"PENTAX", "NIKON", or "CANON"???

[Big Mike]

(Including one Sandisk Extreme IV or III 2GB C.F. media)!

Get an Ultra II card instead of the Extreme...it will save you a bit of money and you probably won't notice the difference.

 

[Benjamin_T]

Make sure your budget allows for memory, and at least 1 extra battery. I would also plan on buying a decent tripod.

Hi, I already have two tripods; though I broke one just recently. :blushing: (My remaining one is a metal one though.)

Yeah, I have already factored in a large capacity - hi-speed memory card. (C.F. or S.D.) C.F. medias are relatively more expensive...I would be considering the Sandisk Extreme IV or III versions.

 

[Benjamin_T]

Get an Ultra II card instead of the Extreme...it will save you a bit of money and you probably won't notice the difference.

Really???

I would be glad to do that. (The Sandisk Extremes really eat up my budget nicely...The Ultra versions are considerably cheaper.)

 

[Big Mike]

I have several Ultra II cards and a couple of Extreme III cards (as well as several others). When shooting, there is little or no difference in most cases. The camera's buffer will determine how fast you can shoot...although the speed of the card may affect how fast the camera clears the buffer to the card. Where I see the difference between fast cards and slow ones...is when reviewing them on the LCD screen...the faster cards bring up the images faster. There is also a difference in the time it takes to off load the card but that is not really a big problem.

The Ultra II cards are faster than the cheap cards, they may not be as fast as the Extreme cards but I don't really notice a difference.

 

[Benjamin_T]

I have several Ultra II cards and a couple of Extreme III cards (as well as several others). When shooting, there is little or no difference in most cases. The camera's buffer will determine how fast you can shoot...although the speed of the card may affect how fast the camera clears the buffer to the card. Where I see the difference between fast cards and slow ones...is when reviewing them on the LCD screen...the faster cards bring up the images faster. There is also a difference in the time it takes to off load the card but that is not really a big problem.

The Ultra II cards are faster than the cheap cards, they may not be as fast as the Extreme cards but I don't really notice a difference.

Great, if you cannot notice the difference; then I don't expect myself to notice the difference either! :mrgreen:

 

[Benjamin_T]

I am "quite tempted" to go for the PENTAX K10D and the SIGMA 24-70mm F/2.8 EX. DG. MACRO.

What do you guys think?

Or do you'll think that going for the NIKON D80 with (Whatever lens within the budget) will be a better idea? (Such as the NIKKOR 18-70mm or the 18-135mm)

Regards.

 

[Big Mike]

I'm not sure which is better...but 24-70mm is an odd focal length on these cameras. It's great on a 35mm film camera (or full frame Canon 5D, 1Ds)...but not so much on any of the camera's in question. I would stick with something in the 17(18) to 50(70) range.

 

[ksmattfish]

Canon, Nikon, or Pentax doesn't really matter. They all can be used to create good photos. But an f/2.8 zoom lens is a lot more useful to me than the typical consumer/kit zooms.

 

[Mike_E]

OK,OK get a Nikon D50 (used or you can still find them new if you look) and a Nikon 18-200 VR. Yes the D50 'only' has 6 mpxls but unless you are going to print at or above 30"s it won't really matter. Spend your money on glass! And from what I've seen, you won't find Anything better for an everyday lens.

mike

 

[cigrainger]

Pentax K10D body and the new Pentax 16-50mm f/2.8. You won't be disappointed. You will also be able to buy any number of great old primes for very cheap. You also will have built-in anti-shake.

 

[Don Simon]

What do you guys think?

No offense, but... I think you need to make your own decisions The D80, K10D, 30D, are all very capable cameras. Canon, Nikon and Pentax all offer a good choice of lenses, though Canon has the most choice and both Canon and Nikon are more widely available. A lot of us are invested in one system or another and have good reasons for preferring our chosen brands. I can't tell you which to buy; I can tell you to go and handle them yourself before putting any money down.

I will say something on lenses though; those constant f/2.8 zooms will be better than the variable aperture (f/3.5-5.6 etc) lenses. Brand really doesn't matter so much as the type of lens (and unfortunately the price). If you want a single 'walkabout' lens, I definitely suggest going for a fixed max aperture (f/2.8 or f/4) zoom, whatever camera you choose. As others have mentioned, don't forget to allow for the cost of tripod, memory, and bag among other essentials (and possibly also some filters). And if you suddenly find you're going way over budget, definitely consider Mike's advice about looking at a less expensive 6mp dSLR.

 

[sabbath999]

Given the choice, I would rather spend the least amount possible on the cameras and the most possible on the glass... the glass makes the image. Nikon's kit lens is better than Canon's (at least to an article I just read) but there is absolutely, positively no way I would make a buying decision based on who has the best kit lens. Cameras you will replace every little bit, but the lenses you will keep for many, many years. Choose the lenses you like, then buy a camera to match it... that's what I say.

Personally, I think the Nikon 18-135 is VERY overpriced, when for only a few dollars (less than $50) more money you can get the D80 with the standard wide-angle zoom PLUS the trick new 55-200 VR Zoom (which blows the pants off the 18-135... VR is VERY cool).

I am a Nikon guy, but the Canons are nice as well (if you forget about the kit lenses and concentrate on getting better Canon glass).

It makes no sense to me to have a nice camera body and cripple your images with cheap glass.

 

[Thor06]

Well, I am personally a Canon fan, but take that with a grain of salt as I have never even owned one . In my research, they seem to be a favorite of a lot of people along with Nikon. I personally fell more comfortable with the way the Canon zooms (its opposite from a Nikon, atleast on the kit lens), it "feels" better, and I know several people with them so if I run into trouble I know people more familiar than myself with the camera. Heres my two cents on the camera though. I guess I dont know your experience in photography, but a $1500 30D is a hell of an expensive way to start. If I were you, I would look at an XT or an XTi instead, then take that extra cash and put them towards some nice lenses. Say you get an XT and an extra lens or two and you dont like it then you still shouldnt have any trouble moving your stuff, but should you get into it and need something more than the XT, you can still keep the lenses and upgrade to a 30D then. Just my 2 cents...

I'm sorry, why would you want someone else spend $1500 of your money?

I think a better question is if you dont know much about what you are buying, why wouldnt you want someone else effectively spending your money?

 

[JIP]

I would go with a D200

 

[Benjamin_T]

Currently I am still thinking hard what to do with my U.S.$1500. :er: (What would you do?)

I will be getting my camera within the next few days, so I am at the mercy of time. :hail: