I've done my homework & narrowed it down...

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 16 Location: Toronto

Hi,
I am a novice, novice photographer having just really got into it. This is my first post and hopefully not my last!
I currently own a digital camera (Sony DSC-P100) but the more I learn about photography the more I begin to think I need to upgrade my camera....
I am really keen on creating photos that have the 'blurred' background effect (shallow depth of field) which I can't create with my camera because the depth of field is too great (even when I set it to the largest aperture)..I've been told this is because-correct me if I am wrong-it has something to do with the sensor in my camera..it is either too big or too small to create this effect. While I do see the benefit of being able to have this great depth of field, I would like more options in the outcome of my pictures.

Essentialy, I am looking for a camera that (in no particular order):
>Allows me to create a shallow depth of field for that 'blurred' background effect
>More Zoom. Currently I have 3x but would like, possibly, double digit (10x or more)
>Aperture & Shutter Priority modes
>Fast Shutter Speed. About 1/2000 at-least.
>Minimum 5 mega-pixels
>I willl be using this camera on a backpacking trip to Africa & Europe so something that is sturdy but lightweight.
>Has the ability for short movie clips but I have a camcorder so this is not a make or break feature...

These are the cameras that I am considering and I would love some feedback...based on what I'm looking for which one (or two) are probably the best for me...I'm also open to suggestions on cameras that I haven't included.
Fujifilm FinePix S5000 Z
Nikon D50
Nikon D70s
Canon EOS 350D / Digital Rebel XT
Olympus SP-500 UZ
Sony DSC-H1
Canon PowerShot S2 IS

Through my research I've heard great things about all and the ratings are generally pretty high. Some seem a bit more advance than others but I think that is okay. Obviously with the Sony I wouldn't have to buy memory cards because I already own some but that isn't the make or break. I've heard really good things about Canon & Nikon.

(The main reason I am considering Digital-SLR's are mostly for the fact that I could eventually get additional lenses, HOWEVER if I had a "LIKE digital-slr" with ultra zoom, I don't think I would need a real digital slr.)

All feedback is greatly appreciated!
Thanks

Joined: 17 Oct 2005 Posts: 306

I don't know a lot about all the camera's you've listed however, some things to bear in mind: -

1. Canon and Nikon are (probably) the two most used camera brands. This is because people like them and they're good. They have the most solid reputation. However, all of the camera's listed here are from reputable brands.
2. Go for something that has mm measurements on the lenses, rather than just a x zoom factor. To get a good long zoom, you want something that goes up to 200mm (35mm equivalent) or even 300mm. This will be good for your wildlife stuf if you go to africa
3. If you do stay into your photography, it's likely that you'll want a DSLR at some point. However, if you buy one now, don't get pulled in on the idea that more lenses make you a better photographer. Although you can get long zooms on SLR like camera, they don't often go very wide, which looks cool as well.

The camera that's closest to mine is the finepix, which I can reccomend heartily, but if it's not too much extra, I'd go for one of the DSLR's. I'd probably go for the Nikon, but that's just brand loyalty!

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 16 Location: Toronto

thanks for the comments.

Note: I've ruled out the Fujifilm FinePix S5000 Z based on megapixels...3 is really just too few...most shots will stay at the 5x7 but a handful I will want at 8x10 or 11x14

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 16 Location: Toronto

thanks for the comments.

Note: I've ruled out the Fujifilm FinePix S5000 Z based on megapixels...3 is really just too few...most shots will stay at the 5x7 but a handful I will want at 8x10 or 11x14

Joined: 18 Dec 2004 Posts: 661 Location: manchester, uk

JayArr wrote:

2. Go for something that has mm measurements on the lenses, rather than just a x zoom factor. To get a good long zoom, you want something that goes up to 200mm (35mm equivalent) or even 300mm. This will be good for your wildlife stuf if you go to africa

It's true that the mm measurement will tell you more then the X zoom factor but in a case like this where someone is looking for 10x or more, it's clearly going to reach at least 300mm anyways so it doesn't matter much.

And most non-dslrs which have a shorter zoom will be at a standard mid-range focal length anyways, I don't think you can find a 3x camera that has a range of 100-300mm so it would be useless to look for one, if you want something strictly in the upper telephoto range, you'll have to get a DSLR and look at lenses which offer this and they are always measured in mm, not X zoom, so it doesn't matter.

Anyways, I agree the issue of whether to get a DSLR or DSLR-Like camera depends on how much you plan on getting into photography. If you're considering it as a serious hobby then go for the DSLR. No, more lenses doesn't make you a better photographer but as I mentioned, the ability to change lenses means you can selectively pick what focal lengths are best for you at what times with better optical quality and the ability to upgrade optical quality even more later on.

So as an example, if you plan on mostly doing long-range photography and a dabble in landscapes, you can get two lenses, one around 100-300mm and a wide angle for landscapes. It's more expensive then getting a 10x or 12x DSLR-Like camera but it will optically be better and you always have the option to change them later if you get into another type of photography (like say, macro) or want to upgrade.

Some people feel this is too much camera for them and they'll never take advantage of ability to change lenses so they want to stick to a non-DSLR. That's perfectly okay, you can do a lot with them if you know how to optimize your use of it, it just depends whats right for you and your needs and only you can decide that.

First, I think you need to decide if you want a DSLR-Like or a DSLR, and then decide which specific camera you want.

Joined: 17 Oct 2005 Posts: 306

Sorry, I should also have said go to the shop and try them out. Then buy them over the internet for the lowest price (if that's your intention)

But do go to a shop and try them!

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:48 pm

The difference with DSLR or SLR (Single Lens Reflex) is it will allow you to change lenses. you can later buy a longer focal lenght or wide lens. depends on the shooting condition you're going to use. IMHO the shorter the zoom the better the quality of the lens ie. 18-70mm or 18-55 rather than 18-200 but I've never had a chance to test the new Nikon AF-S 18-200VR so I can really say any review about it. If the budget is tight I would go for the D50 (I'm a Nikon User) and put the extra money into the lens ie.Nikon AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Zoom-Nikkor and of course this is just an opinion I know Canon user too have a lot to say about the Canon Line of camera. so we'll see. also if you have a chance try to hold and feel all possible camera in your hands.

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 16 Location: Toronto

I agree-I do need to decide if I want a D-SLR or a D-SLR LIKE...
Perhaps if I can get the answer to this question I will be able to decide..
Am I able to achieve the following types of photos **I know the final pic is not only as good as the camera but also the photographer..but these photos are my inspiration...**:

http://tribalcog.com/cgi-bin/pd/pd.cgi?image=/postcard/costa_rica/BP_8961.jpg

http://tribalcog.com/cgi-bin/pd/pd.cgi?image=/postcard/india/0632.jpg

http://tribalcog.com/cgi-bin/pd/pd.cgi?image=/postcard/vietnam/lunch.jpg

with a D-DSLR LIKE camera? or Do I need a D-SLR?
(I ask between dslr like or dslr because i currently have, as mentioned, a sony dsc p100 and can't get this effect)

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:00 pm

withnosocks wrote:

It's true that the mm measurement will tell you more then the X zoom factor but in a case like this where someone is looking for 10x or more, it's clearly going to reach at least 300mm anyways so it doesn't matter much.

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor is an 11X Zoom lens and its only reach 200mm plus the Vibration Reduction it have =)

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:04 pm

urban416 wrote:

I agree-I do need to decide if I want a D-SLR or a D-SLR LIKE...
Perhaps if I can get the answer to this question I will be able to decide..
Am I able to achieve the following types of photos **I know the final pic is not only as good as the camera but also the photographer..but these photos are my inspiration...**:

http://tribalcog.com/cgi-bin/pd/pd.cgi?image=/postcard/costa_rica/BP_8961.jpg

http://tribalcog.com/cgi-bin/pd/pd.cgi?image=/postcard/india/0632.jpg

http://tribalcog.com/cgi-bin/pd/pd.cgi?image=/postcard/vietnam/lunch.jpg

with a D-DSLR LIKE camera? or Do I need a D-SLR?
(I ask between dslr like or dslr because i currently have, as mentioned, a sony dsc p100 and can't get this effect)

With the DSLR you have a lot of feature and control plus the ability to change focal range with the DSLR like what ever lens is attached on that camera you are stuck on what ever focal range it has.

Joined: 18 Dec 2004 Posts: 661 Location: manchester, uk

adorski wrote:

withnosocks wrote:

It's true that the mm measurement will tell you more then the X zoom factor but in a case like this where someone is looking for 10x or more, it's clearly going to reach at least 300mm anyways so it doesn't matter much.

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor is an 11X Zoom lens and its only reach 200mm plus the Vibration Reduction it have =)

I was talking about NON-DSLRs, not SLR lenses, sorry if I didn't make that clear enough, I thought I had.

I don't think any non-DSLR starts below 28mm... 28 times 10 is 280mm... okay, not 300mm but close, especially considering the user is looking for a minimum of 10x, probably more by the sounds of it. But add the crop factor to this and it's well past 300mm anyways.

Plus, most manufacturers know that someone who is look for 10x is looking for telephoto and not wide angle so it would be rather silly to start a 10x nondslr camera at 28mm instead of 38mm. I don't think there are many, if any at all that are made with an exact focal length of 28-280mm range. All the ones I can find that start at 28mm are either less then 10x or more then 10x. Again, speaking strictly of non-dslrs.

In reference to the example photos posted, I'm not sure on the DOF if that is what you're asking about. I have no experience with DLR-Like cameras, I suggest you try to find some example photos taken with the non-dslr cameras you're looking at to see if there are any shallow DOF examples out there. Beyond the DOF, yes you'd be able to take photos like that with a non-dslr. However, as for the butterfly photo, beware that these kinds of shots MAY require little to no shutter lag (since butterflies and other insects/animals can quickly move) which is another area where DSLRs win.

These are the times for the Canon:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S2IS/S2ISDATA.HTM

And the Sony:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/H1/H1DATA.HTM

The Olympus unfortunately hasn't been fully reviewed yet. And with DSLRs, it depends on the lens, though you can check their shutter lag times with the kit lens usually.

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:57 pm

urban416 wrote:

Am I able to achieve the following types of photos **I know the final pic is not only as good as the camera but also the photographer..but these photos are my inspiration...**:
...

with a D-DSLR LIKE camera? or Do I need a D-SLR?
(I ask between dslr like or dslr because i currently have, as mentioned, a sony dsc p100 and can't get this effect)

IMHO all of these shots would be easier to get with a DSLR. And if you did get shots that nice, you may well wish to print 11x14s right? The price differences between DSLR and SLR-like digitals are no longer so large and you will have greater capability down the road. So go on and get the DSLR and move on.

Out of your list, I would go for the Nikon D50 kit, with an 18-70 lens if possible. Next choice would be a konica minolta 5D or rebel xt. These three stand out far ahead of anything else on your list (excluding the D70s, which is a substantial extra investment that I don't think is justified, especially for a beginner, but that's your call). So go put those three in your hands and you will know which one is for you.

:) keithwms

[edit: spell]

Premium Member Joined: 29 Oct 2004 Posts: 5758

If you're going to spend as much money as you would for a DSLR (certainly a less expensive one like the D50), and you're going to have a camera that is just as big, pray tell what is the point of buying one of the 'advanced' point and shoot cameras? You're losing the value and the convenience of a point and shoot, and you're losing the sensor size, image quality, and expandability of an SLR. You get some useful features with them, but you lose the absolute best things about SLRs (good glass, big sensor, infinite expandability) and you lose the absolute best things about point and shoots (lower cost and you can stick them in your pocket). It doesn't make sense to try and straddle the fence for a purchase like this unless you are absolutely 100% sure that you'll 1) never want to upgrade it and 2) never miss the convenience of the compact point and shoots.

Joined: 03 Jan 2006 Posts: 12

Well, shallow depth of field you say...
http://www.deviantart.com/view/24822929/ < this was taken with a non-slr camera and that's the best I could squeeze out of it. The background is somewhat 1 meter away from the foreground object.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/schattenspiel/doggie.jpg < this (pardon the silly subject) was taken with my new dSLR (Nikon D70s) using a simple and most basic 50 mm lens (Nikkor 50 mm f/1.4D)

I'd say buy yourself Nikon D50 (as my friend did before his trip to Africa), you can always buy another body once this no longer meets your requirements.

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 16 Location: Toronto

Scatterherz your first photo link..with the shallow depth of field...that is exactly what I would like to achieve..it looks great to me. Then again so does the one with the Nikon D70s.

Out window shopping cameras recently I did find a store that is selling the Nikon D50 kit (with standards lens) (new, factory sealed, 1 year warranty etc.) for $849CAD ($730US) as opposed to the $999CAD ($859US) they are retailing for...so I may go for it...