please....

Nikon


Canon


or any others....

I personally like Canon, but if anyone has any suggestions please let me know. I'm thinking of taking a photography class in the fall.....

Thanks!!

missfee said:

I got a few camera's and i prefere my Nikons I only use my Fuji digi camera for fun snaps its not bad quality but not as good as my fav Nikon. But i will warn u Nikon lenses can be exspensive. i'm old school i prefer film camera's


.
[Edited 8/16/06 12:45pm]

I have always owned Nikon and Canon cameras

I have few complaints about any of them

i went snooping around the house and found my late father's old Canon 35mm SLR camera...I mean it is 100% Manual too, I think he bought it in the late 70's....and I found his second SLR camera which is more up to date, I think he bought it about 10 years ago..it's a Minolta MASSUM 400si.....

i don't have to buy a new SLR camera after all!!!!

unless I just want one for my own but I can do that when I get some money, but for now, I can just put money to the side to pay for the class only instead of buying a brand new camera along with paying the fees for the class!!! Yayyy!!!
[Edited 8/16/06 13:41pm]

Okay the old Canon I was talking about, it is actually 50mm...

When I was in high school and college taking photography classes, my father's 35mm SLR Pentax was perfect for what I needed it for.

Ask Byron.

I just bought this one:






The image quality is amazing.
The SLR continuous shoot-and-capture is good.

It's an awesome camera, though I'm still trying to figure out how to operate it on manual settings.


Only complaints: Dim , small screen.

Imago said:

Man...you have way too much disposable income.

applekisses said:

Imago said:

I'm just jealous

applekisses said:

What if my disposable income is at the expense of my future and life savings.

would you love me then?

Imago said:

My heart just skipped a beat.

Imago said:

Is this the one that is digital as well? Or is this just a film camera? How much did you pay for it?

missfee said:

Digital

About 800 bucks.
But you'll pay an extra $100 - $120 for flash memory that works best with the camera (this allows the camera to take mutliple shots quickly and instantly moves them to the flash card--Althom would explain it better than me).

But for roughly $1000 total (or less if you can get a deal on it), you get a camera that competes will with more expensive higher end models. ALso, it's a true digital SLR, and not one of those "near SLR" models.

kakikoka

Canon!
Can't say enough about them. They have very easy software for you to download you image to the computer. You can't go wrong with any of their models.

althom said:

Yeah see I love Canon cameras.

I don't really care for the digital camera's though (the regular ones that everyone has) because I guess i'm just use to the realism of a picture. I don't think that, (unless you have a high quality digital camera), that digital camera's can capture the true effect and quality that a 35mm can bring to a picture.

Plus, I really don't have $1000 to invest in one of those nice Canon Rebel XT SLR Digital cameras like Imago has... If I could, that is one digital camera that I would invest in....and probably the only one.

Imago said:

So Imago, how do you print the pictures off? Did you buy a printer, or do you go by other means of printing off the images?

missfee said:

I own an HP Color printer.
Prints high quality pictures. Really nice looking.

In general though, I don't do printed pictures anymore, except to share with loved ones. It's just kind of old and antiquated for me.

Well you've already said the big 2 - Canon and Nikon, but there's also:

Sony
Pentax
Olympus

I've always trusted Nikons to be the best.

I had a Nikon salesperson walk me through the differences between Nikon SLRs, and other comptetitors to show me how they were built better, and was pretty impressed with all the small details they paid attention to. This was years ago when I was shopping for a film camera, but I'd bet the same holds true today with their digital SLRs as well.

He showed me how the Nikons used metal mounting rings for the lenses, whereas Cannon and other competitors were using plastic, which wasn't as durable. Same goes for many of the interior parts.

He also showed me how Nikons had a sturdier spring loaded plate and rollers to pull the film tight so you would get a sharper image, and then compared it to other ones like Minolta and Pentax, that had flimsy rollers that didn't work as well.

He also went into some details about the optics in the lenses, and the coatings, I forget everything he explained, but basically said the Nikons produced better color and contrast, and less distortion around the edges.