photography/camera question

[jonf]

I started to get into photography a bit last year...there's lots of cool nature-ish stuff to photograph out here. Anyway, I've got an old film SLR, which does the trick, but film is a pain in the ass, and i'd really like to have the flexibility of digital. I was just wondering if anybody has recommendations for a decent, relatively affordable digital SLR (if they exist).

[Wilster]

Check the best buy website , its really informative about digtal cameras , one brand which always stands out is Canon ,they have a new series of digital slr's out at the moment ,pretty good from what i've heard.

[Weazl]

Try Steve's Digicams site, google it as I forget the exact URL, its awesome for reviews. Cheers,

[jvincent]

If you want all the skinny on digital cameras from a professional photographer, check the following site out:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/

In addition to the reviews there is a LOT of good technical info.

[little brit]

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/ph...ews/index.html

This site is very useful I think

My husband has the new Canon Digital Rebel XTi, He gave my daughter his old XT. They both just love them. My daughter says she would prefer the 30D. It is considered one of the best out right now and is made of magnesium, or something like that. Much stronger. But her Dad gave her the other one just so he could have an excuse to get the newer one. You don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

[little brit]

Sorry that site seems to be a bit outdated at the moment. But on there is all the major sites that you can go to like Steve's Digicams and Image Resourse etc. Lots of links.

[big mac]

Jonf--I have been debating about switching from film for a year now and have decides to buy the Panasonic dmclz5. Its 289.00 at most places and epinions on the net have given it a pretty good rec. Apparently in full auto mode idiots like me cant go wrong---remember my vcr is still flashing 12:00

[Pinshark]

www.dpreview.com has some good reviews.

[dreaded_snowman]

Probably the biggest issue you'll have going for an affordable camera that'll do nature pics is that almost all point and shoot types bottom out at 35mm equivalent or greater. I can be really hard to capture a stunning vista without a 28mm focal length.... An older camera (but a goodie) that handled this was the olympus 5060...

Also, if you're into flowers and mushrooms and other smaller subjects, a good macro capability can be tough - most don't have any macro flash capabilities (meaning a real macro flash attachment).

A few things to think about picking up your digital....
- try to get one with the tripod mount as close to the center of the lens as you can; then at least you can do panoramic shots and stitch them together. It's a real pain if the mount is off center - you have to have some kind of jig made to do it right... you can get some awesome stitch software - I've made some great pics of 360 degree pans of golf holes...
- get one with an AF (auto focus) assist light - red light that shines in low light to help the camera focus. I've played with many lower end cameras, and low light shots tend to come out blurry, even with flash, unless there's enough light to let it focus (and with those little lenses, that's often more light than you can get without annoying your subjects)
- Don't get too caught up in how many megapixels the various cameras are... It's a camera, it's all about optics - the actual lenses. That's where the picture quality lies. I've seen smaller cameras where the company has taken a really solid camera from the year before and jumped up the sensor by 2MP and completely blew their picture quality in the process, all for marketing hype. My old 2MP camera is much, much better than my much newer 6MP point and shoot. But then again, it's lens is about 20x larger...

[jonf]

Thanks for all the info...I think its going to have to wait for a bit after looking at the prices. In the battle for funds, golf wins out over photography.