DSLR Camera

[VKCOMMO]

Hey

I'm looking for a new camera, looking for a goodish one for around $350, probably using eBay.

Good quality pictures with a half decent video function and a rechargeable battery (Not 4 AA's if possible)

My main pictures will be car show's and scenery.

Which one would you think is a good one. that $350 is just an estimate and if i have to i can go over that.

thanks

[Stressball]

You want a video-capable DSLR for $350? Very unlikely.

Video is pretty standard on brand new DSLRs now, but you will be hard pressed to find one that cheap.

For $350 you can get a good point and shoot camera with slick video functionality, or you can get a 2nd hand DSLR with one general 18-55 lens. You'll still have to hunt though, and you won't get both benefits for that price.

Personally I would take the DSLR, but that's because I prefer photo to video recording. Pick your vice, and hope you don't regret it

I don't know much about the point and shoot option, but you can certainly get a good DSLR quite cheap now. I would go Canon, but that's personal preference. Nikon have brilliant beginner tutorial modes etc so they make it easy to get the hang of them. Also, a cheaper Pentax DSLR will get you some good shots, plus it has the image stabiliser built into the camera instead of making you pay up for it on each lens.

[VKCOMMO]

Thanks. Look... Video isn't that important, TVR-161 was looking at one on eBay before that I liked (thread in this forum) and I made an offer of $250 and the seller counter offered $259 but I didn't accept in time. That had video, down side is that it used AA batterys, but I prefer rechargable ones. That one was the DSLR, fugifilm I believe.

I'll wait for more answers before I buy, but it is a good base

thanks

[minux]

was it a dslr or look like a dslr point and shoot?

[levymetal]

point and shoot i believe, New FUJIFILM FinePix S2000hd Digital Camera Black - eBay 10.0 - 11.9 Megapixels, Compact, Digital Cameras, Cameras. (end time 05-Jan-10 17:26:12 AEDST)

to the op, bigger lens doesn't mean dslr . also, i don't understand what you mean by aa batteries being a downside because you want rechargable ones? you do know they make rechargable aa batteries right?

[Stressball]

was it a dslr or look like a dslr point and shoot?

My thoughts exactly. Not likely to find a video-capable DSLR with a lens for $259, aye

OP, DSLRs have removable lenses. Chunky point and shoot cameras that pretend to be DSLRs are not quite the same thing.

[VKCOMMO]

crap, shows how much i know. i know about the rechargeable AA's, its just i dont like them, i prefer just standard rechargeable battery's.

New FUJIFILM FinePix S2000hd Digital Camera Black - eBay 10.0 - 11.9 Megapixels, Compact, Digital Cameras, Cameras. (end time 05-Jan-10 17:26:12 AEDST) was the one. that is a point and shoot.

which would you recommend? point and shoot or a full DSLR, note that i am no professional, just a beginner.

[50LTRv8]

It all depends on how much you have to spend, DSLR's with a lens kit start at around $1300 - $1500

[INNAWE]

crap, shows how much i know. i know about the rechargeable AA's, its just i dont like them, i prefer just standard rechargeable battery's.

New FUJIFILM FinePix S2000hd Digital Camera Black - eBay 10.0 - 11.9 Megapixels, Compact, Digital Cameras, Cameras. (end time 05-Jan-10 17:26:12 AEDST) was the one. that is a point and shoot.

which would you recommend? point and shoot or a full DSLR, note that i am no professional, just a beginner.

To be honest the 'AA' rechargables imo are far better then the alternative. If you need to replace them or have a spare set around it cost no where near the cost of others and you can get them from the supermarket.
As for your DSLR style cameras they are a waste of time. Reason being is that they are not far of the weight and size of a true DSLR but are no better then the smaller point and shoot cameras.
I have a perfect condition Sony point and shoot I could sell you for 300 if you like lol.

Hope that helps

[minux]

As for your DSLR style cameras they are a waste of time. Reason being is that they are not far of the weight and size of a true DSLR but are no better then the smaller point and shoot cameras.
s

That is so far from the truth it isnt funny. Many dslr style cameras allow shooting in raw, something which hardly any small point and shoots allow. This in itself makes it worthwhile.

[CANYONERO]

my dslr shoots hi def video. wish it cost under $500 lol.

[Stressball]

my dslr shoots hi def video. wish it cost under $500 lol.

Yeah they're introducing video into all the base models now, it's just about normal for a new one. Prices will drop quickly.

It all depends on how much you have to spend, DSLR's with a lens kit start at around $1300 - $1500

Try 600-800, unless you mean twin lens kits only.

[jakbob]

To be honest the 'AA' rechargables imo are far better then the alternative. If you need to replace them or have a spare set around it cost no where near the cost of others and you can get them from the supermarket.
As for your DSLR style cameras they are a waste of time. Reason being is that they are not far of the weight and size of a true DSLR but are no better then the smaller point and shoot cameras.
I have a perfect condition Sony point and shoot I could sell you for 300 if you like lol.

Hope that helps

I agree and disagree.
First of all, I agree AA batteries are fantastic. I use rechargeable AA's in my camera, but its nice to know if they go flat somewhere and I can't charge them, I can wander over to the nearest servo/corner store/supermarket/just about anywhere else and buy a set and keep on shooting. If you have a camera that takes its own special rechargeable battery and it goes flat somewhere you can't charge it you're screwed.

Secondly, a lot of the DSLR style point and shoots are fantastic. I have a fujifilm finepix s1000. Its very small and light (much smaller and lighter than any true slr), has huge zoom (for a point and shoot) and has a lot more features than a standard point and shoot. You get to control shutter speed and aperture for a start. It was dirt cheap when I bought it over a year ago and the next model on is even cheaper again. For the money it was well worth it. Definitely not a waste of time.

[danja]

Using AA batteries can be a mixed blessing. On one hand they are readily available, so if you're traveling for example and your battery dies with nowhere to recharge it, you can pick up some extra batteries from whatever local quickie mart there is.

On the other hand, you'll get far less life from AA batteries. I had/have a Canon A570IS which takes AA's, using the high-power, expensive, lithium batteries you might get 50-100 shots out of it. I put some low-end Everready Heavy Duty batteries in the other day and got TWO shots before it died Compare that with most proprietary rechargable camera batteries (not AA's) and you'll get 200-300 shots with those.

It's all about trade offs. If you don't really need the advantages of AA, you're much better off with proprietary battery and a spare.

[VKCOMMO]

thanks for all the responces guys, innawe, PM me about that camera, you might have a buyer.

i think ill go for a point and shoot because i am only a beginner at camera stuffs. danja is saying what im thinking there with the batterys, i can always get a spare battery from DSE or somewhere and carry that.

my dslr shoots hi def video. wish it cost under $500 lol.

where and what brand is this one, if i can get one this cheap i will get it if it is ok.

thanks for your help guys

VKCOMMO

[CANYONERO]

thanks for all the responces guys, innawe, PM me about that camera, you might have a buyer.

i think ill go for a point and shoot because i am only a beginner at camera stuffs. danja is saying what im thinking there with the batterys, i can always get a spare battery from DSE or somewhere and carry that.



where and what brand is this one, if i can get one this cheap i will get it if it is ok.

thanks for your help guys

VKCOMMO

i just bought a canon twin lens kit 500D.

[Agnu]

If you can sacrifice the video function and can push your limit to about $500 then you can get a mint 20D w/50mm f/1.8 off one of the photography forums for sure. The photos from that camera and lens combination are amazing, even with all the new stuff out there I still majorly respect that old combination, and for $500 you'll feel like you're dreaming...

[Stressball]

If you can sacrifice the video function and can push your limit to about $500 then you can get a mint 20D w/50mm f/1.8 off one of the photography forums for sure. The photos from that camera and lens combination are amazing, even with all the new stuff out there I still majorly respect that old combination, and for $500 you'll feel like you're dreaming...

Having a single 50mm prime lens isn't ideal in most situations. a better option would be a cheaper 18-55 kit lens, slightly less sharp, but probably has better autofocus, and much more useful in most situations.

[minux]

If you can sacrifice the video function and can push your limit to about $500 then you can get a mint 20D w/50mm f/1.8 off one of the photography forums for sure. The photos from that camera and lens combination are amazing, even with all the new stuff out there I still majorly respect that old combination, and for $500 you'll feel like you're dreaming...

Or you could just not be a tightarse and spend $1000 and buy a nice beginners kit that covers all bases lol?

[Rufus®]

If you can lose the Hi-Def video, you can pic up a Nikon D3000 10 megapixel with 18-55mm lens, brand new for $550 from singapore, it will have an international warranty. It is a basic DSLR, but a good starting point and stepping stone into DSLR's

Edit: or you can check out flebay. DigitalRev have good deals, which is where I purcahsed my 500D from.

[INNAWE]

PM sent

[Agnu]

Why I suggested a prime lens is because it will teach you composition, as apposed to convinience. Too many people go and buy an 18-55mm and teach themselves bad compositional habits. Having a fixed lens will teach you to get creative with your composition, so that when you do get a zoom lens 1) it won't be sub-par in quality because you'll have saved up enough dough for a good one by then, and 2) you'll have the basic compositional know-how that you'll use varying focal lengths for what they're meant for, as apposed to for convinience sake. A 70mm focal length, for example, isn't only so that you can crop tighter, there are a lot of other factors in why you'd chose that focal length over another.

For example, most fashion photographers shoot fashion with a 300mm or so lens for perspectives sake.

Sorry it's getting late i'm sortah tired and rambling haha, if anyone's interested just post here and i'll write a bit more up about it next time i'm around .

[minux]

For example, most fashion photographers shoot fashion with a 300mm or so lens for perspectives sake.

Really? I know 2 fashion photographers who shoot hasselblaad, neither use 300mm lenses lol. If your using a 300mm lens your not a fashion photographer, your a guy at the end of a catwalk who needs the reach.

Using a prime doesnt teach you composition, it teaches you to use your feet and not be lazy. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Agnu]

Not fashion as in catwalk stuff, i'm talking about location work. You're mates who are fashion photographers should, if they know what they're doing, shoot at about 200mm atleast on a 6x6 system. The reason being that anything shorter makes the nose look out of place and the ears semi-disappear. A standard lens (on a Hassy being 80mm) is far too short for a flattering, standard beauty lens. This is the general rule, although they do say once you know the rule you can break it. I tend to shoot a lot of location work between 17mm and 70mm. I only shoot longer if it's a very typical shot, but my style of location work calls for those focal lengths. Although all my studio stuff is shot between 70mm and 200mm. There is a reason why the 70-200mm f/2.8L is the most commonly used fashion lens in 35mm format.

But also then again, if you're really good at what you'll do you won't cop out and you'll shoot large format, but no matter the system, perspective will never change. An interesting fact about perspective and our brains is that supposedly, our eyes only properly register a face once, from a certain perspective, and then everytime we see that face our eyes merely reconstruct the face from the pre-existing map registered in our brain. That's why we often think that we, or our friends, look different in photos, because what we are seeing isn't always what we should actually be seeing. This is why most people have a lot of trouble learning the rules of perspective over focal length, because it's an unnatural concept. But i'm pretty sure that's only a theory, but still, it explains a lot .

[rch-13z]

crap, shows how much i know. i know about the rechargeable AA's, its just i dont like them, i prefer just standard rechargeable battery's.

New FUJIFILM FinePix S2000hd Digital Camera Black - eBay 10.0 - 11.9 Megapixels, Compact, Digital Cameras, Cameras. (end time 05-Jan-10 17:26:12 AEDST) was the one. that is a point and shoot.

which would you recommend? point and shoot or a full DSLR, note that i am no professional, just a beginner.

To the op, I have the older version which is the 8000D or something like that which I bought for $400.... Quality is good, check my thread for photo quality