Hi there,

Am shopping around for a dSLR camera at the moment, and being completely ignorant on cameras in general (Ive had a powershot a70 for a few years and decided its time to move up in the world), I have been looking at the Canon 400D and Nikon D80 cameras. The 400D price is very nice considering, although I am not sure if in the longrun it is better going for the D80?. Any other brands/opinions on either? And also where are the best shops to hunt around for and bargin at (so far JBHifi has killed pretty much everywhere else tho it doesnt have the D80)? JB has the 400D for about 1450$ with the kit lense (18-55mm) and another larger lense.

I want a general camera that I can do decent shots of electronics and the such, but also something I can take around and be touristy with.

cheers

From a bang-for-buck perspective I've heard excellent things about the Nikon D50.

http://www.digitalrev.com/

There are some great prices on that site, have a look.

Oooh oooh! I was going to start a new SLR thread because I was in HNs yesterday and saw the new Canon 400D and wanted to know if anyone knew anything about it. I'm still really keen to get an SLR.

I assume the 400D is the next version of the 300D; it seemed fairly similar feature wise.

Canon 400D

I got a mate at jb, he can do them for about $1300 (maybe more)with a 300mm lens

my g/f has a cannon 350d, it rocks my soxs

^ Well isn't your god father a lucky man, man :)

i was trying to hint that i have a girl friend, now i have to be all obvious about it!

I just bought a 400D, It's 10.1 Mega pixel and has a nice new, larger LCD screen. I cant believe how fast this can focus. Happy to give you a look if you want Trog.

trog:

from the stuff I have read about the 400D, it has a better LCD screen, 10.1MP and some autofocus changes (that are meant to be really good). But yeah apparently not a huge upgrade, very cheap tho, the Nikon D80 seems to be a bit more expensive and is about the same image quality, the main problem apparently with the 350/400's is that the handle is quite small but with the battery plugon its good.

ET, cool as! Got any sample pics?

does digitalrev have warranty available in aus? are they legit and good with regards to warranty does anyone know? how long do they generally take to come over?

cheers

I took a bunch of shots for work and a bunch of shots while doing a day trip to queen mary falls and the condimne river canyon. There a bit hard to show here cause if I compress them, it kind of defeats the purpose.

I'm still getting used to using a SLR again as well. My shots arent much chop as yet. That storm pic I snapped last week was with the 400D. I'll see what else I can dig up and post them soon.

I have a 350D, it's pretty damn cool although I find the lenses to be quite plasticy and cheap, same with the camera. Then again I'm also used to playing with really old 35mm slr's where everything is metal, the camera body, the lense casing I guess you'd call it. The lens on my 350D where the focus knob is is a little wobbly (seems to be that way on all the ones I've played with) but it still focuses ok.

I cant believe how fast this can focus.

It probably comes standard with a USM lens, apparently they focus faster than the normal lenses.

the main problem apparently with the 350/400's is that the handle is quite small but with the battery plugon its good.

the battery plugin thing is freaken expensive, I don't find mine all that small but then again my hands aren't all that big either.

Could always check here for a review and possibly some sample pictures. Want a couple of sample pics I took with my 350D trog or are you just going to go the 400?

last edited by whoop at 23:23:22 02/Oct/06

ok, here are a couple of pics I snapped on the day trip to Queen Mary Falls just over a week ago. They have been reduced to half of the resolution and 1/10th the file size. So of course, they wont be as sharp as the full res versions.

Anyhoy, here ya go.

http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/et/images/400D016.jpg

This is Queen Mary Falls down near Boona. I extended the exposure to try and get a blur in the water. I didnt have a tripod with me so had to do it by hand. The shot didnt come out to bad considering.
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/et/images/400D019.jpg

I find the lenses to be quite plasticy and cheap, same with the camera

that's probably because you're using bottom-end gear.

I have a 70-200mm f/4 L lens and the build quality is about a THOUSAND times better than the standard 18-55mm lens. My 70-200 is also regarded as quite cheap feeling compared to the rest of the L lenses. Don't expect any of the sub-$1k lenses to not feel cheap.

As for the camera, my 300D feels pro compared to a normal point-n-shoot camera, but a mate has a 1D mark-II N and it is pure sex compared to my cheap-arse 300D. :/

Speaking of which, he recently had his camera and lens in with canon getting recalibrated, so they gave him some gear on loan until his returned. I just had to get a photo of me holding it:
http://photos.aaron-77.com/upload/ubercamera.jpg
- Canon 1Ds Mk II, $13k (16.7MP, full-frame sensor)
- Canon 400mm f/2.8L IS USM, $13.7k
- Canon 1.4x extender II, $600
- Canon 2.0x extender II, $600
yes, 2 extender tubes is crazy, they just happened be there and I wanted to see what a 1120mm lens was like :P

Back to the real world...

I have the battery grip for my 300D and they are definitely worth the money. Cost almost $400 including the second battery, but it makes the camera a bit more weighty (helps offset the weight of the bigger lenses), gives you more camera to grab onto when using/carrying, and I can get upwards of 1200 photos before running out of batteries.

If you want to take photos of electronics with it then you may need to look into a speedlite as well. I have a 430EX ($430 retail at xmas time) and can get shots like these:
http://photos.aaron-77.com/upload/remote_filter.jpg
http://photos.aaron-77.com/upload/wideangle/camera_with_lens.jpg
That was on my coffee table with little ambient light (tv and a light in the other room) bouncing the flash off the ceiling. (those were probably taken with either the standard 18-55mm lens or the 50mm f/1.8)

If you want to get into some faster action stuff, with the 70-200 I can manage shots like this:
http://fulllockphotos.com/sv/TimeAttack_Sept12Grp1/images/car_5d.jpg
http://fulllockphotos.com/sv/TimeAttack_Sept12Grp2/images/car_19b.jpg
It's really pushing the 300D to go fast enough for that sort of action tho. The 350D and 400D are both that bit faster at burst, and they do focus a lot quicker (I manual focus for my car shots tho).

I'm considering upgrading at some point in the future, but will probably step up to either a 30D or perhaps a second hand 1D N, cos the 300/350/400D range just aren't fast enough for what I need nowadays. I also need to get a telephoto lens faster than f/4 too. Looking at the 70-200mm f/2.8 L. It never ends :(

Yeah it's the lens that came with it and I know it's because it's a "cheapo" lens but stuffed if I'm going to go spend $2k just on a lens for what I use it for and guessing that's how most people in this thread will be :) I was however considering a macro lens. I'm so cheap though I made my own diffuser for the flash rather than buy one :)

cardboard, gaffa tape, greaseproof paper and silver paint on the inside for the win. I'm not sure how well it works but I was bored one night heh
http://users.bigpond.net.au/ritsuko/cardboardlol.jpg (sup 430ex buddy)

last edited by whoop at 00:15:35 03/Oct/06

i still use a tissue held on by a rubber band whenever I need a diffuser

showing your age cerb :p

tissue + rubber band? damn I never thought of that. I wasted half an hour making my cardboard thing :(

(most of that was waiting for the paint to dry though)

I got the Sony a-100 a few months ago(day or 2 after release)...It has got some really good reviews from what I’ve seen.. I prefer it over the 400D and the D80. The only down side is that it doesn't use a CMOS censor, instead it uses CCD (Sonys CCD chips are really good though) but other then that
its great! It also uses Konica Minolta lens mounts so it fits all Konica Minolta lenses up to about 8 years old..

Hey Squeak that is interesting because I too have been doing some research re a camera upgrade and I have read a lot of good stuf about the Sony DSLRA-100, especially that they have the anti shake feature in the camera body and hence all lenses utilise it, but I have read some reviews that the camera is 'loud' i.e. it's action is quite noisy?? what's your opinion re that as it is a toss up at the moment between the 400D and the A-100.

also whats the lag time like on the shutter?

cheers

oh and any pics you can post??

Why do you care if the thing is noisy? plan on taking photos of girls while hiding in their closet? :p

Why do you care if the thing is noisy? plan on taking photos of girls while hiding in their closet? :p

nah, I use my mobile for those pics hehe...its just that if you want to do nature or urban/human photography, animals and people can get distracted or aware of a the photographer and you can lose the effect...we have all seen how people suddenly behave when they realise they are the subject in anything. :)

Hey Psycho!i was tossing up between the 400d and a-100 (I got a fairly early sneak preview of the 400d :P)..

The Sony is a fair bit louder then the canon SLRs, but from what ive seen the canons are probably some of the quietest SLRs around. I wouldn’t say the sony is excessively loud that its gona be a distraction. its one of those things u gota hear for yourself . I personally don’t mind it at all.

The Sony is also a lot heavier and larger but I wasn’t too fussed on the size or weight :s and it does have a lot more functions and 'mechanical' features compared to the 400d..it also was a more comfortable hold for me... + it feels like a better made camera - the canon just felt soo plasticy :s

the thing i was probably most disliked about the canon was it felt too much like
a point and shoot camera, i dont know why i think it was just the size and
the amount the camera could be atomized ..

With regards to the lag on the shutter. Its no different to the canon; well i couldnt pick the difference because i think the sony has less lag though. duno for sure..

Both are sweet cameras, and which ever way u go ull be happy with the results

( I don’t have any cools pics yet.. mainly mug shots and some night pics of houses lite areas fiddling with shutters speeds and the like- im fairly new to SLR so im trying to learn the ropes atm!)

thanks..yep I am still leaning towards the A100 at the mo...have also seen some pretty good 'specials' packs on Teds Camera house (twin lens paks ect)

oh and ps if you want a couple of pointers on your camera go over to here the reviewer gives a tip on setting the sharpness adjustment up a notch and a good comparitive explanation of the Dynamic Range light adjustment features as well. :P *It does do some spiffy things in high contrast scenes with shadow detail ect...

last edited by Psycho! at 01:05:26 08/Oct/06

last edited by Psycho! at 01:05:40 08/Oct/06

I read through dpreview.com's review on the A100 the other day and it didn't sound too bad until I came to the page on the ISO sensitivity. The difference between the others and the Canon 30D (which the 350D is on par with) is amazing.

Given that I can tell the difference between even ISO 100 and ISO 400 on my 300D I think I'd never go above about 400 on the Sony without fear of making my eyes bleed. The Canons look as good at 1600 as the Sony does at 400. I never used to go above ISO 400 at all, but shooting at the basketball needs ISO 1600, so this would be a real concern of mine (if I were in the market for a Sony)

btw, I'm upgrading to a 30D very very soon. Goodbye 4 shots at 2.5fps. Hello selectable 3/5fps for 30+ shots. ^_^

btw, I'm upgrading to a 30D very very soon. Goodbye 4 shots at 2.5fps. Hello selectable 3/5fps for 30+ shots. ^_^

You can pick up a 20d body cheap as nowdays too. theres not that much difference between the 20d and the 30d.

i picked up my 30D yesterday and I am completely in love with it. It's so fast that I'm having some troubles taking just one shot when it's on high speed burst. every feature on the camera is about a THOUSAND times faster than my old 300d. plus the controls are a little more intuitive.

i got it from photo continental for a pretty good price, too. Body + battery grip + extra battery for about the same as what I could have got it from an ebay/online store, but no delivery to worry about and I have local warranty etc (even local online stores often sell international models, so they don't have the same warranty). They even put one on hold for me without needing a deposit.

The 30d is like the more pro version, right?

yer, 30D is in the next line up from the 400d. It's kinda similar to the 5D, only smaller sensor and higher burst speed. It's also about 1/3rd the price of the 5d, but still about the $2k mark for just the body.

I just want something around $200 - $300, any suggestions?. Obviously it won't be a dSLR

hermi, I got a canon ixus 60 for my last trip and it's been really good - it's a little more than that, but the older/lower range ixusus (ixii?) I'm sure would be pretty decent as well, just lower megapixel.

sweet, really only want a camera so I can spam QGL with new pics of fish and the occasional vid clip

occasional vid clip

cant do vids on an slr.

yeah, I'd figured that out during research, which is why I said "Obviously it won't be a dSLR" an had cheap price
Just hijacked thread for quick question seeing as I know sfa about cameras an you guys are up to speed

When visiting a friend today I managed to snap this:

http://photos.aaron-77.com/photos/misc/bird_20061016.jpg

Also got these while working on his car:
http://photos.aaron-77.com/photos/misc/reflection_20061016.jpg
http://photos.aaron-77.com/photos/misc/camgears_20061016.jpg
http://photos.aaron-77.com/photos/misc/parked_20061016.jpg
http://photos.aaron-77.com/photos/misc/gears_20061016.jpg

nice shots!
Bummer you didn't get the wings just past the budgies head! (I call all birds budgies regardless of species cept pigeons, which are just vermin with wings)

cerb you didnt post your greatest achievement

http://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani.gif

achievement or failure????

You decide!

Can I vote via SMS?

I bought a Pentax *ist and it's pretty rocking, definately want a few more lenses though.

maxe: I didn't post that for fear of raping everyone's bandwidth.

for anyone curious, that animation was a low-quality, small-res (2MP) 113-shot burst at 5fps. With that size image the camera will fill the CF card without slowing down.

This one was a high-quality, full-res (8.5MP) burst until the buffer filled, which is about 31 frames:
http://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gif

dont post that one i look stupid

^^ Hey!!
QGL has it's own Star Wars Kid !!!

dont post that one i look stupid

http://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gifhttp://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gif
http://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gifhttp://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gif
http://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gifhttp://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gif
http://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gifhttp://www.sidwahz.com/stuff/maxe_ani2.gif

last edited by Astroboy at 15:17:31 17/Oct/06

eek @ that gearbox pic cerb... some of those helical gears look fuqd! :P

we just got ourselves a sony cybershot DSC-N1 8.1 Megapixel camera... zomg

picked it up for 557 from surpass computers (RRP was still 800 bucks) and for a standard point and shoot, its pretty uber. 3 inch touch screen lcd, lots of different options and its actually got quite a bit of manual control with the f values and stuff, i have nfi maybe cerb can interpret it for me

GO CERB!

f values are the aperture setting. A smaller f number is a larger aperture, which means more light is being let through. It's actually a fraction of the focal length, so an aperture of f/8.0 means that the aperture diameter is 1/8th the focal length.

Increasing the f-stop by a factor of 1.4 means half the light (it's the diameter). So you can get the same amount of light hitting the sensor at say 1/400th shutter and f/8.0 aperture as at 1/800th (half the time) and f/5.6 (double the aperture).

Being able to control the aperture means you can have more control over the shutter speed you select, so if you want less blur (faster shutter speed) use a bigger aperture (smaller f value) and vice versa. Bigger apertures give a shorter depth of field, so the distance from out-of-focus to in-focus to out-of-focus is shorter (see my shot of the cam gears - that's f/1.8).

Shutter speed and aperture are two parts of what I've seen referred to as "the light triangle" - the third being the ISO speed. For a given amount of available light, if you increase one setting, you have to decrease at least one of the others in order to expose correctly. Eg, if you use f/5.6 instead of f/8.0 you could either drop your ISO from 400 to 200 at the same shutter speed, or double your shutter speed at the same ISO.

Is that sufficient interpretation for you Tung? ;P

Finally bought a Canon S3 IS
Sweet camera (as far as I can tell anyway)

Anyways, just noticed this pic on the BBC News site

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/06/sci_nat_enl_1161188217/img/1.jpg

It's a Walrus eating clams off the ocean floor
How mad does that look?

cerb, how can I trick you into coming to take photos of our soccer team for our last game?

Get someone to drive an Austin over an tell him there is a "Mean Machine" from england sitting back observing the game?

cerb, how can I trick you into coming to take photos of our soccer team for our last game?

Mail him out an official looking press pass so he thinks he is a big shot.

cerb, how can I trick you into coming to take photos of our soccer team for our last game?

pm me details of when/where and i'll see if I'm busy.

Mail him out an official looking press pass so he thinks he is a big shot.

I don't need a press pass to think i'm a big shot. your mum reminds me that i am every night.

aing

f***IT - I can't login to edit my post

that was meant to say aing....

last edited by Jim at 06:06:06 20/Oct/06

thanks man :)

Nice pics cerb, is that bird just loose around his house or in an aviery?

lol @ heardy too

the bird was just flying around their house, probably trying to hide from the clown chasing it with the big arse camera.

I read (bits of) the dpreview.com review of the new Canon 400D; one of the things he mentions is that you're better off getting the body + a better lens as the lens included as part of the kit isn't as good.

How much difference does it really make? How much extra is a 'real' lens going to set me back?

The standard lens isn't too bad, but most other lenses will beat it on image quality, focus speed, etc. It's pretty hard to find something as wide for less than about $800 tho, so it's good in that respect. I still use mine quite regularly, which sucks cos if I sell my 300d then the lens will go with it and I'll be left with a widest lens of 28mm. :(

So basically, if you can get the 400d with the optional 17-85mm IS USM instead (enthusiast kit) then go for it, but it looks to be about $700+ extra. You'd be better off going the 18-55 plus 55-200 or 75-300 twin lens kit to begin with so you have the full range of focal lengths, then look into upgrading to better quality once you know what your needs are.

One thing you will definitely want to get straight up is the 50mm f/1.8 - you can get them new off eBay for $130-ish and are the best bang-for-buck lens you will find, ever. they're cheap, and they feel it, but being a prime lens they have inherently better image quality than a zoom lens, plus one of the largest max apertures you'll find on anything this side of 4 figures.

A real, good quality prime lens will set you back as much as if not more than the camera. I'm quite happy with my cheap dodgy plasticy lens that came with my 350D. here (3.09MB) a picture I took of our cat with the zoom lens I got with the camera, same kind of cheapish quality to it but still takes pretty decent photos.
18-55 lens (3.43MB) that also came with the camera.

edit: beaten like a red headded step child :(