Help! My camera can't keep up with my toddlers!

[disneyfan551]

This is a great thread, with good timing! I use my camera, solely for my 4yo's pictures, and I am in the market again! I have been looking at Costco, due to their return policy and they have a D50 and a RebelXT that I'm thinking about. But, I have NO idea about these cameras, and really even know what a DSLR is all about. I live 3 hrs away from the Costco, but am going down tomorrow to hopefully buy one (whether at Costco or Ritz??). My last main problem is that I have no time to research them online, due to current internet availability (break time only! ). Can you guys help me out? I'm willing to pay up to $800 if need be, but was hoping for $400 range, which is what I paid for my Minolta DiMAGE Z1 that I currently own. As long as I have at least a 10x zoom, I'll be on !

Do any of you own the D50 or the RebelXT? What's the difference between them? I can't even tell what their zooms are on dpreview.com, all of the technical stuff really confuses me! PLEASE HELP!!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

a dSLR doesn't have zooms. They are just the bodies. You'll need to buy appropriate lens for the bodies.

As far as I know, D50 is 6MP, RebelXT is 8MP; there is no backlit LCD on the D50 -- something critical if you take pictures in low-light places. Other than that the performance between the two are almost identical. As a Canon user, however, my suggestion will be the Canon gear.

 

[disneyfan551]

Thanks for the info. I had NO IDEA about the zoom/lenses! So, how much would a similar type zoom/lens run for the XT? And, any recommendations on where to purchase either the lens OR the camera? There are so many options, and it's kind of scary! I'm really afraid to make the wrong decision.

I love to take pictures, but I'm definitely a p&s person! I'm wondering if it would be a total pain not having an automatic zoom on an XT or D50? Ugh, I'm so confused now! I really liked the quality of those pictures I saw on dpreview.com....

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Thanks for the info. I had NO IDEA about the zoom/lenses! So, how much would a similar type zoom/lens run for the XT? And, any recommendations on where to purchase either the lens OR the camera? There are so many options, and it's kind of scary! I'm really afraid to make the wrong decision.

I love to take pictures, but I'm definitely a p&s person! I'm wondering if it would be a total pain not having an automatic zoom on an XT or D50? Ugh, I'm so confused now! I really liked the quality of those pictures I saw on dpreview.com....

I bought my dSLR body only because the lens that comes with it is not good enough for me. So I bought Sigma 18-125 as my walkaround lens. It's a compromise between zoom capability and picture quality. Also available Sigma 18-200, better range but picture quality suffers (for my taste) between the 125 to 200 range).

I bought the 18-125 Sigma for around $350-ish (it was more than a year ago) at my local shop (my friend owns a store here).

Cheers,
Kelly

 

[PaulD]

My suggestion is to try both of them out in the store and see which one feels better to you. Both cameras are great and will produce beautiful pictures. The difference between 6mp and 8mp isn't really as big as it may sound. I've printed 8x12 with 6mp and it looks great. You'll find that there are big Nikon fans and big Canon fans. I'm personally in the Canon camp but that's just a matter of preference not function or quality.

I recommend that you buy the kit with the lens. If you are coming from a P&S then you will be quite satisfied with the quality of the included lens. Later on when you want more then buy a new lens at that time. Remember that you'll probably have this camera a lot longer than you would a P&S so upgrades (like lenses and flashes, etc) are often cheaper than buying a new camera like you would when your P&S doesn't meet your needs any more. And there isn't a P&S out there that can touch the image quality of a dSLR.

I noticed on Costco.com that the Nikon comes with two lenses, an 18-55 and a 55-200. That would really cover just about any focal length that you will ever need. Also, I'm not sure you realize how these cameras zoom. They are manual but that's certainly not a bad thing. All that this means is that you turn a ring on the barrel of the lens to zoom. It actually offers a lot more control and it's also much faster. Most people prefer this method over the zoom buttons found on P&S cameras.

Ultimately, don't buy either if you don't like how they feel and work. If you buy a camera that you won't use then it was a waste of money. If you are more comfortable with a P&S then you should stick with that. But, I hope that you like the dSLR's because they have many advantages over P&S.

 

[Laura]

handicap18 is absolutely correct.

During the time you power on a P&S, focus and take 1 picture, I can easily take 5 pictures on my dSLR.

Well, it does depend on the dSLR. A Canon 20D will take 5 pics versus my A620's 1 pic, but Canon's dSLRs prior to that can take about 3 secs to power up, like the original Digital Rebel--not the XT.

Not that anyone here's buying an older model dSLR, though. I'm just saying that camera technology can improve leaps and bounds over the years and in some ways a newer digi P&S can be better than an older digi SLR. Just depends on what you want out of the camera.

That said, if one is taking pics of fast-moving subjects in low light, I certainly don't suggest buying my A620.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

In theory it's 3 seconds but I used to own a 300D and 10D, they both start up in less than 2 seconds. After that, let it "sleep", the restart time is less than 1 second (well, very close to 1 second).

The other trick is to set the sleep timer to 10-minutes, and every now and then (within than 10 minute period) you half press any button on that camera so the camera stays awake at all time. Yes it eats more battery juice, but not by much. I still can use 1 battery only for my entire day trip to Disney using that trick.

The newer dSLR startup time is about 0.3 of a second max, Canon 30D is now at 0.15 second startup.

Besides, Canon have long discontinued the 300D.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

... but Canon's dSLRs prior to that can take about 3 secs to power up, like the original Digital Rebel--not the XT.

I've tested my 300D vs A620 from off-mode, startup, take pictures. Within the same time frame A620 takes 1 picture, 300D takes 3 pictures albeit the faster power-up time on the A620.

It powers on faster, but then the LCD needs to get ready (also, albeit only a fraction of a second, but it adds up), much slower focus time, plus shutter lag).

That doesn't say I never use my point and shoot anymore. I still use it as the back up of my back up camera.

 

[boBQuincy]

The difference between 6 MP and 8 MP is not as much as it sounds because the image area goes up with the square, thus the pixel count difference is more like the square root of 6 vs square root of 8. Iow, 2.45 vs 2.83, a difference of only about 15%.

Printing at 8x10 you probably would never notice any difference in quality.

The "kit" lens is usually about $100 extra over the body alone, that should give you some idea about the quality of the kit lens (although they are better than the $100 would indicate they are still not great). It's a good way to get started for not much $$$.

The next step up in Canon hierarchy is their middle range, with the 24-85 at about $300. I'm sure Nikon has similar ranges.

One of the biggest advantages of dSLR over P&S is the option to get RAW files. RAW is the data straight (almost) from the sensor and is thought of as a "digital negative", ready to be interpreted just as a print from a film negative would be. A RAW file can have about 16 times as much information as the JPG and although it involves more work (post processing) it really delivers the true power of the dSLR.
And with most dSLRs you can get RAW *and* JPG at the same time!


boB

 

[Kelly Grannell]

The next step up in Canon hierarchy is their middle range, with the 24-85 at about $300.

Unfortunately 24mm is so not wide enough for many applications. Of course this depends on your shooting style. I use 17-24 range 50% of the time, 100-200 range 40% of the time, 24-100 range only 10% of the time (and that's only because I can't move in closer or move out further.)

 

[PaulD]

Not that anyone here's buying an older model dSLR, though.

You can still buy the 300D ($549) and the 10D ($799) from B&H. I use both and love them. Yes, I'd love to upgrade to a newer version for some of the bells and whistles but the slightly better noise performance and slightly larger megapixel count make it hard to justify. Both of these cameras still trounce P&S image quality even though they are older. You can get a Rebel XT for not much more than the 300D but you can save about $300 on a 10D vs 20D (more vs the 30D). If you are looking at moving to dSLR and you don't have mucho cashola it's something to consider.

 

[Laura]

I've tested my 300D vs A620 from off-mode, startup, take pictures. Within the same time frame A620 takes 1 picture, 300D takes 3 pictures albeit the faster power-up time on the A620.

It powers on faster, but then the LCD needs to get ready (also, albeit only a fraction of a second, but it adds up), much slower focus time, plus shutter lag).

That doesn't say I never use my point and shoot anymore. I still use it as the back up of my back up camera.

Well, you certainly would know better than I, I'm simply repeating what I've read in reviews of that camera by people who have owned it.

 

[Laura]

You can still buy the 300D ($549) and the 10D ($799) from B&H. I use both and love them. Yes, I'd love to upgrade to a newer version for some of the bells and whistles but the slightly better noise performance and slightly larger megapixel count make it hard to justify. Both of these cameras still trounce P&S image quality even though they are older. You can get a Rebel XT for not much more than the 300D but you can save about $300 on a 10D vs 20D (more vs the 30D). If you are looking at moving to dSLR and you don't have mucho cashola it's something to consider.

Not everyone wants to carry such large cameras around on vacation, which is when I usually take my photos. Yeah, SLRs are unmatched in pic quality, but I think most "normal" people like me just want a smaller, easy-to-use camera for snapshots. I don't have kids, but I imagine when I do and they're doing things like ballet or karate or soccer I'll want a better camera to take nice pics of the action. I won't mind carrying around a larger camera to those kinds of events. And by then, digital SLRs will likely be even smaller and better than they are now!

So, the OP might want an SLR, maybe not. It just depends on the consumer's preferences.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Well, you certainly would know better than I, I'm simply repeating what I've read in reviews of that camera by people who have owned it.

What you've read is correct though. If you insert the battery, close the lid and start the camera, for some reason the startup time is about 1 sec longer than if you do it the second time around (with battery already inside the camera.)

This is true with 20D and 30D too.

 

[PaulD]

So, the OP might want an SLR, maybe not. It just depends on the consumer's preferences.

I completely agree. The OP (or anyone for that matter) should buy a camera that they enjoy using. I love my dSLR but I don't expect that everyone should feel the same. P&S cameras take wonderful photos that most people will be perfectly happy with. I use a P&S sometimes when I don't want to lug around my gear too.

 

[manning]

I agree with PaulD.

I settled on the new Panasonic TZ1. It is light and has a 10x zoom (12.5X if you drop from 5mp to 3mp). I have only taken daylight with great results. I haven't had a chance to do low light yet. I know DSLR has a lot going for it but I just didn't want to pay that much and have to lug a big camera and possibly another lense around. A camera with that much reach and lays in the palm of your hand was what sold me.

It has image stabilization and any low light noise I can take care of with neat image. As a matter of fact I have seen some night shots that aren't that bad.

I figure the camera will handle 95% of my needs.

 

[left210]

I settled on the new Panasonic TZ1.

Manning, please post back and let us know how the TZ1 does in low light and with moving subjects. I am really interested in this camera and have checked it out at the store but it is so hard to tell in the stores. Thanks.

 

[manning]

Manning, please post back and let us know how the TZ1 does in low light and with moving subjects. I am really interested in this camera and have checked it out at the store but it is so hard to tell in the stores. Thanks.

Take a look at this link to see some low light level pictures the photographer says most of the photos there have very little to no post-processing. also this takes you directly to page 6. If you want to see all of his pictures just go to page 1.

http://john-reed.smugmug.com/gallery/1357189/4/65607647

I have taken short movie clips and they are some of the best I've seen for a still digital camera. However there is an issue surfacing about long movie clips. I saw it on this link http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18184 page 45 beginning at post 444. The conversation is between Snoopy1010 and Doug Lerner. They are trying to figure out if it is an SD card falt or in the camera.

Still waiting for dpreview.com to review the camera.

Hope this helps. I'll try to take some low light shots myself.