Digital cameras, need input...

stuwee · Apr 3, 2015

Hey all, I have $300 in ebay bucks from my recent purchases and I can throw another $300 to buy a nice new rig, markWcomer, I respect your opinion greatly, I didn't PM you because I wanted as much input as I can get, my ocd and spreadsheet mania sets in, also, I'm not rich and need to spend wisely!!

My background: Schooled in classic B&W and color 35mm in high school, community college and 'The School of Visual Arts' in NYC. Kodak Tri-X (400) also pushed to (1800), Pan-X (25) B&W printing and enlarging work. Lee/Jani and Nando/Geri have copies of my work of the World Trade Towers (I had those sent out for printing on acid free paper). Also Kodachrome 64 and 25 slide film, Extar 25 print, various Fuji and some fun emulsions my professor made in his lab in NYC. I taught myself how light reacts to film and paper so digital is new to me still I'm not afraid of it.

I've used Canon gear since high school, I got my Grandfathers Contax IIIa rangefinder with a Zeiss lens he bought in Europe in the 1950's so I know a great lens is what it's all about, I can't afford a Leica so...

I'd like a big 50mm 1.4 lens to start with a SLR body, then add more lenses. My eyesight has weakened and I have bi-focal glasses.

Thanks!!

R1200S · Apr 3, 2015

My background is much like yours. Not quite as much photography but tons of equipment thru my hands and lots of lab work. Used to be in the used camera business (Shutterbug ads and all), that's how I got my Leica gear. You didn't mention if you're staying with film or going digital. Either way, it's difficult to go wrong with Nikon or Canon SLRs. With autofocus you don't need to worry about the bifocals too much, especially if you shop wisely and get a camera that accepts diopters. They're cheap and will work no matter which lens you're using.

As for the lens, that 50/1.4 would be more important if you're shooting film than with digital. Digital just seems to gather more light than film does. If you're not shooting low light or action, that 1.4 lens will bite into your $600 more than a 1.8. Most of my Leica lenses are 2.8 and I never wished for anything bigger. Typically shooting for maximum depth of field anyway.

I'd definitely be buying a used lens and most likely a used SLR body also. Digital cameras evolve almost as fast cell phones now days and their prices reflect that. You should be able to get quite a bit of camera w/o taking that big depreciation hit. Same applies to film cameras but as much as I miss shooting chrome, I doubt I'll ever load another roll. As great as that Contax gear is, (especially the lenses!!) I don't see much future for it.

One other thing to keep in mind is that most of the digital gear you'll be looking at will be good for video also. Keep an eye out for the maximum storage card it will accept and I'd steer clear of any storage formats other than SD cards.

Check out DPREVIEWS.COM for reviews on older equipment. I believe that's an Amazon site and it was down for work a few minutes ago.

MarkWComer · Apr 3, 2015

Most DSLRs come with a lens, a zoom at that, so I take it that you're looking for a body only and a separate lens. Be aware that the DX format of DSLRs mean that the image sensor isn't 24 x 35mm- it's smaller- so the "normal" focal length of the lens is closer to 35mm than 50mm. There are a few DSLRs that do have a 24 x 36mm sensor, though- so find out how big the sensor is before investing in lenses to make sure you get what you're expecting.

Whether you'll get a price break on a fixed focal length lens over the supplied zoom is unknown to me.

Lazarus Short · Apr 3, 2015

My experience is somewhat limited. I used Olympus OM cameras and lenses for many years, and some years ago, loaned all my gear to a niece, who ruined everything. Well, time to go digital. I chose a Sony for one reason: Zeiss lenses. I never regretted it. Some time ago, I took a look at the updated model of what I bought, and was astonished at what it could do, and for 500 bucks.

On the other hand, my best friend gave me an Olympus digital camera which was much more modest in the megapixels than the Sony. It became so useful, because it produced digital files easy to post on the www, that I came to use it for most everything. All the photos I have posted on Phoenix were taken with it, and I can't fault it except for its over-dependence on flash mode.

Digital photography has been a great equalizer, making the component behind the camera the critical element (I refer to talent).

MarkWComer · Apr 3, 2015

Yes- I loved my Olympus OM2 so much that I bought an OM1 body later on. NICE! And they fit in the hand so well!

About pixel count: That's what the salesmen sell the most. It seems that the only concern is the number of pixels and nothing else. My Nikon D80 is only 6Mp, and it's plenty! Unless you're printing 36" posters, you don't need 20Mp. I'm not saying that lots of pixels is overkill by any means, but on the practical side, the photos I post here are reduced in size by 35%- web posting doesn't need a whole lot of pixels, neither do personal photos that will be viewed on a screen. Printing an 8 x 10 on your inkjet printer is good even with a 2Mp image!

BlazeES · Apr 3, 2015

Nikon for the win Stumeister. D90! You can still find places that sell the body new for around $600 and less. And a 50 mm won't set you back much more.
If you can find someone that has a used/excellent condition one, you can save lots more and will most likely get extras.
I swear by this camera. Nikon has released several model lines since the D90 days but a lot of what has been updated in newer models is increased pixel density and a lot
of high-tech enhancements I personally don't see the need for. I've had my D90 since 2009/2010 and it's been solid. Built like a tank. Takes beautiful pictures and shoots
in JPEG + Raw mode super fast. JPEG + Raw is the only way to go with a DSLR.

jaetee · Apr 3, 2015

BlazeES said:

I too have the 12MP Nikon D90 and feel VERY MUCH the same way Tony does.... Paired with the 18-105mm zoom, that is a very powerful and cost effective package.

50mm 1.8 can be had for around $100, but I would go for the more useful 35mm f1.8 dx (under $200).

Cool thing about the D90 is that it has a built-in auto focus motor, so if you "REALLY" get back into photography, you can use some of the older Nikon AF lenses that don't have AF motors built into them. The smaller 3x00 and 5x00 series Nikon DSLR's do not have that motor.

Great camera... and the 18-105mm is a considerably sharp optic as well...

laatsch55 · Apr 3, 2015

I got this Minolta from a guy that used to work for us....is it worth anything??

NavLinear · Apr 4, 2015

laatsch55 said:

I think an archaeologist might be interested.

laatsch55 · Apr 4, 2015

True...

BlazeES · Apr 4, 2015

NavLinear said:

Definitely the Smithsonian ! :laughing8:

R1200S · Apr 4, 2015

That Minolta SRT101 helped revolutionize 35mm photography. The lenses might actually have a little value in them. The body..... not so much. Olympus OM2 was my first SLR also! Great cameras!!
Others bring up great points. The best camera for you is the one you use the most. Regardless of features and specs! I remember back in the 1980's Canon came out with a tracking system that sensed your eye movements and would set the auto-focus based on what you were looking at. It worked..... sorta. Basically Canon built the feature because they could. No one used it. Don't let all the features completely influence your decision.

orange · Apr 4, 2015

laatsch55 said:

It's worth the time to learn it, if you have the film. I had a Mamiya 1000 DTL from 1966, which is a landmark consumer camera and the Sekor optics I had were really nice. It looks like they gave you a pretty complete package.

This is another 1966 camera, still a very nice one indeed. See the review.

http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Minolta_SR-T_101

PS Canon's feature may not have been USED MUCH but the industry was developing a lot of innovations that you could take for granted now and are also essential to digital imaging and video as well as SURVEILANCE AND RECOGNITION SYSTEMS.

MarkWComer · Apr 4, 2015

laatsch55 said:

R1200S said:

Nostalgia! That was my first 35SLR. My dad had one of those 13 week union vacations one summer and decided to operate an ice cream truck. I worked all summer handing ice pops to rugrats to pay for that camera.

Although completely manual it was quick to operate. Split prism focusing spot and match needle metering. It was a great camera- loved it! My brother hocked it to buy dope, never saw it again...

orange · Apr 4, 2015

It has more features than the Mamiya but they too have a nice viewfinder and metering that allows you to adjust without moving from the camera.

The Sixties were a great time to be a photographer, with all the advances coming to the 35mm user.

MarkWComer · Apr 4, 2015

orange said:

The Mamiya DTL1000 was my second choice, the DTL500 was not considered because of the lower top shutter speed. Minolta won out because of the metering was easier to use.

Master Tasuke · Apr 4, 2015

my NIKON D5000 DSLR setup was a package deal from COSTCO for just over a grand, with protection plans and whatnot, tripod and accessories $200/300 more.
i got it all at once in 2009, used the daylights out of it and it hasn't let me down yet. it is, exclusively, what i have taken all my photos with since.
you can take that as a hearty recommendation towards NIKON SLRs in general;

seems an excellent deal; http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-D5000...628?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item25a35e5644

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro....H0.XNIKON+5000.TRS0&_nkw=NIKON+5000&_sacat=0

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5000.htm

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5000

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/camerareview/nikon-d5000-review/

stuwee · Apr 7, 2015

Hi all!! Many, many thanks for the input, it's a lot to go over. I was going to say I should just get a point and shoot, then remembering my roots, I'm looking at a used Nikon D something...depends on a few things I haven't worked out that will be best for me. Thanks again buddies!!

MarkWComer · Apr 7, 2015

stuwee said:

Based on the things you've said, you're going to be unhappy with a point-'n'-shoot... Hold out for something nice.

Web Police · Apr 7, 2015

Craig, I'd suggest you get a long zoom camera like a Canon SX50HS or SX60HS. While it doesn't have the large sensor like a DSLR, it does give you all the lens you will ever need in one lens. My SX50 lens can go from Equivalent 24mm to 1200mm. The smaller sensor means less low light capacity, possibly shooting speed and of course you sacrifice some image quality for massive enlargements but for the majority of photographers it will produce wonderful images. It has everything and the kitchen sink should you want to use all the bells and whistles and it can shoot in jpg as well as raw images. Best of all you can get the SX60 for less then $400 or the SX50 for around $250.

I have several brands of Long zoom cameras and I am continually amazed at the image quality of all of them.

Digital cameras, need input...

Flying the Vista Cruiser up there... RIP

Journeyman

Veteran and General Yakker

Veteran and General Yakker

Veteran and General Yakker

Veteran and General Yakker

Journeyman

Administrator,

Attachments

Veteran and General Yakker

Administrator,

Veteran and General Yakker

Journeyman

Veteran and General Yakker

Veteran and General Yakker

Veteran and General Yakker

Veteran and General Yakker

Journeyman

Flying the Vista Cruiser up there... RIP

Veteran and General Yakker

Administrator