|
I've been considering taking up photography as a hobby for a while now. Up until now, I've only had point-and-shoot cameras that'll take a good memory jogger when you look back through them (at the moment I use a Coolpix 3200, which I love to bits, but it's a little thin on adjustable settings). I had a look on Amazon yesterday and found the S7000 or would I regret it later because it doesn't do some of the really fancy stuff? I know the D50 seems to be one of the most recommended newbie cameras on here, but at an extra £200 or so, I wonder just how much extra I'd be getting. Also, a book suitable for people of my experience (ie: very little) would be nice, any suggestions? I'd need something with a pretty big glossary, and at the moment the "for Dummies" book looks a good bet (Amazon have the first few pages to view on their site, looks to be written in a simple enough style), and comes with some sort of Photoshop software. Edit: Couldn't get my links working, fixed. Edited by Raid at 17:48:46 10-06-2006 |
Fuji Finepix S7000 - any good?
-
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years ago -
sam_spade 15,745 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 20 years agoGet a DSLR if you want to make it a hobby. You'll be limited by your lens which is a pisser when you want to take that next step up into hobbyland. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoIt's not an SLR? So it's just a standard digicam, styled to look like one? That's a little misleading. -
deem 31,667 posts
Seen 8 months ago
Registered 18 years ago -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoJust re-read my initial post, I think I managed to bugger it up a little when I edited it 4 times to get the links working. Should've read something along the lines of;
"I had a look on Amazon yesterday and found the S7000, which seemed a nice start pricewise. Were I to buy it, would I regret it later because it doesn't do some of the really fancy stuff?"
...but I think you worked it out.
Anyway, I ordered that book (if anything, it'll give me something to read when my mates and I head down to sit by the canal with nothing better to do); hopefully it'll give me some pointers of what I should expect. -
pingu 5 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 17 years agoYeah, the s7000 is a pretty good starting camera. 5 or 6 years ago I bought the 6900z and loved it; took some great shots & it was good step up towards buying a dSLR (got a 350D these days).
dSLR is different way to approaching photography; not just in having to carry a bunch of leses around with you, but in so much that the viewfinder is just that, rather than an LCD screen. With the prosumer cameras you can see the effects of apature and shutter changes in the EVF, which can be very useful if you're new to photography (SLR's have a light meter indicator rather than showing the exposure 'live').
The drawback of a prosumer is that the lens has to be as flexible as possible, usually something like 35mm -> 300, which means that you often get quite a lot of barrel distortion at the wide end (ie; taking a picture of a flat brick wall straight on will show curving at the edges), and you'll lack the ability to take pictures with a very shallow depth of field at the wide end too (ie; only one element of the picture in focus and everything else blurry).
Best advice though is to go into a local camera shop (Jessop's are actually really good) and spend some time with a few different cameras, testing them out for weight and button layout - check that it suits you. These days you have to struggle to buy a bad digital camera, so get one that you feel comfortable using. After testing it out for a while either leave the shop or tell them that you're interested but have found it cheaper online - a lot of places will try and price match. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoAlright, ignore the bit about the S7000, it seems fairly clear that I'd be needing an SLR. My book came this morning, and whilst I can't vouch for the technical info or level of detail it goes into, it's a pleasant enough read.
So what are my options? I really can't justify spending more than £500 (I don't even want to spend that much, but it certainly seems a case of getting what you pay for with photography), and the major problem here seems to be the cost of lenses. I had no idea that (what I assume are) basic lenses cost upwards of £150.
The D50 certainly seems to be well recommended around here, and you guys don't seem to rate the kit lens it can be bought with. Is this because the quality's not especially good, or does it lack something? Is it something I'm really going to notice as a complete amateur? I see some recommendations for a 50mm prime lens (is "prime" referring to it focussing on one focal length?), but I really want something I can zoom in with (I don't want to be limited by my positioning, I'm sure I'll learn composure regardless), so would the 18-70mm lens be the best bet? How much is that going to set me back?
I've seen Canon EOS 300Ds (I think that's what was named Digital Rebel in the US?) for around £250-£300 on ebay. Would that be a good enough choice, or would I definitely be better off spending more and going for the Nikon? -
deem 31,667 posts
Seen 8 months ago
Registered 18 years ago -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoMy mistake, the 300Ds for £250 were body only, and were several days away from finishing.
I've just gotten to the section of the book dealing with apertures, and it mentions a range of f/2.8 to about f/22, yet the stock lenses that come with these kits seem to have only 1 or 2 points between the minimum and maximum, ie: 4-5.6. Is the book exagerating when it discusses the range, or does a lens like that really limit your creativity with aperture settings? -
bivith 2,469 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoYou're misunderstanding the numbers. I made the same mistake.
When it says the aperture is 4-5.6, it means f/4 at the min zoom, and f/5.6 at the max zoom. These are maximum values for the lens, and a smaller number is a bigger aperture. They can still be stopped down to f/22. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoAh ha, thanks. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoCan anyone give me a rough estimation of how much a half-decent starting lens should cost me? I've been looking on ebay, and a few photography online stores, and the cheapest I'm seeing is around the £200 mark (but then I don't know what half of the listed features are). If basic lenses are going to cost me this much, I'm not sure I'll be able to afford it yet.
As I said, I do like a good level of magnification at the moment (the book says I should take the camera's focal length, and then divide the lens' focal length into that to find the magnification level, but I've not seen a rating for camera focal length on either Steve's Digicams or DP Review, so I assume I've not got it quite right), but I suppose that could change. The camera I use at the moment has a 3x optical magnification, which never really seems enough when I'm outside. -
deem 31,667 posts
Seen 8 months ago
Registered 18 years ago -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoThose are some cracking shots, I must say. It's also a tempting offer, though I doubt I'll be buying anything for about a month (I'll hopefully be getting a £200 housing deposit back in early July). Would the 300D be the optimal camera to go for, price-wise, or is it possible to pick up the 350 for £300ish? -
striker 2,606 posts
Seen 6 months ago
Registered 20 years agoIIRC the 350D was considered the camera the 300D should have been, so I'm not sure it would be such a good deal. But check DPReview and read the reviews for the main SLRs. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoThe DPR review says that the 300D has a software limited feature set, and I saw today on ebay a 300D which had had an upgraded firmware installed to unlock some of these features. Is this a common procedure? -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoI've been checking on ebay a bit, and it seems there's a company selling a 300D kit, including 2 lenses (usually 28-80mm and 80-200mm or similar), tripod, carrying case and all of the original manuals etc. for around the £350-£400 mark, which seems a very good price. The question now, of course, is whether the 300D is a good camera to start off with, given that I probably can't afford the upgraded model. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agodeem wrote:
Was that a serious offer, I may have to take you up on it if I win an auction this week.
I'd sell you a cracking Sigma 70-300mm for £75 if you went with a canon. That, plus the kit lens, and the £72 50mm f1.8, and you'd be laughing.
.gif)
-
deem 31,667 posts
Seen 8 months ago
Registered 18 years ago -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years ago300D on ebay
Can anyone see any problems with this? I can't quite understand why no-one bid on it the first time around (min bid was £300 at the time, less than most of these sell for), considering it has a 1gb Microdrive and bag included in the sale. The lack of bids makes me slightly suspicious, and despite reading it several times, I've not noticed any problems.
Anyone saying it's not a Nikon will be shot.
Additional: Is the Pentax ist DL a decent enough camera? I think the review over at Steve's Digicams said it only had 3 autofocus points (the 300D has 7); is this a major drawback?
Oh, and my choice of the 300D is largely based on financial reasons, not just for the initial purchase, but Canon lenses seem to be cheaper than Nikon ones in the places I've seen them.
Any chance we can rename this thread? I figure the title may be putting people off.
Edited by Raid at 20:21:17 21-06-2006 -
reflux 1,804 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 20 years agoRaid wrote:
The Pentax DL is a MUCH better camera than a Canon 300D. It's also almost two years newer than the 300D.
Additional: Is the Pentax ist DL a decent enough camera? I think the review over at Steve's Digicams said it only had 3 autofocus points (the 300D has 7); is this a major drawback?
1. Lower noise at high ISO
2. Faster in terms of handling/writing/start up
3. More controls and settings
4. Much better viewfinder
5. Bigger and better LCD-screen
About the focus points, the 3 points in the DL are so called cross sensors, that means that they can detect both horizontal and vertical edges. I THINK the 300D only have horizontal detection. Can be wrong on this, but the three cross sensors on the DL will be fine.
The only advantage of the Canon is that they have a much larger range of lenses and pro bodies to choose from if you'd ever need that.
In case you're wondering, I've got a Pentax DS, which basically is the same camera, and I've taken lots and lots of photos with it. Samples here. If you were shopping for a Canon 350D it would be a much harder decision, but really, the 300D is one generation older and it shows IMO.
The thing with Pentax is that you can use ALL older Pentax lenses, even fully manual ones, from the 70s and even earlier. Some of their older lenses are just fab and can be found for nothing at ebay etc. -
Ginger 7,256 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 19 years agoreflux wrote:
Y'see, this is good news, because jessops have got an ist 2DS (or something, not quite sure
Lots of interesting stuff
) for 350 quid new with an 18-55 lens. I was worried that the new lenses were going to be more expensive/harder to come by but from what you say it's the complete opposite! -
reflux 1,804 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 20 years agoPentax lenses ARE harder to find, since they're not as big as Canon or Nikon. However, they are generally a bit cheaper, atleast here, and since you can use all the older models you have plenty of interesting lenses to chose from. I have manual and automatic lenses like a 15mm non-fisheye f3.5, a semi automatic 135mm/f1.8, a fully manual 28mm macro, an excellent automatic 50mm/f1.4, an automatic Sigma 28-70/f2.8 etc. All easy to use since the Pentax cameras have great viewfinders for manual focusing and they still meter the light automatically even though the lenses don't really support that.
For consumers, Pentax is great. Sigma, Tamron and Tokina also make lenses for Pentax so there are plenty to choose from.
I'd hesitate though if I were a pro, mostly because some of their finer lense are hard to find (like the elusive FA 28-70/2.8 or FA 70-200/2.8) but then we're talking Canon 5D/30D/1Ds Mark II or Nikon D200/D2Xs anyway with L-quality glass and a whole different price level.
I think you'd be happy with the Pentax. -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoSo the 300D is as expensive as a "next-gen" (god I'm beginning to hate that term) model because of the brand name only?
And yes, they have a DL2 for £349.99 at Jessops. Can't find a review on Steves or DPReview, but I imagine it's very similar to the DL, which is only 6 months older. To the spec-sheet mobile!
And I maybe took one picture with my Dad's old film SLR (not sure what brand it is actually, I'll have to ask, but I think it's a Canon), other than that it's been cheap 35mm films and point'n'shoot digitals. I'm definitely not a pro!
Edited by Raid at 22:49:46 21-06-2006 -
reflux 1,804 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 20 years agoRaid wrote:
In my opinion, yes. It was WAY ahead of the rest when it was released, but the 350D was a substantial upgrade and the 300D shows its age.
So the 300D is as expensive as a "next-gen" (god I'm beginning to hate that term) model because of the brand name only?
Raid wrote:
DL2 is just an update with 5 instead of 3 focus points and some smaller refinements. Can't go wrong with that one. They have an awesome 2.5" LCD, just like the Canon 30D and 5D.
And yes, they have a DL2 for £349.99 at Jessops. Can't find a review on Steves or DPReview, but I imagine it's very similar to the DL, which is only 6 months older. To the spec-sheet mobile!
There is a VERY helpful Pentax forum over at DPReview.com. They'll happily answer any questions you might have, even newbie stuff, without flaming you -
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoWhere's the best place to buy lenses from? Thankfully I've got a Jessops in Lancaster (uni) and Darlington (home), so I'll always have somewhere to go and test them out, but which e-tailers are good for this sort of thing?
I think I'm going to go with the *ist DL2, assuming that the Jessops shops go with the same prices as their website (anyone know if it's a franchise or not?), or that they'll pricematch. -
Ginger 7,256 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 19 years agoRaid wrote:
Heh, I just went and bought one from a jessops store - 349.99 as on the web, no extras though
Where's the best place to buy lenses from? Thankfully I've got a Jessops in Lancaster (uni) and Darlington (home), so I'll always have somewhere to go and test them out, but which e-tailers are good for this sort of thing?
I think I'm going to go with the *ist DL2, assuming that the Jessops shops go with the same prices as their website (anyone know if it's a franchise or not?), or that they'll pricematch.
-
Raid 980 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 16 years agoAh yes, but that gives me someone to discuss the camera with! Hurrah! Glad to know they're the same price though.
Buying the camera will require an extension of my overdraft, so if I can make it into town tomorrow to do that, I'll be able to buy on Monday. Until then, any chance you could offer a few comments on it? -
Ginger 7,256 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 19 years agoRaid wrote:
Umm, it's a camera
Ah yes, but that gives me someone to discuss the camera with! Hurrah! Glad to know they're the same price though.
Buying the camera will require an extension of my overdraft, so if I can make it into town tomorrow to do that, I'll be able to buy on Monday. Until then, any chance you could offer a few comments on it? not had much of a chance to play with it but I'll be out and about on Sunday - guess that's not much help to yuo though. Lens seems to be really good though, clear and crisp. there are lots of shortcuts to most of the major functions like ISO, over/under exposure etc - pretty happy so far for someone who knows next to nothing about cameras
edit: gimme a sec and I'll stick a couple of shots up on flickr
Edited by Ginger at 20:34:22 23-06-2006 -
Heh, I barely know anything about cameras myself, so a lack of serious technical insight wouldn't mean much to me anyway.
.gif)
) for 350 quid new with an 18-55 lens. I was worried that the new lenses were going to be more expensive/harder to come by but from what you say it's the complete opposite! 
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
