I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it.
When I bought it, I thought "good, now I wont have to buy anything else for some time", but now I am starting to feel as though it is really not doing the job for me I would like. I have thought of this rationally, there are a few features that I can simply love about the camera, such as its awesome macro capabilities, and nice zeiss lens (whether it is just the coating or not, its a nice lens).
But there are a few things that I don't like, one of them being the lack of a changeable lens, a fixed 5x zoom, and a relatively tame "wide" angle zoom out.
Added to that, I still am paying this sucker off. I got it before the price started to plummet, and I owe about 80% on it still.
I don't really know if I would benefit very much from moving to the digital rebel right now. That isn't to say that I am not interested in DSLR, quite the opposite, I very much AM interested in it, but for now I feel for some reason like I would do well to explore SLR in general, and that puzzles me. I mean, there are all the added costs of developing, scanning (I don't have a good scanner, I would get photo cd's made), and buying film. I don't want to give up on digital, just to carry both camera's when I go out, and use both of them for different things.
I know that when I do go DSLR, I will go canon. It is a personal preference that I have formed. As such, I have been looking at getting myself a decent used canon which takes EF mount lenses (so I can use the lenses on whatever DSLR I get in the next few years).
WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
I don't want to spend much more than $200 Canadian for a used camera, but as I understand it, a good camera from the late 1980s that takes current lens technology will do me as well as a brand new ELAN 7 will, yes?
In article <HsFOb.35145$n44.842@clgrps13>, Steven C \(Doktersteve\) <real_dokterst...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? >I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on >the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. >What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
A friend of mine recently picked up a good deal on a secondhand EOS 50E. I see quite a few EOS 50 and EOS 10s for sale in the "used equipment" section of the photography shops I'm familliar with, and you could do a lot worse than either of those.
Chris Brown wrote: > In article <HsFOb.35145$n44.842@clgrps13>, > Steven C \(Doktersteve\) <real_dokterst...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? >>I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on >>the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. >>What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
> A friend of mine recently picked up a good deal on a secondhand EOS 50E. I > see quite a few EOS 50 and EOS 10s for sale in the "used equipment" section > of the photography shops I'm familliar with, and you could do a lot worse > than either of those.
Be wary of older EOS-mount lenses, canon, sigma or other 3rd party. They may not work on newer EOS cameras (and DSLRs) without being "rechipped." Basically a firmware upgrade. I have some sigma and canon lenses from the 1990s that worked on the elan II and 7, but not on a D60 or 10D. I don't know what fee canon (sigma, etc) charges for the upgrade.
To answer your other questions, get a used elan, even elan I or II are great cameras. Try to get only IS lenses. You'll likely be glad you did and save money in the long run because you won't be keep upgrading. So buy the best lens you can afford as a good lens will last a long time, unlike camera bodies.
Steven C (Doktersteve) wrote: > OK. This might sound stupid.
> I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have > owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it.
> When I bought it, I thought "good, now I wont have to buy anything else for > some time", but now I am starting to feel as though it is really not doing > the job for me I would like. > I have thought of this rationally, there are a few features that I can > simply love about the camera, such as its awesome macro capabilities, and > nice zeiss lens (whether it is just the coating or not, its a nice lens).
> But there are a few things that I don't like, one of them being the lack of > a changeable lens, a fixed 5x zoom, and a relatively tame "wide" angle zoom > out.
> Added to that, I still am paying this sucker off. I got it before the price > started to plummet, and I owe about 80% on it still.
> I don't really know if I would benefit very much from moving to the digital > rebel right now. That isn't to say that I am not interested in DSLR, quite > the opposite, I very much AM interested in it, but for now I feel for some > reason like I would do well to explore SLR in general, and that puzzles me. > I mean, there are all the added costs of developing, scanning (I don't have > a good scanner, I would get photo cd's made), and buying film. > I don't want to give up on digital, just to carry both camera's when I go > out, and use both of them for different things.
> I know that when I do go DSLR, I will go canon. It is a personal preference > that I have formed. > As such, I have been looking at getting myself a decent used canon which > takes EF mount lenses (so I can use the lenses on whatever DSLR I get in the > next few years).
> WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? > I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on > the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. > What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
> I don't want to spend much more than $200 Canadian for a used camera, but as > I understand it, a good camera from the late 1980s that takes current lens > technology will do me as well as a brand new ELAN 7 will, yes?
> What do you think. Thanks for any suggestions.
It seems, that needs aside, you really WANT a film SLR camera. Yes, you get changeable lenses, at considerable expense, and through the lens viewing (which you ALREADY have on the F717). But if what you want it a film SLR, go for it! You might want to keep the digital also.
"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote: > OK. This might sound stupid.
> I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have > owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it.
> When I bought it, I thought "good, now I wont have to buy anything else for > some time", but now I am starting to feel as though it is really not doing > the job for me I would like. > I have thought of this rationally, there are a few features that I can > simply love about the camera, such as its awesome macro capabilities, and > nice zeiss lens (whether it is just the coating or not, its a nice lens).
> But there are a few things that I don't like, one of them being the lack of > a changeable lens, a fixed 5x zoom, and a relatively tame "wide" angle zoom > out.
> Added to that, I still am paying this sucker off. I got it before the price > started to plummet, and I owe about 80% on it still.
> I don't really know if I would benefit very much from moving to the digital > rebel right now. That isn't to say that I am not interested in DSLR, quite > the opposite, I very much AM interested in it, but for now I feel for some > reason like I would do well to explore SLR in general, and that puzzles me. > I mean, there are all the added costs of developing, scanning (I don't have > a good scanner, I would get photo cd's made), and buying film. > I don't want to give up on digital, just to carry both camera's when I go > out, and use both of them for different things.
> I know that when I do go DSLR, I will go canon. It is a personal preference > that I have formed. > As such, I have been looking at getting myself a decent used canon which > takes EF mount lenses (so I can use the lenses on whatever DSLR I get in the > next few years).
> WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? > I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on > the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. > What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
> I don't want to spend much more than $200 Canadian for a used camera, but as > I understand it, a good camera from the late 1980s that takes current lens > technology will do me as well as a brand new ELAN 7 will, yes?
> What do you think. Thanks for any suggestions.
Why do you feel limited with a Sony 717. It is one helluva camera. What would you do with the Film SLR that you can't do with the 717? Of course, if you just WANT a film SLR, Hell! Just get one. You don't have to justify the logic to yourself or anyone else. If it will make you happy and give you pleasure, get one and have fun playing with it. That's what life is all about. Bob Williams
> I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have > owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it.
> When I bought it, I thought "good, now I wont have to buy anything else for > some time", but now I am starting to feel as though it is really not doing > the job for me I would like. > I have thought of this rationally, there are a few features that I can > simply love about the camera, such as its awesome macro capabilities, and > nice zeiss lens (whether it is just the coating or not, its a nice lens).
> But there are a few things that I don't like, one of them being the lack of > a changeable lens, a fixed 5x zoom, and a relatively tame "wide" angle zoom > out.
> Added to that, I still am paying this sucker off. I got it before the price > started to plummet, and I owe about 80% on it still.
> I don't really know if I would benefit very much from moving to the digital > rebel right now. That isn't to say that I am not interested in DSLR, quite > the opposite, I very much AM interested in it, but for now I feel for some > reason like I would do well to explore SLR in general, and that puzzles me. > I mean, there are all the added costs of developing, scanning (I don't have > a good scanner, I would get photo cd's made), and buying film. > I don't want to give up on digital, just to carry both camera's when I go > out, and use both of them for different things.
> I know that when I do go DSLR, I will go canon. It is a personal preference > that I have formed. > As such, I have been looking at getting myself a decent used canon which > takes EF mount lenses (so I can use the lenses on whatever DSLR I get in the > next few years).
> WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? > I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on > the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. > What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
The EOS 850 is just as crippled in that it lacks a Quick Control Dial (thumb wheel on the back of the camera) to change the aperture. Same with the EOS 600 series. So, in that respect you'd be better off spending the extra money on a new Rebel.
> I don't want to spend much more than $200 Canadian for a used camera, but as > I understand it, a good camera from the late 1980s that takes current lens > technology will do me as well as a brand new ELAN 7 will, yes?
Depends on if you do much in manual mode. This is where the QCD really shines. Without the QCD you need to press a button behind the lens mount and turn the exposure dial to change the aperture. Turning only the exposure dial will change the shutter speed in manual mode.
> What do you think. Thanks for any suggestions.
If you shoot in Program and Priority modes most of the time any EOS will be fine. If you use manual mode even semi-frequently get one with a QCD.
In article <1rlrd1-of5....@narcissus.dyndns.org>, Chris Brown <cpbr...@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> writes
>In article <HsFOb.35145$n44.842@clgrps13>, >Steven C \(Doktersteve\) <real_dokterst...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? >>I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on >>the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. >>What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
>A friend of mine recently picked up a good deal on a secondhand EOS 50E. I >see quite a few EOS 50 and EOS 10s for sale in the "used equipment" section >of the photography shops I'm familliar with, and you could do a lot worse >than either of those.
Agree with this recommendation. I have 2 EOS 10 bodies and think they still stand comparison with today's mid-range EOS models. My daughter also had a 50E for several years, also a fine camera.
BTW (to original poster) it is a bit excessive to cross post to so many groups. FU set to r.p.e.35mm. -- David Littlewood
> I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have > owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it. > <snip> > Added to that, I still am paying this sucker off. I got it before the price > started to plummet, and I owe about 80% on it still.
> I don't really know if I would benefit very much from moving to the digital > rebel right now. That isn't to say that I am not interested in DSLR, quite
> <snip> > I don't want to give up on digital, just to carry both camera's when I go > out, and use both of them for different things.
> <snip> > WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME?
Let's see now... You write that during the past ten months you were able to pay only 20% of the US$708 (Sony Cybershot DSC-F717 camera) cost, and yet you now want to buy a US$899 camera (Canon EOS 300D Digital Rebel).
You already have experienced the dramatic depreciation that comes hand-in-hand with digital photography. You might still owe more to the bank (at 18%-20% compound interest?) than what your depreciated F717 attracts on the used market.
The charge card bank might profit from your purchases, but digital photography just might lead towards your financial ruination.
Of course, the others posting to this forum are nothing other than enablers of your addictive behavior. <grin>
One of the first rules about being a gearhead addict is to be able to afford what it costs to play in the photography sandbox. ___________________ ___________________
> I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have > owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it.
> When I bought it, I thought "good, now I wont have to buy anything else for > some time", but now I am starting to feel as though it is really not doing > the job for me I would like. > I have thought of this rationally, there are a few features that I can > simply love about the camera, such as its awesome macro capabilities, and > nice zeiss lens (whether it is just the coating or not, its a nice lens).
> But there are a few things that I don't like, one of them being the lack of > a changeable lens, a fixed 5x zoom, and a relatively tame "wide" angle zoom > out.
> Added to that, I still am paying this sucker off. I got it before the price > started to plummet, and I owe about 80% on it still.
> I don't really know if I would benefit very much from moving to the digital > rebel right now. That isn't to say that I am not interested in DSLR, quite > the opposite, I very much AM interested in it, but for now I feel for some > reason like I would do well to explore SLR in general, and that puzzles me. > I mean, there are all the added costs of developing, scanning (I don't have > a good scanner, I would get photo cd's made), and buying film. > I don't want to give up on digital, just to carry both camera's when I go > out, and use both of them for different things.
> I know that when I do go DSLR, I will go canon. It is a personal preference > that I have formed. > As such, I have been looking at getting myself a decent used canon which > takes EF mount lenses (so I can use the lenses on whatever DSLR I get in the > next few years).
> WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME? > I was looking at the EOS Kiss, until I found out it was just a variation on > the rebel, which as I understand it is a crippled camera for consumers. > What about the late 1980's type cameras? The EOS-850 for instance?
> I don't want to spend much more than $200 Canadian for a used camera, but as > I understand it, a good camera from the late 1980s that takes current lens > technology will do me as well as a brand new ELAN 7 will, yes?
Don't be so quick to write of the Canon Rebel Ti (aka 300V).
If I were you I'd first ask what you are using the camera for. If its landscapes and portraits then it really is worth thinking of going digital because you can't beat them for this kind of photography. If its wildlife/sports/action then you aren't going to get anything that will fulfil your needs at any price less than the budget of a small nation, and a film camera will be good (only?) choice.
I've owned the 300V for a year now (my first camera) and have been delighted with it. Bear in mine that the real investment is in the lenses/tripod not the camera. If its going to get bashed about in the field, and in six months time you going to be wanting more features, then by a cheap body and run it into the ground - then in a couple of years buy a camera worthy of your skills.
I've no regrets buying the canon 300V. It gives me all the feautres I need to experiment with and the lens collection I've amassed I'll use when I get my next EOS.
camera critter wrote: >>OK. This might sound stupid.
>>I have a sony dsc F717, and I use it quite a bit. I like the camera. I have >>owned it since last April, and so I am going on a year with it. >><snip> >>WHAT ARE GOOD OPTIONS FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME?
In short: Stop obsessing over the camera's supposed shortcomings. The specific equipment DOESN'T MATTER! Worry instead about composing and taking good pictures.
> Let's see now... > You write that during the past ten months you were able to pay only > 20% of the US$708 (Sony Cybershot DSC-F717 camera) cost, and yet you > now want to buy a US$899 camera (Canon EOS 300D Digital Rebel).
> You already have experienced the dramatic depreciation that comes > hand-in-hand with digital photography.
> The charge card bank might profit from your purchases, but digital > photography just might lead towards your financial ruination.
Heed his warning! ;)
> Of course, the others posting to this forum are nothing other than > enablers of your addictive behavior. <grin>
> One of the first rules about being a gearhead addict is to be able to > afford what it costs to play in the photography sandbox.
Heh...
If you MUST buy 35mm film equipment, start with a cheap, primitive, manual everything camera. Who cares if the equipment is 'obsolete,' it is dirt cheap and takes fantastic pictures. Besides saving a ton of money, I think the 'primitive' mindset will do you some good. Play with it for a few months, THEN decide if you still feel the need to drop a sh*tload on the latest and greatest automagic offering. If you decide you don't like the old camera, you can sell it for what you paid.
Canon, Nikon, Oly, etc. all produced a wide variety of sturdy, functional equipment. Message boards like the two mentioned above are a good source of info for older equipment. I recenty found an excellent AE-1P with a nearly-new 28mm Canon FD lens for $120 at the local camera shop. (Using the old clunker is strangely satisfying; I've actually left my wizz-bang T90 at home a time or two.) If you're willing to brave ebay, even better deals can be found.
Remember, it's not the camera that takes the picture.
|
