Digital Camera Experts

[pocketfours]

Reality check.

The main reason for buying an SLR is that you get to use different lenses, filters and external flashes etc. If you aren't going to get into that (like most people who buy an SLR), then what you have is a very bulky and expensive point and shoot.

With a kit zoom lens the quality isn't significantly better than what you get with a good point and shoot. Prime lenses is the way to go anyway imo.

[griffey24]

Thanks for the help so far guys!

Cocco - thanks I'll look into those suggestions

Ash - yah I used to use that site when looking into buying point and shoots. Thanks for your info on the zoom, yah I'm kind of a noob when it comes to camera specs etc at this point.

P4s - yah I am somewhat concerned with that. Its hard to say how much I will use all those things, until I actually get them I suppose.

[PlayToWin]

Reality check.

The main reason for buying an SLR is that you get to use different lenses, filters and external flashes etc.

I'm not sure if this has been covered in the thread yet, but I'm gonn sorta disagree here. Another HUGE benifit is the quality of the sensor and software built into the camera. The more expensive cameras have better quality and that makes a tremendous difference in the end result. It's not just lenses.

Additionally, if you can afford quality lenses, zoom lenses are the shit.

[swiggidy]

I'm not sure if this has been covered in the thread yet, but I'm gonn sorta disagree here. Another HUGE benifit is the quality of the sensor and software built into the camera. The more expensive cameras have better quality and that makes a tremendous difference in the end result. It's not just lenses.

Additionally, if you can afford quality lenses, zoom lenses are the shit.

I have to sorta disagree here. The sensor for PnS are perfectly fine in decently lit situations, especially if you're never blowing a print up bigger than 10x8 (seriously who does that anyway?). These improvements are huge when you're trying to take low light pictures which was touched on before.

Zoom lenses are "cool" but primes take far superior photos and it is not even close.

[PlayToWin]

Zoom lenses are "cool" but primes take far superior photos and it is not even close.

Wrong. Do more research.

Edit: I'm talking about pro lenses. Obviously, that's not what Griffey has in mind, so it's irrelevant.

[swiggidy]

Wrong. Do more research.

Edit: I'm talking about pro lenses. Obviously, that's not what Griffey has in mind, so it's irrelevant.

you do more research

[pocketfours]

you do more research

When you see people arguing that zoom lenses take better pictures than prime lenses it's probably a good time to realize that you didn't want to talk about photography in a poker forum anyway.

Here's an MTF chart comparison for those who think zoom lenses are the shit (small catch-22 here). These aren't your typical consumer kit zoom lenses either mind you...










EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L:

[PlayToWin]

When you see people arguing that zoom lenses take better pictures than prime lenses ....

I never said zoom's were better. I know they're not as good. What I meant was that to say they're "not even close" is wrong. I've got the Canon 70-200 2.8 and it's fantastic.

Here's an MTF chart comparison ....

Yea, I've never seen these. There's no units on the charts. In the real world, in prints, is it a obvious difference in quality? I kinda doubt it. Before I got my system, I agonized over the issue of zoom vs prime. I went for pro f2.8 zooms and I'm very happy.

Things to think about:
If you want a vacation camera, the versatility of zooms is fantastic.

If you're gonna shoot sports, you'll need a good telephoto (I uses a 2X converter on my 70-200) and you'll need a good autofocus system (depending on the sport). You can't really get good autofocus without spending some cash. Read lots of reviews.