Why go dSLR?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jed Savage, Jun 23, 2004.

  1. Jed Savage

    Jed Savage Guest

    I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!
     
    Jed Savage, Jun 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jed Savage wrote:
    > I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    > Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    > thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    > resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    > and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    > ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    > change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    > but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    > SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    > dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    > probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    > click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    > be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    > examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!


    Frankly nothing. Many digital cameras that are not called dSLR are in
    fact dSL, (no R) and function in almost every way as a dSLR. The reflex
    part allows a direct view through the lens as opposed to an electronic view
    through the lens.

    Most dSLRs are higher end cameras and have features and a quality level
    that appeals to the more serious photographer, especially those coming from
    a 35 mm tradition.

    Rather than focusing on SLR or not SLR, I suggest you look for the
    features, quality and feel that work for you and don't limit your choices by
    worrying about the classification.

    Changing lenses 35 years ago was very important. Good quality zoom
    lenses were either very expensive or extremely expensive. Today that is not
    the case and good (I did not say great, but good enough) quality wide range
    zoom lenses are the norm. Today the ability to change lenses is meaningless
    to 95% of the users.

    Good Luck

    --
    Joseph E. Meehan

    26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
     
    Joseph Meehan, Jun 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jed Savage

    Jeff Durham Guest

    If you are interested in pictures at a family outing, stick with a point and
    shoot digital camera. If you are interested in a wide range of photography
    (landscapes, fireworks, portraits, closeups of insects, flowers, ...), get
    an SLR. For instance, with portraits, you may want to blur the background
    of your subject. This is easy with an SLR by opening the aperture (lowering
    the f/stop number).

    The Canon Digital Rebel 300D and the Nikon D70 are great entry level DSLRs.
    Check out this online Canon workshop for their DSLRs:
    http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/lessons_1-5.html

    If you are interested in doing those types of things, then you want a DSLR.

    Jeff


    "Jed Savage" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    > Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    > thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    > resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    > and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    > ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    > change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    > but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    > SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    > dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    > probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    > click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    > be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    > examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!
     
    Jeff Durham, Jun 23, 2004
    #3
  4. Jed Savage

    jean Guest

    Also, if you want to shoot at ISO 400, 800 or even 1600 and still get a good
    picture, go DSLR. The other advantage is the speed of operation. The
    downside is learning to use it, learning to do some post processing and
    looking like a geek when you carry it around.

    Jean

    Oh, I forgot, DSLRs are also heavier and more expensive, sometimes a LOT
    more expensive. If you are afraid of losing money because they WILL lose
    value, then just look at how much you car's value has gone down, that makes
    a DSLR is easier to justify. I spend more time on my computers and with my
    cameras than in my car.

    "Jeff Durham" <> a écrit dans le message de
    news:IzhCc.146993$...
    > If you are interested in pictures at a family outing, stick with a point

    and
    > shoot digital camera. If you are interested in a wide range of

    photography
    > (landscapes, fireworks, portraits, closeups of insects, flowers, ...), get
    > an SLR. For instance, with portraits, you may want to blur the background
    > of your subject. This is easy with an SLR by opening the aperture

    (lowering
    > the f/stop number).
    >
    > The Canon Digital Rebel 300D and the Nikon D70 are great entry level

    DSLRs.
    > Check out this online Canon workshop for their DSLRs:
    > http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/lessons_1-5.html
    >
    > If you are interested in doing those types of things, then you want a

    DSLR.
    >
    > Jeff
    >
    >
    > "Jed Savage" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    > > Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    > > thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    > > resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    > > and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    > > ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    > > change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    > > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > > non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    > > but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    > > SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    > > dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    > > probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    > > click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    > > be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    > > examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!

    >
    >
     
    jean, Jun 23, 2004
    #4
  5. Jed Savage

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Joseph Meehan wrote:

    >>Can anyone give me some
    >>examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!

    >
    >
    > Frankly nothing. Many digital cameras that are not called dSLR are in
    > fact dSL, (no R) and function in almost every way as a dSLR. The reflex
    > part allows a direct view through the lens as opposed to an electronic view
    > through the lens.


    Surprising reply, "Frankly nothing". There are some significant
    advantages to dSLR (not all related to the S or the L or the R).

    o Larger focal planes allow shooting at ISOs up to 1600: Great for many
    situations I've been in. Few if any non dSLRs can go to ISO 400 without
    unacceptable noise.

    o Interchangable lenses allow more zoom range without loss of quality --
    and the use of image stabilization (available on only two P&S that I
    know of)

    o Lenses are generally much higher in quality (but there are exceptions).

    o Generally more creative options.

    o Though the lens "what you see is what you get" composition. Can use
    the LCD on many non-dSLR cameras this way -- but seldom in bright light.
    And their viewfinders (excepting those with EVF) are notoriously
    inaccurate for composition.

    Downsides of dSLR are size/wt and cost (300D with kit lens is $1000 but
    no one is likely to stop with the kit lens, and really good lenses are
    pricy).

    Still and all, it really surprises me that someone will plunk down $1000
    for a fancy P&S camera when they could buy an entry-level dSLR instead.
    But maybe that's just me.

    Phil
     
    Phil Wheeler, Jun 23, 2004
    #5
  6. Jed Savage

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Jed Savage wrote:
    > I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    > Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    > thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    > resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    > and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    > ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    > change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    > but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    > SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    > dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    > probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    > click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    > be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    > examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!


    Simply, if you don't know, you don't need one. But a good P&S, such as
    the Kodak DX7440 and use it. If you find that there are things it won't
    do that you want to do as you learn more about photography, THEN you
    will have some idea of what you want a DSLR to do, and what it CAN do.
    Buying ANY camera with your eyes closed, and no specific idea why you
    are buying that one over another is probably going to be an unhappy
    experience.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jun 23, 2004
    #6
  7. Jed Savage

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Jeff Durham wrote:

    > If you are interested in pictures at a family outing, stick with a point and
    > shoot digital camera. If you are interested in a wide range of photography
    > (landscapes, fireworks, portraits, closeups of insects, flowers, ...), get
    > an SLR. For instance, with portraits, you may want to blur the background
    > of your subject. This is easy with an SLR by opening the aperture (lowering
    > the f/stop number).


    That is also easy with the better P&S digitals. The DSLR 'thing' is
    changeable lenses. Even the old advantage of through the lens viewing
    is lost to P&S digitals.

    >
    > The Canon Digital Rebel 300D and the Nikon D70 are great entry level DSLRs.
    > Check out this online Canon workshop for their DSLRs:
    > http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/lessons_1-5.html
    >
    > If you are interested in doing those types of things, then you want a DSLR.
    >
    > Jeff
    >
    >
    > "Jed Savage" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    >>Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    >>thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    >>resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    >>and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    >>ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    >>change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    >>question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    >>non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    >>but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    >>SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    >>dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    >>probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    >>click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    >>be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    >>examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!

    >
    >
    >
     
    Ron Hunter, Jun 23, 2004
    #7
  8. Jed Savage

    Guest

    jean <> wrote:
    : Also, if you want to shoot at ISO 400, 800 or even 1600 and still get a good
    : picture, go DSLR. The other advantage is the speed of operation. The
    : downside is learning to use it, learning to do some post processing and
    : looking like a geek when you carry it around.

    ...and of course expense. Honestly, most of the mid-range and higher point
    and shoot digital cameras will allow manual control of exposure. The real differences
    are (as people have mentioned):

    - Interchangeable lenses: Not *as* important as once upon a time, but still necessary
    to do a wide range (think wildlife closeups vs landscapes)

    - High sensitivity: There's more to a digital camera than megapixels. A point and
    shoot may have as many megapixels as a DSLR, but they're usually packed into a (much)
    smaller area. That means less light per individual pixel, so the signal (and
    consequently noise) is amplified more. That results in a lot of digital noise on
    high ISO photos

    If you don't know anything about what I just mentioned, I'd recommend getting
    a $200-$300 point and shoot. Should be mid-range enough to see if you like it, but
    still much cheaper (less than half) of a low-end DSLR.

    -Cory


    --
    *************************************************************************
    * The prime directive of Linux: *
    * - learn what you don't know, *
    * - teach what you do. *
    * (Just my 20 USm$) *
    *************************************************************************
     
    , Jun 23, 2004
    #8
  9. Jed Savage

    Chuck Guest


    > and the use of image stabilization (available on only two P&S that I
    > know of)


    Canon S1 IS
    Minolta A1 and A2
    Panasonic FZ2 and FZ10 (and before the end of the year , Panasonic will have
    a new one with 6mp that they will also sell on the OEM market).

    And I forgot the name of an old one, the UZ I think Not sure.
     
    Chuck, Jun 23, 2004
    #9
  10. Dont get a DSLR!

    If you don't have a reason to get a dslr instead of a point and
    shoot....don't get one. Wait until the lack of options with the P&S gets in
    the way of being creative.


    "Jed Savage" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    > Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    > thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    > resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    > and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    > ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    > change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    > but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    > SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    > dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    > probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    > click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    > be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    > examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!
     
    Gene Palmiter, Jun 23, 2004
    #10
  11. Jed Savage

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Chuck wrote:

    >>and the use of image stabilization (available on only two P&S that I
    >>know of)

    >
    >
    > Canon S1 IS
    > Minolta A1 and A2
    > Panasonic FZ2 and FZ10 (and before the end of the year , Panasonic will have
    > a new one with 6mp that they will also sell on the OEM market).
    >
    > And I forgot the name of an old one, the UZ I think Not sure.


    Oly C-2100UZ
    >
    >
     
    Phil Wheeler, Jun 23, 2004
    #11
  12. Better autofocus and metering

    No shutter lag, very little autofocus lag

    Lower noise at high ISO ratings

    Larger burst mode/higher FPS

    Wide variety of specialist lenses

    Overall better image quality
     
    Brian C. Baird, Jun 23, 2004
    #12
  13. (Jed Savage) writes:

    > I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    > Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    > thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    > resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    > and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    > ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    > change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    > but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    > SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    > dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    > probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    > click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    > be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    > examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!


    Changing lenses. I can't get anything *close* to the wide end of what
    I use routinely in a fixed-lens model. Also more responsive -- less
    delay after pushing the button, faster autofocus. Also higher quality
    pixels -- even at the same pixel count, the pictures are *better*;
    especially at high ISO.

    Of course it's a lot more money, and a lot more stuff to haul around.
    That might end up discouraging you from shooting photos, which would
    not be a win!
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jun 23, 2004
    #13
  14. (Jed Savage) wrote in
    news::

    > My
    > question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    > non-SLR?


    There are three advantages
    1. Currently you must buy a dSLR to get a large sensor.
    2. SLR's has a very attractive view finder - WYSIWG.
    3. You can get change lenses.

    You area rguing against 3.

    But 1 and 2 are two very real advanatages.



    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jun 23, 2004
    #14
  15. Roland Karlsson <> wrote in
    news:Xns9511E1BFA32AAklotjohan@130.133.1.4:

    > There are three advantages
    > 1. Currently you must buy a dSLR to get a large sensor.
    > 2. SLR's has a very attractive view finder - WYSIWG.
    > 3. You can get change lenses.
    >
    > You area rguing against 3.
    >
    > But 1 and 2 are two very real advanatages.


    Oops - sory abbaut the speling. Writting to faast.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jun 23, 2004
    #15
  16. Jed Savage

    Bob Guest

    On 23 Jun 2004 08:35:09 -0700, (Jed Savage) wrote:

    >I've had a sanyo vpc-x360 for about 4-5 years that I've been using.
    >Aside from resolution, it's been an ok camera for me. I've been
    >thinking of going to a 4 or 5 mega-pixel camera tho as I'd like more
    >resolution. I went into the electronic shop here and started browsing
    >and I saw the dSLR cameras. I thought they were cool because of the
    >ability to change lenses (though I don't know why I'd ever need to
    >change lens), and I'm thinking of getting a dSLR my next buy. My
    >question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    >non-SLR? I've heard that they offer the shooter more creative control
    >but I'm not quite sure exactly what that means. Why would one need an
    >SLR? What types of settings am I going to be able to tweak with on
    >dSLR camera that will make much difference in my photos? As you can
    >probably tell I'm not very schooled on photography beyond point &
    >click cameras, I just don't want to buy a standard digital camera and
    >be wishing later that I would have gone dSLR. Can anyone give me some
    >examples of when a dSLR camera would come in handy? Thanks!


    I bought a DSLR so that I could actually see the image - not some crap TV
    picture - before I took it, so I could make sure it was framed and focused. In
    bright sunlight - forget the electronic screen, even inside viewfinders are
    useless. And I had one of the best, a Dimage7i.

    Much to my surprise, I also found that the D70 camera made vastly superior
    pictures as well! And both cameras cost me about the same price - I now
    consider the Minolta an over-priced POS.

    At first I wasn't concerned about changing lenses, but now I have the
    opportunity to extend my range, even if I don't take full advantage of it, I do
    want to get different lenses in the future, something you can't do with a
    standard digital.

    For me, the DSLR has brought photography back to life, much the way my first one
    did back in 1965!
     
    Bob, Jun 23, 2004
    #16
  17. Jed Savage

    Steve Almond Guest

    "Jeff Durham" <> wrote in message
    news:IzhCc.146993$...
    > If you are interested in pictures at a family outing, stick with a point

    and
    > shoot digital camera. If you are interested in a wide range of

    photography
    > (landscapes, fireworks, portraits, closeups of insects, flowers, ...), get
    > an SLR.


    Are DSLRs really better for landscapes? I thought the low end models had
    problems getting wide angle?

    Steve
     
    Steve Almond, Jun 23, 2004
    #17
  18. Jed Savage

    Bob Guest

    Re: Dont get a DSLR!

    On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 17:43:39 GMT, "Gene Palmiter" <>
    wrote:

    >If you don't have a reason to get a dslr instead of a point and
    >shoot....don't get one. Wait until the lack of options with the P&S gets in
    >the way of being creative.
    >


    On the other hand... a good DSLR makes for a better point and shoot!

    One reason I replaced my 'point and shoot' was because it failed to auto focus
    lots of times, and I didn't notice until I got home and loaded the pics into the
    computer. Now I can point and shoot with far less auto focus failure.

    In fact, I drove 50 miles yesterday to take replacement pictures that I had
    already taken - this time NOT blurry!
     
    Bob, Jun 23, 2004
    #18
  19. Roland Karlsson <> writes:

    > (Jed Savage) wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> My
    >> question is really what benefits do the dSLR cameras have over
    >> non-SLR?

    >
    > There are three advantages


    [snip]

    > 2. SLR's has a very attractive view finder - WYSIWG.


    Opinions vary; I think the viewfinder of an SLR is *less* WYSIWYG than
    the live LCD preview that non-SLR digitals normally have.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jun 23, 2004
    #19
  20. Jed Savage

    Alfred Molon Guest

    David Dyer-Bennet <> wrote:

    >Changing lenses. I can't get anything *close* to the wide end of what
    >I use routinely in a fixed-lens model. Also more responsive -- less
    >delay after pushing the button, faster autofocus. Also higher quality
    >pixels -- even at the same pixel count, the pictures are *better*;
    >especially at high ISO.
    >
    >Of course it's a lot more money, and a lot more stuff to haul around.
    >That might end up discouraging you from shooting photos, which would
    >not be a win!


    Oh well... my wife has a (film) SLR, me a compact Olympus 5050. Guess
    which camera gets used more often

    Concerning the high ISO, many people use DSLRs with lenses which start
    at F4 or for other reasons are forced to shoot at small apertures (to
    get sufficient DOF for instance). With small apertures you are basically
    forced to use high ISOs, while with the camera I'm using I can shoot at
    F1.8 at low ISOs and still have a lot to depth of field.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
    Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
    Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html
     
    Alfred Molon, Jun 23, 2004
    #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. Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,260
  2. JB

    Advice please: DSLR or DSLR-style?

    JB, Oct 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    606
    Siddhartha Jain
    Oct 21, 2004
  3. Guest
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    1,408
    Patrick Boch
    Mar 18, 2005
  4. Alan Browne

    [DSLR] rpd.slr-systems is _the_ place for DSLR discussion

    Alan Browne, Apr 7, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    41
    Views:
    959
    David J Taylor
    Apr 14, 2005
  5. Siddhartha Jain

    Which P&S to complement a dSLR (follows "Hamstrung by a dSLR")

    Siddhartha Jain, Jul 5, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    461
    Amamba
    Jul 10, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page