Rule number one in the days before digital was always:

Lenses take pictures, cameras hold film.

It's a little more complicated today but there's still a lot of truth in rule number one. Buy a camera with good optics. Some points:

Sony's better cameras use lenses made by Zeiss. Only a handful of companies make lenses that compete with Zeiss lenses.

Leica (Panasonic cameras), Canon, Nikon, Olympus are in that small handful above.

You mentioned you want an abiity to zoom in. Pay attention to the optical zoom range of the camera. Do not consider at all the digital zoom range of the camera. A digital zoom range is just a nusiance feature you have to take the time and trouble to shut off. You can get optical zoom ranges as little as 3X and as much as 12X. Sounds like you want to lean towards the higher end.

Overall camera resolution is going to be related to how big a print you think you'd like to be able to make. If you're happy with 4x6 and an occasional 5x7 then a 4 megapixel camera will more than serve. 5 megapixels is plenty for an 8x10 print. Buy a 6+ megapixel camera if you regularly plan to make 8x10 and larger prints.

Don't fall into the trap of thinking that more megapixels must be better. The increasing megapixel density of smaller CCD/CMOS sensors can give you pictures that are noisier and more prone to chromatic abberation.

Features: There are too many features of dubious value on modern cameras. Look for the following:

Autofocus is fast and accurate.
Autofocus can be locked.
Macro focus feature.
Exposure compensation +/- easy to use.
Exposure can be locked.
Exposure can be manually set.
Overall system delay.
Histogram display.
Color space options.

A comment about system delay: This is the time between you're pushing the button and the camera actually taking the picture. You want a camera that has the smallest delay possible.

Read the reviews at Steve's digicams -- link below.

Here is a link that might be useful: steve's

P&S or SLR?
What type of pictures do you take?
What system are your current lenses?
Are brand Loyal?
How much zoom do you want?
Price limit?
Here are some links where this has been discussed before.

http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load/photo/msg1015011530487.html?7
http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load/photo/msg072305073492.html
http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load/photo/msg1017010930731.html

I totally agree with firewire800, I hate it when I hear the sales person say "well this one has more MP so the pictures will be better" the hairs on the back of my neck stand! My does not go to circuit city or best buy with me because I eventually walk towards the cameras( I have no intention of buying one) and call out the sales people in their lies.

It's about the Image quality of the sensor and the glass is still just as important.

Joe

>>I have always used a good 35mm camera with extra lens, and have to this point shied away from a digital camera. However....I'm now wanting to purchase one

I would think in this case you need allot of mega pixel especially when taking wild life shots, you want to crop out that bird or what ever.... when you have allot of pixels to start out with, the cropped picture will remain in good quality!

My camera has around 8 mega pixel and I wish it has more then 10.
Konrad

>>I have always used a good 35 mm camera with extra lens, and have to this point shied away from a digital camera. However....I'm now wanting to purchase one.

OK, then stay with what you have been using, If you already have used Cameras with changeable lenses you will never be happy with Point and shot cameras.

I have at this moment Canon Xlt with four lenses, I can shot anything fro family portraits to small birds. The lenses from my old Canon Elan did fit the new digital camera.

The Camera is up to you, Nikon, Canon or others are good Cameras but most of us do decide on our own equipment,
Go check them out, Just remember each sales person will have a favorite they will tell you how great it is. And study all the Photography forums till you have a choice. Bill C

Canon EOS 30D/20D/10D/D60/D30 Forum: Digital Photography Review

Here is a link that might be useful: dpreview

Here is a example of a picture today,....a bird flew to the neighbours tree and I didn't know what it was, then taking quickly
a picture from inside the house just for ID this bird.....

Original

Cropped

Konrad

A couple points here:

You already have an SLR film camera. If it's a current enough major brand you could consider using your existing lenses on a new digital SLR body. Unless you're prepared to spend serious money on something like a Canon 5D then the sensor in your new digital camera will be smaller than 35mm film -- your lenses will change focal length. What was a normal lens on your 35mm SLR will be a short tele on a digital camera with a sensor smaller than 35mm film.

Furthermore, film doesn't care if the light that exposes it strikes the film at a right angle or obliquely; CCD/CMOS sensor care. Lenses for film cameras were not designed for CCD/CMOS sensors and it does make a difference. Your film camera lenses will not perform optimally with a digital sensor. Best to buy new and buy properly designed equipment.

Digital SLRs are great, but -- and it's a big BUT: Every time you put a roll of film in your film camera you're starting clean. One small speck of dust stuck on the sensor of your digital SLR is one black spot if every photo you take from that point on. Two specks of dust are two spots and you get the picture. If you keep changing lenses on a DSLR it is inevitable that you're going to get dirt on the sensor. You can't just blow it off. This is a problem you need to research if you're going to consider a DSLR.

Just because you're accustomed to an SLR doesn't mean you can't adjust to something else. SLRs have long been popular for good reason. However other viewing/focusing system cameras have held their place. It's always been possible to move up from an SLR to a more accurate focusing rangefinder for example, although more costly. The term "point and shoot" as a pejorative applied to non-SLR cameras is a misnomer. The Sony R1 for example would classify as a "point and shoot" camera, and although the EVF finder of the R1 is inferior to an SLR, no 35mm film camera can compete with it's image quality and that goes for some of the lower end DSLRs as well. Trade the R1's EVF against that fact that it's sensor will remain dust free for years and the EVF starts looking like a reasonable compromise.

Just because you're accustomed to an SLR doesn't mean you can't adjust to something else.

I agree with Firewire. I got my first 35mm SLR when I was 22, and got my first digital camera over 30 years later. These days my lovely SLRs sit in a closet. I have three digital cameras (two Olympuses and a Panasonic), but none is a DSLR. I'm sure I'll get a DSLR someday, but I'm in no hurry. I love my cameras and still haven't explored and/or mastered all their features. I have a lot of fun with them.

If anyone wants to take a look, some of my pictures can be found here.

Susan

Taken with a ten year old Tokina lens with a Rebel digital camera recently. We are not smashing atoms here, The guy wants to move up, No spend ten grand doing it. Bill C
{{!gwi}}

I must add here, Try your older lenses on the camera, There are some that will not work and would have to be rechipped. All of mine worked, Are we to just throw our older equipment away?

As for dust, I have thousands upon thousands of Slides and Negatives that were stored properly in sleeves. I have been trying to digitize them. The Sensor on a Digital Camera will never see dust like on a slide or negative, I will not complete this in my lifetime.

Now, The good news, With a digital file you just load it into your computer and do whatever, then put them on CD and do not worry about them. No contest! Bill C

{{!gwi}}

I agree that dust was always a problem with film. Cleaning dirty film is at least possible, but dust or dirt on the film at the time of exposure can only be retouched with difficulty -- this however was rarely a problem as each new film load was clean. With a DSLR you still have dust problems, maybe better maybe worse. It depends a lot on how you will use the camera. Put on a zoom lens and don't take it off, use the camera in clean places especially indoors and the sensor will likely stay dust free for a long time. On the other hand, change lenses a lot and use the camera in dirty places and it's a different ball game. The problem is real, if it wasn't the camera makers wouldn't be trying so hard to address it, and they are. OLympus and Sony are building ultrasonic sensor shakers into their DSLRs to try and keep the dust off them.

That said a sealed "point and shoot" digital camera resolves the dust problem.

Susan adjusted well to her Panasonic Lumix (model?). The Leitz lens on that camera is a stunner and, we're not talking about breaking the bank. I've made 16x20 prints from the 5 megapixel Lumix that rival the results I used to get from 35mm film. The reason is that magnificent optic.

You can live happily with a viewfinder style camera as long as the camera has essential features. Viewfinder style cameras with moveable LCD screens can do things you can't do with an SLR like frame a shot with the camera six inches from the ground without having to crawl on your belly.

And if you are interested in best possible image quality lenses designed for digital sensors are better. Sure old lenses work, but that choice forces you to a DSLR. You could spend less and be happy. Cat: from a high-end "point and shoot" Sony R1.

{{!gwi}}

My Lumix is an FZ5. Nice cat!

You can say whatever about Point and shoot but they are not the same caliber as a SLR, Just look around, If Point and shoot are so good why are Professional Photographer not using them other then taken Photos of there family at home?

As soon as you get one out in the Sun you can't even see the screen, Go to any public event where you can expect to see Photographers and all you see is them Big White lenses for the most part, There is no way a point and shoot can compare to this.

I could probably gather you up a half a bushel of Point and shoot Cameras around my house and they are used, even by me, But, any serious Photography is done by my DSLR with changeable Lenses.

Your Cat Photo is a fine poised photo of the family pet, Nice shot good and clear. But, You would have never taken the photos I showed with a point and shoot.

Now, The guy did not say, What is the cheapest way to go digital, Did he? So, I'll stick to my first statements on this subject, He understands SLR, he has one, Why would anyone step down other then Money or they want a Camera to stick in there pocket like a pack of cigarettes> Point and shoot cannot do what a DSLR can do.

wigardenerwannabe's Asked for opinions on this subject, I gave him mine, You can argue all you want I'll stick to my original remarks. Bill C

Bill,

I totally agree with arguments about the quality difference between P&S and SLR. The image quality of the sensors and glass is far superior to the P&S, but there are some nice P&S out there. I dont think it is a bad idea to mention the better P&Ss out there. I never tell anyone they have a bad camera, unless they ask, but there are a few I would never reccomend.

The new intro DSLRs run about $899 with cheap kit lenses, however there one dual lens kit that is excellent. Add a good lens, >$300 and you looking at $1100 easy. Most people are not willing to make that jump.

I dont know how long you have been hanging but this forum is full of member that just want to take pictures and enjoy doing it, no matter what the camera. I get the sense that you became upset in your last post.

Very few pepople here make money from their photos, so I have found out that making "Pro" reccomendations a usually missunderstood or beyand the level of the Op. I mean no offense to anyone here, it's just not that type of forum, adn I really like it that way. These threads are really about the 'Look at my (dog,cat, kid,etc...)' and that is why I enjoy this site just as I do the other sites.

The original op has not even responded and this has been one of the most replied to messages on the forum in awhile.

Sit back and enjoy all the grandkid pictures!

Joe

Your Cat Photo is a fine poised photo of the family pet, Nice shot good and clear. But, You would have never taken the photos I showed with a point and shoot.

No, I'd get my birds flying (and it wasn't the family cat). Pelicans shot with a Sony R1 "point and shoot."

{{!gwi}}

Now, The guy did not say, What is the cheapest way to go digital, Did he?

No, but Jean did say she was a novice, not a pro. Although she has past experience with an SLR that doesn't mean she can't adjust as Susan has to a very good viewfinder camera at a very reasonable cost.

Point and shoot cannot do what a DSLR can do.

And most (maybe all) DSLRs can't compete with the image quality of this: camera which is not an SLR (even if they cost as much).

It's not true that SLR equates with good camera and everything else is inferior. This is true with digital just as it was true with film. Before I started to work with digital cameras I shot a lot with Contax G system cameras -- not an SLR. The 28mm Biogon on that camera was better than any 28mm lens ever made for any SLR period (you can look it up if you don't believe me). There are viewfinder digital cameras available that rival DSLRs and in some cases surpass the entry level DSLRs.

It is fair to say that the much more expensive DLSRs as a group are more capable cameras than the cheaper consumer oriented viewfinder cameras. But there are enough exceptions in both groups that the groups overlap at the edges. A novice like Jean may be very happy with a camera like Susan's 5 megapixel Lumix which I know outperforms the 6 megapixel Digital Rebel and gives the Rebel Xt a good run.

My thoughts on the M8 and R1:

I have never owned or played with the M8, but it does have some serious flaws and Lieca has acknowledged it and trying to address it. However, for that price those problems should never exist. I do like the Leica brand because it tries to make cameras to the standards it sets for itself, not to simply sell cameras. Other camera brands tried to act like there never was a problem, i.e. early Nikon banding issues, so it says a lot to me that made a statement to address it and attempt to fix it.

The R1 is an excellent camera and I really liked it when I played with it for the day I had it. However, you are limited to the lens on the camera. If I pay $1000 I would rather buy into the system and glass vs. a whole camera, the camera will be obsolete one day, so what do you do then? With an SLR system you have the glass still and just move on to the next body.

You pointed out two of the better current P&Ss. There are some P&Ss that give you great pictures: E10, E20, Dimage, Powershot Pro1. These cameras will give you quality near the DSLRs of their time but it still wonÂt match what a SLR will give. I am fan of both styles, but you have to be fair when comparing the two. My DSLR, grip and lens would take up my whole bag so I carry the P&S for those candid moments
Good day,
Joe

I've been sitting around here all night and had decided that I had enough of this stubborn denial and to just get out of here.

Someone questioned how long I've been around here, I've been on the Garden Web from 1998 till now, I have taken a few trips to
Disney land as Spike and I did not get along, I was one of the first contributors to pay the fee when Spike asked for it, But I soon got tired of it after no one else paid it and stopped. I was never forgiven and soon after that The fee was made permanent, I just did not Pay and was booted to Disney,
I was mostly on the Birding and Computer forum but I also came here.

I've had several names as every time Spike figured out who I was I went to Disney land again. Thank goodness he is out of here, He was a very vengeful and would only forgive those that begged him. I would never do that. Some people loved him, I never could figure that out.

This kind of stuff comes and goes. On the computer NJ forum there's a guy that came on about a month ago asking all kind of questions about computers, one month later he is now advertising he will go on house calls to repair computers, He will not be around long.

Oh, by the way, When Leica decided they needed someone to build a better lens to keep up with there fine quality Cameras You will never guess who they got, One of the oldest Lens makers in the world,
"Tokina". Pop Photography. recent. Catch ya much later.

Clam Digger

None of my Photos were cropped.

Digger,
I hope you feel better now. I never questioned how long you have been here, it was a part of a comment. Your initial reply seemed angry and that is why I made that comment. No offense, but I could care less, just as I do not expect other GW members to care how long I have been here. We are all here to enjoy each others company, share photos and help too!

If you read back I have been a firm supporter of your argument, so I dont know why you felt the need to call me (my comment) out. Oh Well, I do hope you stay around, you do seem very knowledgable of photography. I did not know about the relationship between Leica and Tokina. I wonder who is making their sensor. Is the M8 IR sensitivity issue a lens or sensor problem?
Good Day!
Joe

My dad used to say there were two kinds of photographers, equipment people and artists. (He thought of himself as an equipment person.) I think there are many more than two categories, but I think the important point is that photography, like so many other things, incorporates personal talent and preference. And in fact even someone with a glaring lack of talent can have fun with a camera, snapping pictures of family members or whatever.

What I'm trying to say is that there's no one perfect camera, or type of camera, for everyone. It certainly isn't an issue worth getting angry over.

One of my digital cameras is an Olympus I bought in 2002. It's the same model I used when I was a newspaper reporter/photographer. I don't know what they're using at the paper now, but I still like my "old" camera, 3.2 megapixels and all. I wouldn't try cropping a bird out of the sky with it, but I did this:

{{gwi:13356}}

And this:

I have an 8x10 of each hanging on my wall. To me, at least, they're beautiful. And in the end, isn't that what matters?

Susan

Yes, pictures... I remember these. As long as they bring a smile to your face it is what matters most. Here is one of my favorites, it make me smile all the time.

Clam Digger,

OK, this one isn't cropped (from a P&S Sony with an amazing flare resistant lens). The point of the cropped photos was to show the level of quality available from a viewfinder camera. Sorry about the dig with the pelican photo but you asked for it when you patronized my cat. I understand that you have a long lens on an SLR and that's a capability that few viewfinder cameras possess. And if you want to shoot wildlife then an SLR is the way to go. Long lenses is the biggest reason for an SLR. People are different. The most important lens for me on a 35mm camera is a 28mm and I must have a 24mm as well. Using a lens longer than an 80mm is an occasional experience for me and I could do without it. Different cameras for different people.

As for stubborn denial, I prefer to think of it as stubborn assertion. I assert this and I'm right about it:

It is fair to say that the much more expensive DSLRs as a group are more capable cameras than the cheaper consumer oriented viewfinder cameras. But there are enough exceptions in both groups that the groups overlap at the edges. A novice like Jean may be very happy with a camera like Susan's 5 megapixel Lumix...

And when did someone say something bad about Tokina? I said digital sensors and film have different requirements and lenses designed specifically for digital maximize the performance of the digital sensor. Tokina knows that, that's why they're making a series of lenses for DLSRs. That doesn't mean older lenses are useless, it's not a B&W world.

Back to the original point of this post. Jean is shopping for a camera and buying a DSLR isn't the only or necessarily best option for her.

Joe, you're a nice guy trying hard to keep the peace. You and Susan are right it's about the photos first.

Clam Digger, that's a nice shot of the water bird, what is it? is it some species of tern?

Joe

{{!gwi}}

Wigardenerwannabe, have you made your decision? Or have we scared you off digital cameras entirely? :-)

I think we scared jean away, I would have been scared by now too! I always hoped this site site would never be a debating one, dangit! Not knocking anyone, I think I somehow joined in too. There is so much of it on the other sites, I just want to see other people pictures, ones they enjoy.

Firwire, how dare you call me "nice"...my wife would never think of me as a peace keeper,HA! Thanks anyhow.
Goodday!
Joe

Konrad - did you find that the bird in your photo is a Eurasian Starling? They are taking over the country.

WOW! I got sidetracked since I posed this question...and I have a teenager that doesn't let me get on my computer much, but I just stepped back on and want to say thanks for all these responses. I haven't made a purchase yet, and to be honest need to take a chunk of time and weed through all your comments. I wish I could afford a good DSLR, but practically am trying to keep costs to under $500. I am also an average person in terms of camera use, but love to take photographs and contemplate/dream about better educating myself with it. In any case I am putting some time aside on Sunday to go over all of your posts and see if I come any closer to understanding the ins and outs of the digitals. Thanks again for your insights! Jean