Buying a new photography camera...

[xblack_x_rosesx]

I'm buying a new photography camera, and I was just wondering what people had to say about experience with their own and such.

I've been working with Canon for a while now, so I'm pretty comfortable there, but I wouldn't mind getting a Nikon either.
Canon or Nikon are my pick.

At the moment, I'm not even sure what I want though. My price range is around $1500, so yes.

I'm really looking for quality of the photograph, not how "pretty" the camera is, so size doesn't matter (lol).
I'm pretty sure I'd like to have liveview, and I'm not sure if any Nikon's come with the feature.
I'm still new to photography, so any info on photography in general (ISO, etc..) would be nice to =]

Just input I guess ^^

Cheers!
Brittany

[Etoh*the*Greato]

I use a Pentax K100D and the output is fantastic. If you used a Canon DSLR, though, I'd say just get another one. That way you won't have to buy all your lenses all over again.

[xblack_x_rosesx]

That way you won't have to buy all your lenses all over again.

--

Precisely why I think I'm sticking with Canon =P

[Roy Mustang]

If you are going to stay with Canon, I would go with the Canon EOS 40D.

Right now, you can get for $900 to $1,000 for the body.


Canon EOS 40D for $ 959.95 at B&H photo


[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang[/color][/font]

[xblack_x_rosesx]

Canon EOS 40D.

--

Why this opposed to a Rebel? (just fishing, I have no preference atm)

[Roy Mustang]

Canon EOS 40D.

--

Why this opposed to a Rebel? (just fishing, I have no preference atm)

The 40D has more frames per second. 40D has 6.5 frames per second and the Rebel is 3.0 frames per second. Both have live view and 10.1 mega pixels, but I never use it and the 40D has a 3.0 LCD screen and the Rebel has a 2.5 LCD screen.

I have always like how the body is built on the 20D and 40D and to me the body on the Rebel look cheap.

I'm going to post in a min some more info as going with a Canon or Nikon.


[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang[/color][/font]

[Warrior4Christ]

I've got my eye on a Nikon D60...

Time is running out to talk me out of it!

[PrincessZelda]

I'm going to say a Canon, especially if you already have lenses that fit a Canon. And Canons are pretty nice. I don't really know what else to suggest to you, though, because I haven't really done much digital photography, so most of the stuff I know is about film and film cameras. Though, in some ways, they're pretty similar. Buuuut, yeah.

[Roy Mustang]

Here is what I posted one time in my LJ about digital cameras.

When I got into the digital photography, it came down to Nikon and Canon. Really, both are good and there is no wrong one, but I pick the Canon band out, because at the time, Canon has the CMOS chip in their cameras and Nikon used the CCD chip and I like the CMOS chip better then the CCD chips really and just feel that the CCD chip is for digital point in shoot cameras.

When I got the 20D, I love it and just got the 40D before I went on the trip this Oct, I really like it even more. I may end up trading or selling my 20D off and get another 40D.

But I can say a few things that may change my mind as what camera I may get down the road. When Nikon came out with the D3, D300 and now the two new D90 and the D700, they all use the CMOS chip. The D700 is like the D3, but a smaller body, but it has the full frame sensor in just like the D3, which is Nikon's pro model digital camera. The D700 is about $1,000 cheaper then the D3. The D700 has the self-cleaning sensor just like Nikon D3 and the Canon 40D, 5D and the EOS 1D Mark III cameras have.

One thing that I like about it is, it can shot 5 frames per second and it has a body that is built to with stand dust and some water. The camera just came out this summer so the price is pretty high at high in range of $2,000.

So its not something that I wouldn't go and rush out and buy now. But I'm thinking within a few years that a price will drop and then maybe I try it out.

At the time, I was waiting for Canon new 5D Mark II and after I got the 40D, I'm glad that I got it. The only good thing about the Canon 5D Mark II is newer sensor on it and the sensor is full frame, which the 5D model before it as as well. But that is it and its only 3 frames per frames per second and my 40D shoots 5.5 frames per second. I will not get a camera that shoots less then 5 frames per second.

Also the down side to the new Canon 5D Mark II is that it doesn't have all metal body that D700 has and no weather cover put on the camera like the D700 has.

So, as of right now. I will only keep my 40D and may get another one and maybe in a few years, get a D700 down the road.

Now there is something that alot of people don't know and should think about, if they can't really buy a Nikon camera. It maybe best to go with Sony and here is the reason why. Just about all of the Nikon digital cameras that had the CCD and CMOS sensor chip were made by Sony. Only the Nikon pro digital cameras and the D700 sensor wasn't made by Sony and I think are made by Nikon and I think Nikon wants to make their sensors now just like Canon makes theirs.


[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang [/color][/font]

[Warrior4Christ]

I think pretty much all of those cameras mentioned in the previous post (except perhaps the Canon EOS 20D) are above my price range. XD

[Roy Mustang]

I think pretty much all of those cameras mentioned in the previous post (except perhaps the Canon EOS 20D) are above my price range. XD

The bad thing is, you can't find the Canon EOS 20D as new now. If you were to get one, you have to buy it used.

The 40D price has drop and I got mine around $900.


Also, its just what you want to do with it anyway. The reason why I went with the Canon was people told me that if you do night time work, the CMOS chip works better at low light then the CCD chip.

I have a friend that has an older Nikon one and I really can't tell you if its true or not about the CMOS vs CCD chip deal or not.

I would go with want you want and know what your going to use it for. For what I work with, I had to go with a high model.

Now that Nikon has switch over to the CMOS chip now and it doesn't matter that much anyway for me. But the only way that I would get one as a Nikon is to have the D700.

But for now, I'm happy with the Canon 40D.

[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang [/color][/font]

[Jingo Jaden]

If you want to experiment big time try the Casio EX-f1. Its only about 6,7 megapixels. It can take up to 1200 frames each second *super slo mo* at reduced quality. It can take very decent 300 fps films although those are best filmed outside with a natural light source. It can also film in SD or HD. Take pictures in SD or HD, it got alot of accessories an fun little helpers, fairly user friendly and it can also record sound to some extent.

It costs about a grand.

[Warrior4Christ]

My Nikon D60 did arrive today.. I'm quite impressed. It takes effort to take bad photos. XD

I'm still learning, so I may use this thread for further questions...