i saw a thread about this but it was from 2 years ago but i wanted to see which one of my top 3 choices you guys would recommend...any other suggestions are welcome as well...thanks in advance
the xs has simplt menues and is quick to learn. Famiarize yourself with apeture (f-stop) and ISO too. trust me, its very user friendy. I bought a t1i a while ago and i LOVE IT
Same here... Although if you're searching for it, you'd probably be best searching for Canon EOS 500D (Rebel T1i is what it's called in North America).
The EOS 450D is also good if you want something a bit cheaper (it might still be out of your price range.. I dont know..?). It's more or less the same camera but with 12.2 megapixels as opposed to 15.1. Although that's not really an important difference unless you're printing really big stuff.
actually that might be true...only real difference between photo quality that body makes is visible in high ISO modes and mpixel count itself...more mpix gives you advantage when printing large images and cropping it...in sense of colours, bodies are very similiar...or while shooting in RAW a computer software helps you makes a photo perfect (imho shooting primary JPG with dslr is great sin)
lenses are very important and its more than a half job of creating an image...lens quality (+ filters) gives you real difference in colours, vignetting, chromatic aberatinos, image sharpness... so invest more money in those
The body is more important than you two make it seem, usability, ergonomics, expandability, processing speed, ... True, the body does not generally have that big an impact on the image quality, but it hugely affects the image taking process.
I can say that my Sony is top-notch on ergonomics and usability, the battery is good for anywhere between 800 and 1300 (1292 to be precise, that's my record at least and it still had 5% and was still fully functional) frames and recharges quickly. All important controls can be operated from ready-to-shoot position, ISO number, shutter speed and aperture can be adjusted while "aiming" (= looking through the viewfinder), each with a dedicated button. White balance is not quite so simple, it can be done without looking at the screen but only if you're familiar with the quick menu, which it is part of. All 9 AF points on my a200 can be selected individually with the thumbpad, also while aiming.
Anyway, point is, while the body may not be very important for the photograph, it is important for the photographer
No better deal on the market today, especially if you like small & light.
High-ISO capability to rival the Nikon D700, the nice selection of Pentax DA Limited pancake lenses to keep things small, 720p video, flashy colors if that's your thing (and black if not), etc etc etc.
i want to be able to shoot outdoors stuff like scenery but also be able to use it in like any other situation good too....exept i wont have like studio lighting and stuff like that
and my budget is like no more than $600
yea im in the US
and on amazon the pentaz k-x doesn't come with a lens and i want to get one that has everything i need already there....
on the link in the first post i have my main 3 choices and i know they all come with lenses
the only thing i'm weary about the K-x is that it runs on AA batteries, and according to the reviews the charge doen't last long even with rechargeable batteries, and i dont want to dish out alot of money buying batteries.
if u have one can u elaborate on it?...since if it didnt run on AA batteries thats definitley what i'd go for
I had the K-x before I traded it in for the Nikon D700, and I found I generally got:
1100+ shots on a set of AA Lithiums, or
500+ shots on a charge with properly conditioned hybrid NiMH AAs (Sanyo Eneloops or similar)
...which was more than enough for me. That's with some 720p video recording thrown into the mix as well.
If you end up getting the K-x, I strongly recommend getting Eneloops (8 of them, probably) and a good charger (I recommend the LaCrosse BC700). Good batteries and a good charger really do make a difference in terms of the quality of the charge (how long each charge lasts) and the battery life (how many charge cycles you can get out of them). With AAs you also have the added benefit of being able to pick up a set of Lithiums or (god forbid) Alkalines if you lose your main set of rechargeables for some reason. Not so easy with cameras that use proprietary batteries.
The XSi is a very nice camera--really any dSLR these days is--but the feature set the K-x offers can't be beat at this price point, IMO.
If you end up going the Pentax route, check out pentaxforums.com, as they're a very friendly community and a great resource for n00b photographers.
edit: well AA bateries should be much cheaper, but! I put ONE canon battery in my dslr...capacity 2000mAh...i went to a trip to ukraine for 7 days...made over 400 photos...and I had to change my battery on 7th day on my way home...
im not familiar with prices in US, but here original chargers and batteries are quetly expensive...but! ther's very good eshop in new mexico, http://sterlingtek.com/ , I've ordered 2 batteries from there (around 2 years ago), they came to me (central Europe) within a week and they are as good as original AND the original one has capacity 1390mAh! two batteries which last for over a week for $25? silly
also I've ordered new charger from hong kong because i thought i've lost my original (i've found it few weeks after the order)...it cost me 7,50€ including shipping...a brand new charger...
the only advantages of AA batteries are that you can get them almost everywhere, buy as much as you can, use the same charger for multiple devices and...thats all....you have to use more batteries for one device, all my life i see that AA batteries (even 2500mAh) last very short time (compared to these)
As I stated above, with Eneloops or good quality 2500 mAH batteries you should be getting roughly the same battery life (500-600 shots per charge) as you would with a proprietary battery. With Lithium AA cells, double that.
The number of days doesn't relate to the number of photos or the hours of operation. How long was the camera turned on each day?
I ask that because I took a trip for work and turned my camera on at noon. It was a 5 hour road trip in which I took about 300 photos. The camera was left on the whole day. Stopped to check in at the hotel and switched cards which was the only time the camera was turned off. At about 6:30 pm, we went to the hockey arena in which I spent another 4-4.5 hours taking 300-350 photos at the hockey game. I turned it off after the game because I was at the mercy of the driver and he wanted to go to the casino (I'd never spent $20 faster in my life than I did that first 3 minutes I was there, Haha.) I have a discharge function on the camera and when I got back to my room, I set it to discharge the batteries for about 2 hours while work paid for my beer for those 2 hours. I don't have a battery meter, it only tells me when they are depleted, but when I got back to my room for the night, they were still discharging. That was around 2 am, so 14 straight hours and 600 or so photos, about 1/4th of those with flash, and the batteries still had charge.
My other experience with AA NiMH batteries is with charging a 130 mah Lipo battery in my micro RC airplane. I could charge the Lipo probably 10 times plus flight time with the controller with a single charge on the NiMH. That's quite a bit considering I am also charging the Lipo with it as well.
I pay $10 for 4 batteries and the charger and $5 for a package of 4 batteries. I see off-brand camera proprietary batteries run for $20 or OEM for $40-45.
So, I would estimate that I could run all day (long day, 12-14 hours) and at least half the next day on 4 NiMH, or just toss them in the charger overnight every night for $10 worth of batteries and charger, probably with the capability of taking 1000 photos with a full charge.
)
