canon digital camera vs sony image
chasvanblo
The Fuji-Digital camera I bought from a travelling-merchant, years ago has finally given out. - It no longer powers-up. :-( I used it to take a few Final pic's of my nephew's newly-arrived son a few days ago, so I do have some .jpeg's in it that I really want to take out.
I am shopping to replace this digital camera with one with even more and better features - for a reasonable price.
Beginning my browsing at Wally World, I find a few models of cameras to consider.
How VERSATILE is the standard Aim-and-shoot-type of Digital camera vs. the model that comes with interchangeable lenses (like it's earlier version of the 35mm film camera)?
The Models and prices range from a CANON @$79.00
to a FUJIFILM @$119.00
to a SONY @$119.00
to a NIKON@$149.00
I am not a PROFESSIONAL Photographer by any means. - I want an easy-to-operate unit that will allow me to edit my .jpegs on-the-spot, easily upload to my desktop terminal to post to my FB Wall and attach to misc. E-mails and will allow me to take an occasional live video with sound-recording.
What can be my shopping-options?
I live on a VERY-TIGHT BUDGET, so price is very important.
Placing a PRICE-LIMIT on my shopping, I will go as high as $150 for a GOOD QUALITY Digital camera with more features (I hope to be able to Edit my images inside this camera as well as setting the other options %Aperature, F-stop, Automatic-Focus, Repeating shots, etc.)
I am REALLY GOING AFTER THIS NEW CAMERA, planning to buy it soon.
Comparing the TYPES of Digital cameras (Fixed-focus vs. Interchangeable-lenses) which type of digital camera offers a better deal, is more versatile and is more durable (I hope to travel with this camera)?
Answer
The Canon A810 is an easy to use budget compact camera. Works amazing, easy to use. It takes high quality HD videos, focuses well, not painfully slow. If don't expect manual features or anything professional get it
The Canon A810 is an easy to use budget compact camera. Works amazing, easy to use. It takes high quality HD videos, focuses well, not painfully slow. If don't expect manual features or anything professional get it
What type of camera would you suggest for me?
x_moopy_x
Right now, I'm looking at Nikon and Canon SLR Digital camera's [like the Canon Rebel xti, for example]. I just want some outside opinions on the type of camera I should purchase.
I previously had a Minolta Maxxum5, but I want to "upgrade" to a digital.
I love to take photographs of landscape and scenery [my family travels to the Smokey Mountains in Tennessee very often], including old farm buildings, mountains, waterfalls, etc. I also take many pictures at live music shows, where the lighting can be very poor and there's a lot of action. Basically, i'm looking for an all around great camera.
Now, I'm not the richest person in the world either. I'm looking for a camera [body only] costing $600 or less.
If you could also guide me in the right direction as far as camera lenses, that would be great.
thanks a bunch.
Answer
If you have a couple of Minolta A-type mount lenses, you should look at the Sony Alpha-100 (A100) digital SLR, as this is the type of lens that the camera takes. The body alone is available at B&H Photo for $599. I'm not a HUGE fan of this camera, but it is one of the top 10 digital SLR's in the consumer market right now.
If you want to get away from your Minolta lenses or want to avoid Sony in the first place, the Nikon D40 and Canon Rebel XT are in your price range. They are the number 2 and 3 selling consumer SLR's right now. http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4341/top-selling-digital-slrs-for-may.html I have abias towards the Nikon way of doing things and I usualyl recommend the D40, but you mentioned the Rebel XTi, so I will mention the XT as it is in your price range.
Since you have some experience, you ought to go to a camera shop and play with both the D40 and the XT and see what you think. The way they feel in your hands will be the deciding factor. I have a stock comparison that I will include here, though.......
~~~~~~~~~~
Nikon D40 vs. Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT)
This isn't exactly what you asked for, but perhaps you will find it helpful in making your decision. I have never used a Canon EOS 350D, so I can't actually compare the cameras, but I favor the D40 because it has a spotmeter and the 350D doesn't. Although the D40 seems small, it is practically the exact same size as the 350D.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Cnikon_d40&show=all
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page17.asp
tells us that the Canon 350D meter calibration is off by about 1/3 of a stop. This would not really present any problems, except that it suggests "something" to me about the quality, since the Nikon and Pentax are dead on.
Scroll on down the page for image comparisons. The D40 is clearly sharper and shows less noise at all ISO settings.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page18.asp shows us that both handle shadows equally, but the D40 clips the highlights by about 1/3 of a stop.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page21.asp shows a side-by-side of studio images. The 8 MP of the Canon 350D at least put the camera on equal footing with the Nikon D40 for image quality, but you have to take note that the Rebel XT is shot at ISO 100 and the Nikon is shot at it lowest setting of ISO 200. I think the Canon images may look a little better, but we know from the prior page that under equal lighting levels, the Canon will start to break up before the Nikon.
The reviewer says, "While it is possible to pick areas of the image which lend some credence to the EOS 350D's 34% pixel count advantage it's clear that the average observer would not notice these differences and that you would need a very large output size for any of them to become visible."
Check this out...
http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos350d_samples1/originals/img_4068-raw-dpp.jpg is taken by the Canon 350D with a 17 mm focal length at f/6.3, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using RAW.
http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/nikond40_samples/originals/dsc_1206.jpg is taken with the Nikon D40 with an 18 mm focal length at f/4.5, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using jpeg.
The point of focus for the Canon photo is a bit deeper than it is for the Nikon, but even having 8MP and using RAW and a smaller aperture, I think the Canon image breaks up a lot more than the Nikon. You can barely make out the features on the face of the gentleman in the background. Is this the camera or the superiority of the Nikon 17-55 lens, which so many of us here praise???
Okay, I've made my stance clear. I like the Nikon D40 better than the Canon EOS 350D, so here's my general review of the D40.
The Nikon D40 is a great little camera, very easy to use and quite reasonably priced. It has a few "consumer friendly" totally automatic modes that make it very easy to use, but still offers total photographic control when you are ready to take charge. It will get you in the Nikon family which is a great place to be. If you buy accessories and lenses, you will be able to use everything on any Nikon that you might upgrade to later on.
Check out Nikon's "Picturetown" promotion, where they handed out 200 D40's in Georgetown, SC. http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown/
Here are a few reviews, in case you have not read them yet. Be sure to note that they are several pages long and some of the reviews also have some sample images that you can look at.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/nikon_d40.html
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3756/camera-test-nikon-d40.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/d40-recommendations.htm
I hate to see people slam the camera because it can't autofocus with older Nikon lenses. It is true that there is a "slight problem" with older Nikon lenses not autofocusing on the D40, but if you do not own a bag full of older lenses, it is not going to be a problem. It is barely a problem anyhow. If you check www.nikonusa.com for "AF-S" lenses, which are ALL 100% compatible with the D40, you will find 23 lenses, including 7 "VR" (vibration Reduction) lenses and one true macro lens with "VR". There are another 25-plus lenses in the current catalog that provide all functions except autofocus as well as many (possibly dozens) "out of print" lenses that will work just as well. In addition, although these lens will not autofocus, most of them will still give focus confirmation. From the D40 manual: "If the lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 of faster, the viewfinder focus indicator can be used to confirm whether the portion of the subject in the selected focus area is in focus. After positioning the subject in the active focus area, press the shutter release button halfway and rotate the lens focusing ring until the in-focus indicator is displayed." (See http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/nikonafs.txt for a list of AF-S lenses.)
The D40 only has 3 autofocus zones arranged horizontally at the center, 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock positions. This might be considered a limitation, but realistically, most people will find this perfectly adequate, especially if you are moving up from a point and shoot with only a center zone.
You can get the D40 with the 18-55 kit lens at B&H Photo available through Yahoo! Shopping or at 1-800-622-4987) for $525 (June 2007). Add a Lexar Platinum (60X speed) card for $25 or 2 GB for $35. Or - get the D40 with 18-135 lens and 1 GB Lexar card for $750. They also have used D40's from $475.
And yet... clearly these are both very good cameras. What it all comes down to is which one YOU feel better about. Go to a camera shop and pick them up and see.
~~~~~~~~~~
If you have a couple of Minolta A-type mount lenses, you should look at the Sony Alpha-100 (A100) digital SLR, as this is the type of lens that the camera takes. The body alone is available at B&H Photo for $599. I'm not a HUGE fan of this camera, but it is one of the top 10 digital SLR's in the consumer market right now.
If you want to get away from your Minolta lenses or want to avoid Sony in the first place, the Nikon D40 and Canon Rebel XT are in your price range. They are the number 2 and 3 selling consumer SLR's right now. http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4341/top-selling-digital-slrs-for-may.html I have abias towards the Nikon way of doing things and I usualyl recommend the D40, but you mentioned the Rebel XTi, so I will mention the XT as it is in your price range.
Since you have some experience, you ought to go to a camera shop and play with both the D40 and the XT and see what you think. The way they feel in your hands will be the deciding factor. I have a stock comparison that I will include here, though.......
~~~~~~~~~~
Nikon D40 vs. Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT)
This isn't exactly what you asked for, but perhaps you will find it helpful in making your decision. I have never used a Canon EOS 350D, so I can't actually compare the cameras, but I favor the D40 because it has a spotmeter and the 350D doesn't. Although the D40 seems small, it is practically the exact same size as the 350D.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Cnikon_d40&show=all
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page17.asp
tells us that the Canon 350D meter calibration is off by about 1/3 of a stop. This would not really present any problems, except that it suggests "something" to me about the quality, since the Nikon and Pentax are dead on.
Scroll on down the page for image comparisons. The D40 is clearly sharper and shows less noise at all ISO settings.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page18.asp shows us that both handle shadows equally, but the D40 clips the highlights by about 1/3 of a stop.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page21.asp shows a side-by-side of studio images. The 8 MP of the Canon 350D at least put the camera on equal footing with the Nikon D40 for image quality, but you have to take note that the Rebel XT is shot at ISO 100 and the Nikon is shot at it lowest setting of ISO 200. I think the Canon images may look a little better, but we know from the prior page that under equal lighting levels, the Canon will start to break up before the Nikon.
The reviewer says, "While it is possible to pick areas of the image which lend some credence to the EOS 350D's 34% pixel count advantage it's clear that the average observer would not notice these differences and that you would need a very large output size for any of them to become visible."
Check this out...
http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos350d_samples1/originals/img_4068-raw-dpp.jpg is taken by the Canon 350D with a 17 mm focal length at f/6.3, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using RAW.
http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/nikond40_samples/originals/dsc_1206.jpg is taken with the Nikon D40 with an 18 mm focal length at f/4.5, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using jpeg.
The point of focus for the Canon photo is a bit deeper than it is for the Nikon, but even having 8MP and using RAW and a smaller aperture, I think the Canon image breaks up a lot more than the Nikon. You can barely make out the features on the face of the gentleman in the background. Is this the camera or the superiority of the Nikon 17-55 lens, which so many of us here praise???
Okay, I've made my stance clear. I like the Nikon D40 better than the Canon EOS 350D, so here's my general review of the D40.
The Nikon D40 is a great little camera, very easy to use and quite reasonably priced. It has a few "consumer friendly" totally automatic modes that make it very easy to use, but still offers total photographic control when you are ready to take charge. It will get you in the Nikon family which is a great place to be. If you buy accessories and lenses, you will be able to use everything on any Nikon that you might upgrade to later on.
Check out Nikon's "Picturetown" promotion, where they handed out 200 D40's in Georgetown, SC. http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown/
Here are a few reviews, in case you have not read them yet. Be sure to note that they are several pages long and some of the reviews also have some sample images that you can look at.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/nikon_d40.html
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3756/camera-test-nikon-d40.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/d40-recommendations.htm
I hate to see people slam the camera because it can't autofocus with older Nikon lenses. It is true that there is a "slight problem" with older Nikon lenses not autofocusing on the D40, but if you do not own a bag full of older lenses, it is not going to be a problem. It is barely a problem anyhow. If you check www.nikonusa.com for "AF-S" lenses, which are ALL 100% compatible with the D40, you will find 23 lenses, including 7 "VR" (vibration Reduction) lenses and one true macro lens with "VR". There are another 25-plus lenses in the current catalog that provide all functions except autofocus as well as many (possibly dozens) "out of print" lenses that will work just as well. In addition, although these lens will not autofocus, most of them will still give focus confirmation. From the D40 manual: "If the lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 of faster, the viewfinder focus indicator can be used to confirm whether the portion of the subject in the selected focus area is in focus. After positioning the subject in the active focus area, press the shutter release button halfway and rotate the lens focusing ring until the in-focus indicator is displayed." (See http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/nikonafs.txt for a list of AF-S lenses.)
The D40 only has 3 autofocus zones arranged horizontally at the center, 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock positions. This might be considered a limitation, but realistically, most people will find this perfectly adequate, especially if you are moving up from a point and shoot with only a center zone.
You can get the D40 with the 18-55 kit lens at B&H Photo available through Yahoo! Shopping or at 1-800-622-4987) for $525 (June 2007). Add a Lexar Platinum (60X speed) card for $25 or 2 GB for $35. Or - get the D40 with 18-135 lens and 1 GB Lexar card for $750. They also have used D40's from $475.
And yet... clearly these are both very good cameras. What it all comes down to is which one YOU feel better about. Go to a camera shop and pick them up and see.
~~~~~~~~~~
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
