Higher-end compact or SLR for me?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dan Lenski, Nov 29, 2007.

  1. Dan Lenski

    Dan Lenski Guest

    Hi all,
    I've been using an Olympus C-740 UZ for several years, and it's
    showing its age. It's been a great first camera, and I'm a big fan of
    the 10X optical zoom, but I'm tiring of its low resolution, no sound
    for movies, electronic viewfinder, and long shutter lag.

    I'm researching my options for a new one. On the one hand, I'm
    tempted to go for something small enough to keep in my pocket. On the
    other hand, I want good zoom and manual controls (for nature and
    wildlife photos) and have been really dazzled by the photos one of my
    friends gets from his Canon 350D SLR. And I'd like to be able to buy
    something for $500-600 with lens.

    * Canon PowerShot G9 - High-end compact, 6X optical zoom, can do good
    movies... but dpreview.com is not impressed by its picture quality at
    high ISO (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/)
    * Canon EOS 400D - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, seems to be the
    de facto standard, but it's pretty expensive and apparently the lens
    kit is not so great (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
    page29.asp)
    * Olympus E-410 - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, CHEAP compared
    to Canon 400D, but not as good dynamic range (http://www.dpreview.com/
    reviews/olympuse410/)

    Anyone have any advice for how to decide one way or another? I'm sort
    of leaning towards the Olympus E-410 right now since I could afford to
    start out with a 14-42mm and 40-150mm lens kit. But possibly this is
    overkill for me and I should be aiming for a compact? Is there
    anything similar in size and features to the G9 that I should
    consider? Thanks for any help.

    Dan
    Dan Lenski, Nov 29, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dan Lenski

    Steve Dell Guest

    regarding the G9, I would not be taking pictures with ISO setting above 400.
    You'll be fine.
    "Dan Lenski" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi all,
    > I've been using an Olympus C-740 UZ for several years, and it's
    > showing its age. It's been a great first camera, and I'm a big fan of
    > the 10X optical zoom, but I'm tiring of its low resolution, no sound
    > for movies, electronic viewfinder, and long shutter lag.
    >
    > I'm researching my options for a new one. On the one hand, I'm
    > tempted to go for something small enough to keep in my pocket. On the
    > other hand, I want good zoom and manual controls (for nature and
    > wildlife photos) and have been really dazzled by the photos one of my
    > friends gets from his Canon 350D SLR. And I'd like to be able to buy
    > something for $500-600 with lens.
    >
    > * Canon PowerShot G9 - High-end compact, 6X optical zoom, can do good
    > movies... but dpreview.com is not impressed by its picture quality at
    > high ISO (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/)
    > * Canon EOS 400D - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, seems to be the
    > de facto standard, but it's pretty expensive and apparently the lens
    > kit is not so great (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
    > page29.asp)
    > * Olympus E-410 - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, CHEAP compared
    > to Canon 400D, but not as good dynamic range (http://www.dpreview.com/
    > reviews/olympuse410/)
    >
    > Anyone have any advice for how to decide one way or another? I'm sort
    > of leaning towards the Olympus E-410 right now since I could afford to
    > start out with a 14-42mm and 40-150mm lens kit. But possibly this is
    > overkill for me and I should be aiming for a compact? Is there
    > anything similar in size and features to the G9 that I should
    > consider? Thanks for any help.
    >
    > Dan
    Steve Dell, Nov 30, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dan Lenski

    Scott W Guest

    Dan Lenski wrote:
    > Hi all,
    > I've been using an Olympus C-740 UZ for several years, and it's
    > showing its age. It's been a great first camera, and I'm a big fan of
    > the 10X optical zoom, but I'm tiring of its low resolution, no sound
    > for movies, electronic viewfinder, and long shutter lag.
    >
    > I'm researching my options for a new one. On the one hand, I'm
    > tempted to go for something small enough to keep in my pocket. On the
    > other hand, I want good zoom and manual controls (for nature and
    > wildlife photos) and have been really dazzled by the photos one of my
    > friends gets from his Canon 350D SLR. And I'd like to be able to buy
    > something for $500-600 with lens.
    >
    > * Canon PowerShot G9 - High-end compact, 6X optical zoom, can do good
    > movies... but dpreview.com is not impressed by its picture quality at
    > high ISO (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/)
    > * Canon EOS 400D - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, seems to be the
    > de facto standard, but it's pretty expensive and apparently the lens
    > kit is not so great (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
    > page29.asp)
    > * Olympus E-410 - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, CHEAP compared
    > to Canon 400D, but not as good dynamic range (http://www.dpreview.com/
    > reviews/olympuse410/)
    >
    > Anyone have any advice for how to decide one way or another? I'm sort
    > of leaning towards the Olympus E-410 right now since I could afford to
    > start out with a 14-42mm and 40-150mm lens kit. But possibly this is
    > overkill for me and I should be aiming for a compact? Is there
    > anything similar in size and features to the G9 that I should
    > consider? Thanks for any help.


    You really should do more then just look at review, it would be a very
    good idea to try a number of the cameras you are looking at. For me
    using a DSLR is not just about better images, it is also a lot more fun
    to use, at least for me.

    The Olympus might not be getting great marks for dynamic range but it
    will still be far better then any compact camera.

    Scott
    Scott W, Nov 30, 2007
    #3
  4. On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:19:14 -1000, Scott W wrote:
    > You really should do more then just look at review, it would be a very
    > good idea to try a number of the cameras you are looking at. For me
    > using a DSLR is not just about better images, it is also a lot more fun
    > to use, at least for me.
    >
    > The Olympus might not be getting great marks for dynamic range but it
    > will still be far better then any compact camera.
    >
    > Scott


    Thanks Scott!

    I do plan to go try them out soon. I have already used the Canon 350D and
    enjoyed it a lot, had a great feel and easy to use for me. I definitely
    want to try the Olympus E-410 in person, because I've heard it may be
    slightly awkward for someone with large hands. So pretty much no
    comparison between the dynamic range of a compact and an SLR? Very
    tempting...

    Thanks,
    Dan
    Daniel Lenski, Nov 30, 2007
    #4
  5. Dan Lenski

    ray Guest

    On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:01:12 -0800, Dan Lenski wrote:

    > Hi all,
    > I've been using an Olympus C-740 UZ for several years, and it's
    > showing its age. It's been a great first camera, and I'm a big fan of
    > the 10X optical zoom, but I'm tiring of its low resolution, no sound
    > for movies, electronic viewfinder, and long shutter lag.
    >
    > I'm researching my options for a new one. On the one hand, I'm
    > tempted to go for something small enough to keep in my pocket. On the
    > other hand, I want good zoom and manual controls (for nature and
    > wildlife photos) and have been really dazzled by the photos one of my
    > friends gets from his Canon 350D SLR. And I'd like to be able to buy
    > something for $500-600 with lens.
    >
    > * Canon PowerShot G9 - High-end compact, 6X optical zoom, can do good
    > movies... but dpreview.com is not impressed by its picture quality at
    > high ISO (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/)
    > * Canon EOS 400D - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, seems to be the
    > de facto standard, but it's pretty expensive and apparently the lens
    > kit is not so great (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
    > page29.asp)
    > * Olympus E-410 - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, CHEAP compared
    > to Canon 400D, but not as good dynamic range (http://www.dpreview.com/
    > reviews/olympuse410/)
    >
    > Anyone have any advice for how to decide one way or another? I'm sort
    > of leaning towards the Olympus E-410 right now since I could afford to
    > start out with a 14-42mm and 40-150mm lens kit. But possibly this is
    > overkill for me and I should be aiming for a compact? Is there
    > anything similar in size and features to the G9 that I should
    > consider? Thanks for any help.
    >
    > Dan



    You seem to be outlining two different sets of requirements - sounds to me
    like you'd really like two cameras. A P&S to pack around most of the time,
    and a DSLR when you're 'more serious' about it.
    ray, Nov 30, 2007
    #5
  6. On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:24:33 -0700, ray wrote:
    > You seem to be outlining two different sets of requirements - sounds to
    > me like you'd really like two cameras. A P&S to pack around most of the
    > time, and a DSLR when you're 'more serious' about it.


    Yeah, I expect I will keep the Olympus C-740 UZ... and I have a little
    credit-card-cam as well which is okay for casual snapshots. At this point
    I'll say I'm going for DSLR at this point, since it seems I'll be
    disappointed by anything less.

    My good options are the Nikon D40, Canon EOS 350D or 400D, and Olympus
    E410 or E510, I think.

    The advice I keep getting is to focus on availability of good lenses.
    Which makes the Canons come out way ahead, I gather. And apparently the
    number of autofocus-capable lenses for the Nikon is fairly small. One
    other thing is that I have heard the inexpensive kit lenses that come with
    the Olympus (14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 & 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko Digital Lenses)
    are much better than the Canons. Which makes me lean towards the Olympus
    more.

    What do you think about the prospects of the 4/3 Olympus lens system?
    Will I have better choice in a year or 5 if I get really serious?

    Thanks,
    Dan


    Our Low Price: $529.00



    Shipping Quote Tell a Friend
    Everything we sell is BRAND NEW and FACTORY FRESH *
    Everything we sell comes with a full US WARRANTY *
    Low flat rate shipping
    * = Unless otherwise specified

    For Quicker Processing Place Your Order Online!!

    Receive a Free Digital Flash , Full Size Tripod , Lens Cleaning Kit , LCD
    Screen Cover & 512MB Pen Drive w/Your Order

    Free MP4 Player w/Ear Phone, Digital Flash & Free Upgrade To Express
    Shipping w/Any Package Purchase!
    Daniel Lenski, Nov 30, 2007
    #6
  7. Dan Lenski

    nospam Guest

    In article <94L3j.4764$>, Daniel
    Lenski <> wrote:

    > The advice I keep getting is to focus on availability of good lenses.
    > Which makes the Canons come out way ahead, I gather. And apparently the
    > number of autofocus-capable lenses for the Nikon is fairly small.


    where did you get that idea? there's plenty of autofocus lenses for
    nikon and both nikon and canon have similar lineups. the d40 will
    autofocus with a subset of all nikon autofocus lenses (but will work
    with more manual focus lenses), and as of right now there are over 40
    different lenses from which to choose for the d40.
    nospam, Nov 30, 2007
    #7
  8. Dan Lenski

    Mr. Strat Guest

    In article <94L3j.4764$>, Daniel
    Lenski <> wrote:

    > My good options are the Nikon D40, Canon EOS 350D or 400D, and Olympus
    > E410 or E510, I think.


    Go with the Nikon or the Canon. Jeez...why waste money on something
    less?
    Mr. Strat, Nov 30, 2007
    #8
  9. On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 21:36:13 -0800, Mr. Strat wrote:
    >
    >> My good options are the Nikon D40, Canon EOS 350D or 400D, and Olympus
    >> E410 or E510, I think.

    >
    > Go with the Nikon or the Canon. Jeez...why waste money on something
    > less?


    Something less?
    Daniel Lenski, Nov 30, 2007
    #9
  10. ray wrote:
    []
    > You seem to be outlining two different sets of requirements - sounds
    > to me like you'd really like two cameras. A P&S to pack around most
    > of the time, and a DSLR when you're 'more serious' about it.


    Dan,

    For the compact but versatile, I have been pleased with the Panasonic TZ3:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/

    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 30, 2007
    #10
  11. Daniel Lenski wrote:
    []
    > The advice I keep getting is to focus on availability of good lenses.
    > Which makes the Canons come out way ahead, I gather.


    Eh? The Nikon lenses are much better at the lower-cost end of the range,
    and they are somewhat equal at the higher-cost end.

    []
    > What do you think about the prospects of the 4/3 Olympus lens system?
    > Will I have better choice in a year or 5 if I get really serious?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Dan


    For me, the 4/3 system has been a disappointment, in that it has not
    produced enough size and weight saving to offset the poorer performance of
    the smaller sensor. The Nikon D40/D40x and kit lens are almost as light,
    and more versatile with lens choice. I got the D40 with the 18-55 kit
    lens and 55-200 VR lens (the image stabilisation is very helpful).

    Beyond that, handle the cameras, and if possible, try and define what type
    of photography or what aspect of photography matters to you.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 30, 2007
    #11
  12. Dan Lenski

    bugbear Guest

    Dan . wrote:
    >
    > I'm researching my options for a new one. On the one hand, I'm
    > tempted to go for something small enough to keep in my pocket. On the
    > other hand, I want good zoom and manual controls (for nature and
    > wildlife photos) and have been really dazzled by the photos one of my
    > friends gets from his Canon 350D SLR. And I'd like to be able to buy
    > something for $500-600 with lens.


    If you want zooms up in the 8x or more range,
    I think you'll be best off (on finite budget)
    with a good "bridge" camera.

    Getting very long zooms with a large sensor
    requires a lot of glass.

    I did this at DPREVIEW.com

    Release Status: Not discontinued (current or upcoming)
    Sensor photo detectors: 8 million or more
    Zoom tele (T): 320 mm or more
    Aperture priority: Yes
    Shutter priority: Yes
    Uncompressed format: RAW

    and got:
    Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18
    Olympus SP-560 UZ
    Nikon Coolpix 8800
    Fujifilm FinePix S8000 fd
    Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30
    Samsung Pro815

    BugBear
    bugbear, Nov 30, 2007
    #12
  13. Dan Lenski

    Sosumi Guest

    "David J Taylor" <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk>
    wrote in message news:z%P3j.55383$...
    > Daniel Lenski wrote:
    > []
    >> The advice I keep getting is to focus on availability of good lenses.
    >> Which makes the Canons come out way ahead, I gather.

    >
    > Eh? The Nikon lenses are much better at the lower-cost end of the range,
    > and they are somewhat equal at the higher-cost end.
    >
    > []
    >> What do you think about the prospects of the 4/3 Olympus lens system?
    >> Will I have better choice in a year or 5 if I get really serious?
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >> Dan

    >
    > For me, the 4/3 system has been a disappointment, in that it has not
    > produced enough size and weight saving to offset the poorer performance of
    > the smaller sensor. The Nikon D40/D40x and kit lens are almost as light,
    > and more versatile with lens choice. I got the D40 with the 18-55 kit
    > lens and 55-200 VR lens (the image stabilisation is very helpful).
    >
    > Beyond that, handle the cameras, and if possible, try and define what type
    > of photography or what aspect of photography matters to you.



    I agree 100%. In fact I too tried the Olympus and brought it back the next
    day..
    I have the D40 and D40x. Both outstanding and very good in dynamic range and
    light metering. It's even said it 's better than the D80 and even D200. The
    D80 I can confirm; better with highlights.
    Another thing is handling. The Nikon feels so much better than the Canon.
    The door to the card is very easy to open when your card is full; much
    easier than any other dslr. The kit lens, 18-55 is the best of all
    kitlenses. I also have the 55-200 VR and agree it´s very good.
    I´ve taken thousands of pictures with both and just the other day I was in a
    shopping mall, looking at the Pentax, Canon, Nikon and Olympus. Holding,
    feeling and see thru the viewfinder. The cheap Nikon has about the brightest
    view!
    The 400D looks like when you´re looking thru a tunnel, compared. The body
    feels very plastic and flimsy. Pentax K10 much more expensive and very
    heavy, but unlogical to handle. I tried to open the card door but it took me
    a while to discover: you have to look at the back (door is on the side, go
    figure!) and lift a very small latch that you can only touch with the tip of
    your nail and then in one movement have to turn to open the door. The first
    time the latch jumped back (spring loaded) so I had to try again. Geez, what
    a pain. Hold it, all you people, animals: I need a few minutes to change my
    card. LOL Great for action shooting...

    The 400D looses all pictures in memory if by accident you open the door. It
    also has no spot metering and the kit lens is very bad in all tests.

    --
    "I don´t need a camera,
    I have a photographic memory..."
    Sosumi
    Sosumi, Nov 30, 2007
    #13
  14. Sosumi wrote:
    []
    > I´ve taken thousands of pictures with both and just the other day I
    > was in a shopping mall, looking at the Pentax, Canon, Nikon and
    > Olympus. Holding, feeling and see thru the viewfinder. The cheap
    > Nikon has about the brightest view!


    Funny you should mention that. It was also my impression. I didn't quite
    believe it because so many had said "the Nikon D40 doesn't have a proper
    prism" - to save weight and cost, I expect. But it was brighter than the
    Canon 400. So I bought it!

    Thanks for your other observations as well.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 30, 2007
    #14
  15. Dan Lenski

    Chris Savage Guest

    On 2007-11-30, David J Taylor <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    > Sosumi wrote:
    > []
    >> I´ve taken thousands of pictures with both and just the other day I
    >> was in a shopping mall, looking at the Pentax, Canon, Nikon and
    >> Olympus. Holding, feeling and see thru the viewfinder. The cheap
    >> Nikon has about the brightest view!

    >
    > Funny you should mention that. It was also my impression. I didn't quite
    > believe it because so many had said "the Nikon D40 doesn't have a proper
    > prism" - to save weight and cost, I expect. But it was brighter than the
    > Canon 400. So I bought it!


    The EOS400D likewise has a pentamirror rather than a prism, and yes, just
    like the 300/350 before it, the experience is that of looking down a rather
    dim tunnel.
    Chris Savage, Nov 30, 2007
    #15
  16. On Nov 29, 8:24 pm, ray <> wrote:
    > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:01:12 -0800, Dan Lenski wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > > I've been using an Olympus C-740 UZ for several years, and it's
    > > showing its age. It's been a great first camera, and I'm a big fan of
    > > the 10X optical zoom, but I'm tiring of its low resolution, no sound
    > > for movies, electronic viewfinder, and long shutter lag.

    >
    > > I'm researching my options for a new one. On the one hand, I'm
    > > tempted to go for something small enough to keep in my pocket. On the
    > > other hand, I want good zoom and manual controls (for nature and
    > > wildlife photos) and have been really dazzled by the photos one of my
    > > friends gets from his Canon 350D SLR. And I'd like to be able to buy
    > > something for $500-600 with lens.

    >
    > > * Canon PowerShot G9 - High-end compact, 6X optical zoom, can do good
    > > movies... but dpreview.com is not impressed by its picture quality at
    > > high ISO (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/)
    > > * Canon EOS 400D - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, seems to be the
    > > de facto standard, but it's pretty expensive and apparently the lens
    > > kit is not so great (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
    > > page29.asp)
    > > * Olympus E-410 - SLR, well-reviewed by dpreview.com, CHEAP compared
    > > to Canon 400D, but not as good dynamic range (http://www.dpreview.com/
    > > reviews/olympuse410/)

    >
    > > Anyone have any advice for how to decide one way or another? I'm sort
    > > of leaning towards the Olympus E-410 right now since I could afford to
    > > start out with a 14-42mm and 40-150mm lens kit. But possibly this is
    > > overkill for me and I should be aiming for a compact? Is there
    > > anything similar in size and features to the G9 that I should
    > > consider? Thanks for any help.

    >
    > > Dan

    >
    > You seem to be outlining two different sets of requirements - sounds to me
    > like you'd really like two cameras. A P&S to pack around most of the time,
    > and a DSLR when you're 'more serious' about it.


    I concur. A small compact camera is a compromise. In general you do
    give up something in quality of image for going small. This was true
    with film photography and still true today. The bigger the glass, the
    more photons you collect.
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Nov 30, 2007
    #16
  17. Daniel Lenski wrote:
    > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:24:33 -0700, ray wrote:
    >> You seem to be outlining two different sets of requirements - sounds to
    >> me like you'd really like two cameras. A P&S to pack around most of the
    >> time, and a DSLR when you're 'more serious' about it.

    >
    > Yeah, I expect I will keep the Olympus C-740 UZ... and I have a little
    > credit-card-cam as well which is okay for casual snapshots. At this point
    > I'll say I'm going for DSLR at this point, since it seems I'll be
    > disappointed by anything less.
    >
    > My good options are the Nikon D40, Canon EOS 350D or 400D, and Olympus
    > E410 or E510, I think.
    >
    > The advice I keep getting is to focus on availability of good lenses.
    > Which makes the Canons come out way ahead, I gather. And apparently the
    > number of autofocus-capable lenses for the Nikon is fairly small.


    This advice is correct. Canon has a much wider selection of good lenses
    that what is available for the D40. Another advantage of Canon is that
    their mid-range lenses are much better than what's available from Nikon,
    though Nikon has better low end, and equivalent high end other than the
    fluorite lenses which Nikon doesn't do. Before you think that you'll
    never use a high end lens, remember that if the situation demands it you
    can rent a high end lens fairly inexpensively for a few days, but it
    actually has to exist. In that sense, Canon has an advantage because
    they have lenses for which Nikon has no equivalent.

    Avoid the flawed 4/3 Olympus at all costs.

    If you go Nikon, consider the D80, which won't limit you as much in
    terms of lenses.

    Canon has a big advantage over Nikon because _every_ EOS lens made can
    be used on the 350D or 400D, while Nikon is a mess of bodies of lenses
    that can't be used together, or that can be used without full
    functionality, or that can be used if they are modified electronically
    and/or mechanically.
    SMS 斯蒂文• å¤, Nov 30, 2007
    #17
  18. Chris Savage wrote:
    > On 2007-11-30, David J Taylor
    > <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    >> Sosumi wrote:
    >> []
    >>> I´ve taken thousands of pictures with both and just the other day I
    >>> was in a shopping mall, looking at the Pentax, Canon, Nikon and
    >>> Olympus. Holding, feeling and see thru the viewfinder. The cheap
    >>> Nikon has about the brightest view!

    >>
    >> Funny you should mention that. It was also my impression. I didn't
    >> quite believe it because so many had said "the Nikon D40 doesn't
    >> have a proper prism" - to save weight and cost, I expect. But it
    >> was brighter than the Canon 400. So I bought it!

    >
    > The EOS400D likewise has a pentamirror rather than a prism, and yes,
    > just
    > like the 300/350 before it, the experience is that of looking down a
    > rather
    > dim tunnel.


    But Nikon do it better - a more pleasant viewfinder experience. My
    congratulations to them for a job well done.

    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 30, 2007
    #18
  19. SMS ???. ? wrote:
    []
    > This advice is correct. Canon has a much wider selection of good
    > lenses that what is available for the D40. Another advantage of Canon
    > is that their mid-range lenses are much better than what's available
    > from Nikon, though Nikon has better low end, and equivalent high end
    > other than the fluorite lenses which Nikon doesn't do. Before you
    > think that you'll never use a high end lens, remember that if the
    > situation demands it you can rent a high end lens fairly
    > inexpensively for a few days, but it actually has to exist. In that
    > sense, Canon has an advantage because they have lenses for which
    > Nikon has no equivalent.


    And vice-versa. Where is Canon's 18 - 200mm image stabilised lens?

    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 30, 2007
    #19
  20. Dan Lenski

    Mr. Strat Guest

    In article <ZWN3j.66295$>, Daniel
    Lenski <> wrote:

    > > Go with the Nikon or the Canon. Jeez...why waste money on something
    > > less?

    >
    > Something less?


    Olympus...definitely something less than Nikon or Canon.
    Mr. Strat, Nov 30, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. alexander H.
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    548
    Tax Johnson
    Feb 7, 2004
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    681
  3. Glen S

    purchasing a higher end digital - SLR or P&S?

    Glen S, Jan 21, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    52
    Views:
    962
    David J Taylor
    Jan 23, 2005
  4. High end P&S or Low end D-SLR

    , Mar 29, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    1,338
    J. Clarke
    Apr 6, 2006
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    832
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page