Best digital STILL cameras?

Bill Ravens · July 10th, 2003, 07:03 AM

I just received an email from a developer of tools for RAW image processing. His statement is that Canon is late delivering the SDK for the 10D, and hence, all the problems with supporting software. He also made the point that Canon may drop the RAW format at a future date. There seems to be 50 gazillion different implementations of RAW(even within the canon digital line of products), non of them cross compatible....*sigh*...how utterly typical of this business...no damn standards!!

Craig Jones · July 10th, 2003, 07:26 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Nigel Moore : So I think what you meant , Craig, when you stated earlier that "current digital SLR's are largely limited by the resolving power of their lenses", is not that they're limited in comparison to 35mm which uses the same lenes, but that they're limited in what they could technically achieve.

If this is the case, then you're earlier comment is no longer the contradiction that I thought it was and which confused me.

Thanks for clarifying. -->>>

That's right.

Rob Belics · July 10th, 2003, 09:33 AM

Bill,

What do you mean no standards? There are thousands of 'em! ;)

Rob Belics · July 10th, 2003, 09:47 AM

Maybe I missed it but this comparison of the 10D and film it was mentioned comparing prints. How were these prints made?

If you're talking about comparing the 10D and a film negative printed on an Epson printer (or other), then you're not making a proper comparison because you're downgrading the film negative to the abilities of the printer.

If you take a medium format negative and make a proper paper print in a dark room, then make a digital transfer and everything required to make a dark room print on paper, the digital print will be god awful in comparison.

But if you download the digital file into a computer and use an inkjet to print it, then scan the film negative into the computer and inkjet print it, you won't be able to tell much difference.

Film runs circles around digital. Remember digital circuits are made using film lithography.

John Garcia · July 10th, 2003, 11:15 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Dylan -- I'm currently entrenched in NYC for a couple of trade shows; new forum in a day or two hopefully. -->>>

awesome, i cant wait. I have alot of questions! :)

Kirk Messner · July 12th, 2003, 07:13 PM

I haven't been here since I got my 10D 2 weeks ago. I've taken over 1,100 pictures so far (a big majority have been trashed). My GL2 has been gathering dust ever since. I'd really like to see a digital camra forum here as well. I know there's alot of experience here, and you all will be thrilled to answer all my silly questions :)

I bought it with the 28-135 lens, but already want another, the 300mm f4 L IS USM, which is out of stock everywhere !!

A few decent 10D samples are on my website.

Kirk

Luke Gates · July 15th, 2003, 01:07 AM

about the price of the 707...unless the buyer is an idiot you will never get enough to buy a 10d. Right now the 707 retails brand new for about $650 and you can find it as cheap as $575-600. You have a decent amount of accesories but the only ones of considerable value are the wide angle and the two memory sticks. So considering the camera is nearly two years old, as you said it was earlier, I would expect you get $700 from it...tops. But who knows, you may find a willing buyer.
You may also want to look into the Nikon D100 which is an awesome digital SLR and definitely competes with Canon's 10d. I guess its all preference, its kind of like comparing the GL2 and the VX2000. There are distinct differences but more similarities. I had a stock in Nikon equipment like a flash and a few lenses from my analog SLR so I went with the D100. Its an amaxing camera. Good luck selling your 707.

John Garcia · July 15th, 2003, 12:49 PM

Thanks for the reply.

Yeah, I was going to sell the 707 and put the money towards a new camera. I just needed advice on how much I should sell the package for.

Ill check into the D100 and compare it to the 10D. Thanks again for your input and insite...

Best Regards,

John

Will Fastie · July 21st, 2003, 09:15 AM

DVInfo.net is the best digital video site on the Web, period. Because of this and the high quality of the participants, it's natural to assume that the quality of a digital camera section would be the same.

I don't agree.

The entire still world is going digital. It would be nice to think that the digital camera section would gravitate towards the same sort of quality the rest of this site exhibits, but if you build a better digital mousetrap the world will, indeed, beat a path to your virtual doorstep. I'm sure those numbers are attractive to our esteemed publisher, but the cost will surely be lower quality created by the arrival of a mass market.

There are also some excellent and authoritative sites out there for still digital photography. Two that come to mind are Imaging Resourse and Phil Askey's site. I use both sites regularly, especially for product information. John, if you haven't checked both those sites for information, I recommend them.

All that said, many of us here use digital stills for video work. (I shot 90 minutes of footage for some friends yesterday and also took 50 stills; call it "C" roll.) If there were some way to focus a digital camera section on the application of digital still photography to video, I think that would be an excellent addition that fits the model of this site while keeping the mass market at bay.

Will

John Garcia · July 21st, 2003, 01:29 PM

Alright guys...I need an opinion here...

Ive got a $2000.00 intial budget for my new camera. I really want the EOS 10D which is for sale at a local camera shop for $1499.00. For $200.00 more, I could get the extended grip/battery which would give me about 800 shots of battery life. That would bring my cost up to about $1700.00 just for the body and extended batterys. No memory, and no lens.

The package already comes with a battery, so its really not necessary initially. I would need a compact flash card, and a lens.

I was thinking, what if i bought the body, a small flash card for now, would i be able to afford a lens for the camera for about $400.00? What should I do? Should i get the body and extended batteries and spend about 300 on a lens? I need to have a complete setup because ill be without a camera for a little while if i dont buy a lens right away.

Should I just focus on battery and memory, then wait a few more months to invest in one of the 1500 dollar zoom lenses?

damn...i need help...thanks!

John

Rob Belics · July 21st, 2003, 01:35 PM

Rule 1: Get the best lens you can possibly afford.

Matt Betea · July 21st, 2003, 01:55 PM

Wait a few months with no lens?! Get a lens first. Whether it's a $100-$200 50mm or something else. As sweet as the battery grip is, you can't take many pictures with it instead of a lens.

Jacques Mersereau · July 21st, 2003, 01:59 PM

I have a 10D. I would go with an extra battery and forget the handle grip.
It's not worth it right now imo when you have greater needs:

1) Best lens you can afford like Bob said. For $800 the Canon
17-40mm f/4L USM Lens might do a good job. I have NOT used it
so beware . . . check the camera lists as there are lots
of choices. I have a 100-400 USM L and
the 16-35 mm L. I like them both, but they are $1500 each.

2) Big CF card or two (I like my 1 gig microdrive). You won't get anywhere
near 800 high resolution pics on a 1 gig card.

Jeff Donald · July 21st, 2003, 02:08 PM

B&H Photo had a booth at the MacWorld show in NYC last week, handing out flyers with show discounts.

$100 off 10D, #MWED29
$200 off 1DS, #MWED34
$200 off Epson 7600, #MWED49

Use the coupon number for your discount.

Flyer says the deals are good through July 30.

I would get a 256mb card. Many retailers have them for $50 after rebates (CompUSA, Office Depot, etc.) One battery will get you started, but budget for another card and battery ASAP.

I would recommend the 28-135mm IS lens (don't forget the 1.6X focal length multiplier). If you want a faster lens consider either of the 50mm lenses (F1.4 or F1.8). The 35mm F2 is also a decent lens. You can always get a fast L lens to supplement your general purpose lens as your budget permits.

Avoid the cheap starter lenses usually sold in the kits (35-80mm, 28-80mm and 28-90mm). They are mostly plastic and the digital format will show their optical weakness.

Bill Ravens · July 21st, 2003, 02:15 PM

FWIW...a small thing to remember is that the advertised f-stop setting on canon lenses applies to 35mm cameras. With a slightly smaller CMOS than 35mm, there's an aparently smaller lens aperture. For example, the 28-135 f/3.5 is really an f/4.0

July 15th, 2003, 12:49 PM	#83
John Garcia Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 199	Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I was going to sell the 707 and put the money towards a new camera. I just needed advice on how much I should sell the package for. Ill check into the D100 and compare it to the 10D. Thanks again for your input and insite... Best Regards, John __________________ John Garcia

July 21st, 2003, 09:15 AM	#84
Will Fastie Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Jarrettsville, MD Posts: 353	A Vote Against the DigiCam Section DVInfo.net is the best digital video site on the Web, period. Because of this and the high quality of the participants, it's natural to assume that the quality of a digital camera section would be the same. I don't agree. The entire still world is going digital. It would be nice to think that the digital camera section would gravitate towards the same sort of quality the rest of this site exhibits, but if you build a better digital mousetrap the world will, indeed, beat a path to your virtual doorstep. I'm sure those numbers are attractive to our esteemed publisher, but the cost will surely be lower quality created by the arrival of a mass market. There are also some excellent and authoritative sites out there for still digital photography. Two that come to mind are Imaging Resourse and Phil Askey's site. I use both sites regularly, especially for product information. John, if you haven't checked both those sites for information, I recommend them. All that said, many of us here use digital stills for video work. (I shot 90 minutes of footage for some friends yesterday and also took 50 stills; call it "C" roll.) If there were some way to focus a digital camera section on the application of digital still photography to video, I think that would be an excellent addition that fits the model of this site while keeping the mass market at bay. Will

July 21st, 2003, 01:29 PM	#85
John Garcia Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 199	Alright guys...I need an opinion here... Ive got a $2000.00 intial budget for my new camera. I really want the EOS 10D which is for sale at a local camera shop for $1499.00. For $200.00 more, I could get the extended grip/battery which would give me about 800 shots of battery life. That would bring my cost up to about $1700.00 just for the body and extended batterys. No memory, and no lens. The package already comes with a battery, so its really not necessary initially. I would need a compact flash card, and a lens. I was thinking, what if i bought the body, a small flash card for now, would i be able to afford a lens for the camera for about $400.00? What should I do? Should i get the body and extended batteries and spend about 300 on a lens? I need to have a complete setup because ill be without a camera for a little while if i dont buy a lens right away. Should I just focus on battery and memory, then wait a few more months to invest in one of the 1500 dollar zoom lenses? damn...i need help...thanks! John __________________ John Garcia

July 21st, 2003, 01:59 PM	#88
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	I have a 10D. I would go with an extra battery and forget the handle grip. It's not worth it right now imo when you have greater needs: 1) Best lens you can afford like Bob said. For $800 the Canon 17-40mm f/4L USM Lens might do a good job. I have NOT used it so beware . . . check the camera lists as there are lots of choices. I have a 100-400 USM L and the 16-35 mm L. I like them both, but they are $1500 each. 2) Big CF card or two (I like my 1 gig microdrive). You won't get anywhere near 800 high resolution pics on a 1 gig card. __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

July 21st, 2003, 02:08 PM	#89
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	B&H Photo had a booth at the MacWorld show in NYC last week, handing out flyers with show discounts. $100 off 10D, #MWED29 $200 off 1DS, #MWED34 $200 off Epson 7600, #MWED49 Use the coupon number for your discount. Flyer says the deals are good through July 30. I would get a 256mb card. Many retailers have them for $50 after rebates (CompUSA, Office Depot, etc.) One battery will get you started, but budget for another card and battery ASAP. I would recommend the 28-135mm IS lens (don't forget the 1.6X focal length multiplier). If you want a faster lens consider either of the 50mm lenses (F1.4 or F1.8). The 35mm F2 is also a decent lens. You can always get a fast L lens to supplement your general purpose lens as your budget permits. Avoid the cheap starter lenses usually sold in the kits (35-80mm, 28-80mm and 28-90mm). They are mostly plastic and the digital format will show their optical weakness. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 10th, 2003, 07:03 AM	#76
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	I just received an email from a developer of tools for RAW image processing. His statement is that Canon is late delivering the SDK for the 10D, and hence, all the problems with supporting software. He also made the point that Canon may drop the RAW format at a future date. There seems to be 50 gazillion different implementations of RAW(even within the canon digital line of products), non of them cross compatible....sigh...how utterly typical of this business...no damn standards!!

July 10th, 2003, 07:26 AM	#77
Craig Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 105	<<<-- Originally posted by Nigel Moore : So I think what you meant , Craig, when you stated earlier that "current digital SLR's are largely limited by the resolving power of their lenses", is not that they're limited in comparison to 35mm which uses the same lenes, but that they're limited in what they could technically achieve. If this is the case, then you're earlier comment is no longer the contradiction that I thought it was and which confused me. Thanks for clarifying. -->>> That's right.

July 10th, 2003, 09:33 AM	#78
Rob Belics Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 581	Bill, What do you mean no standards? There are thousands of 'em! ;)

July 10th, 2003, 09:47 AM	#79
Rob Belics Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 581	Maybe I missed it but this comparison of the 10D and film it was mentioned comparing prints. How were these prints made? If you're talking about comparing the 10D and a film negative printed on an Epson printer (or other), then you're not making a proper comparison because you're downgrading the film negative to the abilities of the printer. If you take a medium format negative and make a proper paper print in a dark room, then make a digital transfer and everything required to make a dark room print on paper, the digital print will be god awful in comparison. But if you download the digital file into a computer and use an inkjet to print it, then scan the film negative into the computer and inkjet print it, you won't be able to tell much difference. Film runs circles around digital. Remember digital circuits are made using film lithography.

July 10th, 2003, 11:15 AM	#80
John Garcia Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 199	<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Dylan -- I'm currently entrenched in NYC for a couple of trade shows; new forum in a day or two hopefully. -->>> awesome, i cant wait. I have alot of questions! :)

July 12th, 2003, 07:13 PM	#81
Kirk Messner Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Fowlerville, MI Posts: 51	I haven't been here since I got my 10D 2 weeks ago. I've taken over 1,100 pictures so far (a big majority have been trashed). My GL2 has been gathering dust ever since. I'd really like to see a digital camra forum here as well. I know there's alot of experience here, and you all will be thrilled to answer all my silly questions :) I bought it with the 28-135 lens, but already want another, the 300mm f4 L IS USM, which is out of stock everywhere !! A few decent 10D samples are on my website. Kirk

July 15th, 2003, 01:07 AM	#82
Luke Gates Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: new jersey Posts: 151	about the price of the 707...unless the buyer is an idiot you will never get enough to buy a 10d. Right now the 707 retails brand new for about $650 and you can find it as cheap as $575-600. You have a decent amount of accesories but the only ones of considerable value are the wide angle and the two memory sticks. So considering the camera is nearly two years old, as you said it was earlier, I would expect you get $700 from it...tops. But who knows, you may find a willing buyer. You may also want to look into the Nikon D100 which is an awesome digital SLR and definitely competes with Canon's 10d. I guess its all preference, its kind of like comparing the GL2 and the VX2000. There are distinct differences but more similarities. I had a stock in Nikon equipment like a flash and a few lenses from my analog SLR so I went with the D100. Its an amaxing camera. Good luck selling your 707.

July 21st, 2003, 01:35 PM	#86
Rob Belics Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 581	Rule 1: Get the best lens you can possibly afford.

July 21st, 2003, 01:55 PM	#87
Matt Betea Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: detroit, mi Posts: 187	Wait a few months with no lens?! Get a lens first. Whether it's a $100-$200 50mm or something else. As sweet as the battery grip is, you can't take many pictures with it instead of a lens.

July 21st, 2003, 02:15 PM	#90
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	FWIW...a small thing to remember is that the advertised f-stop setting on canon lenses applies to 35mm cameras. With a slightly smaller CMOS than 35mm, there's an aparently smaller lens aperture. For example, the 28-135 f/3.5 is really an f/4.0