Digital Slr Cameras Ranking
Can you take good photos with normal digi camera, without Digital SLR?
I have a semi Casio QV-5700 digi SLR. I’ve been using this camera for about 4 years. Photography is my hobby and passion. Although, Casio is not categorized in those high ranking reknown brand like Nikon, Pentax, Leica,etc I find this camera reliable esp. taking staged, still life photos, though its quite hard taking photos low light exposure photos.
The thought of upgrading my digi camera crossed my mind. Let’s just say, most of my friends and colleagues own a digital SLR, the big bulky ones. Some of them take great photos, especially with the cool depth of field function, which I find it useful for event photography where you need to quickly capture the subject.
Should I, or should I not switch to the new dslr? What is the reliable, not so expensive DSLR out there? I’m hoping to find a versatile DSLR that can take good low exposure photos and works well in all weather condition. Here are some of the preview of my works. http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/roze_immune/album?.dir=c186
Nikon is a good, inexpensive choice. All due respect to the first poster, but I don’t know why he thinks Nikon’s are pricier than Canon. Nikon has the D40, a 6.1 MP DSLR, with an 18-55 DX ED lens, for $599. The least expensive Canon on the market is the XT (if you can still find it) for $699. The XTi is $899, and both come with a sub-par 18-55. The D80 blows away the XTi, and is in the same price range.
The Nikon D200 is a powerhouse camera at $1499, and Canon has nothing in that price range that can even compete. While the Canon 5D is a better camera than the Nikon D200, it costs twice as much (or more)
If you want to start light, the D40 is your best choice. You don’t have as many controls as a D80 or XTi, but it’s a great introductory camera. And any accessories you buy for it (lens, flashes) can be used on future Nikon DSLRs.
Now, Canon is a fine company, and they make fine equipment. but they force you to buy their 18-55 clunker lens as part of the XT & XTi packages. To get a comparable lens to the D40′s 18-55 ED, you need to spend about $250 more, minimum. That means the XTi runs about $1150, compared to the D80 w/ 18-55 for $1100.
Until you hit the really high end equipment, Nikon is the better choice. And 6 MP is plenty, FYI. You can print excellent 20″x30″ prints, with no detail loss, from a 6MP DSLR sensor. 8 MP is nice, but not a ‘have-to-have’. Heck, if anyone out there really, really thinks that megapixels are that important, I will trade, today, a brand new 8 megapixel camera for a used (but operational and normally functioning) 4 megapixel camera, so long as I get to pick the 4 megapixel camera in question. Why? Because I’d rather have a Nikon D2HS than a Kodak P880. Go ahead and do a search, and see what I mean.
Why is that 4.1 MP Nikon so much more expensive? First off, the sensor is much higher quality. It’s also physically larger (about 8 times larger) than the average point & shoot digital camera. And the overall print quality is much, MUCH higher as well.
Now, more megapixels would allow you to get a larger print, but the quality wouldn’t improve unless the sensor quality also improved.
Don’t buy a camera based on the megapixels (i.e., volume). You don’t buy bottled water based on the volume, you buy it based on the quality. If bottled sewage water was buy 1, get 4 free, would you buy that over the mountain spring water that was the same price, but had no special sale?
I would stick to a DSLR under $800, for now. Go to your local Ritz/Wolf Camera store, and try out the Nikon D40 and Canon XTi. Pick which one ‘feels’ best in your hands, because the end results will be the same. Photographic skill is much more important than the camera model you’re using. You just need to feel comfortable and confident in your equipment.
Top 10 Camera Digital SLR Sales Rating June 2011