Anyone into photography?

MrBrian

I'm looking for a good digital camera,

I love taking photos, but been stuck with the camera on my phone the past 2 years! Still looking for nice camera.

Nothing too fancy, nothing too big. Just something that takes great photos and not too expensive.

dunkman

i know you want a digital but i bought a Minolta SLR Dynax off ebay a few months back - i buy black and white film and the photos are amazing... (the camera cost me £13!!!!)

i love the fact that i have a good digital camera and have thousands of pics on my computer... but with my film camera i HAVE to get them developed... i have the photos in front of me... i'm too old school

catefrances

dunkman wrote:

i know you want a digital but i bought a Minolta SLR Dynax off ebay a few months back - i buy black and white film and the photos are amazing... (the camera cost me £13!!!!)

i love the fact that i have a good digital camera and have thousands of pics on my computer... but with my film camera i HAVE to get them developed... i have the photos in front of me... i'm too old school

do you get more satisfaction from your SLR B&Ws than your digital pics dunk?

MrBrian

dunkman wrote:

i know you want a digital but i bought a Minolta SLR Dynax off ebay a few months back - i buy black and white film and the photos are amazing... (the camera cost me £13!!!!)

i love the fact that i have a good digital camera and have thousands of pics on my computer... but with my film camera i HAVE to get them developed... i have the photos in front of me... i'm too old school

I hear yeah!

But I guess these days we can just print digital images right? I guess it still may not beat the beauty of film.

post some of those photos if you can, i'm interested.

StrummingGnome

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D80-Digital-Camera-18-135mm/dp/B000HK3JH4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1228819988&sr=1-1

Nikon D80.

dunkman

catefrances wrote:

do you get more satisfaction from your SLR B&Ws than your digital pics dunk?

they do have a better look about them... my digital isnt slr and you can get good images, but the film slr just has a certain quality about it?! i suppose its down to preference just like people like vinyl over cd...

i'm not knocking digital, I'll definitely get me a digital SLR through time... but i thought that a film SLR might help me learn the basics more... ISO's, apertures, exposures, etc.

dunkman

MrBrian wrote:

I hear yeah!

But I guess these days we can just print digital images right? I guess it still may not beat the beauty of film.

post some of those photos if you can, i'm interested.

I only have them as photos... i could maybes scan some of them at work...

i have some of my digital ones on here i think (and i then used them to add film grain on photoshop)

http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=4304205&postcount=1

catefrances

dunkman wrote:

they do have a better look about them... my digital isnt slr and you can get good images, but the film slr just has a certain quality about it?! i suppose its down to preference just like people like vinyl over cd...

i'm not knocking digital, I'll definitely get me a digital SLR through time... but i thought that a film SLR might help me learn the basics more... ISO's, apertures, exposures, etc.

i always feel like my slr pics have more of me in them. like tis more of an accomplishment when i see that final pic. digital pics are almost foolproof.

dunkman

StrummingGnome wrote:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D80-Digital-Camera-18-135mm/dp/B000HK3JH4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1228819988&sr=1-1

Nikon D80.

he's just starting out.. that ones is mighty expensive


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D40-Digital-SLR-Camera/dp/B000KIX65S/ref=pd_cp_ce_1?pf_rd_p=136153791&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000HK3JH4&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=1R90RFNBBCN3ANNE02H1


half the price.. but not half the camera for sure.

dunkman

catefrances wrote:

i always feel like my slr pics have more of me in them. like tis more of an accomplishment when i see that final pic. digital pics are almost foolproof.

totally... digital slr's are almost 'point n clicks' for some people... my workmate is a keen amateur photographer and he gets annoyed with folks who spend £500 on a digital SLR and just point n click... obviously you can do so much more with them.

once my next roll of film is finished i'm on the hunt for a 1600 speed Ilford B&W film... i want to achieve that Anton Corbijn feel...

StrummingGnome

The Nikon D80 is a camera suited for beginners, it is very user friendly and great for experimental work. It is mighty expensive, but you get what you pay for in this world. The D40 is a horrendous camera, horrible, horrible, I tell you!

dunkman

walrus wrote:

get anything with 7 megapixels or better..i see some nikon coolpix for about $100

this is an urban myth of sorts... its not just megapixels that make a good camera... some cameraphones can do 7 megapixels but they wont mach the Nikon D40 for quality of photo and it only has 6 megapixels... light sensors, lenses, etc are all important.. not just the megapixels.

MrBrian

dunkman wrote:

I only have them as photos... i could maybes scan some of them at work...

i have some of my digital ones on here i think (and i then used them to add film grain on photoshop)

http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=4304205&postcount=1

Black and White is nice...Yeah scan what you can.

I did have an oooooold Nikon film camera from the 70's, but sadly it's been broken since early 2000.

As far as digital goes, I was looking at Canon, but I hear mixed reviews on some of them. I tested out a couple of Sony cameras but was not too impressed with the qaulity.

dunkman

StrummingGnome wrote:

The Nikon D80 is a camera suited for beginners, it is very user friendly and great for experimental work. It is mighty expensive, but you get what you pay for in this world. The D40 is a horrendous camera, horrible, horrible, I tell you!

i'm sure the D80 is good but £500+ is a big initial outlay was all i was meaning

Digital Camera magazine gave the D40 a 4 star rating in their magazine... cant be that bad.

South of Seattle

This might be a good one for you.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8965738&type=product&id=1217029991611

MrBrian

dunkman wrote:

this is an urban myth of sorts... its not just megapixels that make a good camera... some cameraphones can do 7 megapixels but they wont mach the Nikon D40 for quality of photo and it only has 6 megapixels... light sensors, lenses, etc are all important.. not just the megapixels.

Yeah, true. I guess megapixels also matter more if you are blowing the pictures up.

These are from my 5megapixel Nokia, not great quality...Not a great feel for the photos. (Dunno if the link works)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a391/Brian-G/052120081151.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a391/Brian-G/SunRoyal.jpg

dunkman

MrBrian wrote:

Yeah, true. I guess megapixels also matter more if you are blowing the pictures up.

i'll look at them later amigo as my work has banished photobucket to the internet coffin.



found this from an old photo forum i used for hints n tips

One assumes that the more megapixels you have, the more crisp and clear your photography will be.

Is this true?

The answer is no for the following reason:

Point-and-shoot digital cameras have inferior lenses compared to full-bodied cameras. And as any photographer will tell you, it’s all about the lenses (in reference to quality and choice). So even if you have a point-and-shoot that has 8MP or more, it’s still got a built-in lens you can’t change.

Does this mean a full-bodied digital camera with 6MP takes better shots than a 10MP point-and-shoot?

YES.

For example, if you have a full-bodied Nikon digital camera with a high-quality Nikon 35mm NIKKOR lens attached, you will get better quality photos.

You can have all the megapixels in the world in a point-and-shoot but the blunt honest truth is that it’s still a point-and-shoot, and cannot go beyond what’s built-in.

If the intent is to take digital photos for print use later, the full-bodied with good lens(es) is the only way to go.

The only time more megapixels serves to your benefit is when you’re upgrading from a previous full-bodied digital cam to a better one.

polaris

follow the advice of other posters and get an intro digital SLR ...

you can do a lot with the point and shoots but you can never do things like change lenses or add filters ... I've been using a D50 ...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68492368@N00/2585034486/

Yellow Ledbelly

Photography? Only because I have to be to make the dough

Collin

I once bought three analogue cameras with all the equipment to develop the pictures. I was extremely cheap, a friend of my dad sold them. He has a hobby photography school and they got rid of most of their stuff because they were switching to digital. I sold it all to my friends. I seriously regret my decision.

nick1977

dunkman wrote:

i'm sure the D80 is good but £500+ is a big initial outlay was all i was meaning

Digital Camera magazine gave the D40 a 4 star rating in their magazine... cant be that bad.

I have a D40 and love it.

I'm a beginner....just bought it when my daughter was born a year ago. I'm still learning how to use the damn thing. It has more features than I will ever use, but I am constantly learning.....any resources you recommend about how to become a better photographer and use more of the fancy features?

polaris

nick1977 wrote:

I have a D40 and love it.

I'm a beginner....just bought it when my daughter was born a year ago. I'm still learning how to use the damn thing. It has more features than I will ever use, but I am constantly learning.....any resources you recommend about how to become a better photographer and use more of the fancy features?

take a intro course at your local photography shop ... you just need to learn the fundamentals of photography to understand what you are doing ... it's like learning to cook without knowing what boil means ...

dunkman

nick1977 wrote:

I have a D40 and love it.

I'm a beginner....just bought it when my daughter was born a year ago. I'm still learning how to use the damn thing. It has more features than I will ever use, but I am constantly learning.....any resources you recommend about how to become a better photographer and use more of the fancy features?

i've just been reading up on photography forums/websites.... we have a local camera club but i was warned it was 'cliquey' ... but i really need to learn more about it... as polaris has just said.. perhaps go on a course or something should be our next steps?

alphawolf

i work with canon products and i wont switch. mainly cuz all my lenses are for canon.
although the nikon d90 has a NEW feature with HD VIDEO capabilities. cost about 900-1000 us.

decides2dream

dunkman wrote:

totally... digital slr's are almost 'point n clicks' for some people... my workmate is a keen amateur photographer and he gets annoyed with folks who spend £500 on a digital SLR and just point n click... obviously you can do so much more with them.

once my next roll of film is finished i'm on the hunt for a 1600 speed Ilford B&W film... i want to achieve that Anton Corbijn feel...

i LOVE film grain!


i shot my entire master thesis with 1600 speed film. just gorgeous. btw - not to downgrade your film experience, but most especially when shooting B&W i find NOTHING compares to developing your own film for the best quality negative and making your own prints in the darkroom. bringing B&W film to the local pharmacy for developing....uuuuggggghhhhh. even nicer photo shops, i personally think DIY is the way to go. i do have a complete darkroom in my house, but honestly have not used it in years. it IS a lot of work, even if a labor of love...and it is pricey!


that said, i truly do love digital nowadays. i agree, for prints there is nothing like film! however, i find i really don't make many prints nowadays in any case. last year my husband bought me a beautiful sony digital SLR, but quite honestly i really haven't used it much....have to learn it all! manual cameras are just so much more hands-on, knobs and such.....the digital SLRs, whole other story. this year hubby bought me a new point and shoot, a lumix 12x zoom with the leica lens - spectacular camera! veddersoup had one when he was over for the MSG shows and we both were so impressed, so hubby just picked up the newest model for me. unbelievable lens for a point and shoot, quite intuitive and soooo easy to use! LOVE it! i also have an older sony cybershot with a carl zeiss lens, always loved it, but this far surpasses. lenses are soooooo important. i have to say, i've had both olympus and canon point and shoots, and not impressed with their lenses/clarity at all. i really love sony digial cameras, but i am most definitely in love with lumix now.


oh btw - my analog camera is an old minolta - a fabulous camera! also why hubby got me the sony SLR b/c it accepts all my minolta lenses.


as to the OP, if you just want a knockabout camera that will take good pics, i would say go with the point and shoot. SLRs are fantastic, but often 'too much' camera for the average joe who just wants to take some snaps. and whoever suggested that using a point and shoot is 'too easy'.....quite honestly, far from it. the average picture taken is none too good from a composition/color/lighting perspective. it really is the EYE and not the equipment that is most important in photography.

my suggestion is the panasonic/lumix point and shoot. it has THE largest zoom ratio, a spectacular leica lens and great features that are sooo easy to use, don't even need to read the instructions, it's that intuitive to learn! good luck and have fun!