Backyard Poultry Forum

After being Pentax people for decades, my OH and I went Nikon for our DSLR five years ago. He really wants to upgrade to a new model now, but the camera is working beautifully.

We had a friend from OS visit last year with his latest and greatest Canon, and we noticed how well it managed low light situations.

I like the Holden and Ford analogy. Both are good brands. Go for the one you really like yourself and you'll learn to use it to its best advantage. I wouldn't mind trying Canon if we were in the market, but my OH is the one who really gets the most out of our camera and he doesn't fancy working out a whole new brand.

Happy shopping!

Nikon and Canon are both good brands, a lot depends on how it feels in your hand and your bank account;) Nikon has always been more expensive when I have been buying. My first dslr was a Nikon D40x, although I was determined to buy a Canon 400D at the time, the Nikon felt better in my hand. I'm not knocking the camera or the images it produces, I have sold many photographs taken with it and while I still have the Nikon D40x, I wish I had gone with the Canon instead as the lenses on the Nikon D40x are limited to ones that have an AF motor inside (expensive lenses - so don't buy a Noink without the AF motor in the body!).

I upgraded to the Canon 50D several years ago and primarily use a 70-200mm 2.8 L for shooting equestrian sports, dog sports, wildlife, horses, landscapes and portraits on a professional basis. All the photographs on my website are shot with this Canon combo (with the occasional portrait using the 50mm 1.8 nifty fifty) http://southwestphotography.com.au

If you are considering a 60D and are serious about still photography, I would really suggest closely comparing the specs between the 50D and the 60D and getting a 50D if you can (and get another lens with the money you save on the body). IMO when buying a dslr, I do not want to pay for video components to the detriment of the still camera components. If video is an important feature - save your money and buy a high end point and shoot camera that has video capabilities. Or do what we did and buy a dedicated video camera as well as my dslr.

Some old lenses can be used on digital slr camera bodies, some need adaptor rings, most won't auto fucus so you have to do it manually.

There is a steep learning curve that comes with a dslr - not only the photography side, but in the processing. Unless you shoot entirely in dummy modes (in which case you will *not* get the best images that the camera is capable of anyway, so you might consider saving your money and buying a top end point and shoot that is likely to give you better images straight out of the camera), the very nature of digital images means that you have to learn how to process them just like photographers in the past did in darkrooms - the only difference is nowadays we use computer programs. While you can allow the cameras computer to sharpen/saturate/contrast etc, the quality of the image that you end up with will be far superior if you learn how to shoot RAW/NEF instead of jpg and process the images individually yourself (images also need to be differently processed according to the final output - eg a 16" x 20" will have very different sharpening required than what a 600px jpg destined for web display requires.

Only mentioned this last paragraph as many people are disappointed when they first get a dslr and get inferior photos to what they or a friend can get on a good point and shoot that does everything for you.

_________________
Photography website: http://southwestphotography.com.au
Art Blog: http://michellewrighton.com

I like my point and shoot its a cannon ixus 300hs it was a present from my father who thought I would get better shots with it than a dslr at this stage till i do a course or something. Later on i will look at Dslr when I can afford one and a course. I am impressed with the detail I get in photos with it especially close ups it is way better than my old kodak

_________________
MY WEBSITE http://shambhala-birds.webs.com

very nice photos on your site brookchook.

the reason why i got a cannon EOS60D and not the 50 was because of the rotating screen. i use mine all the time on the sony and would only consider a camera with it due to the way i like to photograph chooks at ground level or above my height in show cages. i was very disappointed with the screen picture quality on the canon though as i was hoping to have one better than the sony but it was worse. however i have found a new use for the screen now where i put the camera on auto, on the tripod and have the extension switch where i can take photos a little away from the camera or when i need my hands on the thing i am photographing. this way i can see what the camera has photographed when i am in front of it. also useful at night when fiddling with settings and i am in almost pitch dark and cannot see the subject through the lens. i do want to learn how to do the video bit but then i have to learn how to get it onto utube or flickR and edit it. i really must learn as there is so much to show if it were in motion...especially with the chooks....man this photography can take over your life.

Thanks Ruff.

The rotating screen is nifty, I have one one my old Canon S3IS (point and shoot). LOL but I have been photographing small animals and kids way before I got that camera so have no problem laying in the dirt to get the shot I want;) I often use a shutter release cable when I am using my tripod and need my hands free (you can get wireless ones but they arn't always reliable).

LOL photography can definitely take over your life...and once you think you know something, theres a whole new world of other things to learn and attempt to master;)

_________________
Photography website: http://southwestphotography.com.au
Art Blog: http://michellewrighton.com

I'm on my second Nikon DSLR. This one is a lower model than my first one but I've worked out that I don't need so much. This one is a D7000.

These days I think it's more about the lens than the camera. I have a few lenses that are better for different things. Today I've just ordered a new one.

http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/astore/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-24-70mm-f28G-ED-Lenses.aspx

It the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8G ED. It has better aperture rating than my other general one. I have better lenses for portraits, a macro, a wide angle, a prime lens and a big zoom, but this is to be more of an all-rounder - that's the theory anyway. I'll find out in a week whether I like it. It's supposed to be good so we'll see if it's only good for people who are good enough to use it.


Here's the latest toy:

_________________

Backyard Poultry Forum

Bought a Sony alpha-58 DSLR. I have an old Minolta SLR and the lenses/flashes are compatible, saved a fortune,




Ron

_________________
"To the Core"

Yes Rotten66 and they are lovely lenses.

I'm a Nikon girl, but a few years ago for some obscure reason (the per second rate I think) bought a Sony as a back-up and love it. If I think I'm doing something sort of serious photography I use the Nikon, but pick up the Sony for all day to day week to week shots. You can find some terrific bargains on ebay gumtrees or the like in the way of older Minolta lenses all compatible with the Sony. Does save a fortune but the more important thing they are so good.

_________________
PC