New Digital Camera

[rxpharm]

as many have discussed, any of the big names for a digital SLR will do a good job, Canon, Nikon, and even Sony!

Donnny, one thing I have seen from reading some of the photography forums is that camera prices in Australia/New Zealand are quite inflated - much higher than the US (30-40% more) and some Asian countries. If you are not in a hurry to get your camera, you may be able to save a significant amount if you can pick it up in Singapore or Hong Kong - or better yet, if you have any travels to the USA.

Sony has been dismissed by a few posters here, but they bought out Minolta, a company that made quality cameras, and are bringing out 3 new cameras over the next year. The Alpha 700 (A700), just announced will be available in the coming month.

[donnnnnny]

interesting what you say here ziggy about cost?? the nixon D300 was quoted to me with no lenses at$3500 aus dollars as apposed to the canon< am i missing something here> or is the canon30d or 400d a poorer quality camera? i am now swayed towards the canon just on cost alone

[donnnnnny]

thanks rxphram might do that?/ the last decent camera i had was a canon A1 way back in 1981 fab camera which i used for years until it was stolen.
My costs will be 10% cheaper as im traveling to thailand in14 days so ill get the g s t (vat) back on any purchase. also if i buy it in australia i dont have to piss around with adaptors for the plugs ,if i buy over there or in usa.
cheers for the advice many thanks

[Snick]

(donnnnnny @ Sep. 15 2007,15:26) on a more serious note, i too am in the market for aslr digital cam. everythimng points towards a canon.i hav been offered a caonon30d with a canon 17-85ultrasonic lense, for $1950 aus dollars can anyone tell me if its a good deal?/ the store say its below cost as the camera is now just superseaded
also canon 400d with twin lense kit 18-55 and 75-300 zoom for $1400 aus dollars seems prety good to me.
cheers in advance
donnnnnny

Donny, first off
40D and 400D are different cameras

40D is the brand new replacement to the 30D, it retails for $1500 USD, street price $1250 ( HK Street price is 8500 HDK or $1100 USD ). That is the Price for the Body only; The Kit which body+lens is a bit more.

400D has been available for a year, and is low-end / consumer version of the 30D. It lacks some features of the 30D and comes with a less durable plastic casing.

look at online for reviews of the 40D, the big points for me are Live View mode (so I can lift the camera over my head and see the image in the display); better low light sensitivity, and faster.

For 1950 Aus dollars (12,800HKD), you could get get the 40D kit in Hong Kong (12,000 HDK + incl one lens).

[Snick]

The D300 looks nice, but won't be available until November/December

Its not an option for me since I have too much invested in Canon lenses, flashes, etc...

[donnnnnny]

thanks snick i realise the 30 d is canon and the 200d is nikon, just could'nt believe the cost difference between the two

[Guest]

Snick is of course spot on with his explanation of the different digital models available, and their +'s and -'s.

I've been using the Canon S31S (the S51S's older sister?)for the past year, and for budding amateurs like myself, who don't really need or can afford the true SLR models, it's a pretty good camera.

There's possibilities a plenty for adjusting just about everything with this camera, but when you just want to point and shoot, you can also do that. The 'mega-zoom' is extremely usable in those situations where you really want a close-up, but can't get closer. All in all a very usable camera to bridge the gap between automatic pocket cameras and true SLRs.

I hope this helps you make your choice Lisa.

[donnnnnny]

maybe the 30d is the way to go for me still not sure

[rxpharm]

Donnnny, would suggest that you go to a camera or electronic shop and try the cameras out to see how they "handle". Digital SLRs have their controls set up differently than the old film cameras. You may find one model or company has their setup easier to use than another. If they allow it, bring along a memory card and ask if you can use it on the camera so you can see what the photos look like on your computer at home.

Your Canon A1 was one of the top of the line film SLRs Canon made - too bad it was stolen! If you happen to have any old lenses from that, they would not work with the new Canon dSLRs.

I would say don't rush this decision, find out what works right for you - one advantage is that the prices will drop over time as well.

The Nikon D300 is the newest and most advanced Nikon. It has many features that appeal to the "pro" photographer - one reason why it costs a lot more than the Canon. Also, when you are looking around check out the Sony and Pentax dSLRs too, you may be pleasantly surprised.

[liisawinkler]

i saw the G7 yesterday and me and my friend here in SIngapore discussed about how i need external flashes to get the most out of a dark setting and i am attracted to it for the simple fact that for a prosumer cam it already has a thingy for attaching external flash to it!

[donnnnnny]

gentlemen ive decided to buy the nikon d80 with 18-55 and70-300 lense kit for 1600 aus dollars. i ve chosen it on cost , as the canon d40 is retailing around$2700 with only one lense.
cheers donnnnny
the d200 nikon was way too expensive at 3500 for body only,.

[googoo335]

Just to mix things up...

The digital camera have to be usable and the lens must be good. The good lenses are expensive. For the so called pro work I cut the costs using a digital camera body (Canon 400D at the moment and for sale in next week) and 2nd hand old lenses (Nikon) with adapters =no auto focus - no automatics at all - and surely not suitable for fast actions. And I am not a professional

The cheapest way to make technically a good pic is to use whatever camera in a good lightning and use some black cardboard or whatever to bloc a light coming straight to the lens.

The most difficult thing is:
a. to operate the thing with so many small buttons
b. to find the object and the right moment
c. to be interested in this subject

You can answer the above

All the best!

[Snick]

I disagree that good lenses have to be expensive. There are excellent lenses in the $100-300 range
From Canon, Sigma, etc...

Higher priced lenses typically offer two features
1) Anti-Shake ( Sony has anti-shake in the BODY, so this does not apply )
2) They have a wider range of F-stops, an expensive lens may start with an F-stop around 2, a $200 lens f-stop 5.6
If this doesn't mean anything to you, then don't worry about it...you don't need the professional lens.

In normal conditions a cheap lens and an expensive lens will both work out fine; in extreme conditions (sports photography, bad lighting, extreme distance....) you would need an expensive lens.

Buying a lens without autofocus is kinda nuts....why ? 99% of the time the camera autofocus is perfect and better then anything that can be done manually. Only is the most complicated of shots (ex. focusing on something in deep shadow, while foreground is light) would someone need to use manually focus.

If you have a Canon 400D, do yourself a favor and buy the Sigma 18-50mm DC Lens. Its cheap and very versatile

[donnnnnny]

agree with you snick i had sigma lenses before with my canon a1, and they were excellent. As for anti shake, surely by using a trypod you can illiminate this problem from the longer type telephoto lenses, thats the way i was taught, i seem to remember anything over 200 mil was considered to long to use with hand s only and a tripod and cable release was required to steady the photo,
cheeers the donnnnnny

[donnnnnny]

I have just taken delivery of my new nikon.D80. funny old world . guess where it was made????yep you got it in one the land of smiles. i was actually a bit dissapointed,that nikon no longer manufacture in japan, both the lenses are nikor and they too were made in thailand.
donnnnnny