Overwhelmed by info and choices, suggestions wanted/appreciated

Hello, I am wanting to purchase a new digital camera to replace my old Kodak
DC280 that has been knocked off the table and no longer works correctly.

I cut my teeth on a Canon F1 many years ago when I was trained by the Army
to be a "photojournalist" and public affairs specialist. After a few years
of using Army supplied F1's and then the cheaper AE-1's they switched to, I
purchased a Canon EOS 620 (which I still own, but haven't used in years). I
used the 620 for at least a decade or more until I bought the DC280 when I
decided to join the digital revolution.

The reason for the history is that I have recently become very nostalgic
about the years when I really pursued photography as a recreation/hobby and
really enjoyed the pictures I was taking. Lately, I've grown very
dissatisfied with the lack of creative/manual control and the snapshot-like
quality that my point-n-click DC280 has given me over the years and now
would like something that gives me -- at the very least -- the ability to
control my aperture or shutter speed so I can once again blur out a busy
background with a narrow depth of field or capture that fast moving subject
with a higher shutter speed, etc.

I've read so many posts here and scanned so many web sites, I've become a
bit overwhelmed with the choices out there. I've looked at all of the DSLRs,
but I can't afford even the modestly priced Digital Rebel at this time.

Any suggestions for something that is between a simple point-n-click and a
digital SLR?

Price ~ $200 to 300
MP > 2 megapixel but preferably in the 3-5 range

This new camera is intended as an interim camera that I can use over the
next year or so until I can save enough money to purchase a true digital
SLR.

Are there any older model digital SLR's that are maybe in the 3-4 mp range
that I can look for on Ebay whose owners are now upgrading to top of the
line new equipment? That may get my foot in the door with the manual control
options I desire without resorting to a point-n-click option.

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!

Tom

 

t.mclean wrote:
> Any suggestions for something that is between a simple
> point-n-click and a digital SLR?
>
> Price ~ $200 to 300
> MP > 2 megapixel but preferably in the 3-5 range

There are probably several good choices, but you wouldn't go wrong with a
Canon A70. It has the features you mention and takes fine pictures.

Stretch the budget to $350 and you can get an A80, which gives you something
you won't get in a DSLR: the tilting, rotating LCD. This makes it effortless
to use creative angles that are hard to shoot from any other way. It's been
a real eye-opener in just the short time I've had mine.

-Mike

 

t.mclean wrote:

> Hello, I am wanting to purchase a new digital camera to replace my old Kodak
> DC280 that has been knocked off the table and no longer works correctly.
>
> I cut my teeth on a Canon F1 many years ago when I was trained by the Army
> to be a "photojournalist" and public affairs specialist. After a few years
> of using Army supplied F1's and then the cheaper AE-1's they switched to, I
> purchased a Canon EOS 620 (which I still own, but haven't used in years). I
> used the 620 for at least a decade or more until I bought the DC280 when I
> decided to join the digital revolution.
>
> The reason for the history is that I have recently become very nostalgic
> about the years when I really pursued photography as a recreation/hobby and
> really enjoyed the pictures I was taking. Lately, I've grown very
> dissatisfied with the lack of creative/manual control and the snapshot-like
> quality that my point-n-click DC280 has given me over the years and now
> would like something that gives me -- at the very least -- the ability to
> control my aperture or shutter speed so I can once again blur out a busy
> background with a narrow depth of field or capture that fast moving subject
> with a higher shutter speed, etc.
>
> I've read so many posts here and scanned so many web sites, I've become a
> bit overwhelmed with the choices out there. I've looked at all of the DSLRs,
> but I can't afford even the modestly priced Digital Rebel at this time.
>
> Any suggestions for something that is between a simple point-n-click and a
> digital SLR?
>
> Price ~ $200 to 300
> MP > 2 megapixel but preferably in the 3-5 range
>
> This new camera is intended as an interim camera that I can use over the
> next year or so until I can save enough money to purchase a true digital
> SLR.
>
> Are there any older model digital SLR's that are maybe in the 3-4 mp range
> that I can look for on Ebay whose owners are now upgrading to top of the
> line new equipment? That may get my foot in the door with the manual control
> options I desire without resorting to a point-n-click option.
>
> Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
>
> Tom

Foveon

 

wrote in news:4008967E.26594.4A9E81@localhost:

> t.mclean wrote:
> Tom
>

>
>
> I found that I too was overwhelmed by all the info, comparisons etc.
What helped me the most was actually going to a few stores and holding
the cameras trying the buttons zooms etc. This helped me rule out a number of
cameras that were very well - specified on paper but in
actually fact would have been physically impossible or very uncomfortable for me
to use (buttons in wrong place, too small etc,too heavy or just not "feeling
right").

I had underestimated how important to me the feel of the camera was.

So my advice is to have a list of specs that you really want and then go to as
many stores as possible and get the feel of as many cameras as possible with
those spec.. This willeliminate a whole heap from your "possibles" list and help
you decide.

The more web sites you scan and newsgroups you visit the more confused you
become...nothing beats getting out there and getting your hands on the
equipment!!

good luck with you search and let us know what you end up buying if
possible.
Sue G

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

 

Wait a month. Then decide.

"t.mclean" <> wrote in message
news:vr4Ob.83298$I06.360133@attbi_s01...
> Hello, I am wanting to purchase a new digital camera to replace my old
Kodak
> DC280 that has been knocked off the table and no longer works correctly.
>
> I cut my teeth on a Canon F1 many years ago when I was trained by the Army
> to be a "photojournalist" and public affairs specialist. After a few years
> of using Army supplied F1's and then the cheaper AE-1's they switched to,
I
> purchased a Canon EOS 620 (which I still own, but haven't used in years).
I
> used the 620 for at least a decade or more until I bought the DC280 when I
> decided to join the digital revolution.
>
> The reason for the history is that I have recently become very nostalgic
> about the years when I really pursued photography as a recreation/hobby
and
> really enjoyed the pictures I was taking. Lately, I've grown very
> dissatisfied with the lack of creative/manual control and the
snapshot-like
> quality that my point-n-click DC280 has given me over the years and now
> would like something that gives me -- at the very least -- the ability to
> control my aperture or shutter speed so I can once again blur out a busy
> background with a narrow depth of field or capture that fast moving
subject
> with a higher shutter speed, etc.
>
> I've read so many posts here and scanned so many web sites, I've become a
> bit overwhelmed with the choices out there. I've looked at all of the
DSLRs,
> but I can't afford even the modestly priced Digital Rebel at this time.
>
> Any suggestions for something that is between a simple point-n-click and a
> digital SLR?
>
> Price ~ $200 to 300
> MP > 2 megapixel but preferably in the 3-5 range
>
> This new camera is intended as an interim camera that I can use over the
> next year or so until I can save enough money to purchase a true digital
> SLR.
>
> Are there any older model digital SLR's that are maybe in the 3-4 mp range
> that I can look for on Ebay whose owners are now upgrading to top of the
> line new equipment? That may get my foot in the door with the manual
control
> options I desire without resorting to a point-n-click option.
>
> Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
>
> Tom
>
>

 

"Sue g" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9473B901A21C7suegil@211.29.133.50...

> I had underestimated how important to me the feel of the camera was.
>
> So my advice is to have a list of specs that you really want and then go
to as
> many stores as possible and get the feel of as many cameras as possible
with
> those spec.. This willeliminate a whole heap from your "possibles" list
and help
> you decide.

This is a great thing to do, but you really need to take a CF card and
display images full sized awhen you get home. Tiny LCDs can't show the
defects (even very significant ones).

 

no no no no no ... "Foveon" needs to grow up for a while.

--
Sincerely,
Alex
California central coast
----------------------------------------
e-mail address not given,
reply here.
----------------------------------------

<
> Foveon

 

Sue g wrote:

> wrote in news:4008967E.26594.4A9E81@localhost:
>
>
>>t.mclean wrote:
>> Tom
>>
>
>
>>
>>I found that I too was overwhelmed by all the info, comparisons etc.
>
> What helped me the most was actually going to a few stores and holding
> the cameras trying the buttons zooms etc. This helped me rule out a number of
> cameras that were very well - specified on paper but in
> actually fact would have been physically impossible or very uncomfortable for me
> to use (buttons in wrong place, too small etc,too heavy or just not "feeling
> right").
>
> I had underestimated how important to me the feel of the camera was.
>
> So my advice is to have a list of specs that you really want and then go to as
> many stores as possible and get the feel of as many cameras as possible with
> those spec.. This willeliminate a whole heap from your "possibles" list and help
> you decide.
>
> The more web sites you scan and newsgroups you visit the more confused you
> become...nothing beats getting out there and getting your hands on the
> equipment!!
>
> good luck with you search and let us know what you end up buying if
> possible.
> Sue G
>
>

I agree with you, Sue. The feel, and the look, of a camera is very
important to me. I have seen some with impressive specs that I
scratched off my list after a couple of seconds holding them. If a
camera doesn't feel good to you, you aren't going to enjoy using it, and
probably won't get good results with it. I feel this aspect is little
mentioned, or completely ignored, in reviews, and is highly individual
in any case.

 

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 06:16:59 GMT, "t.mclean" <>
wrote:


>The reason for the history is that I have recently become very nostalgic
>about the years when I really pursued photography as a recreation/hobby and
>really enjoyed the pictures I was taking. Lately, I've grown very
>dissatisfied with the lack of creative/manual control and the snapshot-like
>quality that my point-n-click DC280 has given me over the years and now
>would like something that gives me -- at the very least -- the ability to
>control my aperture or shutter speed so I can once again blur out a busy
>background with a narrow depth of field or capture that fast moving subject
>with a higher shutter speed, etc.
>
Hi Tom,

I know it's over the budget you set but have you considered the
Olympus E10? I was just looking on ebay and there are some in the 500$
range
with accessories.

Speaking as a longtime Olympus user as well as being an E10 owner,
I can say without question that it will meet your needs now and into
the future as well.

Check 'em out. Good luck.

Bill Mcdonald in Joshua Tree

 

"Bill Mcdonald" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 06:16:59 GMT, "t.mclean" <>
> wrote:
>
>
> >The reason for the history is that I have recently become very nostalgic
> >about the years when I really pursued photography as a recreation/hobby
and
> >really enjoyed the pictures I was taking. Lately, I've grown very
> >dissatisfied with the lack of creative/manual control and the
snapshot-like
> >quality that my point-n-click DC280 has given me over the years and now
> >would like something that gives me -- at the very least -- the ability to
> >control my aperture or shutter speed so I can once again blur out a busy
> >background with a narrow depth of field or capture that fast moving
subject
> >with a higher shutter speed, etc.
> >
> Hi Tom,
>
> I know it's over the budget you set but have you considered the
> Olympus E10? I was just looking on ebay and there are some in the 500$
> range
> with accessories.

Just a quick comparision that includes an E10 shot...
http://www.pbase.com/pennychallenge

 

Thank you for the posts so far. I will take a look at the cameras mentioned.

Sue, your point on how a camera feels is well taken, thank you!

I am curious about one thing, however, in scanning the many posts on this
newsgroup, there seems to be a LOT of people who seem to think they're back
in 2nd grade out on the playground. I'm amazed that I find many people
posting on a PHOTOGRAPHY forum that I assume is populated mostly by ADULTS
in much the same manner I'd think I'd find on alt.kewl.dudez.ur.Mom.suxors
by a bunch of 12 year olds.

Anyway, just my opinion.

Again, thank you to those that have offered sincere assistance.

Tom

 

t.mclean wrote:
> I am curious about one thing, however, in scanning the many posts
> on this newsgroup, there seems to be a LOT of people who seem to
> think they're back in 2nd grade out on the playground. I'm amazed
> that I find many people posting on a PHOTOGRAPHY forum that I
> assume is populated mostly by ADULTS in much the same manner
> I'd think I'd find on alt.kewl.dudez.ur.Mom.suxors by a bunch of
> 12 year olds.

It is amazing to me too. In all the years I've participated in newsgroups,
I've never needed to use a killfile. But this group has made it necessary. I
just checked and I've added 250 names to my killfile from this group alone!
(Probably a fair number of those are the same people posting under different
names.)

It's sad but true.

-Mike

 

As a 20 year veteran of the net..... ahem

That's just Usenet. I do have to admit that his is one of the worst groups I
monitor for lids. You can either let it get you bent out of shape or you can
ignore it and go on your way. I recommend finding a good reader (I use Agent)
with a good filtering/killfile mechanism and then systematically filter out
the people who shat on this group. You will be amazed at the difference once
you don't have to exercise your self-control on every other thread. An
additional benefit is that the daily 800 or so posts turn into something like
300.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:54:07 GMT, "t.mclean" <> wrote:


>I am curious about one thing, however, in scanning the many posts on this
>newsgroup, there seems to be a LOT of people who seem to think they're back
>in 2nd grade out on the playground. I'm amazed that I find many people
>posting on a PHOTOGRAPHY forum that I assume is populated mostly by ADULTS
>in much the same manner I'd think I'd find on alt.kewl.dudez.ur.Mom.suxors
>by a bunch of 12 year olds.
>
>Anyway, just my opinion.
>
>Again, thank you to those that have offered sincere assistance.
>
>Tom
>

---
John De Armond

http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/johngd/
Cleveland, Occupied TN

 

"t.mclean" <> wrote in message news:<vr4Ob.83298$I06.360133@attbi_s01>...
> Hello, I am wanting to purchase a new digital camera to replace my old Kodak
> DC280 that has been knocked off the table and no longer works correctly.
>
> I cut my teeth on a Canon F1 many years ago when I was trained by the Army
> to be a "photojournalist" and public affairs specialist. After a few years
> of using Army supplied F1's and then the cheaper AE-1's they switched to, I
> purchased a Canon EOS 620 (which I still own, but haven't used in years). I
> used the 620 for at least a decade or more until I bought the DC280 when I
> decided to join the digital revolution.
>
> The reason for the history is that I have recently become very nostalgic
> about the years when I really pursued photography as a recreation/hobby and
> really enjoyed the pictures I was taking. Lately, I've grown very
> dissatisfied with the lack of creative/manual control and the snapshot-like
> quality that my point-n-click DC280 has given me over the years and now
> would like something that gives me -- at the very least -- the ability to
> control my aperture or shutter speed so I can once again blur out a busy
> background with a narrow depth of field or capture that fast moving subject
> with a higher shutter speed, etc.
>
> I've read so many posts here and scanned so many web sites, I've become a
> bit overwhelmed with the choices out there. I've looked at all of the DSLRs,
> but I can't afford even the modestly priced Digital Rebel at this time.
>
> Any suggestions for something that is between a simple point-n-click and a
> digital SLR?
>
> Price ~ $200 to 300
> MP > 2 megapixel but preferably in the 3-5 range
>
> This new camera is intended as an interim camera that I can use over the
> next year or so until I can save enough money to purchase a true digital
> SLR.
>
> Are there any older model digital SLR's that are maybe in the 3-4 mp range
> that I can look for on Ebay whose owners are now upgrading to top of the
> line new equipment? That may get my foot in the door with the manual control
> options I desire without resorting to a point-n-click option.
>
> Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
>
> Tom

If you have $200 - 300 to spend for an interim camera, why not buy
something like a Canon Rebel film camera. Minolta, Pentax and Nikon
have other choices. You will have a much more sophisticated camera,
albeit not digital, and could possibly match it with a same-brand
digital later, using the same lens(es) and other attachments on both.

 

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bubivs$i92$...
>
> Just a quick comparision that includes an E10 shot...
> http://www.pbase.com/pennychallenge
>
>

Which you should ignore. george has a heavy bias for Sigma cameras and is
incapable of objectivity. His "tests!" are always rigged in favour of Sigma.

 

"Manfred von Richthofen" <> wrote in message
news:bugd1d$imt$...
> "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
> news:bubivs$i92$...
> >
> > Just a quick comparision that includes an E10 shot...
> > http://www.pbase.com/pennychallenge
> >
> >
>
> Which you should ignore. george has a heavy bias for Sigma cameras

I have a heavy bias toward dramatically better image quality. I've been
though too many Bayers.

 

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bugqeh$p6$...
>
> >
> > Which you should ignore. george has a heavy bias for Sigma cameras
>
> I have a heavy bias toward dramatically better image quality. I've been
> though too many Bayers.
>

No you don't. You have a heavy bias toward artificially sharp images. You
care little about colour. You care nothing about alias artefacts.

 

"Manfred von Richthofen" <> wrote in message
news:buiu10$899$...
> "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
> news:bugqeh$p6$...
> >
> > >
> > > Which you should ignore. george has a heavy bias for Sigma cameras
> >
> > I have a heavy bias toward dramatically better image quality. I've been
> > though too many Bayers.
> >
>
> No you don't. You have a heavy bias toward artificially sharp images.

Call it what you will, I like high resolution low noise, better than film.
Foveon is the only option.

 

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:buk81o$psj$...
>
> "Manfred von Richthofen" <> wrote in message
> news:buiu10$899$...
> > "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
> > news:bugqeh$p6$...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Which you should ignore. george has a heavy bias for Sigma cameras
> > >
> > > I have a heavy bias toward dramatically better image quality. I've
been
> > > though too many Bayers.
> > >
> >
> > No you don't. You have a heavy bias toward artificially sharp images.
>
> Call it what you will, I like high resolution low noise, better than film.
> Foveon is the only option.
>

What are you on? Sigma images are somtimes breathtaking at first glance. You
seen realise after looking at them that they won't print well bigger than
6*4 - theres just not enough pixels and the artefacts will become glaringly
obvious.

 

"Braindead Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bulhci$b91$...

> > Call it what you will, I like high resolution low noise, better than
film.
> > Foveon is the only option.
> >
>
> What are you on? Sigma images are somtimes breathtaking at first glance.

And Bayer images are awful at first, second, and rarely get a third.

> You
> seen realise after looking at them that they won't print well bigger than
> 6*4 - theres just not enough pixels and the artefacts will become
glaringly
> obvious.
>
>
>