Photography Club!

[Joey_V]

I just wanted to know if we have photography enthusiasts on this site...

I am in the middle of deciding which camera is for me.... the Canon Rebel XTi or the Nikon D40 or D40x?

The local best buy has a deal on the Nikon D40x with an extra zoom lens for $749.99... is this a good deal? I think it's until today only so quick comments would be helpful!

Joey

 

[Sasha]

I had the same dilemma 6 months ago. The two are very good cameras, almost the same with 'kit lenses'. But I got Canon at the end, since it felt more robust in the hand, and controls were a little bit more user friendly, and it took me just couple of days to fully operate with all the features. Canon also has a little bit less noise on higher ISO values.
But if you have a good deal on Nikon, you won't regret it. Friend of mine bought one with 70-200mm zoom lenses and it is pretty good, add big flash and you can go professional!

Here you go some Canon examples, have in mind that this is 18-55mm kit lens, I took these this summer:

 

[Joey_V]

Geez.. Sashi...

How do you get pics like that? Do you edit with PS?

 

[twich54]

Joey, you won't go wrong with either brand. FWIW, I've been shooting Canon for 35 plus years. For me, I love their ergonomics and I can grab any Canon and just start shooting. If you get serious, in time your investment in lenses will exceed what you have in camera bodies.

A good site for reviews is www.dpreview.com

 

[Sasha]

Geez.. Sashi...

How do you get pics like that? Do you edit with PS?

Thanks

On the second picture is obvious that I used PS for the red channel layer mask. But I try to use as little PS as possible, on these pictures only contrast and levels are corrected. I mostly try to leave the picture as they are.

 

[Audioseduction]

I plan on getting a Nikon D300 in March. I think the CMOS image sensor is the way to go. ISO sensiitivity is great also.
Sasha, GREAT pics! :bowdown:

 

[Audioseduction]

Joey, you won't go wrong with either brand. FWIW, I've been shooting Canon for 35 plus years. For me, I love their ergonomics and I can grab any Canon and just start shooting. If you get serious, in time your investment in lenses will exceed what you have in camera bodies.

A good site for reviews is www.dpreview.com

A single lens can do that!

 

[twich54]

ISO sensiitivity is great also.

FWIW, that is one area where Nikon is definetly struming second fiddle to Canon, thus the reason 80-90% of pro Sports shooters shoot Canon. Although the D300 has closed that gap ALOT !!

 

[twich54]

A single lens can do that!

No, what I meant is , that most serious amateur or pro photographers acquire numerous lenses that add up quickly !

 

[Audioseduction]

Sasha, do you mainly shoot with jpg format or do you use the RAW format to manipulate with your PC?

 

[amey01]

Yes, I'm a bit of an enthusiast as well, but unfortunately can't take pics anywhere near as good as Sasha's - great job.

I bought a Canon EOS 30D about a year ago - but I already had a few Canon lenses from my previous film-based EOS50 so my decision was made.

 

[Audioseduction]

Here is a macro shot I took of my watch.

 

[amey01]

Here are a few of mine, cropped, but untouched by Photoshop:

1st: Canon 30D, EF 50mm, f11, 1/500

 

[amey01]

One other.

 

[Audioseduction]

Here is the same image after I used Photoshop CS3 on it.

 

[twich54]

Here is the same image after I used Photoshop CS3 on it.

George, nice pic, but......great watch !! I've always loved Acutron's !!

 

[Sasha]

Sasha, do you mainly shoot with jpg format or do you use the RAW format to manipulate with your PC?

I use RAW mainly because the picture quality is much better than jpg in the start. Also bonus with RAW is Canons great software where you can nondestructively (original picture is always there) finetune the color balance, white balance, saturation and sharpness. I think of it as a mastering od the picture. When I export in PS, I fine tune the levels, crop and thats mostly it, if I don't want to do some extra with the picture...

But in the end, I bow down to the analog masters of photography...

 

[Joey_V]

So which is better for the money?

The Nikon D40x or the Canon XTi? I went to Ritz today to play with the two cameras and it seemed like the XTi was easier to use... however, the people there said that the Nikon takes better pics.

What do I do?

 

[TheBobGoat]

Ive been shooting in RAW with my D100 for about 5 yrs now. 20 gigs later... =)

 

[Dreamer]

OK, I'll throw my $0.02 worth into this discussion. As a long time Minolta owner (bought my first Minolta 35mm SLR in 1985, and currently own a Sony Alpha, which is essentially a Konica/Minolta camera) Here is how I see things when it comes to decent cameras:

If you have deep pockets, get a Nikon. They cost a lot more, but they are virtually indestructable (that's why a lot of news photogs use them, and they are pretty much "standard issue" for US military photogs). They take very good pics, and give you "pro-level" control over functionality. But if you'r enot a hard-core shutterbug, you may have a hard time getting pro-quality results" from a Nikon--they can be a little TOO dependant on the user's skills...

If you want a camera that is REALLY easy to use, but maybe not "battlefield rugged", and you're probably going to replace it in 3-5 years anyway, get a Canon. They take good pics, are very easy to learn and use, and in skilled hands can yield impressive results.

If you want to get the best bang for the buck--durability approaching Nikon, higher resolution than either Canon or Nikon, and a wide range of controls ranging from full-auto idiot-proof to full-manual arsty-fartsy, get a Sony Alpha. They are based on the Konica/Minolta cameras, and at their price point, the other two brands can't even touch it. But The Sony SLR is sort of like Martin Logan speakers--they put you in a sort of "outcast club" among some of the snootier camera buffs (mostly because your camera will have 15% more resolution at 1/2 the price, I think...) And also, all the old Minolta Maxxum lenses are 100% compatible with the Sony Alpha, so you can get used lenses to go with it for REAL cheap. The Sony Alpha is not the BEST camera out there, but it is a "giant killer" at it's price point. It's sort of like the Benchmark DAC of the camera world--sure it's not a Wadia, but it's REALLY damn close, and at 1/2 (or less) the price...

If I had unlimited funds to spend on my camera, I'd either have a Nikon or a Pentax 645 (with a digital back). But I don't, so I went with the camera I've known and loved for 20 years. My Minolta's never let me down (Maxxum 5000, 7000, 9000, several lenses, flashes, remotes, Cokin filters), so I went with the Sony Alpha when I went for a Digital SLR, and I LOVE it.

Of course, YMMV...

--Richard