Saturday, August 9, 2003

Hey, That's Only Three Or Four Times What A Sane Person Would Spend...

so after some random conversations about it with r0b last week, i've started looking around at the various different digital slr cameras that are available.

i've been playing around with my current slr a bit, and i like it a lot, but i absolutely hate dealing with film.

getting it developed is just a pain in the ass, not to mention expensive as hell, and a shoot, develop, look at picture cycle means i don't get anything approaching instant feedback, so by the time i actually look at the pictures i've forgotten 90% of the details of how i took the picture (what lighting, what settings, what lense, etc.), so it's kind of hard to figure out what, if anything, i'm doing wrong. i imagine it's like what programming must have been back in the day of punch cards, with the edit, compile, test cycle taking hours or days. while you can certainly learn that way, it's not what i'd call fun, especially if other options are available to you.

in addition, there's the whole "i want to get these things on the net eventually" question, and i still haven't gotten around to picking up a scanner, and even if i do, it'll add yet another step to the cycle, which will result in me having another thing to procrastinate on, which is always a bad thing.

so anyway, i start browsing around on various different sites, and i discover that virtually all digital slr cameras are so far out of my price range that it isn't even funny. then, i start looking a bit closer, and find that there are at least a few out there that are only a little out of my price range, and if i look even closer, there are places one can get them where they are arguably in my price range, if you squint a bit and try not to let the "oh my god that's expensive" reflex kick in.

basically, i'm down to the nikon d100 and the canon eos-10d. as usual the nikon is more expensive, but in its favor is the fact that i have a nikon film slr camera and a few lenses (albeit cheap lenses that would not be hard to replace) for it that would work with the nikon. on the other hand the canon is newer, so is less likely to be horribly out of date in the very near future, and while the reviews of both are quite positive, the ones for the canon seem slightly more positive.

so i played with the nikon today at the mall, and i think i'll go look at the canon tomorrow, and then i'll work on convincing myself that i don't need one, since even these low end digital slr's are freaking expensive...

10 comments:

  1. i've said it before...

    technolust. it's more harmful than we all thought.

    ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Get the Nikon, you'll like it. :-) I have the D1x (and the D1 before that). If the D100 had been out I would probably have gotten that instead.

    (and you think it's expensive now; just wait until you get hooked on some expensive glass!)

    - ask

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nikon announced a D2h recently (wireless networking is an option), so if you have a bit of patience you could also wait for the next generation of Nikons.


    - ask

    ReplyDelete
  4. just as i was patting myself on the back for convincing myself that i probably shouldn't blow $1200 on an lcd display, given the somewhat mutable status of my job, now you go and remind me of the other shiny gadgets i'd been lusting after. damn you! ;) as a reward for spending a couple hours at work today, i drove to microcenter in cambridge, and found an open-box special on one of the ones i had my eye on (an olympus e20; i've been very pleased with both the cameras from them i've owned thus far, but many website reviewers seem to scorn them, which gives me pause.). it's now safely 6pm on sunday, though, so i need not be tempted further. besides, i'd look pretty stupid buying a snazzy camera right *after* a long vacation, wouldn't i? don't answer that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. about the olympus e20, it seems like if you're already spending that much, you might as well go a bit further and get one that let's you change lenses. it seems silly to lock yourself in like that. i mean the canon eos 10d is only a few hundred dollars more, and you get a lot more freedom going forward.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So if your goal is a Nikon-lens-compatible digital SLR camera, then you should be shopping for the Fuji S2. My father-in-law has some not-so-cheap Nikon lenses, and after painstakingly researching all the available options, concluded that the Fuji is an overall better camera for the money than any of the Nikon alternatives, particularly the D100. My father-in-law shot weddings professionally for better part of twenty years, and knows way more about cameras than I do, so I trust his opinion on this.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh, the Nikon has a smaller-than-35mm CCD, so you have to multiply your lens focal length by 1.5. Bogus! The Fuji also has smartmedia and CF slots, and a firewire port...

    ReplyDelete
  8. there were a few reasons i was drawn to the e20. a: i don't want to spend a colossal amount and am probably less discerning than someone who knows something. b: i don't have an existing investment in lenses to preserve. c: the first time i took my current camera out, it wound up getting waterlogged. i'm rather rough on hardware.

    still and all, i'm willing to spend more if there's a good reason to, but the real pain in the ass about this is a question of where one would go to pick one of these up and try it out. it's hard to make a decision that way.

    ReplyDelete
  9. as for trying these sort of things out, i was able to try the nikon d100 at a local ritz camera (there's almost certainly one near you somewhere), and another local camera shop stocks the canon eos-10d, so for whatever you're looking for, you can probably find a place willing to let you play with it for a few minutes with a minimum amount of effort. i mean it's a 1500-1700 dollar piece of equipment, i doubt they're going to mind charging a battery, sticking in a CF card, and letting you fiddle with it if you might be spending that kind of money ;-)

    ReplyDelete