Old 27th February 2006, 02:46   #81
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Hope that tripod works out well for you, PB. Personally, I refuse to buy anything that has "Sony" written on it, but that's just me. As long as it does what you want, then that's what matters I suppose.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2006, 05:50   #82
GIR_Prototype
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 15
Send a message via AIM to GIR_Prototype Send a message via Yahoo to GIR_Prototype
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. Besides a carry case, what other accessories/attachments should I think about getting with a tripod?
Not really. If you're anal-retentive about getting things level and whatnot, they make bubble-levels you can attach to tripods. The most useful things for the Slik were the carry case it came with, and the spare quick release shoe that I bought a few weeks later.

Sometimes too, people make adapter feet that the tripod goes into. Wide ones for sitting on top of snow, I think once I even saw a floating thing for shooting in a swamp. The Slik U9000 really doesn't need that(althought it can't float, and that is kinda cool) as it's got an aluminum, plastic, and stainless steel construction, with threaded spike feet with rubber-bottomed plastic pieces you can "screw" down over the spikes so it sits on rubber, or that you can "screw" up to bare the spikes, and bury them into the ground.
GIR_Prototype is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2006, 07:10   #83
fwgx
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King)
 
fwgx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
Hope that tripod works out well for you, PB. Personally, I refuse to buy anything that has "Sony" written on it, but that's just me. As long as it does what you want, then that's what matters I suppose.
I would normally agree. This one was a decent price and entirely black which I like. I couldn't stand carrying a bright silver thing around with me.

.: fwgx.co.uk.:.My art:.

"We think science is interesting and if you disagree, you can fuck off."
fwgx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2006, 00:16   #84
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
Not really. If you're anal-retentive about getting things level and whatnot, they make bubble-levels you can attach to tripods. The most useful things for the Slik were the carry case it came with, and the spare quick release shoe that I bought a few weeks later.

Sometimes too, people make adapter feet that the tripod goes into. Wide ones for sitting on top of snow, I think once I even saw a floating thing for shooting in a swamp. The Slik U9000 really doesn't need that(althought it can't float, and that is kinda cool) as it's got an aluminum, plastic, and stainless steel construction, with threaded spike feet with rubber-bottomed plastic pieces you can "screw" down over the spikes so it sits on rubber, or that you can "screw" up to bare the spikes, and bury them into the ground.
Cool beans. If the horizon lines in the viewfinder aren't accurate enough, I might consider getting a bubble level for it. If it's no big deal, then I won't worry about it.

[edit]
Actually, the SLIK U212 that I'm looking at already comes with a bubble.
[/edit]

Quote:
I would normally agree. This one was a decent price and entirely black which I like. I couldn't stand carrying a bright silver thing around with me.
That's another reason why I really like the SLIK more... Not only does it have an impressive feature list, it's also completely black.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 14:42   #85
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06...ympuspanas.asp

Olympus and Panasonic (Matsushita) worked together to develop their 4/3s cameras. I didn't know that... Sounds good to me. I like Panasonic, too. Sigma just released five new 4/3s dSLR lenses as well, but none of them impressed me as much as the Zuiko lenses that I'm looking at, anyways.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 18:00   #86
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
4/3 is expensive, i hear.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 18:05   #87
fwgx
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King)
 
fwgx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,314
I got the D50 with 18-70mm lens yesterday. Took a few photos at my house party last night and was very impressed with it. It was very quick, no grain, the flash wasn't too bright, even without the flash it was still good and focussed quick. I still need to finish reading the manual because I don't think I know half the functions on it yet. I just love how quick it is though, it's such a good thing after my Canon A70!

.: fwgx.co.uk.:.My art:.

"We think science is interesting and if you disagree, you can fuck off."
fwgx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 18:46   #88
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
indeed. I got to play with a 350d properly today, a girl at work asked me to take a few pictures of people in teh snow during my lunchbreak today (she needed it for her college work) so i got to use hers. Its like night and day, even compared to my S7000, which is meant to be a 'prosumer' 'bridge' camera

(i hate those terms...)
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 19:21   #89
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
That's not really surprising.

All those 'bridge' cameras (except the Sony R1) have the same tiny sensors as the cheap point & shoot models, and most of the time their lenses are designed for maximum zoom range instead of quality as well.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 19:47   #90
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
true, which is kinda sucky. everyones like "oh, but the free depth of field from a small sensor is so great".

I LIKE MACRO PHOTOGRAPHY, I WANT *RID* OF DOF! :'(
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 20:04   #91
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Reminds me of that guy from Stiftung Warentest (a tax-funded independent testing foundation, good idea in theory...) who argued that SLRs are overrated and "all professionals blur the background in Photoshop".
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 20:19   #92
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
O_o;


No,I'm fairly sure thats wrong. (I suspect some of them may add a little blur, but not in such a way that a compact would replace their slr...)
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 22:22   #93
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
At closer focal ranges, the human eye narrows its depth of field as well. The only time the human eye has a large DOF is when it's focused on an object really far away. The only reason why you don't really notice it is because you're always paying attention to whatever you're focused on. In a digital image, you can look at any area of the image while the lens/sensor was focused on one point, so you can see just how narrow/wide the DOF actually is.

Quote:
indeed. I got to play with a 350d properly today, a girl at work asked me to take a few pictures of people in teh snow during my lunchbreak today (she needed it for her college work) so i got to use hers. Its like night and day, even compared to my S7000, which is meant to be a 'prosumer' 'bridge' camera

(i hate those terms...)
I never particularly cared for those terms either. Most digital P+S cameras made within the past couple years have all the same features that "prosumer" cameras have, so there really isn't a need for such a term. The term really only refers to digital P+S cameras that are shaped similarly to dSLRs, have EVFs, and have zoom ranges of 6x or more. Some of them have interchangable lenses, though. But those are rare. In reality, they're still P+S cameras. They just give more of a dSLR feel without the cost.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 22:46   #94
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
To this point, when I really wanted to take a picture, I used my X700 Minolta film camera (circa 1982). I have all the toys.

But this is changing. These CCD cameras are getting better. About the only annoyance I find in them is that CCD's saturate much quicker than film. For some. pictures, especially outdoor shots with low speed film and for portraits, I think film still does better.

Its just the difference between log scale exposure, like film and a linear exposure like a CCD. The megapixel ratings will sure give the 35 mm a run for it's money now. Still, if I'm gonna take art pictures, I still use a 35mm or my Mamiya frame camera.

I'm still not trading in my 35mm for digital. The D50 doesn't make me change my mind.

Is there a camera that will?.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 23:00   #95
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Olympus E-330? Canon EOS 5D, EOS 1D mII? Fuji S3 Pro?
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2006, 23:48   #96
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
In reality, they're still P+S cameras. They just give more of a dSLR feel without the cost.
Yeah, mine was second hand stock, bought from my work for staff price (20% on top of the buy-in price) so it was roughly £120. Pretty damn cheap for what it is.

Edit: i do hear good things of the s3 pro. the e330 is overrated IMO, the live lcd view is dim and cropped, which sort of defeats the purpose.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 00:01   #97
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
There are two modes of live view in the E-330. One mode uses a secondary image sensor in the OVF compartment to generate the feed for the LCD, and the other mode flips the mirror up to use the main sensor. The latter doesn't feature AF, though, for obvious reasons. While I doubt I'll use the live view feature much, it's nevertheless a nice feature to have. Regardless of the live view, it's still a true dSLR, and such, is fully-featured and has everything I need and more. The new MOS sensor has the sharpness of more expensive CCDs and low power consumption of CMOS sensors, too. That's a nice plus.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 00:23   #98
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
The latter doesn't feature AF, though, for obvious reasons.
This is the main reason that its pointless. focussing on an LCD is far less accurate than a TTL viewfinder.

As long as youre not buying it for the live view, and you dont mind paying a lot for the 4/3 lenses, go right ahead
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 00:44   #99
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
This is the main reason that its pointless. focussing on an LCD is far less accurate than a TTL viewfinder.
I don't see how, really. A couple of the dSLRs I've looked at only have a few AF points in the OVF, while my P+S camera can use any point in the image area as long as I set it to any mode other than AUTO. Maybe I'm missing something.

Quote:
As long as youre not buying it for the live view, and you dont mind paying a lot for the 4/3 lenses, go right ahead.
The 4/3 system is becoming more widely accepted, too. It's new, so naturally, it's still expensive (to an extent). It's really not that much more expensive than some other mounting systems.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 01:07   #100
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
I don't see how, really. A couple of the dSLRs I've looked at only have a few AF points in the OVF, while my P+S camera can use any point in the image area as long as I set it to any mode other than AUTO. Maybe I'm missing something.
He means manual focussing.

SLR autofocus can't use the whole picture because it has to use special AF sensors, but it uses phase detection* which is generally more reliable than the contrast detection (simply adjust focus until that part of the image delivers maximum contrast) used by non-SLRs.


*please don't ask me how that works
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 01:10   #101
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Ahh, that makes more sense, yes. I don't even know how to manually focus my P+S.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 08:07   #102
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
you ususally cant. My s7000 has an electronic focussing/zoom ring, which is basically an analogue controller programmed to zoom/focus. Its really annoyingly slow though.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 08:58   #103
fwgx
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King)
 
fwgx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,314
You can manually focus my A70 in macro mode from about 50-1cm. I might try using manual focus when I'm a bit more confident and know how the camera works properly. I did manage to take some pics with the manual focus on without realising so they came out blurred. Got one good one though.

.: fwgx.co.uk.:.My art:.

"We think science is interesting and if you disagree, you can fuck off."
fwgx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2006, 16:09   #104
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
mark said
you ususally cant. My s7000 has an electronic focussing/zoom ring, which is basically an analogue controller programmed to zoom/focus. Its really annoyingly slow though.
Mine has a manual focus feature, but I never read how it works. I saw it in the user manual, though. Not like I'll ever need it... :P

Quote:
I did manage to take some pics with the manual focus on without realising so they came out blurred.
Oops.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th March 2006, 20:49   #105
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Dpreview's full E-330 review.

Frankly I find it rather disappointing, looks like its new sensor isn't better than the E-500's (and no match for the bigger ones used in other dSLRs or the Sony R1).
Jpg processing isn't great either (better shoot raw), the jaggies caused by clipped highlights (edit: or rather demosaicing) are particularly nasty.

Last edited by gaekwad2; 18th March 2006 at 21:19.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th March 2006, 22:41   #106
fwgx
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King)
 
fwgx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
There are two modes of live view in the E-330. One mode uses a secondary image sensor in the OVF compartment to generate the feed for the LCD, and the other mode flips the mirror up to use the main sensor. The latter doesn't feature AF, though, for obvious reasons. While I doubt I'll use the live view feature much, it's nevertheless a nice feature to have. Regardless of the live view, it's still a true dSLR, and such, is fully-featured and has everything I need and more. The new MOS sensor has the sharpness of more expensive CCDs and low power consumption of CMOS sensors, too. That's a nice plus.
I really wouldn't worry about having a live view on the camera. Believe me you wont ever use it on a camera of that size. On my compact I use it most of the time but there's no way I would use it on the D50. For a start the camera is too big and secondly the viewfinder is extremely comfortable and easy to use - and I wear glasses.

.: fwgx.co.uk.:.My art:.

"We think science is interesting and if you disagree, you can fuck off."
fwgx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2006, 09:12   #107
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
my camera is rather large, not much smaller than phily's. Its a 'bridge camera' so it has a live view, and a electronic viewfinder, which is a smaller lcd of the same resolution behind a magnifier. I tend to use it far more often than the LCD, but the lcd is sometimes handy for macro or quick snapshots. The SLR viewfinder is far FAR greater than any EVF though, and if my camera had one, i'd probably use the LCD even less.

Cameras with live LCDs that swivel are handy, as you can shoot easily from the hip, or above your head, which is good for candid shots, or shooting over crowds. If you really want a live LCD, you can get ones that attach to the viewfinder, like this.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2006, 12:39   #108
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
That thing costs less than the price difference between the E-500 and E-330, how well it works is another question of course.

Btw, nice spin by Olympus in their press release (reproduced on page 1 of the review). They somehow forgot to mention that all sensors have microlenses in front of them that focus the light onto the sensitive area and therefore enlarging that area won't give you more sensitivity/less noise.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2006, 00:14   #109
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
gaekwad2 said
Dpreview's full E-330 review.

Frankly I find it rather disappointing, looks like its new sensor isn't better than the E-500's (and no match for the bigger ones used in other dSLRs or the Sony R1).
Jpg processing isn't great either (better shoot raw), the jaggies caused by clipped highlights (edit: or rather demosaicing) are particularly nasty.
That was the review I was waiting for. And I agree... it is a little disappointing. Out of the entire package, the only things I really like are the large LCD screen, the 4/3 lens mount system, the SonicWaveFilter dust remover, the dual memory card slots, and the off-center position of the OVF. The Live View is a great idea, but very poorly implemented. I would have really liked to have that feature, but I'm sure I wouldn't have used it much. So it's not like that was ever a deciding factor. Also, the persistant noise reduction is horrible, judging from the comparison pictures... and it can't be turned off.

It has some really nice features, but the overall image quality is what's really important. It doesn't look like the E-330 has the quality that they said it would. It'd probably be worth it if it were about $400 less in price. Even though I really wanted to finalize my decision to get this camera, it's a good thing that I waited for a good review before getting my hopes too high.

And of course I really appreciate all the info and help from everyone. I'm going to go back through this thread in a bit and look a little more seriously at all the other previous suggestions.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2006, 00:26   #110
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
So I'm waiting Sarge. When you figure out what to buy, I'm waiting to do "ditto". I'd like a new digital. When I have you figuring out whats the best camera, that means I don't have to.

/ theme from jeopardy plays
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2006, 00:28   #111
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
When I get done doing my "catch up" on the forums, I'll get back to reading through this thread again. :P I was away from the boards for a couple days, and lots of threads have moved in that time.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2006, 00:35   #112
ElChevelle
Moderator Alumni
 
ElChevelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: the MANCANNON!
Posts: 22,436
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
When I get done doing my "catch up" on the forums
Good luck with that, btw.
Make sure you watch Death Wish 17 before passing judgement on me for the Super Mega Ultra ****** crack
ElChevelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2006, 00:42   #113
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2006, 02:24   #114
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Well, it looks like I'll quite possibly be following a couple people's advice. After a bit more deliberating, specification comparison, and sample image critiquing, the Canon EOS 30D (official site) looks like the best for the price range. I've heard tons of great things about Canon in general, and I've seen the reviews on the EOS 20D (has the same imaging hardware as the 30D, so I used the 20D's image reviews as a base), and I must say that I'm quite impressed. The 30D builds on the 20D's successes, and adds a couple more features, a larger LCD screen, and a refined button layout. It's got a magnesium alloy chassis, too. I've already had the chance to mess with the EOS 350D (Rebel XT) at a couple stores, so I know how quick Canon EF/EF-S lenses are. They're VERY fast. I was eyeballing this one pretty hard, actually. And if I get the camera as a kit, it should already have a smaller lens with it.

If I get the 30D, I'll also need to get at least one CF memory card. The SanDisk Ultra II series seems to be quite good and highly recommended. I could probably go for the 4GB model, but for now, I think a 2GB card would be sufficient. The 4GB one is out of stock right now, anyways. :P And also, if I get the 30D, this will be the VERY next thing I order. I HATE proprietary battery packs, and this adapter allows the use of six AA batteries. Woot! And of course, I'll have to have a tripod. The Slik U212 that I'd picked out before is still a prime candidate. I can worry about other things like carry cases and whatnot later, once I have everything.

Keeping in mind that none of this is set in stone... this is a much better setup than the Olympus, though. As always, I'm still open for suggestions and ideas. I was curious about what the Fuji S4 Pro is going to be like, but I'm sure it'll be too expensive anyways, so I'm not overly worried about it.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2006, 07:14   #115
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
the 30d will be pretty huge once you get that battery grip on. A far cry from the oly e330...
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2006, 11:58   #116
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
With a big tele that won't matter much, actually it'll be easier to control than the tiny 350D.

One thing if you get a Canon: forget about kits.
Their kit lenses are traditionally only useful as paperweights.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2006, 16:36   #117
fwgx
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King)
 
fwgx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,314
Personally I wouldn't get a 20 or 30D straight off. It's a shed load of money and you'll probably be more than happy with the 350D or the Nikon D50. If you find after a year or so that it doesn't do everything you want then sell it and get the 20/30D.

edit:
If you're going to spend that much money on a 30D you really should know why you're getting that camera, what results you are going to get compared with anything else. The D50 I got was pretty much the cheapest D-SLR I could find and is leaps and bounds better than any P&S I could name.

.: fwgx.co.uk.:.My art:.

"We think science is interesting and if you disagree, you can fuck off."
fwgx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2006, 19:36   #118
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
agreed. You'd be far better putting the money into good lenses.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2006, 20:43   #119
GaryMichaelReed
Junior Member
 
GaryMichaelReed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2
Thanks
GaryMichaelReed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd March 2006, 00:58   #120
Mental8300
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 32
Send a message via ICQ to Mental8300
Get the 30D. Its a better camera, I'd regret getting anything less, or anything non-canon and I wouldn't want to go through the trouble of selling it to buy a new one.

If you don't like the kit lenses, get the body only and a lens separate. Maybe you could even get a lens that you'd like better then the one that comes with the camera (regardless of quality).

-j.reed a.k.a \\

edit: remember if you go on vacation you'll need a larger mem card. I hope you have a laptop or some type of hard drive storage if that ever happens. My friend has a Rebel and he brings his laptop and uploads his card every night
Mental8300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > General Discussions

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump