Need help picking out a camera...

[hobbes]

Im ina bit of a tough decision. I want to egt very into photograghy, but I dont know if I wanna do digital or 35 millimeter. I love the resolution on the 35, and Ill be using it to mainly take action shots of skatebaording. So know any good mid priced 35 MM cameras, slr's, with a good lens, and how much will it cost? Thanks so much.
-Nick

[edweird]

My mothers rig is 100% Pentax. It whipes the floor with any other camera I have ever shot in quality and maintenance. Sure Im no pro but mark my word Pentax is the bombgiggity. And as I remember it was not to expencive. about 6 hundred for the base camera and 3 lenses. But that was years ago...

[mrhooie]

I've used a Canon for about 15 years.. I've owned 4- 35mm SLRs and have loved everyone.

Even though I know have an EOS, I still find I use my TLb for winter outdoor shots.

You'll also find it's easy to own 3 or 4 different lenses for different circumstances. If you're going to do skateboarding and bmx photos, you'll want to buy a fisheye lense.

Never used Pentax, but I think the question in SLRs is how much are accessories as they all pretty much perform the same...

As for digital - you may find that they don't take action shots well. The ones I have played with have a delay before the actual shot is taken (from the time that you press the shutter button)

[synreal]

i would suggest that if you are interested in the art of photography that you invest first in a decent 35mm rig.

currently digital cameras cannot match the quality of film (and wont for a while). don't get me wrong, i love digital cameras, but if you are just starting to learn i would try to get a very basic 35mm setup that has as many manual features as possible (get a built in light meter though).

that way, after you has gotten used to setting f-stops, shutter speeds, ISOs.... you will be better able to fully use a more modern camera.

for a first setup you should be able to pick up a used pentax or ricoh body with a few basic lens and filters for under $250-300. just go with one that looks to be in good physical shape, and don't worry about how old it is (cameras haven't evolved that much since the 70's, and most hold up well over time).

best of luck

//side note - you should give C-41 black and white film a try, you can get some really nice effects. this is a black and white film that you can send to any corner store to get color processed in the one hour machine, and the images end up sepia-toned (creamy brown, black, and white - like old fashioned photographs)

[Hexis]

Yeah for anything fast you are better off with 35mm, the uber expensive digital will do well, but if you wanna spend 4k on a camera body, just get both. You can bring your pics nicely to the digital domain with a film scanner. With a 4000dpi one would would get the equiv of a 21 mega pixel scan on a 35mm slide or negative. The nice thing about a film scanner is that it scans the film (slide or negative) directly, so you are scanning off the original, not a print.

[hobbes]

Yeah I know I'm definetely going with a 35 MM SLR. I want a good rig, I dont mind spending about 500 for the camera and a lens and filter. What are the price ranges for an alright flash? I was thinking about 50-75 dollars, is that correct? Also whats a good choice of camera, for skateboarding photos and other photos, but mainly action sports, also, does it recharge on its own, or do I have to like wind soemthing after every shot? Thanks again, and also whats a good camera with manual features. Later.
-Nick

[synreal]

Most manual cameras in the sub 500 range need to be advanced (wound) by hand after each shot it taken. 50-75 sounds about right for a mid-range flash.

You should be able to EASILY afford a nice setup (body, 2+ lens, flash, filters, case and some film) for %500. I don't know if there are any camera shops around you, if so, go take a look at their used gear. be honest with the salesman, tell them what your experience level is and what you plan to do with the camera, they should be able to help you out.

if you don't have any stores nearby hop online and check out setups there (ritzcamera.com is a decent place to start). Nikon, Minolta, Pentax, Canon and Olympus are all good brands. Best of luck.

[hobbes]

I think I may buy a canon Rebel EOS, and another lens, how much are fisheye lenses? And is the last camera a good camera for nice quality pictures? Thanks.
-Nick

[mrhooie]

Nothing wrong with the Rebel EOS! not a bod choice

what you'll find is that it will automatically advance with each picture taken

Also - is has a setting that will aloow you to take multiple shots when the button is pressed.

As for a fisheye lense? hhmmm,, i think abou 250

[hobbes]

Know any other online sites other than Ritzcamera.com? I justw anans ee soem more, Im gonna go with the Canbon Rebel, but a fisheye, and a good flash, and a tripod, and LowePro carryign case, it should be a nice rig.Well later.
-Nick

[synreal]

jump on www.mysimon.com, they index quiet a few online merchants. i've had pretty good luck through them in the past (saved about 30% on more than one occassion)

[joeyjoe367]

for those of you who say that digital cameras don't get the same quality photos, a normal 6X3 photograph is approximatly 2.7 MegaPixles.

There are cameras out there, TODAY that are 3.2, 3.3, 4.0 and even 5.0 megapixles.

...it's just that digi-cams are more expensive. those High-res CCD's aren't cheap.

[synreal]

not to start a flame, but you aren't quite right. yes a 2.7 megapixel camera will produce a 4x6 at 300dpi (which is a decent print), which is fine for printing out and sending to aunt mildred. It is not however 'photo' quality.

Digital images are restricted in quality to however many DPI (dots per inch) their CCD can capture, while 35mm cameras with good film are not. Film is for all intensive purposes without resolution, the emulsion of chemicals on the film itself forms softer edges to shapes and eliminates the jagged appearance that digital images have when blown up.

Are digital cameras good? Most definitely, I love them and use them on a daily basis, but they have yet to surpass film (believe me, I am waiting for that day to come). For instance to create a 1200dpi (99.999999% true photo quality) 8x10 image, you would need a 115.2 megapixel camera.

[joeyjoe367]

Dpi doesn't actually matter that much, if you're talking about printing out photos on a photo-quality ink jet printer. How it works is it combines 'x' number of colors into 1 drop of ink and is then placed onto the photo paper.

Yes, if you blow up the pictures, they won't look as good, but what I meant was that for a 6x4 photo, printed on photo quality paper with a photo-quality ink jet printer, a 2.7 Megapixle camera is probably just as good as a 35mm Film.

...of course, I noticed that the colors of the picture looked a bit more pale than usual... either that or i wasn't feeling well when the picture was taken :P

I will admit, tho, that normal cameras are probably better for what hobbes wants to do.

If you want to post on the internet or something, get a scanner

[synreal]

agreed, for the average guy who just wants to take pictures of his kid's first birthday/steps/DUI arrest/etc.. a consumer grade digital camera is fine. but for use in photography as an art form, resolution/quality matters alot, and currently film is king by a long shot.