Rarest wood
Member
Ime looking for a camera bundle as my box brownie just doesnt cut the mustard anymore I have around $500 all in to spend any sugestions and advise
what should $500 get me suggestions please
- Thread starter Rarest wood
- Start date
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
Ime looking for a camera bundle as my box brownie just doesnt cut the mustard anymore I have around $500 all in to spend any sugestions and advise
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
talbot
Member
There are plenty of good deals avaialable in the UK at present from jessops, dixons, comet etc.
I would recommend a digital SLR, much more versatile, and really any of the top brands are worth considering:- Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Sony etc.
You'll get a ton of replies here I think giving you specific models but my advice is to go to Jessops and have a play around with some as size and feel are so important.
Consider what its going to be used for and what key features you think you need/want then you'll probably end up with a short list of a 2 or 3 to revisit.
A good site for reviews and recommendations: http://www.dpreview.com/
Good luck with your hunt.
regards, Bill
I would recommend a digital SLR, much more versatile, and really any of the top brands are worth considering:- Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Sony etc.
You'll get a ton of replies here I think giving you specific models but my advice is to go to Jessops and have a play around with some as size and feel are so important.
Consider what its going to be used for and what key features you think you need/want then you'll probably end up with a short list of a 2 or 3 to revisit.
A good site for reviews and recommendations: http://www.dpreview.com/
Good luck with your hunt.
regards, Bill
gerryr
Member
Why? That is a really poor recommendation, especially given the budget stated by the OP. $500 won't buy squat in the DSLR realm, but it will buy a good P&S, solid tripod, lights and tent and still have a bit left over. A DSLR is a good idea ONLY if someone has an interest in photography outside taking photos of pens. I have a DSLR, a couple of film bodies, several lenses and other assorted stuff, but probably 90% of the photos I take are not of pens. Frankly, photographing pens gets very boring very quickly.
To the OP, read this article, http://content.penturners.org/articles/2008/pen_photography.pdf . There are some specific cameras mentioned as well as what features you should have in order to do the job correctly.
A Nikon D40 would be my first choice, followed by a Canon Rebel XS. Both should be available with a nice lens for under $500 (US). Be careful shopping the gray market! You want to make sure you get the full manufacturer's warranty. Buy from a reputable source.
Neal Addy
Member
I agree with gerryr. I'm certainly not going to knock DSLRs (I own one) but they're probably overkill for product shots unless you have money to burn. They are only needed if you plan to get into more serious photography and/or want, or need, detachable lenses, filters, or other attachments. The cost of those items can add up VERY quickly. Before you know it that $499 entry-level DSLR body can end up costing you thousands.
For product shots a decent point-and-shoot is just fine if used correctly. If you want more manual control there are quite a few DSLR-like cameras that will give you some serious features for half the cost of a true DSLR body.
A great site for researching cameras is Digital Photography Review. I highly recommend you start there.
For product shots a decent point-and-shoot is just fine if used correctly. If you want more manual control there are quite a few DSLR-like cameras that will give you some serious features for half the cost of a true DSLR body.
A great site for researching cameras is Digital Photography Review. I highly recommend you start there.
marcruby
Member
The problem with a DSLR (and I own a very fine one) is simply that one SLR lens is rarely designed to fit all. Canon makes a few really fine point and shoots with macro ability. I'd go with their top of the line if all you want to do is spend $500 and not keep spending ad infinitum. - And, while it's embarassing to admit, a 14.7 megapixel Canon Powershot G10 will way outperform a 6 megapixel Nikon D40.
Marc
Marc
Last edited:
gerryr
Member
It depends on how you define "outperform." The sensor in the Nikon is 8.6X the size of the sensor in the Canon, so the Canon will never outperform the Nikon when high ISO is needed. More pixels doesn't always mean better images.
marcruby
Member
I would expect more than a slogan if you are comparing cameras. I'm not sure where you're gwetting your size information, but Canon says i's a 1/1.7" Type CCD - Nikon says the D40 has a 15.6 x 24.7mm CCD sensor so it seems to me your statistic is slightly distorted. In any case it's the number of pixels taking the picture and the sophistication of the software turning that information into an image that determine accuracy. And that's what any camera is really for. 'Better images' is the responsibility of photographer.
I use a D90 (and a pair of N90's) and have also worked with the D40 and the Canon. I have to say that the Canon's capabilities really surprised me. It is a very good camera that can consistently come up with quality results. I wouldn't say the D40 disappointed me since it performs exactly the way I would expect an older generation consumer oriented camera to perform. The standard lens is a limited zoom with no macro capability. The low pixel resolution becomes a more obvious problem when a tack sharp lens like the 105 macro is used or when the photographer wants to do any significant maniputation in something like Photoshop.
The D40 is for people who want to get into the Nikon family of lenses knowing they will eventually upgrade the body. If the camera is just used as a point and shoot and the lens is never changed out then it's a bit expense for a camera with some obvious limitations out of the box. Eventually they will buy a D90 or a D300 and be very happy fiddling with the controls.
The Canon is intended for people who want to spend the money once, have a capable camera which is convenient and easy to use and get excellent pictures.
Marc
gerryr
Member
According to DPReview, the Canon G10 sensor is 7.6mm x 5.7mm or 43.32 square mm. The Nikon D40 sensor is 23.6mm x 15.8mm or 372.88 square mm. That is a factor of 8.607. The photosites on the D40 sensor are significantly larger than those on the G10 sensor, therefore low light performance of the D40 will be superior.
SuperDave
Member
... what was the original question?
marcruby
Member
I'm going to quote DPReview here:
"When we reviewed the G9 last year, we praised it for the styling, handling and build and for its excellent output at low ISO settings. The G10 builds on this by adding handling and control refinements, improving the LCD resolution, and, most importantly, adding a wider lens starting at 28mm (equiv.)."
I'll even concede the point, although I'm not sure how 1/1.7" gets gets to be 7.6 x 5.7 mm. But this is a theoretical issue for most photography. Think, if what you are saying is a serious issue, professionals wouldn't be switching to DX3's at 8K a crack. More pixels mean sharper pictures. The Canon's software does a decent job of filtering noise. I've used it in low light, it's OK. It's no D90, but it's a third the cost. Basically it works fine, except that it focuses a bit slowly. I'm not normally a low light photographer anyway. If I was I'd still have my Leica M4 with a Noctilux. I sold that camera for more than I paid for it. Amazing machine.
I think you think I don't like the D40. That's not the case. It's simply that the G10 is an excellent camera that offers a lot of versatility without the cost creep of a DSLR when you discover you need another lens. The D40 simply doesn't have the resolving power to stand up to significant manipulation, which is a serious issue for me. It also lacks an internal lens motor and it's plastic. That it happens to work better at iso 1600 is a moot point for most photography.
Marc
"When we reviewed the G9 last year, we praised it for the styling, handling and build and for its excellent output at low ISO settings. The G10 builds on this by adding handling and control refinements, improving the LCD resolution, and, most importantly, adding a wider lens starting at 28mm (equiv.)."
I'll even concede the point, although I'm not sure how 1/1.7" gets gets to be 7.6 x 5.7 mm. But this is a theoretical issue for most photography. Think, if what you are saying is a serious issue, professionals wouldn't be switching to DX3's at 8K a crack. More pixels mean sharper pictures. The Canon's software does a decent job of filtering noise. I've used it in low light, it's OK. It's no D90, but it's a third the cost. Basically it works fine, except that it focuses a bit slowly. I'm not normally a low light photographer anyway. If I was I'd still have my Leica M4 with a Noctilux. I sold that camera for more than I paid for it. Amazing machine.
I think you think I don't like the D40. That's not the case. It's simply that the G10 is an excellent camera that offers a lot of versatility without the cost creep of a DSLR when you discover you need another lens. The D40 simply doesn't have the resolving power to stand up to significant manipulation, which is a serious issue for me. It also lacks an internal lens motor and it's plastic. That it happens to work better at iso 1600 is a moot point for most photography.
Marc
Last edited:
Dario
Member
From dpreview
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...debyside&cameras=canon_g10,nikon_d40&show=all
..........................Canon G10....................................Nikon D40
Max resolution====4416 x 3312.................................3008 x 2000
Effective pixels===14.7 million....................................6.0 million
Sensor size======1/1.7 " (7.60 x 5.70 mm, 0.43 cm²)...23.7 x 15.5 mm (3.67 cm²)
Pixel density=====34 MP/cm²....................................1.6 MP/cm²
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...debyside&cameras=canon_g10,nikon_d40&show=all
..........................Canon G10....................................Nikon D40
Max resolution====4416 x 3312.................................3008 x 2000
Effective pixels===14.7 million....................................6.0 million
Sensor size======1/1.7 " (7.60 x 5.70 mm, 0.43 cm²)...23.7 x 15.5 mm (3.67 cm²)
Pixel density=====34 MP/cm²....................................1.6 MP/cm²