Recommended SLR Camera for absolute beginners

[The_Cheat]

i strongly recommend the Nikon F601QD with a used 35-80mm f4-5.6
very nice camera with everything u need at this stage,built in flash,AF,Program mode,Aperture priority,Shutter priority and fully manual mode for only ard $150 for the camera(try yahoo auction) and another <$150 for the zoom lens.
i started off with this set up last time,no regrets

Hey kex, can you refer to me some weblink regarding this camera? The Nikon F601QD is very alien to me. Sorry for the ignorance. :embrass:

 

[kex]

here
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/models/htmls/slr8991.htm

 

[The_Cheat]

here
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/models/htmls/slr8991.htm

Thanks kex! Would take into consideration of Nikon 601QD.

 

[clive]

(1) What's the differences between the mounting of the lenses? Like the EF mount Canon, the A mount for Minolta, etc. etc. Will the decision to get a certain brand, i.e. a certain mount, decide what sort of accessories it would be limited to? Which mount is more popular, and have more cheap, yet effective accessories?

(2) How do one judge whether a lens is good or not? I mean, probably one would look at the specs of the lens saying 75-300mm, at relatively cheap price, and say that it is a good lens. But, does specs really matter?
I'm asking, since I do not know how to choose a lens... but the offer of Minolta Dynax 5 at MSColor ($649), which includes a AF 28-100mm and AF 75-300mm lens, seems really really attractive!

1. the name of the mount for a particular brand is just a commercial name. eg nikon needs a name for their mount, so somehow they decided to call it the F mount, canon like to call their autofocus mount the EF mount. (older canon manual focus mount is called FD mount)

2.a lens is good or not? depends on how it relates to you needs. very very loosely speaking, larger aperture lenses are usually better built in terms of physically, optically, etc(a lot of details to read up in this aspect)...likewise for constant aperture zoom vs variable aperture zoom...there are some basic common knowledge like " 80-200/f2.8 is 99% of the time *more worth it* than 70-300/f4-5.6" or " if i primarily shoot landscapes then i dont really need f2.8 or faster wide angles unless i want a brighter viewfinder/to achieve DOF effects", or " avoid the kit lens" ..etc; again there are some exceptions... like u mentioned , theoretical n technical things aside, price is a real issue too..so u need to weight up a combination of those common knowledge, your needs over a range of time, and how u feel psychologically, and your budget, and what is the trend now..etc...all these u have to read up n work it all out for urself coz u r unique.

^_^

 

[The_Cheat]

1. the name of the mount for a particular brand is just a commercial name. eg nikon needs a name for their mount, so somehow they decided to call it the F mount, canon like to call their autofocus mount the EF mount. (older canon manual focus mount is called FD mount)

2.a lens is good or not? depends on how it relates to you needs. very very loosely speaking, larger aperture lenses are usually better built in terms of physically, optically, etc(a lot of details to read up in this aspect)...likewise for constant aperture zoom vs variable aperture zoom...there are some basic common knowledge like " 80-200/f2.8 is 99% of the time *more worth it* than 70-300/f4-5.6" or " if i primarily shoot landscapes then i dont really need f2.8 or faster wide angles unless i want a brighter viewfinder/to achieve DOF effects", or " avoid the kit lens" ..etc; again there are some exceptions... like u mentioned , theoretical n technical things aside, price is a real issue too..so u need to weight up a combination of those common knowledge, your needs over a range of time, and how u feel psychologically, and your budget, and what is the trend now..etc...all these u have to read up n work it all out for urself coz u r unique.

^_^

Hey clive thanks for the information on the different mounting.

Don't mind me saying this, but your points on the lenses is as good as not saying anything!! Haha~! :bsmilie:

Geesh! Suddenly selecting gears in photography turn out to be the exact process as that of selecting gears in music. I'm more acquainted with bass guitar, and went through the whole arguement before about the best equipment is NOT the most expensive, or the one that is most-packed with function, or the one with the can give the "BEST" sound. The best guitar is one that suits your need, regardless of the specs.

Oops! I'd digress... :embrass:

Anyway, may I know what's wrong with kit lens? Are those lens/lenses not generic enough for standard amateur picture taking purposes? :dunno:

 

[clive]

Don't mind me saying this, but your points on the lenses is as good as not saying anything!! Haha~! :bsmilie:

exactly man! :bsmilie: ie: "its just too complicated, there is just too much to consider, only u can make the final decision" its analogous to the situation like say a female friend asks u which colour top looks gd? then in order to try to help n answer her fully, u end up going thru the pros n cons of every colour top available...and she still frowns n doesnt know what to wear after 1 hr. (but we all know she has already in her mind more or less decided what 2 wear, just that the asking part is to get verbal affirmation ^_^)

Anyway, may I know what's wrong with kit lens? Are those lens/lenses not generic enough for standard amateur picture taking purposes? :dunno:

typically kit lens has just enough decent optical quality to get pass by. but its ok for holiday snapshots where the capturing the moment is typically more important than having stunning image quality

 

[kex]

Hey clive thanks for the information on the different mounting.

Don't mind me saying this, but your points on the lenses is as good as not saying anything!! Haha~! :bsmilie:

Geesh! Suddenly selecting gears in photography turn out to be the exact process as that of selecting gears in music. I'm more acquainted with bass guitar, and went through the whole arguement before about the best equipment is NOT the most expensive, or the one that is most-packed with function, or the one with the can give the "BEST" sound. The best guitar is one that suits your need, regardless of the specs.

Oops! I'd digress... :embrass:

Anyway, may I know what's wrong with kit lens? Are those lens/lenses not generic enough for standard amateur picture taking purposes? :dunno:

nothing is wrong with kit lens...they take beautiful pictures too.juz that human like to go for the highest quality in lens to satisfy it's desire..like wad my signature says lol..
kit lens usually do not have a fixed aperture value like a better built one with a F2.8 throught the zoom range.ie: 28-100 f4.5.6 at 28mm the f stop is 4,but when u zoom out to 100mm it will become only f5.6 which is a stop slower and the viewfinder become darker..if u measure the ambient light @ f4 but u realise after zooming out,it is only f5.6,so it is quite troublesome lor..
and faster lens with a F2.8 or bigger allows u to shoot in lower light condition.

 

[The_Cheat]

exactly man! :bsmilie: ie: "its just too complicated, there is just too much to consider, only u can make the final decision" its analogous to the situation like say a female friend asks u which colour top looks gd? then in order to try to help n answer her fully, u end up going thru the pros n cons of every colour top available...and she still frowns n doesnt know what to wear after 1 hr. (but we all know she has already in her mind more or less decided what 2 wear, just that the asking part is to get verbal affirmation ^_^)

Haha~! :bsmilie: Think the most genuine comment most guy would wish to give, but dare not give is: "It's the best if you don't wear anything!!" :bsmilie:

typically kit lens has just enough decent optical quality to get pass by. but its ok for holiday snapshots where the capturing the moment is typically more important than having stunning image quality

Hmm... so are you saying that the kit lens are perfectly alright as standard amateur picture-taking right? If so, then I think kit lens are quite okay with me. Don't expect to take specialised or creative photographs all the time!

Err... then again, can always take snapshots with my digi-cam hor? :think:

 

[patch17]

I have a M42 system on sale.

hmmm... which M42 system do you have on sale?

 

[The_Cheat]

nothing is wrong with kit lens...they take beautiful pictures too.juz that human like to go for the highest quality in lens to satisfy it's desire..like wad my signature says lol..
kit lens usually do not have a fixed aperture value like a better built one with a F2.8 throught the zoom range.ie: 28-100 f4.5.6 at 28mm the f stop is 4,but when u zoom out to 100mm it will become only f5.6 which is a stop slower and the viewfinder become darker..if u measure the ambient light @ f4 but u realise after zooming out,it is only f5.6,so it is quite troublesome lor..
and faster lens with a F2.8 or bigger allows u to shoot in lower light condition.

Hi kex! Thanks for the pointers. I'd read about the changing of f-stop values at different zoom before, and I'd yet to experience any of such trouble before. See, the only camera I use is Panasonic FZ-1, a 12x optical zoom camera with a constant f2.8 value, thus no problem with light problem at full zoom in.

Maybe I should indeed get the kit lens and experience the problem in order to understand how troublesome it is. One would never understand the cons of something until one truly experience it, right? :dunno:

Hmm... here's another thought. Though it's easy to learn from other's mistake to jumpstart one's learning process, one ought to experience those mistake themselves to learn.

Okay, now I'm talking nonsense! :bsmilie:

Anyway kex, your signature very chim leh! What is "lens connoisseurship"?

I know what is masturbation! Hahahahah~! :bsmilie:

 

[kex]

"connoisseurship" wn "WordNet (r) 2.0"connoisseurship
n : love of or taste for fine objects of art

 

[The_Cheat]

"connoisseurship" wn "WordNet (r) 2.0"connoisseurship
n : love of or taste for fine objects of art

Thanks for the definition!

 

[OzOn3]

Thanks for the definition!

Hey, if you're planning to get the EOS 300 by Canon, do work with the kit lens for awhile.. Then may i suggest that when you have enough dough, get the EF 50mm f1.8. You'll notice how much a difference it'll make to your "optical quality". That's how i moved..

OT: what bass guitar you using? I using Warwick Rockbass Corvette. I feel it's probably one of the most value for money basses out there.. Great tonality, body is sexy enough.. Neck.. Well i got used to it. Overall nice wood

 

[The_Cheat]

Hey, if you're planning to get the EOS 300 by Canon, do work with the kit lens for awhile.. Then may i suggest that when you have enough dough, get the EF 50mm f1.8. You'll notice how much a difference it'll make to your "optical quality". That's how i moved..

OT: what bass guitar you using? I using Warwick Rockbass Corvette. I feel it's probably one of the most value for money basses out there.. Great tonality, body is sexy enough.. Neck.. Well i got used to it. Overall nice wood

Bass-talk

My main axe is the ruby-red Yamaha RBX-6JM. It's the cheapest quality 6-stringer on the market, with ebony fretboard and beauty "infinity" in-lay. Bought mine three years ago at under $1.4k. In my opinion, Yamaha still produces some of the best mid-range basses.

As for warwick, I really prefer the thumb made in the mid-90s. The more recent warwicks doesn't really produce the kind of tonality as they used to... But hey! There's one hundred and one thing that actually decide the tone isn't it?

Well, sometimes the best bass are still those brandless ones that are provided by jamming studio. Cheapo basswood would be enough to provide sound that could really get in sync with the band fast. Hate the buzz from those passive basses though...

Camera-talk
Actually if I were to get the Canon 300v, I'll be blackmailing my good friends to t-loan me some lenses for a long long period of time!! :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[OzOn3]

Well, dunno if it was written here already, but the Dynax 5 and EOS 300/V are rather in specs. Not sure about the Nikon though. But if it is the same, then i guess the deciding factor would be preference already. See whether your feel better with a Canon, Nikon or Minolta

OT: 6 String a bit too much for me.. Haa. The thumbs are expensive.. My Corvette is the "budget" edition.. So it's rather cheap. Ack, it's only $720. Haa. As compared to the "real" one, which is at least $1.3K i think..

 

[The_Cheat]

Well, dunno if it was written here already, but the Dynax 5 and EOS 300/V are rather in specs. Not sure about the Nikon though. But if it is the same, then i guess the deciding factor would be preference already. See whether your feel better with a Canon, Nikon or Minolta

Yup! The specs of 300V and Dynax 5 are quite similar, except that 300V has a better construct, while Dynax 5 is a super-fast AF camera. Oh! The price are hell of a different too!! Hee~! :bsmilie:

Nikon F65 is older than 300V and Dynax 5, so don't have as much function. However, it's a highly acclaimed SLR for beginner to start with. That's why was taking it into consideration initially.

Actually one of my greatest concern is the choosing of camp. There's always seems to be hostility (friendly ones though) between Canon and Nikon when it comes to photography. Don't feel like sticking my neck out to choose either one of the camp yet, without any knowledge.

Anyway, I think I'm just gonna go ahead and get the dynax 5. The brand new dynax 5 promotion at MS Color is quite attractive, at $649 for the camera kit plus freebies which include a AF 75-300mm lens (don't know the f value). I'd also gotten some attractive offers from the fellow Clubsnappers, after posting a WTB thread in buy/sell forum. Think the "bad" resale market for Minolta is really helping me to get a bargain right now! Hee~! :bsmilie:

OT: 6 String a bit too much for me.. Haa. The thumbs are expensive.. My Corvette is the "budget" edition.. So it's rather cheap. Ack, it's only $720. Haa. As compared to the "real" one, which is at least $1.3K i think..

So you are using a 4 stringer is it? Well, it doesn't mean anything if you're playing a 4-string, 5-string, 6-string or 7-string or 8-string bass. People always thought that I do a lot of soloing part, since I uses a 6-string. But the fact is, I don't do solo at all!! The whole point of getting a 6-stringer for me was the ease of movement when I do the walk. Oh! I play jazz mostly. That's why the 6-stringer have open out more options for me, as well as enabling me to be more lazy! :bsmilie:

Don't think that one who owns better equipment would produce better music. It's the same argument in photography too! I have no experience with warwicks, so I cannot really comment about the differences between the different Corvette. However, I can give you another analogy on the budget and expensive edition doesn't really make a difference. Think you would know that there are US Fenders and the Mexican Fenders. The Mexican Fenders are easily less than half the price of the US ones, and there are indeed differences in construction, tonality, or whatnot. Yet, both Mexican and US models could still beat the rest of the other more expensive passive and active basses in performance during recording, and also to get in-sync with the band. Go figure that!

More expensive basses, like Status, that have a graphite neck, may perform better alone. Yet, they are the least preferred bass when playing in the band, since they stand out too much! Sad huh!

 

[OzOn3]

haa, your observations have been spot on.. It's always the one camp vs another camp thing, though it don't really matter what camp you are in.. It's the person that maketh the photographs, not the camp.

Alright! Good luck with your Dynax 5! Hope you'll learn great stuffs about photography with it!!

Eh no, i use a 5 string.. I like the thumping low end of the B string.. Woo sexy. Haha. I haven't heard of the status yet.. Only graphite neck i know are the modulus basses.. Especially the flea one

Ah, the dynamicity of a band.. I've yet to experience it.. Cause i'm always changing jamming partners.. Haa.. When change, seldom do we actually finish more then 2 songs.. Haa, sad yes, fun yes too! haa.. Better equipment produces better sound, but a good harmony with lousy equipment produces better MUSIC! haha.. Guess we're on the same wavelength! haa cool!

Alright, have fun with your camera!

Oh wait, last question, how long have you played bass for?

 

[The_Cheat]

OT: Been playing bass for 4+ years already. Was learning from Jonathan Sim for quite sometime, and am ashamed to say that I haven't been practising since December 2003... :embrass:

 

[OzOn3]

Johnaton Sim! !! I heard of that name before.. Scary man.. Haa!

 

[The_Cheat]

Yar! Was laughing all the way when I'd heard his demos in the 80s! What a drastic difference of then and now! :bsmilie:

He's teaching in Yamaha Contempo Pop School. If you are interested to learn, can go there lor! Very very nice man! :thumbsup: