken at 1/320

OOF and Motion blur could explain it - the treeline is about 100 yards away.

You can adjust the sharpness and saturation using the DPP software that came with your camera if you shoot in RAW. Sharpening and saturation are applied in-camera to generate the JPG files. As such, some information is altered/lost in the process that cannot be recovered from the JPG file. The higher settings, the more you alter/loose. If you apply sharpening and saturation during post processing then you have complete control and can apply as much or as little as appropriate on a per picture basis.

Comparing P&S vs DLSR setting for sharpness and saturation is analogous to comparing TV settings from the showroom vs settings after a proper calibration. Most people complain that a calibrated TV looks soft, dim and under-saturated because they got use to the eyeball searing settings out of the box.

I think the point was that if you have a friend or relative that is a Costco member, they can buy it online and have it shipped to you directly.

I buy stuff for my Mom online at Costco and have it shipped directly to her instead of me. She then mails me a check. Now if she needs to return something to Costco for any reason, that may become an issue but so far hasn't needed to.

It seems strange that a Auto DSL can't yield proper exposure, lens speed and ASA.
That is not to say you can't get a certain effect by using manual, but for snaps you would think that it would do better than a $200 Canon

They both look out of focus to me.

Would you be able to take one using a tripod and post here?

It will never be better for snaps, as it wasn't designed for that. Even if the pictures were the same quality, the fact that it is bigger and heavier would make it worse than a P&S. The point that Thunder22 was making could be summarized as "what is proper?" People have become used to the settings on point and shoot cameras, and now consider those results normal.

Many people purchase DSLRs and are disappointed with the standard shots. A DSLR is more work, but is ultimately more rewarding. You just can't skip the step of tuning the settings to those which the new camera owner prefers.

I haven't used Automatic mode since the first few weeks with my D70, many years ago. I have used Manual, and Aperture Priority, but usually I shoot in Program (P) mode, which allows me to save my favourite settings, essentially a customized Auto mode baseline from which I can vary settings as I wish.

Actually JCL, if done properly and obviously needs practice, DSLRs produce incredible results straight out of the camera that P&S cannot match. I am no expert at this but a tinkerer and have achieved astonishingly good results with little to no post processing.

PS: By full manual I meant, manual focusing as well. All my lens except one are manual lens (no auto focus). Most are fast primes or fast zooms (70-200mm F3.5) Here is an example of a 50mm macro with default sharpness, ISO-400, Shutter at 1/125, F1.4 (I am guessing here) with a 2X converter, cropped and re-sized for the web. With DSLRs do not be afraid to bump up the ISO to 800 to get a faster shutter speed.

http://www.chooha.com/macros-p/1.jpg

Sorry to hijack the OP's thread.

I do have a tripod that I use for a spotting scope - but I've already gotten the answer I was looking for :) The point here for me was to figure out what people consider 'soft' since it is a very discussed subject with the 50D, and indeed what others consider soft I consider quite good :)

I still have a long way to go before I am comfortable with the camera but I am getting there, albeit slowly.

Should have bought a Nikon:nanana::nanana:



http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y96...p/DSC_2714.jpg


http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y96...DSC_9314-1.jpg

Gotcha, that wasn't clear.

Why? so that people can get soft/mushy colors like on the center of the butterfly or blow out the whites on the side of the swan?
:stickpoke

Beautiful shot.
:thumbup:

I don't agree, a DSLR used with proper technique and settings will outperfrom a P&S.

Thank you. :thumbup: I buy at Costco.com and have it shipped directly to my parents/friends in another state all the time. And Costco is better than online or NY stores as you can take it back in 90 days with full refund and no questions asked.

As was discussed already, it wasn't an option for MD.

Actually, we do agree, that is what I was saying. I commented that the standard in-camera settings may not match what people are used to with their point and shoot cameras, but that by tuning the in-camera settings, a DSLR will give excellent results (you just can't skip the step of setting it up). I wasn't referring to post-processing.

The DSLR won't work better taking snapshots as a point and shoot because it is bigger and heavier; that isn't about the image quality but rather the convenience.

Agreed, but you likely changed the in-camera settings from what the factory shipped the camera with. I similarly do little post-processing. I just don't use the default camera settings.

grant you about the side of the swan that was down to me not the camera. But the lens I used on the butterfly got me the effect I wanted.

Where is your work so we can have a look see.

I am his friend. ;)

The white being blown out on the swan was due to the dynamic range of the camera, not you. White swans on a black pond is an extremely difficult shot to get perfect with any camera and you did a good job.(as is a wedding couple, white dress and black tux in the same pic really exposes the capabilities of any camera), I wouldn't use the swan pic as an example of how great your Nikon handles dynamic range however, because it clearly blew the whites.

I've posted a lot of pics in the past, here's a sample:

http://www.xoutpost.com/off-topic/lo...-air-show.html

That being said, I don't consider it work, it's a hobby :D, and constructive criticism will only make me a better photographer. :thumbup:

:thumbup:

I'm not that glued up yet only had the camera one year and I am still learning. I do know the sun was coming down on that side of the swan when I took the picture.

You need to explain in more detail about dynamic range so that I can learn a bit more and know for future what to do different.

Dynamic range is the ability for the camera to properly expose blacks and whites and grays in the same exposure. For example, if you exposed for the black water, the picture would be over exposed in the white areas as the camera tries to let in as much light as possible as most of the pic is black, and the detail in the feathers will be completely lost . On the other hand, if you expose for the white of the feathers, the rest of the pic will be underexposed and very dark.

High dynamic range imaging - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's my opinion that if you're in a situation where you have very bright whites and very black subjects, that you meter for the whites and under-expose 1 to 2 stops for the whites so that they don't get blown out and you can see the detail. You can always lighten the darker areas, but once a subject is blown out, it's very difficult if not impossible to correct it in post processing.

Sorry everyone for keeping this up - but would this be better than what I had before? and/or an acceptable level of sharpness? First picture is the crop - second one is the full picture resized. There is no artistic value in these pictures - it is just a consistent target for me to use.

With IS on, and f/9 @ 1/640 on iso 800 because i wanted to eliminate my shaking as much as posssible so blur was more important than noise. Did manual focus but confirmed by camera as being in focus (i think ;) )

Raven, can you email me the original (RAW or JPG) image? PM me for my email address?

thanks:thumbup: my next purchase will be a light meter as I think this will help me to get a better picture and to do the settings as manual as possible. I have been out for 2 hours tonight trying to get a dramatic sunset and I thought tonight that a light meter would have helped me a lot.

Found the main cause of my blurry pictures - the filters I had bought at Best Buy screwed up the image quality quite badly. For anyone interested they were Sunpak UV filters. The one Canon filter I have (for the kit lens) blurs the pictures too - though not quite as badly. The reasoning I had for using said UV filters was to protect the front element of the lenses - obviously not worth it at the price of picture quality. Would like to write it off as one faulty filter - but all 3 lenses I have, with 3 different UV filters all have the same effect.

As you suggested in PMs the cropping did change the quality of the pictures some too :)

The previous picture I posted was without the filter and I think it looks better. Anywho - here is some more pictures I took to show the difference. Taken with my 70-300 lens at 300mm - with and without the UV filter.

AHA...unless you are willing to plunk down major moolah on filters, don't bother with the filters as the cheapo ones are just not worth it. I would rather use a lens hood and forget about the filter if the aim is to protect the lens. Remember this is an addition of another glass element in front of the lens and that will effect the PQ.

The picture on the right is much better from what I see...do remember that not all zoom/tele lenses are super at all focal lengths. The sweet spot for a 70-300 (usually a jack of all trades, master of not many) may be around the 150-210mm focal length. Your mileage may vary.

Now that you have the first issue taken care of, start looking into metering and more importantly lighting :) Have fun, this is a great hobby with rewards. Take thousands of pictures and don't be afriad to experiment.

I use the shutter and aperture settings more and more now on my still pretty damned good Nikon D40. These settings do wonders in getting good shots, like depth of field, in difficult situations. In this respect I actually like my old manual camera better because I loath menus in cameras and anything else except restaurants.

I keep it in Auto when I hike around. If a mountain lion pops up I won't have time to screw around.

Most often I keep it in Program mode, programmed with my own default settings. This works for most situations.

Good thing about digital is that you can take a lot of shots! It took me a long time not to be cheap with my shots, since I was used to 35mm where one has to conserve film (and money).

Blown highlights are a universal digital problem. I have had the best luck underexposing them some because it is easier to fix the shadows later. Some shoot raw because it can sometimes extract detail out of some of those bright white areas. You still have to pay attention to those bright areas in your viewfinder.

Sharpness is an odd thing. Some camera makers have a default kind of low sharpness in-camera, expecting that you will sharpen your keeper photos on your computer. In the end, photos from cameras and lenses with similar specs will ultimately look pretty much the same if they are sharpened, adjusted, etc. properly on your computer.

Right now I am experimenting with film again, having it scanned and then I adjust the image and print it myself at home. Hopefully, I can get a good old film camera for landscape and architectural photography and get good results on the cheap.

Besides, I miss my old film camera and manual controls (for landscapes and other still subjects only. I am spoiled by automation.

I think the issue here is focus, not a filter. You need to experiment and find out why this happened.

Definatly a filter issue - I am not able to get a good sharp picture with one of those filters on - doesnt matter if I use manual or auto focus. After I took the filters off I am happy with how the pictures turn out :)

I did a series of tests with micro focus adjustments against a cloth surface and it just kept making the pictures more blurry - finally reset the focus and took the filter off and it was a world of difference.

Save your money.

Unless you are shooting in a studio or shooting film, you won't need one. Bracket your shots and use the histogram.

caught the rainbow yesterday evening and the little bambi last week visiting our plum trees .

Here's one from my wifes D90..
 

Playing after the rain!

found this image on the web . it is called sunfall on the english channel .
i have no idea what is happening to the water , maybe someone can explain .

What's happening is a bad photoshop attempt.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: That is a poor photoshop.....

thanks guys , i thought it could be a wind up but you never know , i just wondered if there was some phenomenon i had never heard of .