Any camera/photography people?

[holdemholmes]

I noticed that some older threads had brought up the topic of photography, and just wanted to see if anyone could make some good recomendations for a camera. I'm looking for something in the $250-$400 range with good zoom, decent low light performance that also has hd video that is something close to hd. It won't be used for anything in particular, but I'm exploring the possibility of getting into photography and also want to have a good camera for taking pictures of my son and a vacation that is coming up. Any suggestions?

[Junior]

Can never go wrong with Canon or a Nikon.  Search for SLR's in your price range and either would likely suffice to what you're looking for.  We picked up our Canon XT a few years back for $350.  Now it doesn't shoot video but the newer camera's that of that similar model now do.  For a couple hundred more you can usually find a nice 70-200mm lense to go with it and some places will even discount the price if you bundle them.  Haggle and barter with them, you'd be surprised how much you can save when you're stingy in the store with em! lol   GL

[holdemholmes]

I'm not partial to an SLR, and i'd rather get a higher end point and shoot instead of an SLR unless I will be getting much better picture quality with an SLR in the same price range. I am kind of partial to Nikon, but I am still open to ideads. Thanks for the quick response.

[Nerre]

There aren't really any "point and shoot" cameras today. Both SLRs an most "compact" cameras can be used on full auto as well as full manual and all settings in between.

The bigger lens on an SLR gives more light to the sensor (thus better light sensitivity) and can also giver you shorter depth of focus, but otherwise the main difference is the possibility to change lenses.


The one tip I can give is: forget the megapixels.

Most people will only view the images on a computer monitor, and there are no computer monitors that are over 2 megapixels. Even if you are going to print your photos a cover page on a glossy magazine would not take more than about 5 megapixels. (And pictures printed bigger will be viewed from a larger distance, thus there is no need for more megapixels for bigger prints.) And I think all cameras today have more than 5 megapixel, but 14-16 megapixels will only make your memory card get full faster... But a camera with 14 megapixel can usually be set to only save pictures in 7 megapixel.


I personally like an optical viewfinder, but those are very rare today...

[Dr. Neau]

The benefit of more megapixels is being able to zoom in on a portion of a picture after the fact without losing as much resolution.

[William]

In my personaly experience, when buying an SLR camera, you won't have much need for a 70-200 lens. You'd be better off putting that money towards a good 28-55 lens with a low f-stop. It'll be far more versatile then a powerful zoomlens and give you better quality photos in low light conditions.

Like Dr. Neau mentioned, with the high resolution you have available nowadays you'll get much better looking photos by cropping a photo shot at 35mm then when you zoom in with a 200mm lens. When you zoom you lose depth.