What SLR Camera? (1 Viewer)

[haganap]

I am looking to enhance my already crap photography by purchasing an SLR camera. I don't have a great deal of funds available for this project. Although I love seeing some of the pics on here, I have a decent digital camera with 10x optical zoom. Although the pictures are good, they are not spectacular.

What would take my photography to the next level for a small price?

 

[Munchie]

In my film days it was Minolta but now I have gone digital it is Nikon for me. They do a few "entry level" Paul as do Canon and they are both good cameras. To move on you really need am SLR to which you can add lenses as you can afford. Currently I have a D70s and D300 with 18-200 VR nikon lens and a 120-400IS Sigma.
The more serious photographer would tend to go for "Prime" lenses but to build up a range of those you are talking big bucks. I find the two zooms i have are adequate at my level (semi serious amateur). :thumb:

VR and IS are image stabilising systems which help to reduce camera shake.

 

[dylan]

Digital Photo mag gives Gold Award to Nikon D3100 as a first serious D-SLR

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DESCO]

Hi Paul

Don't think it matters what camera you have, to me the end result depends on the eye of the person taking the picture.

During my time working for Kodak around the processing labs, some of the best pictures I have seen were taken on simple point and shoot cameras.

I know how you feel have never been able to get what I call a good picture, but my wife hardly ever takes a poor picture, so much so that I now never take stills but restrict myself to video as I seem to be able to get what I want in this medium.


Dave.:thumb::thumb:

 

[scotjimland]

What would take my photography to the next level for a small price?

No disrespect Paul .. a better camera won't improve your photos, ( or mine for that matter ) but a photography course would...

you can have the most expensive SLR in the world and still take crap pictures and visa versa .. some of the very best pictures ever taken were with pin hole cameras..

I have a Nikon D50 with a couple of lenses, yes, it certainly can take a good technical quality photo but CAN'T take a stunning picture, one with a wow factor .. only the operator can do that.

Jan has Panasonic Lumix and has taken some stunning pictures .. all on dummy mode oh:

 

[Munchie]

Hi Paul

Don't think it matters what camera you have, to me the end result depends on the eye of the person taking the picture.

During my time working for Kodak around the processing labs, some of the best pictures I have seen were taken on simple point and shoot cameras.

I know how you feel have never been able to get what I call a good picture, but my wife hardly ever takes a poor picture, so much so that I now never take stills but restrict myself to video as I seem to be able to get what I want in this medium.


Dave.:thumb::thumb:

This is just so true. It helps if you get some basics. For example look up the "rule of thirds" and if you take a portrait get the head near the top not in the middle. In landscape the horizon should very rarely be in the middle rather a third of the way down from the top or a third of the way up from the bottom.

Also remember that you "see" with all of your senses, cameras can't do that, so what you "see" as an outstanding landscape may look mediocre on a two dimensional photo.

Hope this helps.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jim]

My advice would be to buy a quality compact. I would choose one of the canon G series. I have a G9 but I think they are on 11 now. I also have a Canon 5D mk2 which is a superb full frame SLR. The 5D is great but I do a lot with the G9. if I could only have one camera I would choose the compact for pure convenience coupled with a high spec so that if you want to shoot in raw or have complete control with manual you can:thumb:

 

[yorkshirepudding]

Does your current camera have exposure compensation? If so have a play with that and you should see some improvemnt. The other comments regarding composition and lighting are all good advice. If you still feel you need an SLR look at the second hand market, there are people upgrading to the latest toy all the time and so there are some good buys out there.

 

[lesleyjean]

I am looking to enhance my already crap photography by purchasing an SLR camera. I don't have a great deal of funds available for this project. Although I love seeing some of the pics on here, I have a decent digital camera with 10x optical zoom. Although the pictures are good, they are not spectacular.

What would take my photography to the next level for a small price?

Hi Paul

I have recently been looking at photographs in members albums.
Take a look at Pwilmo, his pictures are incredible, he may be able to point you in the right direction,

not that yours are bad, in fact they are good:Blush:

Lesley

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gooney]

Buy Photoshop, a camera can't improve your composition, but if you find a picture where you have got the composition right, Photoshop can improve the picture.:thumb:

 

[haganap]

Jan has Panasonic Lumix and has taken some stunning pictures .. all on dummy mode oh:

This is the same camera that I currently have Jim. It is a decent camera and I have had some great pics with it.. I just want to go up a notch, it is quite limited in some of its qualities but a great camera.

I was looking at second hand by the way. :thumb:

 

[Larrynwin]

3 years ago I bought a Canon EOS 40 D 10 mp along with 3 zoom lenses. The user controls eg manual or auto focus , selectable exposure and focus points plus many more are beyond those of a smaller non SLR, as well as the picture quality are very good , plus the fact you have a through the lens live viewfinder which makes photography so much easier. I covered a family wedding recently with the EOS and everyone complimented the organised and candid shots for which a camera like this is totaly suitable.
It is a heavy camera and I will often take my Panasonic Lumix TZ 10 in preference due to ease of handling.
Much also depends to which size you wish to enlarge your pics, above A4 then 12mp upwards is preferable and the lens on the likes of Canon and Nikon take some beating for pin sharp pics.
All that said , as earlier on this thread , an expensive camera will not produce a beautiful , correctly exposed photo, the users skills are very important.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[hilldweller]

I am looking to enhance my already crap photography by purchasing an SLR camera.

It won't happen. Just about any modern digital camera will deliver seriously good photographs. Indeed they exceed the quality of the cameras used by all the big names in photography.

But if you want a new toy, that's a different matter.

 

[Munchie]

I find it particularly useful for wildlife. For example set the camera to highest quality and largest size. Then if you take a photo of say a woodpecker you can crop it without losing any quality and still get a good sized photo. The wonders of Digital. My photos come out at 36" wide so with a landscape you can crop to create a "panoramic" shot.

 

[hilldweller]

Jan has Panasonic Lumix and has taken some stunning pictures .. all on dummy mode oh:

I've got one, Paul's got one.

The results are so good it's all I carry now.

At 48x zoom ( 12 optical and 4 digital ) it still gives a decent full screen travel picture. At just 12x zoom I think it's better than any 35mm I've had in the past.

Here is no zoom and 48 zoom, see if you can spot the couple in the wide angle.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Larrynwin]

I've got one, Paul's got one.

The results are so good it's all I carry now.

At 48x zoom ( 12 optical and 4 digital ) it still gives a decent full screen travel picture. At just 12x zoom I think it's better than any 35mm I've had in the past.

Here is no zoom and 48 zoom, see if you can spot the couple in the wide angle.

Brian the Papparazzi

 

[Gooney]

Looks like the pictures might have been a damn sight more interesting 10 minutes later!!

 

[scotjimland]

I've got one, Paul's got one.

The results are so good it's all I carry now.

Me too,

It gets tiring carrying a heavy SLR about all day, even with only one zoom lens .. and the day you don't take it out .. sods law you miss that one off shot .. or you brought the wrong lens oh:

A compact is also easier to keep hidden.. I wouldn't have dared walk about the markets in Morocco with the Nikon and it's broad Nikon branded strap shouting out 'I AM RICH' .. the Panasonic was ideal ..
Of course it has it's limitations and when I want to do something special I'll dust off the Nikon .. I wouldn't sell it but wouldn't buy another.

There are some compact SLRs , Olympus Pen gets some good reviews.. but outside my budget

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[haganap]

It is a heavy camera .

best sell it too me before you can't lift it then Larry, I mean woudn't want and old fella like you hurting your back and being kicked out the Nuttters group would we

 

[Larrynwin]

This is the same camera that I currently have Jim. It is a decent camera and I have had some great pics with it.. I just want to go up a notch, it is quite limited in some of its qualities but a great camera.

I was looking at second hand by the way. :thumb:

Go careful who you buy 2nd hand from, these can be fragile pieces of kit and a heavy knock may not be evident until you run a print.

 

[scotjimland]

Here is no zoom and 48 zoom, see if you can spot the couple in the wide angle.

right of center about half way up the frame ?

the quality of the zoom is outstanding Brian .. I assume you rested the camera or used a tripod ?

My only dislike of the Lumix is not having a proper 'look through' viewfinder .. I find it difficult to see in bright light .. and don't like holding at arms length.. I find that unnatural

Haven't looked at cameras for a couple of years, is this now standard in 'point and shoot' cameras ?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Terry]

you are right Jim -was just going to post the same answer
in front of the grey building
edit were you perving Brian ?

 

[Munchie]

Whichever way you go Paul discount any talk of digital zoom. You can do that much better in a computer. Google any photo web site and ALL will tell you the same thing. In saying that compact cameras are great I am not knocking them Steph carries one and I use it when I can't be bothered carrying my SLR.
A reat deal depends on what you want to do. If you are a "holiday snapper" an SLR is a waste of money. If you are serious about getting more into photography then in my view an SLR is a must. :thumb:

 

[Larrynwin]

best sell it too me before you can't lift it then Larry, I mean woudn't want and old fella like you hurting your back and being kicked out the Nuttters group would we

Think I've done it already, poor old bugger

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[hilldweller]

right of center about half way up the frame ?

the quality of the zoom is outstanding Brian .. I assume you rested the camera or used a tripod ?

My only dislike of the Lumix is not having a proper 'look through' viewfinder

That's about it, the wall gives it away. I only took the shot to prove how good the zoom is.

No tripod. Handheld. Can't remember if I managed to rest on something.

Now viewfinder, my gripe too. I bought a Sony first, with viewfinder, it was so crap I returned it and got the Panasonic. It was like Trabant to BMW Mini. The Sony filled with dust and the viewfinder was rubbish anyway.

Now I've just seen "Never use digital zoom", but with that paparazzi shot it is the only way.

 

[Terry]

Must admit Brian I am more than happy with my Panasonic - I was looking at changing a few weeks back as I got offered a good SLR at a good price but Jim and others told me to stay with what I had for what I did Then SWMBO had the final say- I did not need it a bit like the van - always want thing's but do not need them so a waste of money
terry

 

[Munchie]

Digital zooming can be done much better in Photoshop or whatever manipulation program you use rather than in camera. :thumb:

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[656]

I have a Nikon D300 with a 24-120VR lens, a 50mm prime and carry a couple of Nikon SB800 flash guns plus Manfrotto tripod and a light meter. I can take hundreds of pics but only like a few, but I keep everything on a 1 terabyte NAS. For not so crucial pics I use a Lumix with a Leica lens. A DSLR may be weighty but with the range of features it can't be beat. You don't need Photoshop, Elements 8 is just fine. However, a photography course will do you pics a power of good.

 

[Larrynwin]

I use Elements , although not very often, if the picture is right it shouldn't need adjusting :thumb:

 

[656]

I use Elements , although not very often, if the picture is right it shouldn't need adjusting :thumb:

Even the best snappers tweak their pics. No one is infallible

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}