Want to get Into Photography

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: dmw16
One thing I didn't see in the Nikon sticky was a wide angle lens. I have always had an interest in architecture so I think a wide angle lens would be a nice to have. Any thoughts on that.

Also, about the D70...that is a 6MP. Is there a similar option out there in an 8 or 10 MP that people seem to like? Clearly I have a lot of research still to do, but as long as people are willing to share I am happy to listen.

Megapixels is probably the single most overrated aspect of digital cameras today. More megapixels alone does NOT make a better camera; in fact, with manufacturers trying to cram more and more pixels onto a fixed size sensor, a very high pixel count can result in more image noise at higher ISO (which you need to shoot in low light without flash)

A 6 MP camera will let you print shots up to 13x17 or 16x20. Some have made great enlargements up to 30x40 with some post processing added. Now, the question you've got to ask yourself is...how often will you actually print beyond 8x10? If you plan to make poster-sized prints very often, then yes, a 10 MP camera might be right for you. In that case, you should seriously consider the Nikon D80/90, Canon 30/40D, and Rebel XTi/XSi (all of which cost much more than a D70).

Since you're just starting out, I don't think 6 MP is a barrier at all. In fact, Ken Rockwell (a pro photographer and Nikon reviewer) says he uses his 6 MP Nikon D40 most of the time.

Also, as far as wide angle lenses go...how wide do you want to go? Wide angle lenses are usually on the expensive side of things; pro level lenses like the AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm f/4 G DX. Mounted on an APS-C sensor camera like a D70, D80, or D300, this lens gives an effective 35mm equivalent focal range of 18-36mm, which is about as wide as you can go on an APS-C camera.

It's only true if all other aspects are equal. Just like more MP doesn't mean better IQ, less MP doesn't mean better IQ. As sensor/image processing technology matures, the penalty of putting more MP is less. Think about DSLR pioneers from Nikon. Those had very little MP(D2H only has 4MP) but the image quality is far worse than MP packed cameras of nowadays. In the end, more MP on DSLR cameras still provide more benefits because the current technology can handle it.

On the other hand, MP race on compact cameras is silly because of the reasons I mentioned above.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: 996GT2
On a Canon, to adjust aperture you have to hold down the AV button and then turn the control dial. On a Nikon, you just use the front control dial for aperture and the rear control dial for shutter; very clear and no fuss with holding down the AV button every time. That's just one of the reasons I switched to a D70.

This is a primary temptation for me to sell out and go over to Nikon. That'll never actually happen because I'm too invested in the Canon system at this point, but good lord do the ergonomics of our cameras need work. I played with a Nikon D200 on the weekend and changing settings quickly was a joy to do, compared with the Canon system. Arg. Anyone know if any of the newer cameras do aperture settings differently?

i don't understand what you two are talking about. a two-dial canon camera shifts aperture with the rear dial and shutter with the front dial. a D40 has to have a button pressed in combination with the dial to shift aperture in manual mode as well.

Which Canon DSLRs use two dials for that purpose? That'd be my new upgrade target.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: yllus

Which Canon DSLRs use two dials for that purpose? That'd be my new upgrade target.

everything but the rebel series.