So there are two questions:-
1. Should I go for a Digital or a SLR Digital?
2. What would you buy with upto £500? (ok it is not a vast amount of money but it is all that is available)
Thanks Andy
Camera
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6763
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
Hi Andy,
I'm sure you'll get lots of replies to this excellent question - and I encourage other visitors to respond. If you know of links to web resources that answer the question then please post these also!
Now for my 2p, assuming that (given the website) you're going to photograph butterflies ...
I personally started with a non-SLR (which really got me into lepidoptera photography seriously after a break of 15 years!). But then the bug bit. I'm now on my 2nd digital SLR (a Canon 30D). But this is not a cheap option and here's why:
1. The prices quoted for a digital SLR (even on eBay) normally only include the cost of the body.
2. You also need to get at least 1 lens. Preferably, for butterfly photography, a macro lens. This can cost about £250 at its cheapest.
3. You also need some memory. 1Gb can cost £50.
4. You also need batteries.
5. You might want a tripod.
6. ... and now you also need a bag
All in all, I don't see how anyone can get by with less that £1000 for an SLR solution, to be perfectly frank.
Anyway - for £500, the only viable SLR solution that is all-encompassing will, I believe, be found on eBay. Such as a second-hand Canon 350D that includes all of the above. Biut I'm willing to be corrected. And even then, for that price, you'd have to question the condition!
So, my advice is to go for a top-end compact digital, and £500 will get you a long way! This will be more flexible than an SLR (you don't need to buy multiple lenses) and many can be extended with additional lenses anyway (to increase magnification by a factor of 2, for example). The downside is, of course, image quality - but you'd be very surprised at the excellent quality you get from some compact digitals these days!
I'd appreciate other comments on this since it's been a while since I had to make this difficult choice.
Cheers,
- Pete
I'm sure you'll get lots of replies to this excellent question - and I encourage other visitors to respond. If you know of links to web resources that answer the question then please post these also!
Now for my 2p, assuming that (given the website) you're going to photograph butterflies ...
I personally started with a non-SLR (which really got me into lepidoptera photography seriously after a break of 15 years!). But then the bug bit. I'm now on my 2nd digital SLR (a Canon 30D). But this is not a cheap option and here's why:
1. The prices quoted for a digital SLR (even on eBay) normally only include the cost of the body.
2. You also need to get at least 1 lens. Preferably, for butterfly photography, a macro lens. This can cost about £250 at its cheapest.
3. You also need some memory. 1Gb can cost £50.
4. You also need batteries.
5. You might want a tripod.
6. ... and now you also need a bag
All in all, I don't see how anyone can get by with less that £1000 for an SLR solution, to be perfectly frank.
Anyway - for £500, the only viable SLR solution that is all-encompassing will, I believe, be found on eBay. Such as a second-hand Canon 350D that includes all of the above. Biut I'm willing to be corrected. And even then, for that price, you'd have to question the condition!
So, my advice is to go for a top-end compact digital, and £500 will get you a long way! This will be more flexible than an SLR (you don't need to buy multiple lenses) and many can be extended with additional lenses anyway (to increase magnification by a factor of 2, for example). The downside is, of course, image quality - but you'd be very surprised at the excellent quality you get from some compact digitals these days!
I'd appreciate other comments on this since it's been a while since I had to make this difficult choice.
Cheers,
- Pete
Hmm a tricky question, and one that my friend pondered over for a while before making his decision.
Three Choices:
1. A top end compact
2. A bridge SLR type camera
3. An SLR
As for the compact, some of the Canon Powershots produce fantastic results, and some of them have "Apeture Priority" and "Shutter Priority" for more control. The main problems I see people complaining of is the camera focusing on things that they dont want it to. (like the flower a butterfly is sitting on). You can put it in your pocket too!
Bridge cameras such as the amazing Fuji S7000 and S9500 act exactly like an SLR but you dont have the range of lenses available to you as you would have with a proper SLR. Although you can buy add-on lenses (macro, wideangle etc).
Like Pete pointed out, the downside is image quality. They tend to have physically smaller sensors than a full blown SLR, so the pixels are closer together (creating more noise etc).
SLR's are the business, but have the disadvantage of price, and of course you cant put it in your pocket. They tend to come with a rechargable battery and charger.
You can pick up a 300D or even a 350D on Ebay for £300, and you will want a Macro lens when you get into it, another £300. (although I managed for a year with the 18-55mm lens).
The Fuji S9500 SLR-like camera retails at about £440, and it has macro functions, although you can buy a special macro addon lens for about £30.
You can get a good Compact for less than £400, and they have macro functions.
Again like Pete stated, you need a bag, and perhaps a tripod. I just managed to get a 2gig Compact Flash card off Ebay for £30, so thankfully the prices are coming down now.
For a bag your talking £20-50 for a half-decent one for your SLR or SLR-type.
Tripod I use is the Manfrotto 190PRO with a ball head, about £150. But to be honest you dont need one. But if you do buy one, get a good one.
Wow sorry to waffle on....
And for the record, I use an old Canon 300D with Canon 100mm USM Macro lens. (and the Manfrotto tripod when I can)
Three Choices:
1. A top end compact
2. A bridge SLR type camera
3. An SLR
As for the compact, some of the Canon Powershots produce fantastic results, and some of them have "Apeture Priority" and "Shutter Priority" for more control. The main problems I see people complaining of is the camera focusing on things that they dont want it to. (like the flower a butterfly is sitting on). You can put it in your pocket too!
Bridge cameras such as the amazing Fuji S7000 and S9500 act exactly like an SLR but you dont have the range of lenses available to you as you would have with a proper SLR. Although you can buy add-on lenses (macro, wideangle etc).
Like Pete pointed out, the downside is image quality. They tend to have physically smaller sensors than a full blown SLR, so the pixels are closer together (creating more noise etc).
SLR's are the business, but have the disadvantage of price, and of course you cant put it in your pocket. They tend to come with a rechargable battery and charger.
You can pick up a 300D or even a 350D on Ebay for £300, and you will want a Macro lens when you get into it, another £300. (although I managed for a year with the 18-55mm lens).
The Fuji S9500 SLR-like camera retails at about £440, and it has macro functions, although you can buy a special macro addon lens for about £30.
You can get a good Compact for less than £400, and they have macro functions.
Again like Pete stated, you need a bag, and perhaps a tripod. I just managed to get a 2gig Compact Flash card off Ebay for £30, so thankfully the prices are coming down now.
For a bag your talking £20-50 for a half-decent one for your SLR or SLR-type.
Tripod I use is the Manfrotto 190PRO with a ball head, about £150. But to be honest you dont need one. But if you do buy one, get a good one.
Wow sorry to waffle on....
And for the record, I use an old Canon 300D with Canon 100mm USM Macro lens. (and the Manfrotto tripod when I can)
Wayne
Why not go down the second hand road? many high street photographic shops have good stocks of DSLR and macro lenses. Mainly because people like me are always upgrading 
I do still think that you may need to stretch your budget
Just as an example and this is not the perfect setup for butterflies but...
http://www.mifsuds.com/usedpriceindexmz.htm at this site a Nikon D100 £349 and a 60mm f2.8 micro at £319 I have no links to this company, just used them ion the past
Shop around on the net or the high street and you can get lucky.
Hope this helps
Chris
I do still think that you may need to stretch your budget
Just as an example and this is not the perfect setup for butterflies but...
http://www.mifsuds.com/usedpriceindexmz.htm at this site a Nikon D100 £349 and a 60mm f2.8 micro at £319 I have no links to this company, just used them ion the past
Shop around on the net or the high street and you can get lucky.
Hope this helps
Chris
I have a Canon S3 with 500D closeup lens and it does the job for me. I can get A3 quality pictures from it with a little spare for cropping. It has a 12x zoom, flip up lcd screen for overhead/ground level shots. You can shoot in auto-everything mode, or other modes that give you control. You don't need a big bag because you haven't got a lot of lenses. And the sensor is locked away from dust, which can be a real nuisance with DSLRs, and best of all, you can carry it around all day.
I paid just under £400 for it with the 500D and adapter and 1 gig SD card.
Here's a shot I took with it a few hours ago. I used aperture priority for control of depth of field but auto-everything else.
I paid just under £400 for it with the 500D and adapter and 1 gig SD card.
Here's a shot I took with it a few hours ago. I used aperture priority for control of depth of field but auto-everything else.
-
David Tipping
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 9:16 am
- Location: Harrogate
I've very recently (today!) upgraded my camera, for which some of the brilliant shots taken by users of this site are entirely to blame. I've come to realize the inadequacy of my own efforts!
Andrew, you might care to take a look at my gallery. All the shots are taken with a compact (Canon Powershot A95) which set me back about £200. The major drawback is the autofocus, which too often picks out something other than the butterfly. The pictures are obviously not quite as sharp as you would expect with a decent SLR, but I suppose many people would find them acceptable. I guess your choice will ultimately be governed by how much of a perfectionist you are.
Andrew, you might care to take a look at my gallery. All the shots are taken with a compact (Canon Powershot A95) which set me back about £200. The major drawback is the autofocus, which too often picks out something other than the butterfly. The pictures are obviously not quite as sharp as you would expect with a decent SLR, but I suppose many people would find them acceptable. I guess your choice will ultimately be governed by how much of a perfectionist you are.
DJT
