I have a $1000 to spend on a camera....help me choose.

[Chipstien]

I have a $1000 to spend on a camera....to SLR or not.

I recently purchased a Konica-Minolta Dimage A2 from Costco. What a awesome camera. Does everything I want it to do and more. Pictures are unbelievable too. I am trying to decide whether to keep it or get something different. My choices are the Dimage A2, the Canon Powershot Pro, and the Nikon Coolpix 8700. All are 8 MP. The K-M and the Canon are 7x opticle while the Nikon is 8X opticle. I have a Nikon Coolpix 800 that has been a great digi-cam but want a camera that is in-depth for lack of a better word. I love Nikon but in this case the 8700 is at a significant dis-advantage. It is not sold at Costco. I am sure most of us are aware of Costco awesome warrantee/return policy. This is a feature that I take full advantage of. Anyways the Canon and the K-M are both sold at Costco which makes both fair game. Which is the best. (BTW, I have always had a "thing" for Minolta camera..... just really like them. )





Now for Part 2. There is one other camera that Costco carries that I am torn between and it definatly had its advantages. Canon Rebel Digital SLR. All of these cameras are under $1000 and though the SLR has its advantages, one of the reasons I am getting a new camera is to get a higher opticle zoom. Well to do that with the Rebel SLR means I need to get a telephoto lens which cost BIG bank. And how much of a difference does the 8MP versus the 6. 3 of the Rebel. Should I worry. And then there is the size factor. The Rebel is quite a bit bigger then the others especially with a tele-photo lens.



So help me out. Where is the Camera experts Which should I get. (Or keep)Oo.

 

[XJSuperman]

I would go with the cannon rebel digital SLR. I have a cannon rebel NON-digital SLR and let me tell you it is terrific.



AND you don't necessarily have to get the expensive lenses. My wife bought me the rig a few years ago with the standard 28-90mm and also a 75-300mm cannon telephoto lense. The whole setup was under $600.



Since then I have a promaster 100-400mm telephoto and a phoenix 500 mm mirror lense (still learning the ins and outs of it). The promaster was under $300 and I got the mirror lense for $110.

I also use a 2X teleconverter... so effectively with the right speed film (I am practicing with 1600 ISO now) I can run from 28-1000mm with the respective lense w/converter and I carry very little gear when I am out with it.



Now all I need is a WIDE angle zoom lense... something in the 12-20mm category. But those seem $$ even for the 'less expensive' ones.



Now I am still very much a newbie to photography BUT if you know where to look you can get lenses for these cameras without emptying your pockets. A lot of stores have 'storefronts' on e-bay and I have bought 2 lenses there with great success.

One was "IOWA CAMERA". THere websight has changed or something but if you search e-bay for them you'll find them. Nice people and great prices.

 

[ladyjaine]

Chipstein,



I have one of the early Digital SLRs and I adore it. I wasn't able to make the transition to digital before I got it. I just think in SLR.



I love being able to swap out lenses and filters and KNOW what is going to happen to the images. I do very little 'Photoshopping' of my images, I just never got into making a bad picture worse.



I like to go to 17th Street Photo for my camera equipment. Nothing is gray market, everything I've ever ordered arrived on time and in excellent shape. Decent prices. when you call them they are friendly, for New Yorkers.



Try infra red images using a tripod and switch back and forth between a shot with the filter and a shot without. Freaky!!



Jean

 

[klenger]

I'd love to get a setup with the Olympus 4/3 Digital SLR camera line, but my budget won't allow that till I win the lottery. It sure looks cool though.

 

[seagrave2001]

I would go with the cannon digital rebel... . I have my eye one, but its a little pricey for me now... . I will be getting one in the future. My friend has one and absoutly loves it...

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

I believe you can use any modern Canon AF lenses on the EOS Rebel digital. The only drawback is your focal length changes due to the 4/3 format (it makes them more of a "zoom" lens with greater focal length due to CCD being smaller than a 35mm film frame).



I read in a recent report the new Nikon SLR is killer and was chosen above the digital EOS, this was a PC Magazine article so I wouldn't put a lot of weight on their opinion.



Vaughn

 

[Chipstien]

I have decided to return the A2 and get the Rebel digital for now. FWIW I like the A2 much more than the Canon Powershot Pro. But I have decided that SLR is indeed the way to go. Vaugn care to elaborate on that. You spoke in mars-ish. Try speaking in Neanderthal. The Nikon D-70 is the camera that you were referring to. Yes it is by far and away the best Digital SLR available. However it is also 1299 vs. 950 for the Canon. The only downfall is that it is a larger camera like what the Pros would use.

 

[Hohn]

I was in a similar situation not long ago.



I had $1k to burn, and it really boiled down to Powershot Pro 1 vs. Digital Rebel.



I bought the Powershot Pro 1. Why? There are a number of reasons for me.



As a whole, the Pro1 offers more, right out of the box.

-- The Digital Rebel requires you to buy an additional flash to get flash exposure compensation! Otherwise you don't get it on this $1k camera.

-- The Digital Rebel will not take pix smaller than 1024x768. The Pro1 offers more resolution settings, and I can take TDR-friendly pix without having to shrink them on the computer. Trust me, post processing is a PITA.

-- For the same range, the Pro1 offers 8MP, while the DigiReb is only 6MP. That said, the image quality would probably be about the same. The Reb uses the superior CMOS, while the Pro1 uses a CCD-- the same one in the Sony F-828 that is supposedly prone to purple fringing. I have yet to notice this purple fringe-- I guess it's only common in very bright light shooting wide open (which I almost never do).

--- The Pro1's lens is much more capable right out of the box. The Digireb's included lens is a plaything-- you'll need additional lenses to open up its capability. Then you're not comparing $1k cameras anymore, are you?

-- The Pro1 is a much smaller package. I find it to be remarkable compact for its capability. It's well-made and has a tight, precise, almost German feel to it. No looseness in the controls or buttons.

-- The macro on the Pro1 is incredible, right out of the box. It has a lower res (5MP) Super Macro mode that will amaze you. I managed to take a picture at 5mp resolution where my eyeball filled THE ENTIRE IMAGE! They *that* with an SLR out of the box.



I came into digital from an SLR. But I found that if I wanted to TRULY replace my SLR capability, I was doing to have to spend almost $2500 with the DigiReb.



The Pro1 was my 90% solution. It's only downfall is really high speed action shots, which I don't do. It's a non-issue for me.



Feature-for-feature, the Pro1 offered more of exactly what I wanted. I'm happy I have it. The autofocus isn't even CLOSE to what a DigiReb gives (as far as speed), and it seems to not like dim light, but it usually seems to capture the shot. In bright light, I've just pushed the button-- no focus or meter pre-reading-- and the shot turned out perfectly.



Overall, I've been real impressed with it. The dim-light slowness is the only weak point. Sticking on the big EX550 flash would cure that. But it's not a real problem for me.



I'd encourage you to look VERY carefully at the Reb vs. the Pro1. The only way I'd give the nod to the Reb OUT OF THE BOX is if I had to do a lot of high-speed photography. But how often are you going to do that with the wimpy lens it comes with??



The DigiReb DOES use the standard Canon EF lens mount. If you need the capability of an SLR, then the DigiReb is really tough to beat.



As for the the D70 being "far and away the best Digital SLR available", I'd say you have a LOT of homework to do. The "best" sells for a HECK of a lot more than $1299. Closer to $12999.



justin

 

[Chipstien]

Originally posted by Hohn

As for the the D70 being "far and away the best Digital SLR available", I'd say you have a LOT of homework to do. The "best" sells for a HECK of a lot more than $1299. Closer to $12999.



justin

It was late at night and I must have had a brain fart. I meant the D70 was the best digital SLR in the under 1500 range. IMHO, of course. Canon also has a 10D which is around 100 more and does NOT come with a lens. And it is *basically* the same camera as the Rebel. Same features and specifications but better case. But if I were gonna spend 1400 I would just pony up another 300 and get the Fuji S2. Fuji has some special "pixel" that is a Octagon instead of square so you have more sides plus the pixels are divided in half so you can have to different shades of gray in the same pixel. Apparently what this gives you is a 6. 1 million effective pixel camera that records 12. 1 million pixels. It uses a Nikon case, (when I saw it I thought it was a Nikon), and uses Nikon Lenses. The FinePix S2 is definately the most bang for the buck, that is for sure. I just can't justify the added 800 or so.

 

[Chipstien]

This Digital Rebel is downright awesome. Hey Vaughn, now I know what you mean. The 4/3 format is the reason you can get the camera with the 18 to 55 mm lens. I also got a 28 to 300mm telephoto lens to compliment the 18 to 55mm lens. And I decided to get a 1. 4 tele-photo converter to play with too. And I couldn't spend all this money without getting a real flash so I bought a Sunpak PZ40X Auto-zoom flash which is sweet since the finish matches the camera. After all this I realized that I had nothing to put everything in Had to get a nice Tamrac bag and a couple of UV filters for the lenses too. Spent a little over 1700 for everything. Ended up having more money sitting around then I thought, hence the extras.



I only have a 512K card but I can still get about 160 pictures of the largest setting and over 400 on the "medium"setting. At some point I will get the 2 Gig card or bigger depending on what is out but the 512 will hold me over untill then. I pretty much only use the 28 to 300 mm lens since it is hardly any bigger in size then the 18 to 55 and has much more zoom, (10. 7X on a film SLR). As Vaughn has mentioned the digital SLR naturally see more Zoom so it actually makes the 300mm equivalent to around a 470mm with a film SLR. Focus is almost instantaneous as compared to the Minolta A2 which, while not slow, was not very good for action shots. Overall picture quality actually seem better then the A2 even though there are less pixels. About the only thing I don't like about the Rebel is the case feels *plastic-y* and the auto pop-up flash is always catching me off guard. However both are petty things that mean nothing.



Overall I am very happy with the purchase. Obviously I spent more when all was said and done but the end results are a much better camera with lots of possibilities for future upgrades.

 

[Hohn]

Congrats! I have to say I'm maybe a little envious



I'm happy with my Pro1, since I didn't have the $$ for anything over $1k.



Sorry I was so obnoxious (i. e. "do your homework"... ) I think I was tired, too.



Now you'll have to try to find a way to use that DigiReb to take pictures of itself so you can post them here



Justin

 

[Chipstien]

Here some pics. As you can see the telephoto lens is barely any larger then the supplied lens.



#ad




#ad




#ad

 

[EricBu12]

Have almost the same setup.



I have the rebel and a 2 lense set. a 28-70 and a 70-300 zoom. I bought a bag like yours in the pic and I have a 256MB CF card. I bought the extended life battery so I have 2 on hand.



I like the SLR style so you look through the lense like a real camera. Plus the versatility of changing lenses. I saw a 1000mm lense but it was way expensive. so there are alot of great lenses to do great shots.



I use Medium fine compression on the card I have so I can take 120 pics on a 256mb card.



In my opinion, the only thing a 8MP over a 6. 3Mp is for a finer resolution for studio picture and professional photography. For everyday pictures, 6. 3 is more than enough.

 

[Chipstien]

Actually I think the SLR w/ 6. 3 Mp has a better picture then the A2 w/ 8Mp. Regardless, as you have said it is more then enough for me. I agree that being able to look through the lens is a very nice feature. It was very hard to determine from the electronic viewfinder on the Minolta whether a picture was in focus or not. With the SLR type there is no mistaking.