That Abes Of Main is probably the better deal, just make sure they are legit, have good reviews, and you use a credit card.
Although the cheap tripod they include, and third party battery don't make it that much of a better deal to me, at least they include a memory card. I'd probably go with the 549.00 Wolf deal and buy whatever else I want with the remaining cash, but that's just me. (Actually I'd probably buy the one for 375.00 on Craigslist but I'm cheap like that)
a while back I was all hot for a new digital slr, so I bought this at B&H for $900+
Rebel XSi
Just took a few pics with it, and since then it's been just sitting in a drawer unused...
I buy things on spur of the moment decisions, then a couple weeks later I'm all interested in a completely different hobby...
I'll take it off your hands for 200.
thanks, but no...
I bet I'll be all interested in digital photography again sometime...
Well, definately shop around. The D40 is only 6 megapixil and has a MSRP of $449.99. The added lens has a MSRP of $170, total, $620. $599.90 is not a good deal for mail order. You can probably walk into a camera shop and pay $500. Buy from a local camera shop, and even if you pay full MSRP, you have service available. I've had a "Best Buy" horror story, and heard several others. I suggest never buying any electronics from them you may want or need to return. They make it almost impossible.
I didn't check the second camera.
Personally, I haven't bought an expensive digital yet. I'm waiting for the price to come down on the 12 mexapixil+. Until then, I'll stick with my cheap 8 megapixil Pentex Optio, and my 80's vintage Minolta X-700 35mm film camera.
I hate digital in general, but these are both nice cameras. I have a slight bias toward the Canon because my 35mm SLR is a Canon and I'm used to it, but it's hard to go wrong with either of them.
Depending on her interests and use, you might want to make the decision by pricing accessories that she may one day want to pick up. Get lens sizes and start looking at lens, flash, cable release options, etc. A lot of that may be standard to both cameras, especially external flashes, but I know for a fact that Canon and Nikon use different lenses.
This is true. My aunt bought the Nikon because it was pretty and someone told her it was a good camera, but she's got no clue how (nor inclination to learn how) to use all the features and there's really no reason for her to own something so big and complicated.
Having an SLR camera makes a big difference when you're shooting with film because you get more accurate framing options than a camera with a viewfinder, but with digital there's really no advantage to having an SLR other than the extra features and manual options. The SLR mechanism doesn't have any impact on framing or image quality when shooting digital.
Telephoto (200mm or higher, preferably) with a macro option.
yeah I just learned that macro is code for expensive. Those types of shots are ing awesome though.
Macro isn't much of a cost add on, if any.
I think I found the winner for 821.
http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?item=CNEOSRDXSIBK1
Item #: CNEOSRDXSIBK1
Manufacturer Part #:
Canon EOS Rebel XSI Black Digital Camera w/ 18-55mm IS Lens & Sigma 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DG AF Lens
Items included in the kit:
EOS Rebel XSI Digital Camera w/ 18-55mm IS Lens Kit - Black (QTY 1)
Deluxe 3 Piece Lens and Camera Cleaning Kit (QTY 1)
Ultra High Speed Secure Digital Card Reader (QTY 1)
58-mm Multi-Coated UV Filter (QTY 2)
70-300mm F4-5.6 DG Macro AF Lens for Canon (QTY 1)
LP-E5 Extended Life Lithium Ion Battery for Rebel XSi/ XS (QTY 1)
8GB HC Secure Digital Memory Card (QTY 1)
CR325 SLR Digital Camera & Camcorder Bag (QTY 1)
Not really. It just so happens that macro is often a feature of lenses that would already be expensive.
Thanks.
You really should only buy a camera like that if you plan to learn photography, which takes time and effort, otherwise you'd be better off with a Coolpix S640 which is less than an inch thick and shoots 12 MP images, or at the most a P90 which is a zoom camera.
EDIT: As long as I can say I told you so in a month WGAF.....
I disagree. The compact digital photo camera has closed the gap to the SLRs somewhat mainly because of software improvement (something that wasn't really available to 35mm compacts). But when you speak about framing, speed, depth of field - in short all the things that make the difference between a good and a great picture, you need an SLR (whether digital or film).
100mm macro or even 70mm macro. 200mm macro with a decent f number are rare and crazy expensive. 100mm macro are often 1:1 lenses which is the best feature for macro photography.
When buying lenses I like starting with a reasonably priced "universal" lens (28-75mm, 28-150mm with an f number around 3,5) these are cheap and a good learning lenses. When you figure out what type of photography you like you then invest in good lenses with decent (low) f numbers. Bare in mind that a good lens will survive many camera bodies (also cost more) so when buying a camera you have to go with a brand that will keep it's standards for many future generations.
So far only Nikon has never changed it's bayonet mount, and Canon has only done it once (with the move to autofocus). These are the two brands that also offer the easiest path from amateur to serious to pro, if you want to go that way. There's a couple of other brands I like and respect, but there are personal preferences so not something for a thread like this.
Speed and depth of field probably does make a difference, but I didn't even think of that. My anti-digital bias is strong enough that I've come to take it for granted that those are both impossible when not shooting with film.
I have a 70-300mm macro zoom lens, f4-22, that I got brand new a few years ago for $80. It's my baby. It would fit the Canon body.
Don't tell me you bought from Abes of New Jersey.
I'm not saying they're gonna itup, but they do have a great track record of bull .
Order something tonight, then tomorrow morning they're calling your ass for extended warranties and extra carrying bags and special lens caps. And they won't ship your item without this phone call.
Don't expect it to arrive on time, cause they don't have it in stock. And when it does arrive, there's a higher than normal chance that the product is damaged, at which time AOFM will give you about it, then finally send another one weeks later, which has a higher than normal chance it's damaged, lather, rinse, repeat.
edit: I've never bought a camera or glass from them, so LMMV. I was referring to HDTVs mostly. But then again, everything could go smoothly.
Last edited by jaffies; 08-24-2009 at 09:44 PM.
I'm 10 minutes away from pulling the trigger. Maybe I'll hold off. I know B&H is solid but I couldn't seem to get as good of a package deal from them as I could get from Abe's of Maine.
Well I must say the last few generations of digital SLRs are doing a good job and with the increased resolution and lack of compression those things are just as present on digital pictures as they were on film (and I'm a big fan of good old film, specially slides).
There's actually a digital back for the Hasselblad camera that is so good that it has almost totally replaced film for studio shooting - and that's something many swore would never happen.
BTW for anybody using Digital SLRs: memory cards are so cheap now that please do not shoot in any format that has compression (jpeg, jpg...) but ONLY use the camera's raw format.
But that's a zoom and it's probably only a real macro lens when in the 70mm position. If you like the macro picture you taking with that lens, believe me you would love the results if you used a "real" 100mm non-zoom macro lens (you probably wouldn't like the price though - I know I don't)
BH is super solid, I've bought from them for my private use and professionally and have no complaint in the 10+ years I've used their services.
On the Nikon
So these cameras don't use an LCD viewfinder? The LCD is only to see the picture already taken? Am I getting that right?Viewfinder: Eye-level penta-Dach mirror single-lens reflex viewfinder
LOL.
I ing told you man.....
You wouldn't want an LCD viewfinder on a DSLR, but they do make them.
Who makes them? Someone has to make one where you can go back and forth depending on the situation.
Yeah but you wouldn't want one, the whole point of a DSLR is being able to see the image exactly as it is through the viewfinder so you can determine depth of field, focus, etc.
Can you imagine trying to focus the lens while holding the camera away from your body to see the image on the LCD?
Man I need a good analogy right now..........
Don't get me wrong I get your point. I get what an SLR is all about. The visual physics behind an actual looking glass...
There are situation though where an LCD image frame would be helpful.
I just started reading a little but it looks like the Canons have a LCD viewfinder option.
Yeah, people make them, but it's like putting mud tires on a Ferrari.
If you want to see a "live" image through an LCD don't buy a DSLR.
Last edited by PM5K; 08-25-2009 at 10:40 AM.
But what if I want to take my Ferrari mudding?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
