Which SLR? Sony Alpha, Nikon D80 or Canon Xti?

[bousozoku]

So they would not look as good with the Raynox coming from the D40 as they do with the H5? That sucks that my H5 will take better macro's then the D40 unless I buy expensive lenses. But the Raynox 250 will work with the D40 or no?

It's unlikely to work properly.

Generally, even the clip-on parts have to be made for a specific film or sensor size. You could try it, but I doubt seriously that your results, even with an excellent product of its kind, would be usable.

I don't suggest putting anything in front of the lens that isn't part of the scene. I'm sure you'll be able to find some economy macro lens that will be good enough. You should be able to pick from Nikon, Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina.

 

[Mechcozmo]

I'm a very happy Pentax shooter myself. I use a K10D, and a friend of mine uses a K100D. Built-in IS (aka SR in Pentax terms) is great for low-light shots. Unparalleled lens compatibility. And perhaps best yet... when I show off my camera to Canon and Nikon shooters, they both say "Wow, I wish my equipment had feature X!"

Try the cameras in your hand first. I don't like the viewfinders on the Digital Rebels-- too small. And the Nikon's didn't fit my hands right. The Pentax was the right fit for me, literally and technologically.

 

[Chappers]

How about a Pentax, or Samsung (the same camera different badge and price).

Shake reduction in body (on newer camera's) so all lenses work - far cheaper for you.

Its worth a look.

 

[andiwm2003]

To Apple_iBoy and andiwm2003. I played with the A100 in the store the same time I played with the Nikon D40. I really like both. My problem with the A100 is that the majority of people said don't get it. They said that at the moment there are no upgrade options, and may never be. I don't want to invest in the body, and multiple lenses and then have Sony just stop making SLRs. I do really like that it has IS built in, and I love the autofocus when you put your eye up to it! I've been very happy with my H5 and have had a few Sony camera's before and they all still work great. It's a tough decision. I'll have to look into the A100 a little more. Another bonus is that Sony will let me trade in my H5!

sony will release two upgrade bodies this year and the a100 will eventually get a better chip. so the upgrade path is there for the next years. after that who knows. but that is true for all brands. for e.g. you can't use pre ef canon lenses on new bodies.

IS built in is great. i love that. the autofocus sensor at the viewfinder sounds cool but honestly you press the release halfway down when you look through the viewfinder anyway. and if you carry the camera and something gets close to the viewfinder if focusses and wastes battery time.

the trade in issue is not too great. you can get the sony discounted somewhere else cheaper than with the trade in.

contrary to some other posts i feel the body has a good quality.

a number of people like it. as i said, all brands are good right now. canon has the least noise. if you shoot sports and in low light consider that.

 

[sjl]

IS built in is great. i love that.

IS (or VR, or whatever term you want to give it) built into the camera body is a decent feature to have, but be aware that it will always be more effective with relatively wide angle lenses. The longer the lens, the more an unsteady hand will affect the shot, and the less effective in-body IS becomes. There comes a point where IS in the lens is more effective.

The ultimate, of course, would be to have IS in both the body and the lens, and have the body switch over to lens-based IS when it's more effective. But I don't see that happening in any system any time soon.

 

[whistler72]

I have an Oly E500 and am quite impressed with it.

 

[Daeve]

Try the cameras in your hand first. I don't like the viewfinders on the Digital Rebels-- too small. And the Nikon's didn't fit my hands right. The Pentax was the right fit for me, literally and technologically.

Absolutely! Ergonomics is almost as important as features - after all you'll be holding it for hours.

Canons (300D, 350D 400D, 30D) for me are too small to hold and use the buttons correctly whereas Nikons (D50, 80 and 200) are perfect for my hands.
I tried the Pentax/Samsung recent range - and almost bought one based on price but after playing with in store for an hour it was so uncomfortable I couldn't justify it even with the 2 lenses they were throwing in.

I settled on a D200 which has been fantastic.

 

[Mechcozmo]

I tried the Pentax/Samsung recent range - and almost bought one based on price but after playing with in store for an hour it was so uncomfortable I couldn't justify it even with the 2 lenses they were throwing in.

Really? Wow. I had the same thing, but reversed-- the Nikons were awful in my hand! (Along with other UI problems) In any case, though, you're right-- if you're going to be holding onto the thing for hours at a time, make them enjoyable hours.

 

[fmetaljacket]

Limited choices

Hello everyone. I'm in a similar situation as the original poster. I work for a small non-profit that conducts educational seminars. We take photos for our marketing materials, but we are limited to using AmEx Rewards in order to get a good DSLR camera. These are my options:

http://www.membershiprewards.com/catalog/search/?fromPage=Shopping&N=11003500

Most of the pictures we take are indoors with low light. The two types that are usually taken are 1. Up close with participants talking/shaking hands with presenters and 2. Long distance shots of presenters making their presentations (avoiding using flash)

We previously had a Sony Alpha that took great pictures in these circumstances (I am presuming this is because of the image stabilization for the long shots), but definitely had a LOUD shutter. Of the above options, which do you think would work best for the kinds of photos we want?

I really appreciate any advice you may have.

 

[Mechcozmo]

Most of the pictures we take are indoors with low light. The two types that are usually taken are 1. Up close with participants talking/shaking hands with presenters and 2. Long distance shots of presenters making their presentations (avoiding using flash)

We previously had a Sony Alpha that took great pictures in these circumstances (I am presuming this is because of the image stabilization for the long shots), but definitely had a LOUD shutter. Of the above options, which do you think would work best for the kinds of photos we want?

I really appreciate any advice you may have.

Either of the Canons. You can get a 50mm f/1.4 lens for 'em, which will allow you to take pictures in low-light conditions quite nicely. And, if you've got the money, the 70-200mm f/2.8L is a great telephoto for low-light. Expensive, but if you're a photographer, it's worth it.

 

[Silverbird0000]

Ok, so I just bought a Nikon D40. Thanks everyone for your replies and input!