Having fun with the "vortex" comment Been there myself over a few months. So, I may not be your best resource..
For me, it was the D40 (not the D40x). Cheapest thing I could afford with the thought: If I am no good, at least I won't have spent too much.Well, have to say the thing does kinda magic for me.Learning-curve is not to steep.I was pointed to a site: http://www.kenrockwell.com/ and skies cleared up.....
Http://www.users.skynet.be/fc042264 <=== mine with D40..
Of course there's more choice, but I think you won't find much better at that price. Payed 500 euro for d40 + 18-55 kit lens..
Maybe wait a bit think by end of year there will be serious price-reductions anyway..
Something simple like a Nikon D40 with a basic lens. 18-55..
Then learn photography..
You will have potential to grow..
You will save heaps of frustration..
You will pay only a little more..
Its like a toy vs the real thing, & indoors shots will prove it to you..
Don't read any more tech hype etc..
Persuasive Marketing Systems -inc Copywriting, Design & Photography..
"Point & Shoot Goes Nowhere" - that's a provocative statement given that virtually every great photographer started with a point and shoot or it's equivalent in their day..
Certainly there is no really good reason why someone should not start with an entry-level DSLR set on point 'n click 'P' mode, save for the clunkiness of the form factor, the necessary investment in lenses, need for a flash gun, filters, tripod and a good grounding in Photoshop (the latter two both being essential to actually 'go' somehere in photography)..
I feel the person who asked the original question in this thread really would be better off with a G9 which is just about large enough to be handleable yet small enough to fit in a coat pocket. That it features RAW is a plus point. Raw is like having an original negative, if you really need to rescue a once-in-a-lifetime shot, then you probably can..
A good photographer can take good photos with any camera, but of course save for the 'news factor' where 'citizen photographer' shots taken on anything will be published, DSLR images are required for commercial use. Many picture buyers and stock agencies now specify 10mp minimum, so if you want to sell to that sector then get the right tool for the job and learn the right shooting techniques; one without the other being a complete waste of time these days..
So I'd say learn the basics on a G9 and if you find you have un-realised talent combined with a spirit of perseverance, later go for a 40D - missing out the entry level because you'll by then be appreciative the semi pro features..
One the other hand if you enjoy using a smaller camera (and I still use a little old s400 sometimes) then go for that and enjoy it within it's semi-automatic limitations..
John.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor..
Maybe Peter is right. Depends on what you want. But even with a P&S-camera, you will need basic skills to get a GOOD pic.Composition/lighting/WB/capturing moods/exposure.Indoors even much more difficult then outdoors on a sunny day coz of the light.Using flash is something that can ruin a pic. It kinda flushes the colors..
So, if you want lots of color indoors, you need etra lights, nicely spreaded no flash or low-level flash or expensive 1.4 - 2.8 lenses or your subjects shouldn't move and you need longer exposure with a camera on tripod (so HE doesn't move either) or VR - lenses (also costly) or high-iso camera (800+)..
The high iso (sensitivity of the film/CCD in digital cameras) tends more to grainyness on P&S then on NIKON D40. If you want, I can give you examples..
Maybe you better respond in a while, so we can have an idea..
To keep it short: Nice colors are easiest outdoors on sunny day,indoors you will have to analyze the setting and take appropriate measures..
Best of all - entry level DSLR. Fast, flexible, best low-light (indoor) performance and capable of being enhanced by adding lenses. Any entry level DSLR will be great. They all have auto modes and scene modes to some extent and you will be bale to use them..
Big super-zoom, hmmm. Fuji S6000/65000 if you can get one. Big, well featured and great in low light ( better than any other non DSLR ). No IS, but not that big a deal in practice..
Compact models. Maybe the Canon A650 IS - it's very close to the G9 in terms of features, but no RAW or external flash, which won't bother you. Decent low ligh performance. The G9 is ceratinly very good, and you could consider the Fuji F30 and F31 which are very nice compacts..
Don't exclude the advantage of RAW. You may not want that now, but later you may..
Last word. Any entry level DSLR is the best image quality and performance. If size is not an issue and your budget can make it, get a basic DSLR. Try them in the shop..
Pentax K100DFuji S5200Fuji E900PCLinuxOS..
What's not stated in your post, and is very important to consider, is your own interest in this, and what resources you want to invest. Are you wanting to make a primarily one time purchase - i.e. more P&S preference, or get into a camera/lens where likely the $500 is the tip of the iceberg, long term..
I have had, and highly recommend, the Nikon Coolpix 8800 for two plus years. By and large I have been very content with the camera and it's focal length range and pixel count have provided a lot of latitude in the kinds of things I've been able to capture. It's lens is far larger than most of the P&S cameras out there, but it's a lot bigger than most, too. Having said that, I got a Canon S2 IS last year for my wife for Christmas and she absolutely loves it. Would choose the S3 if I were looking now - for her..
If you are really more of a P&S person (no put-down implied or intended) as far as your interest, then by all means stay away from a DSLR - it really is a whole different commitment - in terms of dollars and learning. And a good P&S still benefits from really understanding photography and investing the time to understand what the aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc. do for you, as you seek to take the shots that are important to you. This is not your dad's P&S - they really have come a long way..
The time has come for ME to move to a DSLR, but I've been using the more manual features of my P&S for awhile and I keep bumping my head on shots I can't take because the camera just isn't fast enough, bright enough, etc. But I also have a background working in a high end photo studio (at one point) and I do Photoshop training and am big into post processing, RAW, color management, my own prints, etc. So I'm already into it far deeper than you may want to be. I'm already using my camera for the occasional commercial job. I know it's limits and stay well within them..
At the end of the day - choose what will continue the fun factor, but also provide some challenge, so you can grow, as a photographer, if that is what you want to do. If it's really more about getting a camera that will capture most of what you want, with a minimum of effort, etc. Then a P&S is your best bet and everyone will have their favorite, for their reasons. I would offer up the Nikon Coolpix 8800 for a lot of sound technical reasons, but there are many others that have a lot to offer and can serve, as well. I chose the Canon for my wife and she couldn't be more pleased with the camera and the results, so it was the right choice for her..
My thought is to get the best lens you can (for me that means the lower the F the better, the wider angle the better and also it helps if it has some sort of high-quality lens designation showing that special glass was used). and ergonomics are important (you need to hold them to know if they'll work for you). image stabilization (the real kind, not the fake type) can be handy at times...
Thanks to all for your advice. I think the 8800 is out of my price range. I'm kind of back and forth between the G9 and the D40 right now..
I don't have any commercial ambitions for these shots. I know my way around photoshop but really only use it for minor touchups. I'm a musician and have more blurry and dark shots of myself performing than I care to save hard drive space for. Thats the kind of low light environment I would like to be able to photograph in. Or even a low lit dinner party etc...Beyond that I just like taking pictures of friends and things that things I want remembered. I like taking photo walks and feel I have a reasonably good eye.
I just feel that people I know with DSLRs can have a richness and attractive depth of field in their photos that the P&S cams I've owned don't give me. I imagine thats simply the physics of having a larger camera. If the G9 can give me that then maybe thats the way to go. Though whoever mentioned the ability to grow with a DSLR and the ability to upgrade it a year down the line made a good point as well..
A friend of mine who loves his DSLR recently offered this advice on the topic:.
"Perhaps the key diff btwn G9 and any slr is the commitment to a lifetime of wanting, and sometimes buying, painfully expensive lenses."..
I just did a check and it may well be that the 8800 is no longer available..
For what you have described, a DSLR is the better choice, but certainly more expensive in the short and long term. Getting a 50mm f/1.8 lens is a relatively cheap lens (around $115) yet is bright enough to do a decent job in darker lit situations. In most DSLR cameras it is the equivalent of a 75mm lens, but might be the sharpest lens you could afford without spending far more than you have mentioned to this point..
If you get a body with a kit lens, it might be okay for some basic stuff, though many of them aren't designed to deal with low light, etc. but will very likely be better than most P&S cameras. The biggest thing you will give up over many of the good P&S cameras is zoom. A decent zoom lens can be quite the investment. The medium range zoom I'm looking at is around $900 and the longer one is around $1000 and these are less expensive options than many go with...
I just feel that people I know with DSLRs can have a richness andattractive depth of field in their photos that the P&S cams I'veowned don't give me..
Yep. There's a little more to learn with a DSLR, and they are less forgiving when you get things wrong. But the image quality, the control and the creative potential is way ahead of any P&S..
I imagine thats simply the physics of having alarger camera..
If the G9 can give me that then maybe thats the wayto go..
But it can't. Although it is outwardly a bit larger than some, the sensor is tiny compared with any DSLR. This limits both the image quality and the depth of field characteristics..
Though whoever mentioned the ability to grow with a DSLR andthe ability to upgrade it a year down the line made a good point aswell..
A friend of mine who loves his DSLR recently offered this advice onthe topic:"Perhaps the key diff btwn G9 and any slr is the commitment to alifetime of wanting, and sometimes buying, painfully expensivelenses.".
Yes to that too ..
Could someone please explain to me what the lens adapter option for the G9 is all about?.
Adapters like that let you put auxiliary lenses in front of your camera lens. They either allow you to take in a wider range than your single-lens camera will (I'd hate to call the G9 a point and shoot) or zoom more. There's also a decrease in light transmission and a degredation in quality..
I actually have a set for my now retired CP 4500..
If the G9 doesn't do all you need it to do, you should either look for a different all-in-one camera or a DSLR.
'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'..
For what you have described, a DSLR is the better choice, butcertainly more expensive in the short and long term. Getting a 50mmf/1.8 lens is a relatively cheap lens (around $115) yet is brightenough to do a decent job in darker lit situations..
Not on the D40/D40x. Being entry-level cameras a few shortcomings are to be expected, but the one massive failing is that they can only autofocus with AF-S lenses. In practice that means a few 'consumer zooms' and a rather larger number of expensive lenses which are unlikely to be of interest to (or within the reach of) the typical D40 owner..
And unfortunately the 50/1.8 is not an AF-S lens..
Another option, and the one I chose, is the Canon 400D which can use every Canon autofocus lens - including Canon's 50/1.8 - as well as all the Canon-fit lenses from Sigma and the others. The camera is slightly dearer but the lens is less..
In most DSLRcameras it is the equivalent of a 75mm lens, but might be thesharpest lens you could afford without spending far more than youhave mentioned to this point..
Sharpness isn't really the issue, low light is the issue..
If you get a body with a kit lens, it might be okay for some basicstuff, though many of them aren't designed to deal with low light,etc. but will very likely be better than most P&S cameras..
Yep, better than any P&S in fact. And even with a 'kit lens' the low light performance will be better - but this comes from the sensor not the lens. Investment in a really good lens will improve it still further of course, but that can come later if necessary..
Thebiggest thing you will give up over many of the good P&S cameras iszoom..
Yes - this is part of the trade-off. In fact there are some very high ratio DSLR zooms, but they are simply a different compromise between image quality, aperture, zoom ratio, size/weight and cost...
Information overload is a fact of life on dpr. For example, I got IO just reading these replies to your questions!.
It was silly of you to think that asking a question here would simplify your choices... .
Let me jump in and actually try to simplify things for you...quote some simple "rules"....
1. Don't buy a camera while you are confused..
2. "Point & Shoot" is not a phrase that describes a camera type. Rather, it's a description of a WAY to take pictures...a life-style choice. Most people are "P&S" photographers...at one time or another. Unfortunately, some people think it's degrading to admit that they "P&S"...with their dSLR..
2a. You can't buy a non-"P&S" camera...they don't exist..
3. Buy the largest piece of Silicon (the sensor) you can afford. Get one with the smallest number of pixels you can put up with..
3a. There are not many cameras that satisfy "rule" #3. Finding one will be easy (because there are only 2). Picking the ONE you want should be easy..
Look at the Nikon D40 & the Pentax K100D with one "kit" lens. Choose the one that feels best in your hand. Ignore all the other $#@%....
I am looking to buy a new camera and have been trapped in a dpreviewvortex of information for the last few days. I'm trying to narrow itdown but the more I read the more options emerge. Please help me.About me:Price range: <$500 give or takeLike to take beautiful pictures but don't do much post-processing.So RAW isn't a priority. Basically, I want the photo I take that Idownload to my computer to be as stunning as possible. I don't wantmy indoor photos to look like garbage. I'm not too worried aboutsize.
Ones that caught my eye:Canon sd750, 800, 850, 870. Is there a big difference from theearliest to the latest?G9: great looking camera, and I love how it feels but if I'm notconcerned with RAW is it worth the extra dough?I almost just bought a S3 IS I saw advertised for $180 on a whim, butit was out of stock. Should I throw the S5 in the pot?Or the Fuji F50fd? Or the FZ8, Nikon D40, A710...Ahhh! Help! I begof thee..
Charlie DavisNikon 5700 & Sony R1HomePage: http://www.1derful.infoBridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/..
Steve Balcombe wrote:.
Sharpness isn't really the issue, low light is the issue..
The context was a 50mm f/1.8 lens - given the budget issues, this would likely be the brightest glass, as in widest aperture lens, allowing in the most light, leading to the sharpest pics. These lenses get rave reviews almost unanimously. Most kit lenses are going to start a f/3.5, etc. and if a zoom, that will only be available at the low end - use the zoom and it typically bumps up a couple or three more stops, making it tough to capture good shots in low light - certainly not impossible, but a lot more challenging than a lens supporting f-stops down to 1.8..
The 50mm f/1.8 - in whatever brand is one of the gems - from all the reading I've done. It was my first lens purchased and I'm looking forward to my D300 arriving to really take it and the camera for a spin...