Camera s, Pros and Cons of...

[Guest NickInTheNorth]

Shaun check out what lenses they are, and if they will fit the canon EOS digital SLR's. If they will then I reckon that for the short term it may be worth swapping. Lenses are the most expensive part of digital SLR photography (or film!)if you can swap your camera for the canon then I reckon you are making a good swap. Then get saving and buy yourself a canon digital SLR body (can find them from about $700).

 

Pretty certain that both the EOS 300 and the various canon digital slr use the EF mount system.

[poledark]

Like Argyll I have the Nikon 8800 and it does everything it says on the box (and them some more)

 

BUT the time lag, even when pre focusssed is a problem, but only when trying to capture a fleeting moment.

 

I have spent three days this week in a swim with kingfishers hovering and then plunging into the weed about 10yds away...I prefocus on the spot where I think the bird will hit the water,(I do this by holding the shutter halfway down) keep one eye on the bird and one eye on the water, and when it starts its dive I click...always to late..If I try to guess the moment it will start its dive I always get it wrong!

 

If you do not have the camera focussed on the spot you want then it can be an agonising wait while it searches for focus.

 

For what it is worth, you can practise with an SLR without using film, you should be able to judge whether you got the shot or not.

 

The "sports" mode on the 8800 will give you 15(?) shots but you lose the image while the pics are being taken and I always drift off the subject before the last shot is taken, I am thinking of fitting a "viewer" on the flash bracket to solve that problem.

 

If I had the money, then I would get an SLR and a long lens but only for certain shots requiring instant focussing....quality is not a problem.

 

A thought here...why would you need a digital slr? if it is only for certain shots then why not an ordinary slr? You should be able to pick one up secondhand very cheaply..and probably the lenses to go with it. I might dig out my Spotmatic F and tele lenses and have a practise...

Den

 

[ 12. May 2005, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: poledark ]

[chesters1]

yep slr's are as cheap as chips ,bought a spotmatic2 in pentax case + a pucka wideangle in its pentax case for £8 been collecting other bits for it (zooms etc) its the camera as a teenager was the bee's knees but my budget only allowed a zenith B very second hand ,probably will never use it but you never know as soon as i get it back from my daughter in law

with a digital 40 shot spead even the worst photographer must get one right

 

[ 12. May 2005, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: chesters1 ]

[Vagabond]

poledark:

BUT the time lag, even when pre focusssed is a problem

So how much would it cost (and how heavy would the camera be) to aquire a digital that responds as rapidly as my old SLR Canon A1 ?

[Vagabond]

Used my Canon A80 this morning - as I said, light to carry and OK for trophy shots, like this male tench.

 

 

...and it came from very, very close in.

 

 

[ 12. May 2005, 11:27 PM: Message edited by: Vagabond ]

[poledark]

Vagabond I have no idea, but I haven't checked out the digi slr's that cost into the thousands..no point looking as I won't pay that sort of money!

 

Spurhound, as far as the weight is concerned then if you need speed of reaction in order to get quality shots, then you may have to put up with a bit of extra weight, after all it does not seem to worry the digiscopers, and quality of shot is the be all and end all of there photography.

 

PS I tried again today for the hovering kingfishers, but it was to windy for them

 

Den

 

[ 13. May 2005, 12:13 AM: Message edited by: poledark ]

[n4lly]

Shaun

 

If you want to play with film, have a muck-a-bout,

amazingly cheap, look here

 

on ebay for £25

 

Sean