While they are good little camera's, a budget D-SLR performs way better for not that much more money. Also, you can buy Lenses for DSLR's that cover a really wide range, from 18mm (nearly twice as wide as that Fuji) to around 300mm (just short of the fuji's zoom).
The Nikon D40 is very well suited to a beginner to DSLR photography, its made for people who are upgrading from point-and-shoot camera's, which sounds ideal for you. Take a look at that before you make your mind up.
i thought i replied, but aparently something went wrong. anways, the A630 is pretty good, its got lots of features found on higherend cameras. i'm happy with it. it's pretty good at recording video as well. I'll upload a few full resolution pics for you to see as an example. you can see other examples on http://www.flickr.com/search/? ... p;q=canon+a630&m=text
I have the older S5600. It's my intermediary camera while I save for the Nikon digital that I want.
These hybrids are honestly not remotely close to SLR standards specifically with regard to depth of field. In every other respect they're a very good stop-off, but the depth of field issue is a crippler for me, and makes the camera good, to me, only for long landscape shots and family photos.
IMO, if you're looking for a DSLR to look good with a camera, nothing short of a DSLR will achieve it. The Fuji has a similar shape, but it's a LOT smaller than a full-size DSLR and because of that it looks like it's a DSLR made by Fisher Price. If it's just to look good, don't bother.
With all the above said, the Fuji lens on these cameras is actually not too bad, and if you're looking for good definition, the Fuji CCD is top-notch. In fact I'd go as far as to say that the Fuji lens will make a better job of a landscape photograph than an expensive DSLR with a cheap lens. I've often been appalled by aftermarket brands such as Tokina and Sigma, though they're better than they used to be.
With traditional film cameras, once the shutter release goes, the only thing that will make a difference is the glass you put between the outside world and the film. With digital, it's all more complicated, and electronics play a much bigger role. At the end of the day, Fuji's sensor is very good for a relatively cheap camera.
Somehow, I think you're missing the point. The biggest advantage of SLRs is the interchangeable lenses, which gives you options that are unimaginable with a compact camera, no matter whether it's a super-slim Casio Exilim or a chunkier superzoom. From the huge long lenses (almost telescopes sometimes!) used by pro sports photogs, to the dramatic fisheye, primes for absolute image quality, and so on.
@ SamH: Sigma make some cracking lenses. The 17-50/2.8 is especially well received, even more so on the Sony/Minolta mount that I use. I haven't got one, but I do have the 70-300 APO DG. This lens is better than "kit" telezoom offerings, and frankly is unbeatable for the price class it occupies. Obviously it gets caned by lenses that cost >£500, but it gives you great image quality for the money. Whether it'll still be working in five years time is a different issue, however...
Well, there's a new Canon P&S (point and shoot) just out, which theoretically replaces/upgrades the A630. It's the A650 IS and so far it looks very nice indeed. A little more expensive, but seems worth it (better lens, image stabilization, more MPs etc). A nice lusty camera like this could really get me into photography- some of the samples are impressive - check out this cat
Mcintyrej: I looked at the D40 but it's £300. I will move into DSLR photography at some point, but as a poor student the £120 Fuji's price/performance ratio is what drew me to it.
SamH: Hehe, don't worry- the looks of the Fuji are simply an added bonus and not the main reason I chose it
Strobe: You're absoloutely right, I realise lens changes are part of a dSLR's appeal but right now all I want is a wide range of shooting options without being tempted to spend even more on different lenses!
wow the A650 looks pretty cool, but its about $100 more than the A630. get the best camera you can afford. also, be sure to get rechargable batteries and one of those small 4battery rechargers. i have the energizer mah2500 AA batteries for it along with the compact charger. these camera's eat up batteries, especially if you leave the lcd on. the 2500's are pretty longlasting though.
Pentax K100D are down around $445 USD right now, and might drop even further thanks to the K100D Super coming out.
That's with the 18-55mm kit lens, which, while not the best glass you'll ever use, is almost as good as the Nikon kit, which is indisputably the best of the kit lenses.
Yep, ND grad filters are cool...
[size]Sony A100, 18-70mm @ 18mm, 1/80s, f/16, ISO 100, Hitech 0.9 ND grad[/size]
Basically when shooting digital you don't need the huge array of filters that film photographers needed. Colour effects can be done in PP, for example.
Graduated filters are good for landscapes, but get square ones, not the screw-in type.
Circular polarisers are useful for controlling reflections off water and glass, and sometimes enriching colours.
Some people like to use UV or Haze filters as a protector on their lenses. I choose not to, although the filters can cut some of the haze very slightly in landscapes and give you a clearer horizon.
There's all sorts of other filters available - soft focus, star effects, and so on. But the ones above are the starting points imho.
PS. Your pictures look like North Wales / Snowdonia to me.
Yes - don't buy them from Jessops. Ebay is your friend when it comes to getting cheap filters, there are plenty of reputable Hong Kong dealers doing all the major filter brands. My 55mm Hoya Pro1D Circ Pol filter would've cost me £60+ even from a web shop in this country - straight from HK I got it for ~£25.
In terms of recommendations, what kind of shots do you want to achieve? For square filters (such as ND grads) you need a holder which clips onto an adapter that screws into your lens filter thread. So, you can use the same filters on different size lenses just by having a suitably threaded adapter for each lens size you have. Cokin is the usual starters kit for these things, they're cheap and cheerful - although apparently their ND grads aren't entirely neutral, which is why they call them "grey graduated" instead. As for soft edge vs hard edge gradation, the longer your focal length and the smaller your aperture, the harder the gradation needs to be.
Personally, my graduated filter kit consists of a 55mm Cokin adapter (both my kit lens and 24mm prime have a 55mm thread, which is handy), wide angle P-size holder, and a Hitech ND soft grad kit (which has three filters at 0.3, 0.6, and 0.9 - which block out 1, 2, and 3 stops of light respectively) ground down to 84mm width to fit the Cokin P-holder.
A circular polarizer (Circpol, or CPL) is great for city shots, or anywhere that there's glass, water etc so you can either eliminate or enhance the reflections just by turning the filter (only really works on clear days with direct sunlight, although there is still some effect on cloudy days where the light is very diffused). But they do cut out a stop or two of light, so it's not a good idea to keep them on indoors. Most brands will be fine for entry level photogs like us using budget DSLR kit and lenses. You can spend silly money on filters (Lee filters spring to mind) but there's little point unless you've got a £2k lens to stick it on the front of.
So first thing you need to do is check the filter size on your lenses, and what filters you want to use on what lenses. Generally, imho, there's more opportunity to use filters on a wide angle or kit lens than a telezoom, so I'd err towards that.
I should know, I was there a few weeks ago. Sadly the weather was so atrocious that I didn't get a single shot of Snowdonia itself.
me too. ducks were very friendly today, so ofcourse my battery had to die after few shots
Generally i take very few pics lately, mainly because i got a job recently and once i get home, its already dark outside. And of course the weather sucks during weekends. Here is my latest (2 weeks old) phototrip... http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/20070930-naru
Actually you can take photos when dark, but then it requires interest of something above us rather than on same level
Unfortainly Canon Ixus 75 is rather bad option for such photography as ISO 400 is rather bad option, lot of noise already and still you need shutter times of above 10 seconds to get anything but black, however this ball moves too much in that time :P
EOS400D might perhaps work out nicely, but price is bit high for my level of hobby, maybe Nikon D40X would do, I just doubt if it loses bit too much details compared to Canon 400D when taking pictures of small stars?
