I shoot an Olympus e-510DSLR, a Kodak P-880, an Olympus C-750Z and a Nikon 775. Yes, I do still shoot with the Nikon 775 even though it is a 2MP camera with a slovenly response to tripping the shutter release. And I used to shoot two Minolta film SLRs - the XE-1 and the X-700. I'm saying all this so that I can share some perspectives with you. Notice, I say, my perspectives - they are not the absolute fact - perspectives are what you develop when you intend to buy a new camera, particularly a DSLR.
Most newbies are told to go to a shop and hold / handle a few cameras. Some use that handling to make up their mind, but often we see newbies come back to the forum, none the wiser. So much for that - they are so new to the DSLR business, they listen to the salesman, they listen to more experienced forum posters and they still can't make up their mind. Because they don't have sufficient discrimination to eliminate a brand or a model.
My perspective is towards entry level DSLRs by the way, so, here goes.
Canon
Canon is a big brand - it makes pro level 35mm equivalent DSLRs (called "full frame") as well as chic IXUS point and shoot cameras. I know people and have recommended Canon point and shoots, particularly the Powershot A Series that are good value for money. I have no shooting buddies near me that have Canon DSLRs although I have some friends who have Canon DSLRs. As a Pro brand, you will find some of the sharpest, well built, brightest, heaviest lenses made by Canon in the world. If you saw the Olympics or sports meets, there would be a whole brace of Canon Pro sports shooters with big white lenses.
If you intend to be a Pro sports shooter, a Pro journalist, then Canon is one of two brands that is a no brainer choice. Be prepared to spend big bucks for quality. Be prepared to carry heavy gear. Be prepared to insure your gear. I would expect lens rentals and repair facilities to be available given the demands of the Pro photographers.
But what do the Canon entry level DSLRs offer you?
A reputation inherited from the Pro gear (whether practical or not). The ability to buy a Pro quality, expensive lens if you wanted to.
Reasonable, competitive features.
Better low light pictures given the same type of kit lens as the other brands.
You can buy non Canon brand lenses from third party makers.
You can use second hand, autofocus, meant-for-film Canon lenses.
What I don't like about Canon?
The right hand grip from the earlier entry level models - it didn't feel right in my hand (you may feel differently).
The perception that I have to buy more expensive, better range lenses (bigger as well) if I wanted some respectable sharpness and performance).
The perception that the earlier entry level kit lens was not "nice"
No in body sensor shift image stabilisation
Our perceptions are clouded by our prior experience - I had had no prior experience with Canon film or digital bodies.
Nikon
Nikon is the other Pro brand in cameras. My comments about Nikon Pro cameras would be similar to Canon, except that Nikon has only recently arrived on the full frame, 35mm sensor scene. With Nikon though, I have some empathy. My photo mentor when I was in school carried a Nikon. My nearest photo buddies carry Nikon DSLRs. I have held the Nikon D40, D40x, D300 in my hands and came away happy with the feel of the bodies in my hand, the silky sleekness of operation.
What do Nikon entry level DSLRs offer you?
The very cheapest models feel good in your hands and are quite small in terms of bulk - almost like the small Olympus bodies. Once you fit non kit lenses on though, the bulk increases significantly, although with the new kit lenses, the package still looks attractive.
The ability to fit a long heritage of older Nikon lenses, even manual focus ones.
The ability to fit Nikon Pro quality, expensive lenses.
What I don't like about Nikons?
Features in the cheaper bodies have been purposely truncated so as not to draw sales away from their mid-range and Pro level bodies. For example, exposure bracketing and depth of field preview.
Some older, meant-for-film autofocus Nikon lenses will not motorise on the cheapest Nikon bodies.
No in body sensor shift image stabilisation
Olympus
Olympus has always been a maverick. The famous designer was Y. Maitani - he designed not only the famous OM-1 film SLR but even very unique and special small cameras like the XA. Olympus is not a big camera company. They have skills and reputation in microscopes (I used them when I was studying Materials Engineering).
When it came to the DSLR world, the story goes that Olympus never had an established auto focus film SLR - (maybe the autofocus idea generated bulky film bodies and bulky autofocus lenses which were not the Maitani style) - so they decided to maverick it again and produce an E-System using a smaller Four Thirds Sensor. The Four Thirds organisation has a few members - Kodak, Panasonic, Leica and Sigma. They just announced the micro Four Thirds Standard - which is about using the same sensor size, having a shorter flange distance to the removable lens mount - we're all waiting to see what kind of EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens) camera body will eventuate. Existing Four Thirds lenses will mount on a micro Four Thirds body with an adaptor and autofocus.
Olympus contribute body design ideas and probably body chassis to Panasonic Lumix DSLR cameras.
What do Olympus entry level DSLRs offer you?
A well designed, optimised (sharpness vs cost vs size) pair of kit lenses.
The smallest bodies amongst the competitors (although certainly bigger than a compact camera).
A from-new line of lenses from Olympus and Leica. Some re-engineered lenses from Sigma
The ability to fit (with inexpensive eBay adapters) manual focus second hand lenses from Olympus, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax K, M42 Screw Thread, Nikon.
In body sensor shift image stabilisation
A 2x sensor crop factor so your effective telephoto magnification for the same optical focal length has more reach. A 200mm optical focal length lens will give you 400mm of reach.
What is less to like about Olympus?
A smaller sensor, so slightly more grainy photos at ISO levels above 400.
The 4:3 aspect ratio vs the 3:2 aspect ratio of the other brand's APS-C sensors.
The 2x sensor crop factor will make legacy and current lenses less wide. A 24mm optical focal length will become 48mm focal length effectively, meaning it isn't wide any more.
Less lens choices and no legacy auto-focus second hand lenses.
A less than sharp viewfinder (makes focussing those manual focus lenses hit and miss)
Pentax
Pentax is a very senior brand. It was a peer competitor to my previous favourite and deceased brand, Minolta. Neither were able to compete with Canon and Minolta in the heavy duty, big time Pro photographer market, although there were Pros who did use both brands. In their film SLRs Pentax stayed with the M42 screw thread mount (called the Pentax / Practika mount) a long time. They are a small company but they have recently merged with Hoya Glass who make optical filters, spectacle lenses. They also work closely with Samsung and some of their DSLRs are rebadged and sold by Samsung with some changes.
What do Pentax DSLRs offer you?
Very good value for money. In fact, probably the lowest price possible for a DSLR, particularly the older models.
A variety of "primes" - single focal length lenses that are small and light.
A variety of lenses including second hand manual focus lenses (M42 screw, Pentax K mount). New lenses are either Pentax branded or Samsung and Schneider Kreuznach approved. Sigma are a major lens supplier.
Utilitarian features - well thought out, photographer's features rather than the latest "I have this feature too" ideas.
In body sensor shift image stabilisation
What is less to like about Pentax?
The reliance and close association with Sigma means that the lens feel and build quality do not have the Nikon / Canon "feel". That does not mean Sigma / Pentax lenses are not adequate.
The surface finish and general feel may not be up to the standard of a Nikon.
Sony
Sony had been making digital compact cameras for a long time. When they wanted to get into the DSLR business, Minolta happened to be looking for a buyer for their camera business, so Sony bought the Minolta camera and DSLR business. With that, they introduced the first Sony DSLR, the Alpha 100. Soon after, Sony, with much investment in technology and development, introduced a brace of new Alpha models, incorporating more Sony ideas. Sony have an extensive optical, digital business in still cameras, TV cameras and TV technology, just like their competitor Panasonic.
What do Sony DSLRs offer you?
The Sony brand, support and service network, retail and point of sale network. IT'S A SONY! Competitive and keen pricing.
Engineering money and engineers galore - they too are technology mavericks.
Minolta personnel and expertise from the previous Minolta DSLRs.
Second hand, Minolta Auto Focus Lenses, new Sony branded ones and Carl Zeiss branded lenses.
In body sensor shift image stabilisation
What is less to like about Sony?
The kit lenses are not the sharpest.
Some features purposely left out on the entry level bodies.
A peculiar left - right weight balance caused by cramming articulating large LCD panels in the body.
Sometimes choosing a brand from these is first preluded by - "Do you have a problem with not buying a universally accepted Pro brand like Canon and Nikon". Your photos may not and will probably not be different but the chip on the shoulder may show through. If you have no problems, then you can continue on to enjoy choosing from a wider range of brands.
Look at what you need right now to grow. By the way, can you show us some of your photos? It helps to see them to keep our discussion in context. I want to grow as a photographer, not grow my equipment collection - that's not the point.
Right now, I'd like an articulating, large high res 3" LCD screen. A body of minimum 8MP that costs AUD 300 so that I can have two bodies. A tele lens, probably the 70-300mm. Something that will help AF indoors. A flash, with light stand, brolly, reflector and some skills to use it outdoors and indoors for people photos. PP skills in layers and object removal. A pressure sensitive tablet. A Dell 24" LCD monitor. A colour calibration spyder. An A3 colour printer. A 7" netbook that lasts 6 hours on batteries that has video in and card reading. Time and money to go to Thailand, India, parts of Europe, maybe China.
There are so many things I want to buy that can improve my photography.
Changing camera body isn't gonna help me learn or improve as much.
Image via WikipediaI have this 250mm f/5.6 Minolta Rokkor MD mount legacy manual focus lens from my film SLR days. Put it on an eBay MD to FourThirds adapter and shot a few. Forum participants think that the bokeh is a little ferocious:
So while passing Micheal's Camera Store in Melbourne, I happened on this Tokina 200mm f/3.5 mm lens. It's a metal and glass that feels real solid and cold in your hands. The focussing action is smooth - completely different feel from modern rubber and fibreglass covered lenses. So I took it today to Blackburn Lake and incidentally met Maruhan.
Focussing the 200mm at f/3.5 is easier than the 250mm CAT at f/5.6 - there is a much longer travel in the focussing mechanism and the f/3.5 is brighter, with a more definite in-focus image visual. However, operating with the Olympus e-510 viewfinder and this lens is not as much fun nor is it as fast as my shorter reach standard 40-150mm autofocusZuiko Digitalkit lens zoom. I'd say I would get less than 50% keepers due to manual focus error. Here are some results.
Image via WikipediaI was initially fascinated with stitching several photos together to create a panorama. It's easier to do that nowadays because more and more cameras can do that in-camera and more and more software automatically do that. Olympus, by the way, have an in-camera panorama feature but don't get too excited about that. It essentially turns on grid lines so that you can overlap your shots as you point but only works with Olympus branded xD cards and doesn't do much else(?). Their PC Studio Master software will then take over the job once you get back to the PC.
There are, however, several software that create panoramas for you.
The problem with panoramas, though, is that you get a very wide aspect ratio result - viewing them are a problem. You either get lots of paper surface, print and mount on the wall or you have this band that will be several screen dimensions wide or auto-fitted into a small rectangle that fits one screen.
There are interactive panorama tools which allow mouse control and zoom so that you can browse / tour through the result image. I'll update this posting later when I have time.
Microsoft Labs Photosynth is a leading edge interactive idea - it's more than just a scrolling panorama.
Image via WikipediaWe often see newbies say "Please recommend the camera with the best IQ (Image Quality)". Invariably, the most common and sensible reply is "All current model DSLRs do a fair job - pick the one you like the most - go to the shop and hold a few and buy the one that feels good"
There are problems with The Question and there are problems with The Reply, even though each party is sincere in their conversation.
Let's deal with The Question in this post:
The DSLR with standard kit lens(es) will give varying levels of satisfaction. On most models, the kit lenses are made to just hit the targeted price level. It's not about photo quality, it's about business. It's like those mini, all-in-one hifi units. The makers can design electronics very well and the account for most of the manufacturing cost. The speakers are chipboard boxes wrapped over cheapboard units. It's nearly the same with the entry level DSLRs - the makers spend money on making a fair body but when it comes to the lenses, they tack on the cheapest units they can. After all these lenses are often not sold separately (i.e. they may not even merit a standalone price). The lenses are just so that the body can be sold.
So, most newbies will say, "OMG, the whole kit already costs more than my Point and Shoot camera and it's still not, like great? You mean, I have to buy some more lenses?" Unfortunately, dear, the answer is "Yes" - Many Olympus entry level DSLR buyers may be exceptions to this case, but in long term, even they would feel the need for a brighter glass indoors.
So, The Question is real wrong.
The best Image Quality in an entry level DSLR package doesn't come from the package or more importantly, the body. The package in general will give you mediocre to reasonable IQ but not great IQ - the lenses may be less than sharp, will often be dark and may not have the range of angles (wide or tele) that you eventually want or are accustomed to from your Point and Shoot Ultrazoom.
If you spend over-much for a class, quality body, you don't have enough money left over for good lens(es).
If you go for broke and make yourself broke by buying the biggest and baddest body and brace of lenses, eh-ah, you've got yourself a bigger problem - you'll be feeling like an idiot as you would be the weakest link in the IQ chain.
Come up with a better and more relevant Question. Please!
Image via WikipediaI just bought a second hand Tokina f/3.5 200mm Minolta MD mount lens. It does have a little fungus on the lens rim, but the weight feel, the smoothness of the focussing action is simply classy. The lens barrel is all metal, Made In Japan - in an era when they were. I quite like my fibreglass bodied modern Zuiko Digital kit lenses that came with the Olympus E-510 - they're light, quick working (in bright light) and small. But they don't feel at all like these classic old lenses.
I'll find some time to shoot in the weekend, maybe. And try the old, hand me down, Vivitar Series 1, 70-210mm f/3.5 manual focus zoom as well. That's even fungusier.
Olympus and Panasonic have just announced the Micro Four Thirds Standard. It's obvious that this is a significant milestone in the evolution of the digital camera. To the extent that Phil Askey penned a short commentary when reporting the announcement.
What's so significant?
Commercially, the Four Thirds Standard and the Micro Four Thirds Standard had to come from companies that did not have a strong vested interest in keeping pre-digital legacy lens mounts, lens catalogues.
Although it is not clear to me whether the Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds Standard is truly Open Standard (as in Intellectual Property, free availability of engineering specs), these "Standards" are purposely declared to be available so that other companies do not have to reverse engineer the electronic and mechanical interfaces. I don't know what it costs financially to gain a ticket to these Open Standards for a would be manufacturer, but it is, shall we say, not specifically a closed door.
The significance is that there is a possibility that Kodak + Panasonic supply a sensor, Olympus and Panasonic (maybe others will join) that supply more than one body, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica, Sigma, maybe Schneider Kreuznach can supply Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds lenses.
If any other brand can supply just one thing - either a sensor or a body or a lens, the empire and diversity of parts to mix and match will grow. If nobody wants to join the club, then this is just another proprietary, locked in, dead end idea.
The aim of the Four Thirds Standard is to make a smaller DSLR body and lens for the same telephoto magnification. The aim of the Micro Four Thirds Standard is to make a camera smaller than a DSLR and grow up the bridge prosumer camera to a larger sensor. This means you have one sensor size and in the long term, two lens systems, the longer one being useable on the shorter one.
It is difficult to do this in the shoes of the Big Two - Canon and Nikon - they are committed to
the 24x36mm sensor size (requiring true full frame lenses)
the APS-C sensor size (another lens system)
if they want to independently create a Micro Four Thirds competitor, they have to come out with a short flange lens mount. (yet another lens system)
That's three lens systems they have to support and grow. If they decide to mount their full frame lenses on the APS-C sensor body, they don't enjoy any reduction in package bulk or size.
The Micro Four Thirds Standard can use :
"legacy" Four Thirds Lenses that already exist, in autofocus and body image stabiliser mode. Thus scarcity of lenses is not as much an issue. True, the compactness of the Micro Four Thirds camera body with a Four Thirds lens would not be pretty, but you have a lens that may auto-focus, image stabilise and with no crop factor or magnification change.
legacy manual focus lenses for various brands - Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax K, M42 - already exist for the Four Thirds bodies, then the Micro Four Thirds Standard will also fit those with the relevant adaptors.
with enough reverse engineering, will and skill, current competitor autofocus lens systems in autofocus mode - since the flange distance will be shorter than any DSLR lens mount.
The purchasing public has long asked for an EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens) alternative to the DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) with an OVF (Optical View Finder). There have been some prototypes and navel gazes but at the end of the day, the following cause some concern:
How do you establish a commercially viable line of new lenses for the system?
Who will expend resources and costs on initiating the proprietary lens system?
At the end of the day, what is the ROI (Return of Investment) on such a venture, given that traditionally camera companies "own" the mount and thus other companies will be reluctant to support it.
How will the pricing and price categorisation be viable given that that EVIL has to compete against the so called Bridge Prosumer Cameras and the entry level DSLRs - a very "hot" price level with lower volume sales than the USD 100 compact.
The camera body makers can choose to:
make expensive Micro Four Thirds bodies
make cheaper Micro Four Thirds bodies
make bulky Micro Four Thirds bodies
make more compact Micro Four Thirds bodies
incorporate optical rangefinder mechanisms
incorporate Electronic Viewfinder in addition to an LCD screen
simply just have only an LCD or OLED screen.
Not every Micro Four Thirds Body and not every Micro Four Thirds Lens has to be tiny. This is a Standard / System. You can Mix and Match! Build them good, let them come.
Maruhan dropped by for a read and made the following points:
DNG is an attempt by Adobe to create an open / standardised RAW format for digital image files...
(Wikipedia)
It is an attempt and a serious one. But, like Microsoft's .NET, Sun's Java and even the ubiquitous Adobe Acrobat it does not appear to be fully in the public domain. See my earlier post: Adobe DNG is not RAW. DNG is also not a superset - and as long as the camera makers don't all come onboard, there will be RAW metadata attributes that are not mapped to DNG metadata.
Pentax has offered the choice of DNG or Pentax RAW .NEF in their newer DSLRs - the K10D, the K200D and the K20D.
In a related RAW topic of discussion, some DSLR models - the Nikon D3, D700, D300, Canon 40D and the Pentax K20D are saving 14bit RAW files.
The digital range for 12bit RAW is 4096 values, for 14bit RAW this is 16,384 values. What does that mean, other than my RAW is bigger than your RAW?
It's a case of the bottleneck in an image processing system limiting the number of values in digital processing. The sensor and electronics itself might be processing 16bits of data, converting to the final RAW format at the end. So certainly, as electronics follows Moore's law and gets better and faster every year, there is less need to downsample due to the current cost / state of the art of the electronics. A larger number of bits will allow more fineness in digital processing. Whether this translates to visual tones within the extremes, is another thing. One thing that the experts seem to agree on, is that shadows and noise may improve.
Image Dynamic Range may improve. How much depends on whether the 12bit RAW already handle the captured DR - if 12bit RAW is not the bottleneck but the sensor is, then 14bit RAW is unused headroom.
More bits means a larger data volume during in-camera processing and a larger datafile. That affects file save times to media cards.
Remember, the output JPEG, the bitmap language of the Web remains resolutely 8 bit.
For some reason, the javascript from Delicious forces my Blogger layout to skewf. Or was that blogging through the ScribeFire Firefox extension? Seems to be ok now that I have re-edited in Windows Live Writer.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_ucSlUtwFGSMW8Ow5a3T9J165DbtkJFhE41Kr7WRuCYkWa3AOArTDZzLiE1SB1dWkA0gtA64vnLCG-oTIZ_5URRAKp2ZImeKPRGuexI_Dj8zaCNTBBbNgv1xlg-gQQ8HqJ0XFzoqtdc-oTdq8mxHQIP=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sy-lvDhMH1NkAoWE_kvrjBIiMLAMaTL09olMorPBdjzSQO5TkWwPNDhiCN9o7r7LU3ytDEDxIZumWJfizm8jnt66zxGb3cl1Gb74yImQ0gWoP-3nWDIeNTGE8vBVJt--VR0Ye-ezOTTmO_9SDC6eKY=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sE3LjECOai-xGg1FORYITE6RnnUXLJ-Qf3kKtaf2ydsEphZSlhtZFfsju7jUScJRRElz6xewZsNveuTsf6J-_cAq7WTHEbgvXus-SBj0hdFlAhEXxajQKc9FdVkyBQASfAt2rXic_s0P3bjoVdPGPU=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vQ5iS7uNGcB2jV56Sz2irfAniP9PnH7WZoHM21sjNzzm3NLLvNr747b9Vr39zt2XTb_xt69pmNlt82N7_s5n_zo3vIKsST2vupL2Va2EZttQjp0V8WZ9V1WjHAUtwoo-WKZMBvUW_yVvt6dd9ZlBv6=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_t1d2KTlkKRE3NE2_fOrfmICpmNtcH0Q8XSzUPa-Ap2icI4_H9fbjrQEGHSRwbn6HXXiBeUM-ykfKrThFG-4tZZ_TI28lh_oU8hOZ-b478BoNlqF5OdWCbT_ifqSsEo9P3QuxBTcW7SxXNQq8jAmi5O=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uIaixz26z5P3xFLRQB_cBAhGeMfYcKamSW_Sdusdgcpl5lLjFVtOT0HsMRXCzDWmlrjGM4y6wWAS0l-mCRz4L0bif71XS69MS88OqnFcnL-chPogAPdjReYJoi716iDbqJ9w7vCqFxlbjuXqEjNLaG=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_stITQbPkpWbQIrwPpL0k0ehJb75Oy4KNHjP6aNfTgvvyhe3DGW-5jn9p06v5agv5J0NpkIiTVvOlQapDg0rTlGZADgnJjQr2txIm8kfXwpLpwjTAINDA0Yo815Js4cIQ8HCRUqvhqb5CfPoIM2E4ew=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v6QEyS2mVrld_fl_h_tOsIHRa9ZHsooRfXmNiK7rz6pUfV3pMiEK18bdo5Gc5uEeHJT0fTrkthMT08870xMfxrnVULTcJ7cWOcCtHRfQNIeWPXk-XkcN_YAEvHoa3l9r9U4JGgXKySa4yyKRrVWYs=s0-d)