should i blow £600 on a camera....

[Mord]

so, i don't know jack all about them, or photography only a fair knowledge of optics.

so, i have a run of the mill 3MP consumer camera and it pisses the hell out of me, i take a picture and it thinks about it and snaps a picture that never turns out how it should, it's not bad but it's just not all that nice, this is not due to my skill, i get the best pictures out of it.


anywho, in a few months i could buy a 20d or a 350d with a kit lens and buy a decent lens a month after that, or get a cheap lens to make do if it's affordable.

what i'd use it for: all the general consumer stuff and pictures i'd like to take but never have the opportunity to, i have no interest in going pro let alone presumably have the skill to, though it's something i've toyed with for a long time though i'd like to hear people who bought a dslr for the same reasons and wether it went well or not.


it's either that or a 2405FPW, which i rather need.

 

[extraextra]

If you're not going to go "pro" or anything and don't want to put the time and effort into working a DSLR, I wouldn't recommend it, even a 350D. Pictures require post-processing and generally won't look great with a cheap lens. The 350D is a small DSLR, but it's not really something you can carry around on a day-to-day basis and just whip out for an impromptu shot or something.

I'd recommend a point-and-shoot with some manual features, like Canon's A620
(amazing camera), or if you want even more flexibility, you could try a Powershot Pro. Fuji and Sony also make some good cameras.

 

[Mord]

i'll learn anything and put the effort in, it's more the amount of use i'd get out of it that i worry about.

no way would i ever buy a non pro camera, i'm a bit of a control freak and i cant stand the amount that consumer cameras dictate how they want you to take pictures.

oh and my PS skills are unparalleled by anyone i know, plus aperture looked pretty straight forward when i had a go with it.

 

[extraextra]

Is portability an issue? (Like, do you want to have a camera strapped around your neck/in a bag?) If it's not that much of an issue, then the 350D could work since it's a small DSLR. Also, there isn't really an "all-in-one" lens, and the good ones cost money (upwards of $1000, if you want really good quality).

The Powershot Pro is SLR-like, you can set everything the way you want, the lenses just aren't interchangable. I think Sony has something similar with the RC1 (or whatever the name is).

Otherwise, if the lenses + portability aren't an issue, go for it!

 

[Applespider]

no way would i ever buy a non pro camera, i'm a bit of a control freak and i cant stand the amount that consumer cameras dictate how they want you to take pictures.

In that case, if you want a new camera, that's what you're spending the cash on so why bother asking? If you need the new monitor more, buy that and get the camera next time you have spare cash.

To be fair though if you're currently working off a relatively old 3MP camera and not getting the shots, it might be worthwhile to see if there's a mid-range one you'd be happy with. Moving from an old 3MP to a new 6MP camera last year was like chalk and cheese with regards to sensor quality, camera processing and shutter lag.

 

[Mord]

portability is not at all an issue, the better it fits my meaty man sized hands the better.

my sole issues is wether anyone who was in a situation like mine would actually use the thing.

oh and i have used 35mm SLR's and 350d's several times before, and many cameras inbetween.


what i "want" the most is a MK3 triumph spitfire, however it's not so much practical atm and I'm unlikely to use it all that much, i'll need a 2405FPW by the end of September at least when i got up to Edinburgh to uni but i could get a dslr sooner.

 

[cookie1105]

I want a spitfire 1500. But I went for the 350d.

Not really...to import one into Denmark would cost me the best part of £8000. Stupid Danish taxes I could get a lot of kit for that.

 

[Mord]

the mk3 is faster and sexier, anyway, i'm pretty dead set on saving up and getting a second hard 20d, you can get one for not much more than a 350d and they just seem nicer in general.

 

[RedTomato]

Save your money and get one of the cheaper cameras with full manual control, and learn everything you can about aperture, f stops, depth of field, the different shooting modes, histograms, the different lighting modes, image composing, shutter speed, film speeds.

Every photo, plan it before hand and consider what you're trying to achieve. After every photo, review it and look at what happened, what you got wrong / right and how you could have improved it.

By the time that you can consistently shoot better pictures in full manual mode than in the auto mode (suprisingly difficult with modern cameras), and know what every setting does and how it will affect your image, you'll be ready to upgrade to a digital SLR.

Photoshop is cheating. The skill is to get good pictures with good composition first time straight out of the camera. A bit of cropping is as far as i will go to rescue a picture. (and some red-eye removal if needed)

I brought a Canon Powershot A70 about 2 years ago, for £200 quid, plus another £100 on batteries, memory, bag, cheap full tripod, and a mini tripod. I've taken about 6000 photos, and am still learning the full depth of manual controls that it offers. For the same money, you can get a lovely camera now.

I took some lovely pictures out of a l'espion digital miniture camera, about the size of a 50p which I got for a tenner at a street market. With a tiny 'toy' camera, people are so much more relaxed, and it was much easier to carry around with me - shame the drivers were Windows only (!)

 

[beavo451]

Photoshop is cheating. The skill is to get good pictures with good composition first time straight out of the camera. A bit of cropping is as far as i will go to rescue a picture. (and some red-eye removal if needed)

I would disagree with that. With regards to composition, yes you should do it in camera. You cannot get pictures like you see in pictures and from professional photo studios without photoshop or another image processor.

so, i don't know jack all about them, or photography...
...thinks about it and snaps a picture that never turns out how it should...

This would not be a limitation of the camera. This would be a limitation of the knowledge about how the camera works.

no way would i ever buy a non pro camera, i'm a bit of a control freak and i cant stand the amount that consumer cameras dictate how they want you to take pictures.

You already did once. To clarify a bit, the 350D is not classified as a "pro" camera either.

How often do you need the camera? How interested are you in photography? There is no point in buying a camera with features that you don't use. If you need the monitor more, I would buy that first and then think about the camera.

 

[Mord]

i have a mac driver for my lesbian camera

but anyway, i really am a quick study and i've used SLR's to good affect many a time, buying a learning half way camera is a waste of money for me, for powershot money i could just about get a 300d if i looked hard enough.

this is not a question of my ability to use the thing, that much is a cert, it's more wether i will seeing as i constantly see the types of shots i'd like to make and think up things which would look great but weather someone like me who would never go pro due to other interests would get their moneys worth or continually think they wasted 600 quid on something they get a few pretty pictures out of.

i don't get impatient when i'm in total control of things and i'm happy to spend time on a shot, oh and i hate photographing people, it's not going to happen.

 

[Mord]

I would disagree with that. With regards to composition, yes you should do it in camera. You cannot get pictures like you see in pictures and from professional photo studios without photoshop or another image processor.



This would not be a limitation of the camera. This would be a limitation of the knowledge about how the camera works.



You already did once. To clarify a bit, the 350D is not classified as a "pro" camera either.

How often do you need the camera? How interested are you in photography? There is no point in buying a camera with features that you don't use. If you need the monitor more, I would buy that first and then think about the camera.

i will need the lcd in a couple of months though i could get it early, but i know i'd just spend camera money on other stuff.

Saying i don't know jack was a bit of an overstatement, I'm not mentally retarded and i can tell what works and what does not and i've had good results

oh and i'd probably not get a 350d, as i said before the 20d looks the better deal for me.

the features i want are complete controll and excellent quality, and every point and shoot has completely failed to deliver that, and if some really expensive powershot does it i may as well get something for a bit more than i can really have some fun with like a 300d in that price range.

to clarify, my skill is not what is in question, i can pretty much master how any new toy works with a couple of days use, it's weather someone in a similar situation felt they got their moneys worth.

oh and i dident buy my current camera it was given to me.

 

[beavo451]

Then go for it.

 

[extraextra]

You'll need a better lens than the kit lens that comes with the camera.

 

[Abstract]

the features i want are complete controll and excellent quality, and every point and shoot has completely failed to deliver that, and if some really expensive powershot does it i may as well get something for a bit more than i can really have some fun with like a 300d in that price range.

Get a Pentax. Good camera and excellent features for the price you pay. It likely won't cost 600 quid.
Also, Olympus' kit lenses aren't supposed to be bad, so you'd get decent photos out of those. You may get more bang with 600 quid than you would with a Canon....unless you get a used 300 or 350D.

Or maybe just get a Canon S2 or S3 IS and get the monitor.

I'd actually recommend you get the monitor first. Getting a DSLR just means that you'll blow your money on lenses and accessories for it rather than save for your monitor, which you said you "need."

 

[Mord]

You'll need a better lens than the kit lens that comes with the camera.

hence me saying i'll get one, i did the exact same thing with my macbook, i couldn't afford to get 2GB ram right away and it was slow as **** for the first few weeks but then after a month i bought 2GB and now it's fine and i'm allot happier i did not just buy a cheap powerbook off ebay and get 2GB ram straight away.

 

[cookie1105]

I think you know what you want. Get the 20D and be done with it.

Then make sure you go out and use it at any available opportunity and you will enjoy it.

 

[REDSRT4]

DSLR's are nice but not the easiest to learn how to use, if you wanna take amazing pictures then yes get one, if not stick to a regular point and shoot