Robsa
newbie
Reged: 15/05/2008
Posts: 3
|
|
Hi everyone
I used to be a keen photographer when I was younger and am looking to take it up again. I am particularly interested in portrait photography. I was wondering whether you think it better to buy a recently released camera with a high megapixel sensor such as the Sony A300, or buy a more professional camera, such as a Nikon D2H, which is used?
I appreciate the fact that a lot has to do with what size I plan to print images out at - I estimate you could probably get a good quality print from 4 megapixels at A4/250ppi? That's seems plenty big enough. Do you think I really need 10 megapixels?
Again, I understand it gives you room to 'play' ie crop the image and so forth. But if I am mainly portraiting people this is not so important.
Will I find a camera like the D2H has more features or a higher quality image than the Sony, or has technology moved on so much that the D2H is now not worth buying at all?
Any comments would be most appreciated.
Thanks!
regards,
Robsa
Edited by Robsa (15/05/2008 11:40)
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
It's a matter of whether you can live without the latest features and gadgets in the end... The Sony has built in image stabilisation, dust control, more pixels, live view, a big review screen etc - the D2 doesn't... By the sound of it you are coming from an earlier era so probably could easily live without the latest all singing whistles and bells.
My first DSLR (indeed my first digital camera!) was a Canon EOS D30 bought second hand. It was something of an impulse purchase as used DSLR's were extremely rare at the time and it was more a matter of grab it while it was available than a rationalised decision - I was essentially a Nikon manual camera user at the time. My second DSLR, this time a 20D, was also purchased used though this time I had been on the lookout for an upgrade. At the time the 30D (not to be confused with the earlier D30...) had only just been released and was well outside my budget so I got a lot of camera for a lot less than I might otherwise have had to spend. Since then the pace of 'improvement' has rocketed and prices have tumbled so the advantages of an older, slightly less advanced, model relative to price aren't quite as clear cut.
As to using an older camera? It's fair to say that the performance, overall, of more recent models is generally better than older cameras - particularly at the extremes. High ISO and faster frame rates spring to mind as examples but are not the be all and end all of things. Pro cameras for instance may well have faster and more accurate AF than a more recent but budget camera (you only get what you pay for and speed and accuracy costs).
I still regularly use my D30 and even at extreme ISO (a recent ISO1600 example here) but there's no doubt that the 20D is a bit better noise wise (image noise anyway, the mirror noise is way worse). I'll probably stop using the D30 when it gives up the ghost (it's worth very little these days) but until then it's likely to take many more pictures...
Guess I've waffled on a bit but maybe it's helped... 
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Robsa
newbie
Reged: 15/05/2008
Posts: 3
|
|
Thank you so much for replying, Nigel. I have a couple more questions if that's ok?
If, say, I got hold of a Nikon D1X for under a hundred quid that would be well worth it then, you think? Am I correct in thinking that it is a tough camera which can take a knock or two, being a pro camera and all?
Regarding bells and whistles and stuff, you were indeed correct in assuming I am from 'a different era' (I'm not an old man though! I'm only 37). My first camera was a Praktica SLR which was totally manual and had a screw mount lens system. It actually took fantastic pictures, and even after upgrading several times through the years to nice Pentaxes and Canons, I still managed to get results on the Praktica which were easily the equal of anything I managed on, say, my T90.
A friend just got a Nikon D200 the other day (mmmmm, drool) and as I was stroking and admiring it I said to him 'I suppose it has a built in light meter?' to which he looked at me blankly and replied 'No, I don't think so'. I think this shows how out of touch I am with digital cameras! Of course it must have a built in light meter.
Now days I suppose you don't really need to buy filters and stuff do you? Do people still always fit skylight filters? I have been using Photoshop for about 15 years now (good lord is it really that long?!) so know my way round it pretty well (I could not claim to be an expert though) and I guess I can do most stuff that filters provide using that.
well, sorry to waffle on a bit. Thanks again for replying
regards
Robsa
|
T Sargeant
Jessies' Finest *
Reged: 01/08/2004
Posts: 1847
Loc: Reading, Berkshire
|
|
Just a couple of notes.
2nd hand pro cameras, generally these *will* have been owned by pros and as such they're quite likely to have taken a bit of a hammering in their lives, don't let this put you off, but make sure you can see it in the flesh first.
Quote:
Now days I suppose you don't really need to buy filters and stuff do you? Do people still always fit skylight filters?
Huge can of worms this one! Just search for UV or skylight filters and you'll find some of the (heated!) discussions that have come up about this in the past. I do, others don't and there are arguments for both sides.
One filter that you can't really replicate in PS is a polariser, and if you ever do landscapes I'd still say they're a necessity.
Sorry about the short post, I'm sure someone else will give you more detailed information
--------------------
Tom
CRIPN
"When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail!"
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
If, say, I got hold of a Nikon D1X for under a hundred quid that would be well worth it then, you think?
I'd have one for that kind of price!!!
Quote:
Am I correct in thinking that it is a tough camera which can take a knock or two, being a pro camera and all?
Yes... Older pro cameras are likely to have taken a bit of a bashing but poor exterior cosmetics don't necessarily mean mechanical problems as pro kit is also more likely to have been subject to a regular maintenance schedule. If buying from a dealer you will most likely get some form of guarantee. On the other hand if you have managed to find one privately for under a ton it's not a major disaster if it turns out to be a bit iffy. Ideally it would be good to get it with all the software and leads though there's enough aftermarket accessories and software (some free) to cope if it doesn't.
One known characteristic of the D1 series is that they can be a bit battery hungry even by the standards of their time (my D30 eats battery power faster than the 20D) so you will need spare power cells.
Quote:
A friend just got a Nikon D200 the other day (mmmmm, drool) and as I was stroking and admiring it I said to him 'I suppose it has a built in light meter?' to which he looked at me blankly and replied 'No, I don't think so'. I think this shows how out of touch I am with digital cameras! Of course it must have a built in light meter.
I think it shows how too many people have too little understanding about the technology they use........
Quote:
Now days I suppose you don't really need to buy filters and stuff do you? Do people still always fit skylight filters? I have been using Photoshop for about 15 years now (good lord is it really that long?!) so know my way round it pretty well (I could not claim to be an expert though) and I guess I can do most stuff that filters provide using that.
Skylight filters are a bone of contention. Some fit them (me for instance) others see them as an anathema and instruments of Satan.... It's a matter of personal choice.
Polarisers and neutral density filters (graduated and non-grad) remain useful tools. The effects of grad ND filters can be replicated post capture with multiple RAW conversions or combining multiple exposures but I suspect it remains simpler in the end to fit an ND filter to balance the light. The effect of polarisers is almost impossible to replicate post capture. Most other effects can be done in PS and probably with more control...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Robsa
newbie
Reged: 15/05/2008
Posts: 3
|
|
Thanks so much for the replies guys, most helpful.
Well, I will keep scouting about for a 'bargain' used DSLR for a bit and save up the dosh. If I can get a nice condition used pro camera for around £500 I will have it, otherwise I will see what's about. Ideally I would like a magnesium bodied camera as opposed to plastic. Are there any good new sub-£500 cameras with magnesium bodies and, say, 10 megapixels?
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
As far as I know the only magnesium bodied cameras are the pro or near pro spec models (5D, D300 etc). Mag alloy costs...
Ffordes have an Olympus E1 or two... Otherwise I suspect you will have to save a bit more dough......
I find both my plastic cased Canons fine if occasionally a bit squeaky/creaky when gripped in the wrong place. Fortunately both have a metal chassis which may not be true of some budget models...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 36309
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
 The 20D isn't plastic cased, it's got a magnesium alloy body - the D60 was the last Canon at that level not to have, the 10D, 20D, 30D and 40D all have. OTOH, the chassis is partially made of plastic (and partially stainless steel).
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
All I can say is Canon are to be congratulated for making it look and feel like plastic! I work in the plastics industry and it fooled me............. 
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Malcolm_Stewart
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 11/07/2005
Posts: 2217
Loc: Milton Keynes, UK
|
|
If you do buy a used camera, I'd recommend downloading the manual prior to purchase, and then making sure that the "kit" on offer contains all the important items, including the software. (From what I understand, Canon only supply upgrades on the internet to their DPP package which is supplied on CD. Don't know Nikon's policy.)
I was surprised to discover that a new battery charger for my used "pro" model costs ~£300, and it's difficult to keep a DSLR running without a charger.
Good luck with your purchase.
--------------------
Malcolm Stewart
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 36309
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
Hmmm. Can't say about the 20D, but neither the 10D nor the 30D look or feel like plastic (apart from the doors) - maybe my metallurgy and materials technology degree helps me there, though.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
I suspect that it partly due to derivative assumption as well, you know: my D30 is plastic and it's a Canon, the 20D is a Canon therefore it's plastic......
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 36309
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
I suspect that's spot on!
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
