Help!!! want a dlsr...

[Gruditch]

Printers for printing your pics

Gruditch

[Rogerdodge]

Nick
Not fair. I have not shown bias.
In most of my posts I clearly rate Nikon and Olympus as highly as I do Canon.
I do however feel Sony are poorly built, and not aimed at the same market as N/C/Om.
It is Eccles who bangs on and on and on in every endless bleedin post that his Sony is superior to everything else, when it patently isn't.
It is gimicky, plasticy, and garish (orange and silver - I ask you).
Sure - it enables Eccles and XMileHigh to take some really good images. Just how good they could be if they had real kit remains to be known.
(Can I take my tongue out of my cheek now?)

[NickB]

...ah the Canonista arise to the defence of one of theirs
To be honest, they do have a go at everyone else, so I guess they are completely fair in that respect ...

meanwhile in another universe, Amanda wanted help,
....not a show of the solidarity of the butterfly photography fraternity
Edit: The REAL reason I got a Nikon was professionals who use them say they still work after they have been dropped, kicked, etc; that's the solid magnesium alloy body and the reason it does feel like a brick! I do think the Canon range in FX and APS sensor megapixels exceeds that of all the other makers at the moment. But at the lower-priced end all the cameras are adequate (yes, I did say that ) for the job. The big difference in image quality comes with the lens you buy for that body.....
Once you jump, though, the path back to different body gets longer with every lens you buy for your choice of body....

[Rogerdodge]

Nick
Below is the third post in this string.
It is from me, contains sound advice, and nowhere even hints at a Canon bias.

Amanda
Welcome to the site.
I can echo most of what Nick has said.
If you look at the various photos on this site, you will see dreadful ones and mind-blowing ones taken with the identical camera/lens set up.
Buying any of the modern DSLRs will give you the tools to take first class photographs.
By far the most important factor in taking outstanding images is the photographer.
So, go for Canon, Nikon, Olympus or Sony and you have equipment that is capable of taking excellent photographs. They are all good cameras, and only the most picky will find much to choose between them.
Choose a good, prime, Macro lens and you have ticked all the boxes (100 is great for flowers, but a bit "close" for butterfies, 180 is great for butterflies, but a bit distant for flowers. 150 seems ideal)
Then read all you can (scan the photography forum here for great info), practise, practise and put your efforts up here for constructive criticism. You will end up taking excellent shots.
Read this thread- viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3333 and you will gather some really good advice.
Let us know which set-up you are considering.
Good luck, and don't get disheartened if your first efforts are not brilliant - practise will help.

Now show me one post from Eccles where he isn't banging on about Sony.............
I rest my case.

[NickB]

Dearest Roger
A truer gentleman and scholar is harder to meet and I retract my unfounded accusation of any bias unreservedly ...

[eccles]

I would only add to the previous comments by saying having drawn up a short list based on your budget and features that you think you'll want, go down to your local camera dealer and play with as many of them as they'll let you have a go at. This is because the handling can be quite different between them, and what feels right for one person is wrong for another. And as already suggested, be aware that buying just a camera with kit lens doesn't stop there as you'll most likely want to add capability with additional lenses such as telephoto or macro.
If you want to know what's out there http://www.dpreview.com gives in depth reviews of most of the mainstream models.

Roger, Sony wasn't mentioned here.

Get a Sony A200. Built in image stabilisation, decent kit lens, proper spot metering, screw or SSM AF driven lenses both work. You won't regret it.

You see? Everyone has their favourite so you have to try them out to find which you like best or you'll go round and round in circles.

This was in response to a recommendation from Zonda to buy Nikon, and was made purely to illustrate the pointlessness of recommending a particular brand, which is why I made the second comment.

I have not shown bias.

I refer the gentleman to the comments he made a few moments ago.

[Dave McCormick]

I have decided to chip in here based on what I said earlier on this thread. I may not know half as much as some of the people on here about photography, I have only had DSLRs for 3 years or so, so compared to some, I am a novice.

Anyway, the first camera I had was Vivitar 4345. See here: http://www.dealtime.co.uk/xPF-Vivitar_ViviCam_4345 for more details It is really only a point and shoot with no macro capabilities and not designed for insect photography and it only has a 4 mega pixel size, which by todays standards is small, but I didn't know this at time, or knew what macro was. People do say, give someone a camera and if they learn how to use it as best they can, they can turn out a good shot as you can get with it. Here is the first few shots I got with it. I was surprised I got the White-Shouldered House Moth at all, as its a micro moth and its not easy to get one without even a good macro mode

White Shouldered House Moth

Silver Y Moth Resting

But after a while I noticed that after I started learning things about cameras and how limited my camera was. I still did not know enough about cameras or have the money for a good DSLR or whatever, so I upgraded to a Samsung Digimax L85. Its Macro function lets you zoom to 1cm close to subject and it has 8 mega pixel sensor and image stabalisation, see here: http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/digitalcamera ... 640,00.htm for more on it. It was a good camera, I got many decent shots with it, here are a few:

Green Brindled Crescent

Owl Butterfly

Painted Lady Feeding

Female Common Blue, Subspecies Mariscolore

In 2007 I upgraded to my first DSLR, Canon 400D with 18-55mm lens kit. I was glad I got it in autumn/winter, so I could learn to use it before the butterfly season began again next year, but I didn't have a macro lens, which is important if you want to get decent shots of insects. I looked around and found about prime macro lenses and other lenses and because many had said and used Sigma 105mm or 150mm, and since I only had enough money a few months later for 105mm, I got it. Still I found it hard to get shots. It took me a few months learning how to focus on insects properly with it. I did like the extra distance and the option of changing lenses so you could do a range of things with the camera. You may wish to read this thread I made when I first started using my Canon 400D and sigma 105mm: http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/phpBB2/v ... 00d#p10750

It took a while to get used to compared to the compacts I used before, but once I got the hang of it, here are a few of the shots I did start getting:

Owl Butterfly (Caligo Memnon)

Ringlet Feeding

Small Heath Resting

Small Tortoiseshell Very Damaged

Then I started noticing the difference between shots taken with a compact and those taken with a DSLR, like I noticed shots with a DSLR looked more realistic I thought.

I then this year, upgraded to Canon 500D, but I still have all my other cameras. There is nothing wrong with my canon 400D, still find it useful, but the canon 500D has an extra mode, CA which allows you adjust how you want to shoot something like have vivid blues/greens or have a sharper/blurrier background etc... It also came with full HD video recording, which I liked since I found it annoyng changing cameras and liked the video mode, but for photographers, its not always what people go for. It also lets you shoot using the LCD screen, on live mode, which is not always as good as using viewfinder, but occationally it can be useful. You'll see all the shots I take now are with my 500D and Sigma 105mm.

I am not bias towards Canon, its just the only DSLR make I have used and since I like it alot, have not decided to move away, plus my lens fits canon mount and it would cost too much for me to transfer over, and besides, there is nothing wrong with the cameras I have as I like them and know how to use them fully. I have not used other camera makes, but I have seen what they can do in the right hands, like the Sony A700.

If you look here: http://www.learnaboutbutterflies.com you'll see many wonderful shots taken by Adrian Hoskins and if you see here: http://www.learnaboutbutterflies.com/Bu ... graphy.htm

He says:

My gear : People often ask me what equipment I use to produce the images used on this website. Almost all of the images have been photographed with my Sony a700. Most shots are taken using fill-in flash supplied by a Sony twin-macro flash unit. The vast majority of photos are taken with a Sigma 105mm macro lens, although I also carry an ancient Sigma 180mm F5.6 macro for less accessible species such as hairstreaks, and use a Sigma 28mm F2 for habitat shots. Why did I choose Sony ? Mainly because I was already tied into a system of Sony-Minolta lenses, having used Minolta film cameras for many years previously.

And if I could choose my dream outfit ? If I was unlucky enough to have all my Sony equipment stolen, and had to re-equip with a complete new outfit, I would probably choose either a Canon EOS 50D or a Nikon D90 body. Both are extremely well specified, and superbly built. I would probably choose in favour of the Nikon because I prefer Nikon ergonomics, and the Nikon 100mm VR macro lens is equipped with optical vibration-reduction, which gives a steadier viewfinder image. By the time you read this however Canon may well have brought out something even better !

You can see he is not exactly bias towards one make. And that link will help on photograhy, helped me a bit. Well good luck in finding a camera, whichever you decide to choose! Now I'm off to bed

[Lee Hurrell]

Blimey Dave, don't you ever sleep?

I think your Small Tortoishell may actually be a Painted Lady and CERTAINLY wins the most worn and still flying comp!

Cheers

Lee

[Dave McCormick]

Blimey Dave, don't you ever sleep?

I think your Small Tortoishell may actually be a Painted Lady and CERTAINLY wins the most worn and still flying comp!

Cheers

Lee

I am sick at moment and could not sleep well, so decided to come on for a while, but that was actually a Small Tortoiseshell, the black lines and white lines are not the same as in a Painted Lady and as I remeber, it did not look as big as a Painted Lady and there was alot of Small Tortoiseshells that year (2008) here, alot more so than in other parts and only a few Painted Ladies about, around 4-5 I saw the whole year.

[eccles]

A nicely balanced viewpoint there Dave.
Amanda, you have already taken the first step by actually trying out one or two cameras so good for you. You found a preference despite both of the ones you handled being good photographic tools. Try a few more if you have the opportunity, go with the one you like best and work at it. Just about every model currently available will take good photos but you have to learn to accommodate their little foibles and menu systems to get the best out of them. This is why personal bias is so misleading; once any one of us has used a camera for a while, then anything else feels "wrong". The one(s) we have chosen, for each of us, are the best.
Mike.

[AmandaUK]

hello,
havn't been on in ages... forgot my id and password. I have gone for the Canon 450D, i've found a shop that has a discount code and canon are doing £30 cash back/ so will be getting my new camera for £420.00

The reviews are good, and it does say if you don't need hd then stick with the 450D
my lovely hubby is giving me it for christmas.... now looking forward to spring, getting out and having a play
many thanks
amanda

x