Would these lenses fit my future Nikon D7000?

Question

I am in the progress of choosing my new equipment. First of all I have picked the Nikon D7000, it seems like a very nice camera, and it is not that expensive. I could go Full-Frame but seeing the price-tag that might be a little too much, and I would rather like some nice lenses.

Right now I got my eyes on these two:

• Nikon Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.4G
• Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G AF-S VR Micro

I feel this should cover, a lot of the photos I would like to be taking. The 105mm could be replaced with a Nikon Nikkor AF-S DX Micro 85mm f/3.5G ED VR, but I am hearing that the 105mm will give a little extra.

I would like to know, does these lenses fit the Nikon D7000? Would they still be nice if I in some years upgrade to FX?

Would you recommend some other lenses? And in time what lens would you recommend as the third lens.

Also feel free to comment on the choice of the Nikon D7000, I have been looking at cameras like Canon D7, but I feel the Nikon is a little better.

I have used a Canon 450D and a Canon 600D before, also a little bit of Nikon... mostly rented by friends.

Thanks for reading, I hope you got some input!

Asked by Allan Kimmer Jensen

Answer

Both those lenses are compatible with the D7000 and that should also be the case with any FX camera you buy further down the line. A 50mm lens is an excellent choice for a starter lens, and the 1.4 is an excellent example of one. The 105mm will be very good for portraits, and of course macro photography.

Your choice for a third lens will be determined by what kind of photography you want to do. If you feel you want to try landscape photography, you may want to invest in a wider angle lens. If you want to try wildlife or sports photography, you will want something longer. I would concentrate on learning the camera and photography in general before even thinking about a third lens, however. A good tripod is arguably more important anyway.

The D7000 is by all accounts an excellent camera and is a great choice. Happy photographing!

Answered by ElendilTheTall

Check more discussion of this question.

Open standards in digital photography

Question

I'm interested which digital camera models and brands are most open standard friendly. I'm more an open source fan than a photographer, so I can be picky about openness and tolerant with performance and image quality. I suppose there won't be analogy of OLPC computer in digital camera world, but there shall be some models that meet more open standards than others.

Here is a list of standards I know about (I'm not 100% sure about this, feel free to correct me):

• ¼" tripod mount is free to implement
• 4/3 lens mount is more open than others, like Canon or Nikon mounts. It's not fully open, but at least interested third party lens manufacturers don't have to reverse-engineer camera electronics.
• SDHC is more or less open
• AA batteries are a standard factor compared to proprietary Li-ion batteries
• Adobe DNG open raw format is supported by some cameras from Pentax and other manufacturers

So, any other recommendations?

Asked by user713303

Answer

There are literally thousands of "standards" used in digital photography, but few address what you seem to be asking: open standard hardware, os/file systems, etc. ASA/ISO film speed is a standard, as are APS-C and 35mm sensor sizes.

Sadly, all of the consumer oriented brands (Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, etc.) are totally locked into a philosophy of locking you into their "system" with their hardware, software in the camera, software to decode the RAW files, etc.

And, IMHO, much of their proprietary software is second rate.

I have no hope for the DSLR business, perhaps cell phone cameras can take over P+S

Answered by Pat Farrell

Check more discussion of this question.

What kind of camera do I need to capture deep space images?

Question

By deep space image, I mean below kind. In the background it is space dust, I think.
Is it dependent on camera or location? If on camera, what kind of cameras are capable to capture this kind of images?

Asked by Reddy S R

Answer

Unfortunately, a lot of images like the one you show here are digitally altered and it is difficult to get comparable results. The image above shows the Milky Way, looking approximately at its center, which appears to us to be in the constellation of Sagittarius.

To get such a detailed view of the comparatively dark nebulous structures, however, you need to use really long exposure times. Unfortunately, because of the stars' apparent rotation, exposures above approximately 25 seconds (for wide angle lenses; the smaller your lens angle, the shorter the time) begin to show star trails. So I doubt that the image you show was really created as one exposure. If so, the photographer must have used an extremely low-noise semsor with exceptionally high sensitivity.

The linked "star trail" image (which shows the telescope I work for, by the way) used a technique called "stacking". To create it, 70 1-minute-exposures were added together. This is a common method that allows you to get very good images using a normal DSLR and an external timer/trigger.

If you stack the images so that the star "pinpoints" are on top of each other, you will get a detailed skyscape with blurred foreground. This is what I suppose was done in your example image: The sky was images with a series of exposures, stacked together for greater sensitivity, and the foreground has likely been added afterwards.

Of course, instead of doing that much digital manipulation, you can also follow the traditional route and mount your (D)SLR on a tracking mount. A good description with sample images that show what to expect from real-world exposures is given on the "bedfordnights" Geocities page.

Edit: I forgot to address your question regarding location. Yes, it depends on the location: For one thing, the center of the milky way (which is its brightest area) gets higher above the horizon when you move from the poles to the equator. But most importantly, images of the quality you show above are only possible from the darkest locations on the planet (which sounds exotic and adventurous, but essentially means "anywhere where there are no human settlements causing light pollution in about 200 km radius").

Answered by jstarek

Check more discussion of this question.

Which is more likely to yield better overall low-light performance, Canon 1DS2 or 1DIII?

Question

1DSII is full-frame, meaning I can at least theoretically get a little more performance via slower shutter speeds without shake (using 1/f general rule of thumb). But the ISO limit is 3200 (H). Also I already have a 1DII and am familiar with its (somewhat peculiar) button-pressing scheme...plus the 1DII and 1DSII use the same batteries.

On the other hand: 1DIII is APS-H (1.3x crop), ISO max is 6400. Plus it has newer DIGIC processors. But I know there was some concern about auto-focusing of the 1DIII (maybe very specific conditions?).

My use will be widely varied, but a big portion of what I do is dance photography (on-stage, with poor lighting) and it's one place where the camera/gear really does matter.

It's not too hard to find either of these bodies used, and the price is comparable. Which one is likely to serve me better?

Answer

When looking into camera gears I don't own, I use DxOMark to get an idea of perform and quality of certain aspect.

• DxOMark Side by Side Comparison of Canon 1D mk3 and 1Ds mk2

According to DxOMark, 1D mk3 able to produce "lower noise high ISO" image at up to 1078 ISO while 1Ds mk2 is at up to 1480 ISO, roughly 0.3 stop better.

Check more discussion of this question.

How important is optical zoom in snapshot cameras?

Question

I want to buy a new snapshot camera. Because i want a new one with geo-tagging, I haven't such a great choice. So the following three cameras are my favorites:

http://digitec.ch/ProdukteVergleichen1.aspx?artikel=209007,207072,208802

• Canon Powershot SX230 HS
• Sony DSC-HX7V
• Panasonic Lumix TZ20

But now they look all very similar to me. The biggest difference I can see as a beginner is the optical zoom. Is this correct? Or is there a more important difference that I can't see?

And if it is only the optical zoom. How much is the difference between 10x and 16x? Do I feel any difference?

Answer

I never tried to hold a 384e mm zoom on such a camera, but as @dpolitt mentioned it might be very difficult. You may want to try that at a store or read up on that.

But, leaving any other image quality aspects aside, I think the wide angle focal length might be much more interesting. 24e to 28e mm, from your given comparison, is quite a difference which cannot be compensated by moving your feet as much as on the narrow angle end. If that is important to your needs, of course.

Check more discussion of this question.

Should I buy a DSLR to get started?

Question

I'm really interested in getting into serious or even professional photography. I've read some articles about fundamental concepts like aperture, exposure, ISO sensitivity, etc., and I want to get the feeling of how changing different setting affects the resulting picture.

My point-and-shot camera has a manual mode but it seems like no matter what kind of settings I select, I always get worse results then if I shoot in auto mode.

Some people claim that manual mode on point-and-shoots is a joke. Should get a "real camera"?

Answer

You might want to try borrowing or renting a camera first. Even the cheapest DSLR will cost several hundred dollars, which can be a lot of money if you aren't sure it is right for you.

That being said, DSLRs now are a lot better than they were in pure auto mode, which can make it pretty easy to jump right in. I went from a P&S to a DSLR not all that long ago and really enjoyed it pretty much right away.

One big consideration when thinking about switching to a DSLR is the pure size of the camera. You will no longer have something you can stick in a pocket or throw in a bag. They are much bigger, much heavier and much more fragile. They are also a lot more expensive to buy, repair and upgrade.

Check more discussion of this question.

What features really matter in a point and shoot camera?

Question

I am planning to buy my first new digital camera. Now I am too confused for more than 20 days about how I can choose a camera.

I want to use the camera for domestic purpose.

The Canon IXUS 220 HS looks good but it is only 12 MP and only 5X zoom. But there is a also the Canon A3300 that is 16 MP.

So I don't know what is the basis of selecting a camera. What is Image Stabilization? When should I buy a CMOS sensor camera? How much Optical Zoom is sufficient? How much does noise matter in the camera?What about if the camera has HD video recording, and if not, how much will that lack affect viewing on my 32 inch TV?

The cameras I'm currently looking at are Nikon s3100, Canon IXUS 220 HS, Canon IXUS 110 HS, Canon A3300, and Sony W370/B. This will be my first camera and I can't take any risk because I cannot afford a new one in the next few years.

Answer

I would put the number of megapixels at the bottom of the priority list. Megapixels matter, but once you get past about 10 you'll have enough for anything you're likely to do. In particular there wont be a noticeable difference between 12 and 16, theoretically you'll be able to print a 16MP image 15% larger, but that's only if the lens resolves more detail and that detail is not lost to noise.

Image stabilzation prevents blur due to camera shake when you take a photo. It becomes very important the longer the zoom lens. With a 5x it's probably not important but once you get 10x or more you should definitely look for a stabilized model. How long a zoom you need is really up to you.

All small sensor point and shoot cameras will produce noisy images in low light, it's just something you need to be aware of and plan your shooting accordingly.

HD video is a useful feature, I've seen some really good quality clips from this sort of camera, so if you plan to take videos at all I'd look at one that records HD.

Check more discussion of this question.

What medium format film camera should an SLR guy look at?

Question

Ok, I know the SLR world pretty well, I've owned Pentax, Canon, and now Nikon film SLRs, from the '80s to the naughties.

But I know nothing about medium format cameras, so I need your advice!

My Requirements

• it has be pretty cheap, I'm expecting to pay between $200 and $800? less would be better so I can spend on film / processing / lenses

• I don't want a "toy" camera.

• I'm trying Medium Format for the quality of the film, so I want a body that can take awesome interchangeable lenses.

• I want the lenses to be relatively easy to find in 2nd hand camera shops, and I don't want them to be the most expensive lenses (i.e, Pentax lenses are more than enough, though better is always good!)

• I need it to have a pretty reliable through the lens light meter.

• it does NOT need any auto focus

• it CAN be heavy and bulky

• it MUST be a waist "look down" viewfinder.

• I'd rather 6x6, but am flexible. I want to be able to put awesome low ISO film in there.. don't know if that limits me in the size?

• I would like a pretty fast shutter... but I know in older cameras it's hard to go above 1/1000

One More Thing, Very Important

• I do a lot of night time photography, so I need to be able to meter light at very long exposures, and of course set very long exposures.

Answer

The good news - all medium format gear is ridiculously cheap now that everyone switched to digital.

Cheapest hardware is probably 645, Mamiya was always cheapest and is lens compatible right upto their most modern digital models. Although most people used them as eyelevel SLRs you can get a waistlevel finder for $10

My favorite 6x7 was always Mamiya RB67 (or RZ if you like more electronics)

Then of course there is the famous Hassleblad - I've nearly been tempted to buy a Hassleblad just as a piece of art.

Whichever it's going to cost a fortune in film and you need a very high end film scanner

EDIT: Not sure if it's allowed here but check www.keh.com for used MF gear (no link other than a long time very satisfied customer)

Check more discussion of this question.

What is the best camera to buy for a child to help them learn about photography?

Question

I have a seven year old daughter who is keen on getting a camera for Christmas. She is able to look after possessions (is very safe with her violin from school) although this is a recent development. I use Olympus 4/3rds and Micro 4/3rds camera. She has borrowed my EP-1 a number of times and enjoyed using it.

I learnt photography using a completely manual Praktica PLC3. This was challenging to use as you had to do the light metering and set the focus yourself. I wouldn't want to get a completely manual camera as I think that might put her off, but I would like one with enough flexibility to allow manual setting of aperture, shutter speed and focus so she can really learn how to be creative with it once she's got bored with point and shoot.

What cameras would you recommend we look at? Should we get one with a viewfinder?

Budget: under 200 GBP / 300 dollars. Preferably less!

Is this a sensible approach, or should we go for a cheap / rugged point and shoot until she is ready for the next level?

I am aware of the "What non-toy camera would be good for a child?" question, but it doesn't quite answer the same issues I am seeking to solve.

Answer

When there are many choices and no single "right answer" I like to let my children be involved in the decision making. Therefore I recommend this approach.

1. Find a camera store with a good selection in your price range AND a sales person you feel can work well with your daughter to help her make her selection. Discuss your goals with the sales person and find out your options. Make an appointment to come back with your daughter.

2. Talk with your daughter about her Christmas gift and help her develop her list.

   A. She may want to get more than one camera. Seriously! Last week I saw young girls in a swimming pool having a wonderful time taking each others' pictures underwater. Underwater digital cameras start at U.S. $20 according to a google search.

   B. Does she want to make stop-action movies of toys moving, clouds moving or a plant growing? A tripod is needed so the camera doesn't move between shots.

   My nephew has had his own camera for a year and a half. He enjoys making "Lego Men" movies from stills. His last upload to YouTube was impressive: Title, credits, background music and narration of the Lego Men as they moved around. He uses the free Windows Live Movie Maker to make movies from .jpg photos.

   C. Does she want to take pictures of fireworks, lightning bugs or the funny blur of someone swinging? A tripod and a bulb-capable camera are needed.

   D. Does she want to do funny things like "Hall of Mirrors" effects of her friends or put the cat's head on the dog's body? If so software is needed. If it doesn't come with the camera(s) and can't be downloaded free it has to be part of the Christmas gift budget.

   E. Etc.

3. Take her to the camera store to select her Christmas gift. Take your camera to record her decision process. :)

Check more discussion of this question.

What should a beginner look at in comparing two point & shoot cameras?

Question

My interest in photography grew over the last few days, and I finally decided get into this thing. My goal is to become a Nature/Wildlife & Fashion photographer some day.

Since I am total beginner at present, I don't plan on buying a new camera or DSLR. What I have at hand are these - - a Canon PowerShot A590 IS (8MP) and a FUJIFILM FinePix AV100 (12MP) Series camera (I know both are really basic and pretty old models).

I have read that shouldn't be worried about the "megapixels" of camera, so what should I look for?

For instance, the specs for the two cameras I have are here and here. The examples are for the purpose of you suggesting me what I should look for in a camera.

Please advise, which one would be better and why? (Again, I am just a beginner, and I'll purchase a DSLR as soon as I get some understanding of how it all works, and some confidence. Thanks.)

Answer

This is a good exercise, and there are some interesting differences between these models which are illustrative of things worth comparing.

• Technology generations: The Fujifilm camera is from 2010 and the Canon model from two years earlier. Electronics continue their march of getting cheaper and faster, and in general newer models have an advantage — although this is most true in the midrange. At the high end, more expensive initial choices give cameras longer functional lives (and non-electronic benefits like better controls and better build aren't influenced by tech improvements); at the low-end, new models might "spend" the improved tech on lowering costs rather than increasing quality.
• Image stabilization: The Canon camera in your example has a "real" optical stabilization system, while the Fujifilm camera says it has "Digital Image Stabilization" which is doublespeak-like industry code for "no image stabilization".
• Sensor size: The Canon camera has a 1/2.5-inch type sensor, while the Fujifilm has a slightly bigger 1/2.3-inch sensor — this is about 15% more surface area, which in this case is not very significant. But in some cases, the sensor size can really make a difference.
• Optics: Both models feature a relatively useful moderate zoom. There's no way to compare image quality from the specs, and that's something that's probably also worth looking into if you can. The Fujifilm has a more conservative 3× zoom range (which is usually better for image quality), and provides a more-useful slightly wider angle (but not by much). Since you have the cameras, some actual test shots would be useful.
• Aperture: Related; the Canon camera opens up to f/2.6 at the wide end and f/5.5 at the long end of the zoom range. The Fujifilm is a third of a stop slower at the wide end, and similar at the telephoto end. (It doesn't zoom out as far so direct comparison isn't easy.) This is a more significant difference than the 15% sensor area, but it's also in this case pretty small. In some cameras, the difference is worth making a big deal about.
• CHDK: There's nifty firmware hacks available for Canon P&S cameras, including this model; there's really nothing like it for other brands. That might be a way to make an older camera do some really cool new tricks.
• Viewfinder: The Canon has one, the Fujifilm does not. This isn't a through-the-lens finder (it's basically a little tunnel of plastic optics) and so is less useful than the one on a DSLR, but it may still fit your photography better.
• Control modes: Honestly, this is less useful on a small-sensor camera, but if you're learning about photography it's nice to be able to take more control. Neither camera offers "full manual", but the Canon offers shutter priority and aperture priority program modes, while the Fujifilm is auto-exposure only. (In fact, I'm not sure it even has EV compensation or exposure lock, which would be a big concern.)
• Responsiveness: You can't really tell this from specs, but maybe can get it from reviews. Testing it yourself is of course great. There's several important things to look for: time it takes to go from off to ready, time it takes from shot to ready again, and lag between when you fully-press the shutter to actually taking the photo. Secondarily, a fast AF speed and at least moderate burst rate are nice.

Then there's control layout, build, and general feel. This varies model to model but the different brands do tend to fit some generalization. For example, in every Canon P&S camera I've used — including the high-end ones — zooming is very clearly a "stepped" operation. You press the zoom lever, and it goes from 35mm to 50mm to 85mm, or whatever sequence of pre-programmed points the camera offers. Fujifilm cameras still use a servomotor that works in the same way (with the exception of a few which have the great feature of using manual zoom lenses), but there are more steps and it feels smoother.

Whether this is a concern or bother to you is somewhat personal — as is the issue of control or feel in general, but for learning photography, you do want as many accessible controls as possible, and basically more buttons is better, because fiddling in menus is no good.

Check more discussion of this question.

Is buying a camera and trying things yourself the best way to learn?

Question

I love photos and every thing related to them. I want to begin in this field as a hobby, then become a professional in time. Some people have advised me that the best way to learn photography is to "buy a camera and try to take photos and learn from your errors".

Is this good advice, and if so, what is the camera suited my case?

Answer

It depends on your discipline and self-criticism. If you can truly see the fault in your own work, then yes that is a great way to start.

What goes hand-in-hand with this is going to look at photos that you find awesome (books, galleries, museums, even online gallery of famous photographers). This gives you a baseline to know what is possible and lets you work out why you prefer their photographs to yours.

Then, shoot a lot and criticize and compare your work to your own previous and that of those you admire. Repeat until you are no longer advancing. After that you will need something else to break your learning plateau: photography books, courses, seminars, etc. Depending on the style of photography you seek, photo tours are an excellent way to learn.

As for the camera. You can start with anything with full manual controls but it helps greatly if you get a more advanced model so that those controls are more efficient. You can always upgrade later but if you buy into a system right away, it gets harder to switch. On the compact side you can do a lot with a Canon Powershot S95 for about $350.

Honestly, most people who come to my photography classes having a bought a camera already quickly learn they do not have what is best one for them once they learn about photography and what each type of camera and lens is ideal for. So, I personally recommend to learn as much as possible before jumping into a big investment. Technology will improve in the meantime.

Check more discussion of this question.

What advanced cameras are the size of a point and shoot?

Question

My wife is starting to get in to photography more and more. She likes her point and shoot camera because it is small so it can go with her most ever where.

She is interested in some of the nicer cameras (with focus control and high zoom lenses). Is there any way to have the best of both worlds? Have a camera with the features of a higher end camera but in the size of a point and shoot camera?

Answer

As well as the "bridge" category, there is also the new category that has yet to settle on a name, but is variously known as

• (Mirrorless) interchangeable lens compact/camera (MILC or ILC)
• electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens (EVIL)
• single lens direct view (SLD or SLDV)

These have different lenses available, as do SLRs, but are smaller due to not having mirrors. Some examples are the Olympus PEN E-P2, Panasonic Lumix DMC GF1 and the Sony NEX-5.

These are all pretty compact, especially when used with a pancake lens. You can get big zooms for them, but the lens will be big, so the overall compactness will be lost.

One thing to note is that a large zoom built into a compact (often marketed as "Ultrazoom" or similar) tends to be combined with a very small sensor, which means that the image quality will suffer, as will low light performance. This article explains why.

Check more discussion of this question.

What medium format camera should an SLR guy look at?

Question

Ok, I know the SLR world pretty well, I've owned Pentax, Canon, and now Nikon film SLRs, from the '80s to the naughties.

But I know nothing about medium format cameras, so I need your advice!

My Requirements

• it has be pretty cheap, I'm expecting to pay between $200 and $800? less would be better so I can spend on film / processing / lenses

• I don't want a "toy" camera.

• I'm trying Medium Format for the quality of the film, so I want a body that can take awesome interchangeable lenses.

• I want the lenses to be relatively easy to find in 2nd hand camera shops, and I don't want them to be the most expensive lenses (i.e, Pentax lenses are more than enough, though better is always good!)

• I need it to have a pretty reliable through the lens light meter.

• it does NOT need any auto focus

• it CAN be heavy and bulky

• it MUST be a waist "look down" viewfinder.

• I'd rather 6x6, but am flexible. I want to be able to put awesome low ISO film in there.. don't know if that limits me in the size?

• I would like a pretty fast shutter... but I know in older cameras it's hard to go above 1/1000

One More Thing, Very Important

• I do a lot of night time photography, so I need to be able to meter light at very long exposures, and of course set very long exposures.

Answer

The good news - all medium format gear is ridiculously cheap now that everyone switched to digital.

Cheapest hardware is probably 645, Mamiya was always cheapest and is lens compatible right upto their most modern digital models. Although most people used them as eyelevel SLRs you can get a waistlevel finder for $10

My favorite 6x7 was always Mamiya RB67 (or RZ if you like more electronics)

Then of course there is the famous Hassleblad - I've nearly been tempted to buy a Hassleblad just as a piece of art.

Whichever it's going to cost a fortune in film and you need a very high end film scanner

EDIT: Not sure if it's allowed here but check www.keh.com for used MF gear (no link other than a long time very satisfied customer)

Check more discussion of this question.

What should I look for when shopping for my first DSLR?

Question

I am thinking of buying a digital SLR camera. What things should I be looking for?

Answer

Things to look for when buying your first dslr:

• Price. Far from me to tell anyone how to spend their hard earned cash, but having an idea of what money you want to pay will help.

• Ergonomics. Does the body feel good in your hands? What about when you have your lens attached?

• What brand? I'm a fan of Canon. Nikon is equally awesome. There are other brands as well, but I recommend the big two: Canon and Nikon.

• Beginner/creative modes. Since this is your first camera, having modes that do some automation will ease you into using an SLR.

• Entry Level/ Prosumer Level body. If you have a sufficient budget, consider which would serve you better: Buying a more expensive body now, with features that you can grow with, or a less expensive body with fewer features, leaving you more cash more lenses. In terms of producing great images the chain of importance goes: Photographer >>> Lens > Camera Body.

My first dSLR was a Canon 20D, a prosumer body. I chose it because I have larger hands, and the 20D size and weight felt better (twss), and I wanted something I could grow with.

Check more discussion of this question.

Are there any cameras which require a PIN before deleting photos?

Question

This would protect you from mischievous kids (or malicious brats, as the case may be).

Answer

No, there are not.

I have heard of rather expensive write-once memory cards, if you are truly serious about preventing deletion.

Also expensive but at least reusable is an Eye-Fi card which sends photos to a WiFi access-point as they are shot. That way, even if they are deleted from the card, the photos will be on a computer somewhere.

Check more discussion of this question.

What compact interchangeable lens cameras have manual video?

Question

I'm looking to buy a single camera to use both as a personal snapshot camera and as a video camera to document my artistic work (mainly kinetic sculptures and light installations). The micro four thirds format is appealing for its compactness, as well as the short flange focal distance which allows potentially broad lens compatibility.

I was all set on buying the Lumix G3 but then I discovered it has no manual controls for video. I want at least aperture priority as the Vimeo shallow depth of field eye candy effect is kind of important in my field... The Lumix GH2 has manual video controls but it's simply too big to be called 'compact'. The Olympus PEN cameras have manual video controls, but seem to get bad reviews for video quality.

What's a good EVIL/CSC alternative? Ideally no bigger than the Lumix G3 but with the video controls and quality of the Lumix GH2. Could I adapt+attach a lens with a manual aperture ring to the G3 (to escape the no-manual-controls problem) and trust the G3's auto ISO + shutter speed to give me acceptable results?

Answer

four thirds will limit the ability to get the "depth of field eye candy effect"

You don't need a small aperture necessarily but the smaller the sensor the harder this is to achieve, the Sony uses an APS-C sensor which will help somewhat in doing what you want. I don't believe the manual control is up to par with your needs however.

Depth of field can be manufactured in post processing if it is a top priority of yours, this would give you more flexibility with camera choices as you can fiddle with it later on and get the image nice and sharp initially.

The Olympus also has some magnificent controls in regards to manual control, I think Andrew has a good point there. I can't say that the times I've used the PEN that the videos have been bad for a four thirds camera.

You can mount pretty much any lens to any camera these days it needs to have both manual aperture and focus rings however. I would really try to avoid any camera that does "auto ISO" or "auto aperture" as the only way to achieve great results is to control all these functions yourself. In decent light that means keeping ISO as low as you can and using your aperture to control the light and depth of field.

In the end the GH2 may not seem like a compact, but as soon as you put big lenses on these cameras, how can any of them be called compact? The only time I find the sony NEX even slightly compact is when it has the 17mm pancake lens on, then you lose your ability for decent depth of field (unless something is at minimum focus distance), any other lens, even primes make them so big that you may as well just get a better camera that is going to perform much better under your needs.

If you want professional results, unfortunately you are going to have to spend more on a camera to get them. In the end I would just get a decent proper DSLR and do things properly the first time.

The Nikon D3100 is one of the first DSLRs out with full time autofocus in Video and the results you will get, along with the lens options at your fingertips without mount adaptors and having to resort to manual lenses is far superior.

Check more discussion of this question.

Does a Point and Shoot camera with great Auto mode exist?

Question

I'm canon 7D shooter and I feel completely uncertain when buying a camera for my dad. Tech specs are not a good indicator of how user friendly a camera is.

Does a point and shoot camera exist that allows you to put the camera in Auto mode and simply get good pictures? I don't want one with bazillion shooting modes, however I'm looking for a camera with:

• Quick start up time.
• Has great 'A' mode.
• Feels solid, doesn't have flimsy buttons.
• Small enough to fit in fanny-pack :) but not big enough to need a separate bag.
• Decent videos, 720p is fine.

Answer

you did not tell us about accepted price range, so I cannot recommend you exact camera.

However, (although I am DSLR user too) I have some experience with P&S cameras. I would recommend one of the Panasonic Lumix compact cameras - they have good construction and lenses (some have Leica lenses), are very user friendly and have good Auto mode with intelligent AF. I was surprised how good photos can they produce (in this camera category, of course). They also have some "more advanced" settings and programs.

Other candidate could be Nikon P300 (which I am going to buy as second camera to my DSLR) - it also has the priority programs etc. - maybe your dad would later dive more deeply in photography...

Check more discussion of this question.

What should I look for in a second-hand DSLR with a nice long zoom lens?

Question

I am considering buying a cheap second-hand DSLR with a nice long zoom lens (at least up to 200mm) for photographing nature in particular. I have a lovely Panasonic LX5 which takes great macro pictures, but I am missing the capability to take pictures at a distance with nice bokeh.

I am not looking for professional quality images, but it would be nice to have a reasonably fast autofocus to capture fast-moving subjects. There are plenty of older Nikons and Canons (and everything else) on eBay; any suggestions as to what I should look for and what I should avoid?

My budget would be under €400 - and yes, there do exist cameras with OK zoom lenses at that price second-hand; however, I think the question can probably be answered usefully for different budgets as well.

Answer

Craig is correct — the DSLR and lens should be considered separately. If you do find a bundle that has both you want then, of course, you can buy it, but first decide which cameras and lenses would be satisfying.

As I am mostly familiar with every lineup, I'll speak from that perspective ;)

Going used is a great opportunity to find excellent values. You may be missing low-light performance or the ultimate gimmicks — I mean features — like video capture and live-view, but you'll get more of what matters.

Every brand has a low-end lineup and one or more high-end lineups. You should really go for the higher ones, because they are built to be more durable, and so have a better chance of staying in good shape and having shutter-cycles left. Usually, the are rated to take between 3× and 10× more photos. As a bonus, you will get better ergonomics, more direct controls and larger viewfinders.

If you go with Canon, for example, an XXD camera like the 30D or 40D falls into this group. For Nikon, that would be the D70, D80, D90 or any Dxxx, like the D200.

Since you are considering telephoto and nature photography I would actually go with Pentax, Sony, or Konica-Minolta (acquired by Sony). The advantage is that these cameras have in-body stabilization which will save you money on the lens since you do not have to pay for in-lens stabilization.

You may be able to find the Konica-Minolta 7D which is built like a tank, the Sony A700, the Pentax K10D or K20D which are great. These last two Pentax cameras are weather-sealed as an extra bonus. A quick search on eBay shows the K10D for under $300 and the A700 for just over.

Then, you can find a compatible lens. On the cheap, you have to compromise on image quality and speed, so I suspect you will want to go for a 70-300mm or 75-300mm of the respective brand or a third-partly like Sigma. I see a Minolta 75-300 for Sony or KM cameras for under $100 on eBay. Most other brands go for a similar price.

Check more discussion of this question.

Are there big reasons to prefer the Canon 600d vs Canon 550d?

Question

I'm just wondering wither there is any big(ish) reasons I should get the Canon 600d and not the Canon 550d. I'm interested in the difference in video quality and low light performance (if there is any) and obviously intersected in difference of all round image quality.

Answer

The performance of these two is expected to be pretty much identical since they share the same sensor.

If you get the cheaper one (550D) then you should invest the difference towards a better lens. This will have much more impact on your photography than anything else.

EDIT To answer comment. Compared to the 550D, the 600D:

• Lacks an Eye-Start sensor, you have to manually turn on or off the status display.
• New 'intelligent' mode added to Auto & Scene modes. More 'artsy' filters.
• Live-View can shoot at different aspect ratios, basically an automatic crop.
• LCD can be rotated outwards and titled.
• Can control flashes wirelessly.

Check more discussion of this question.

Olympus XZ-1 or Lumix LX5?

Question

I wonder which one of the two cameras should I get. Here is one comparison. I've seen good photos on flickr using both cameras, so I'm not sure. People say that the Lumix's aperture is slower than the Olympus. EDIT: Also, is it possible on the Olympus to disable the bokkeh effect?

Answer

The bokeh is influenced by the aperture you choose. It is not an effect.

The wider the aperture you choose, the less depth-of-field you get which is what makes bokeh appear. With the Olympus you have more latitude to choose less depth-of-field but you can choose an equally large depth-of-field on both camera.

The Olympus ZX-1 is really nice and produce very good quality images for its class. It also handles very well because of its well-placed dials. I'd go for the ZX-1 except if ultra-wide-angle is very important for you.

Check more discussion of this question.