Canon DSLR's

[SlowLS]

ok i may be buying this EOS D60, i think its 8.3 MP. Do you guys think this camera will take better pics then my 35mm Canon SLR? Does any one use this camera now that can give me the ups and downs about it?

Thanks, Mike

[94EXCIVIC]

eos d60 I've never heard of it, is it the nikon d60?

[die in a dick fire noob]

dude an eos d60 is like 7 years old... you should look for a 20d if you want a canon with 8 mp...

i wouldn't pay for one period, the tech from 2002 was TERRIBLE...

[fmx_dbc]

Too bad I just sold my 20D....

[SlowLS]

dude an eos d60 is like 7 years old... you should look for a 20d if you want a canon with 8 mp...

i wouldn't pay for one period, the tech from 2002 was TERRIBLE...

its only 100 bucks but i just want to see if itll take better pics then my 35mm slr?

[die in a dick fire noob]

the problem with your 35mm slr is either the film or how you're taking pictures, digitals don't take "better" pictures than film, it's just easier to manipulate and recreate... for what it's worth the answer is that nothing below 16mp really takes a photo with more information in it than 35mm film. Would you ever notice the difference in a normal sized print? the answer to that is no...

i would not buy it since you can buy a 20d for about 250-300 and it's going to be faster processing, better photo quality, newer technology and easier to use and learn how to use as the information for a camera from 2002 is probably hard to find, since 94ex never even heard of it this kind of just proves it.

[e2blade]

real men shoot nikon. i lol @ film users. technology rules you

[die in a dick fire noob]

here buy this http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/ele/1400360356.html

[e2blade]

D40 cough

[die in a dick fire noob]

don't tell him to get the worst entry level camera...

[e2blade]

yeah ok, thats why it won all the awards. i talk out my ass all time :)

[94EXCIVIC]

get a nikon d100 if your gona go that old, the d70s are pretty good as well

[die in a dick fire noob]

umm, awards are based on consumer bias... consumers have nothing to do with attempting to further your knowledge of photography... the xt won a whole shit ton of awards too... so have pretty much every camera ever introduced from nikon or canon... the point is the camera isn't made for an amateur photographer, it's made for the consumer, small, lightweight, light on features as to not confuse anyone... none of those sound good to me.

[fmx_dbc]

The Canon Rebel XT is a bad ass camera for the price. Other than that, your photo quality lies with the lens. Buy the Rebel XT and then buy my 85mm 1.2L lens
Listen to StatiK, he definitely knows his camera stuff!

[HondaFreak]

Canon ftw! I got a T1I and its my baby. If I was you I would ATLEAST get the XT.

[e2blade]

have you ever owned a D40. using one for 2 seconds doesnt count either

[die in a dick fire noob]

bro i've worked at 3 different camera stores, used tons of d40's and d40x's... compared it to endless amounts of cameras... i thought i've been through this...

[94EXCIVIC]

have you ever owned a D40. using one for 2 seconds doesnt count either

I've owned one so im speaking from experience. I shoot nothing but nikon, but i also own a canon rebel xti its my second one and its great

[HondaFreak]

Ill probably end up getting a Nikon as my secondary camera. Gotta see what's good with them 'kons.

[e2blade]

bro i've worked at 3 different camera stores, used tons of d40's and d40x's... compared it to endless amounts of cameras... i thought i've been through this...

nope lol

[die in a dick fire noob]

k well now we have, i've sold a shit ton of cameras for a long time, also been through school for photography lol, and now i work in a bank... bottom line, ton's of experience with all nikon's camera's for the last 7 years... had a d70 for a long time, now i shoot canon.

[fmx_dbc]

Canon FTMFW!

[e2blade]

so whats your opnion on Nikon higher end cameras :)

[die in a dick fire noob]

i used the d3 when it came out and the d2x for a while, i liked them, but a camera is a camera at some point extra features and buttons become useless... i didn't really see a point of the d2x vs the d200... i loved the d200... thought long and hard on the d200 vs getting a canon, but canon could be had for cheaper and was 5fps which is what i was really looking for. so my 400 dollars was better spent than the 1200 for the d200 body at the time. i still think canon has better off the sensor color rendition.

[e2blade]

the d200 is shit compared to what is out now. i owned one forever and i wanted to throw it after 6 o clock
the ISO capability of the d700 is unbelievable

[fmx_dbc]

I have been experimenting with Canon's 5D and 5D mark 2 recently. Very nice cameras.

[die in a dick fire noob]

well seeing as how i don't go above 100 iso, i'd say i don't have a need for 6400 or whatever the fuck it goes up to now... it's such a dumb measurement because it really has nothing to do with the numbers anymore lol... and yeah the d700 is super nice, i would take one if it were given to me haha.

[HondaFreak]

I agree with you statiK. I really would not care much if a camera has a high ass ISO capability. I always try to avoid raising my ISO. Honestly, the only reason I would raise it is if there is some kind of UFO flying at night and I need to snap a picture of it to show everyone. In other words, an "emergency" type situation. My camera goes up to 12,800 ISO and I can tell you now, I can't ever imagine using that setting.

[e2blade]

you say this because you do not shoot things that you MUST use high ISO, so how can you say its dumb or anything. i have used 6400 iso many of times and the pictures turn out great. you have to use something to be able to judge it, and after even 1600 iso, film isnt even comparable

[HondaFreak]

Well, you're right. I haven't shot anything where I need a high ISO. I do prefer not to shoot at a high ISO unless its B&W just to add some texture and shit. But I guess I will need it eventually. Can you give me some examples where we would need 6400 though? I'm just wondering.

[HondaFreak]

Actually don't tell me. I just found out my self. When its dark and you want to get a steady shot without a tripod. duh.

[die in a dick fire noob]

I never called it "dumb," I said the fact that they still refer to it as ISO which is a measurement of film speed, is in fact dumb. It no longer has anything to do with the speed of anything, When you raise the ISO you are turning off photosites on the sensor and changing the grouping of the pixels. That has nothing to do with film, ISO, speed, or anything else... hence me calling the obligatory reference "dumb."

the function itself is quite useful for shooting low light, but there is NO situation where you NEED a higher ISO. In film there were those situations because you needed the film to be able to expose with less light, and the same theory applies to a digital sensor. But with better and better sensors and a better lens it's quite possible to never go over 400. I've actualyl never shot over 400 unless i was completely unprepared for what i was doing. Which happened 1 time i'll admit. However, having a flash, a large aperture lens, and a tripod with me in my bag pretty much at all times really eliminates the need for it in my specific situation.

So basically, what i'm saying, is that i wouldn't base a camera buying decision on that factor. That's not to say any of you did but it's not really a selling point for me SPECIFICALLY. I know Koopa bought one and uses his high ISO function all the time and takes great shots. But again, for what he does, it's easier for him to use that rather than a flash setup.

[SlowLS]

can some one explain the ISO numbering to me,I.e whats the difference between 64 ISO and 1600 ISO

i usually shoot @ 200ISO and the pics for the most part come out ok

[die in a dick fire noob]

In film the lower the number the more detail that's captured, the actual photo crystals on the film are smaller grains, and the higher you go the bigger the grains are thus the less quality you have. However, with larger grain you can expose much quicker as they take more light from the lens. So a high speed film like 1600 will be grainier but will also allow you to shoot handheld indoors or outdoors in relative lower light. And vise versa with a lower speed. You shouldn't necessarily use a 64 speed or 100 speed for portraits as it will show a lot of blemishes, that's why a lot of portrait film is 160-200.

[Big C]

Just picked up the new Canon 7D today. Fucking excellent camera. Huge step up from my old 50d. The new features are badass. I love the new focusing system. But thats only one of the many, many improvements to the 7D. If you can afford it, I'd highly recommend it.

For shits & giggles, here is a ISO 12,800 shot using only the in camera noise reduction and resized to 800 pixels. Taken right from the camera, no additional tweaks. Totally usable image IMO. 3200 & 6400 ISO are silky smooth and even better.

Don't believe me its 12,800 ISO? Check the exif info, its there :)

http://cmpixels.com/images/misc/IMG_0064.JPG

[91DA9]

Just picked up the new Canon 7D today. Fucking excellent camera. Huge step up from my old 50d. The new features are badass. I love the new focusing system. But thats only one of the many, many improvements to the 7D. If you can afford it, I'd highly recommend it.

For shits & giggles, here is a ISO 12,800 shot using only the in camera noise reduction and resized to 800 pixels. Taken right from the camera, no additional tweaks. Totally usable image IMO. 3200 & 6400 ISO are silky smooth and even better.

Don't believe me its 12,800 ISO? Check the exif info, its there :)

http://cmpixels.com/images/misc/IMG_0064.JPG

And might I ask where that 50d is now?

Anyways, back on topic: I would find out if someone around here would be willing to do a photoshoot day with you and check out an XTi, XSi, or T1i. Prices range from about $450-$800 for starter kits(sometimes with multiple lenses), and they're great cameras to learn on. I've had experience with an XTi and a Nikon D40, and I can honestly say after having used both I'll never pick up a D40 again.

[Big C]

And might I ask where that 50d is now?

Sold that sucker on craigs in less than 24hrs about 2 weeks ago.

[91DA9]

Sold that sucker on craigs in less than 24hrs about 2 weeks ago.

Oh got it.

[die in a dick fire noob]

damn wish i could sell my flash, had it on ebay, here, craigslist in charlotte, and other forums... no one wants a real flash lol...

but yeah 91da9 is right...

[HondaFreak]

Yeah man, that camera is sick. The picture looks clean 12,800. What lense does it come with?

[die in a dick fire noob]

^ doesn't come with a lens. the 5d and 7d are sold body only typically.

[e2blade]

dont make me go OVER 9000 ISO on you bitches
or post a legendary 25,000 iso

[Big C]

Yeah man, that camera is sick. The picture looks clean 12,800. What lense does it come with?

I got the kit cause thats all I could find locally. Comes with a 28-135 IS but its still wrapped in plastic. It's only a $400 lens, I won't even bother with it. I am just gonna sell it actually.

dont make me go OVER 9000 ISO on you bitches
or post a legendary 25,000 iso

lol go for it

I know the D700 has excellent high ISO performance. It fuckin better for $1000 more than my lil 7d :sucker:

[HondaFreak]

dont make me go over 9000 iso on you bitches
or post a legendary 25,000 iso

do it!

[fmx_dbc]

Playing with a Canon 1:1:2.8 Macro today
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb32/fmx_dbc/Astar1.jpghttp://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb32/fmx_dbc/Astar2.jpghttp://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb32/fmx_dbc/Astar3.jpg

[e2blade]

lol weve totally gone off topic.

[fmx_dbc]

so? lol