Working all digital is soooo much easier from a workflow standpoint, especially if your end goal is digital distribution. I can go out and shoot hundreds of shots in an afternoon and it costs me nothing in consumables. I come home, transfer them into iPhoto, pick the ones I like, toss the ones I don't. Or keep them all. What I've found is that what I see in the viewfinder is different than what shows up on the LCD on the camera is different than what I see on the computer monitor. Size matters ;)

WIth the Nikon I shoot RAW, and can alter the exposure without artifacts after the transfer. Can't do that when you have a deveoper scan your film. You are at the mercy of their scan,a nd depending on what format they give you on the CD, may have a hard time doing decent manipulation. But I find that with my D70 I do almost no post processing. And no, it isn't as "warm" as film. But the flexibility and ease of use makes up for it imho. ymmv.

There are things you can't change with photoshop.


You can play with exposure, color balance, focus-depth of field and have instant feedback. The turn around for film is at least a day and by then you don't remember what you were trying to do or care.

You can get 4x5 prints at Wal-mart for .19 that look as good as professionally processed corrected film prints.

I just turned 40...my excuse for buying a D200 and some nice glass. Having a blast with it thus far. I was an 'early adopter' to digital photography and this is my 5th digicam, but that was in the point-'n-shoot realm, and I never really shot much film at all, so the DSLR thing is all new and exciting to me.

The advice about the body vs. lens importance is significant. I went for the D200 because of the weather-sealed metal body, performance and ergonomics, but a D70s or D80 or even D50 is really a close call for a lot less $$$. The prices of the glass is what surprised me -- I really had no idea before a few months ago.

I picked up a D200 and 18-200 VR a couple weeks ago and have a 10.5 fisheye coming. A nice surprise was trying out Capture NX, which is available on a 30-day free trial. Check out the video tutorials; it rocks.

http://www.capturenx.com/

Well, i found a local dude on Craigslist with a D50 and 18-200mm Nikon for $1275. Was going to meet him 30 minutes ago to buy it, but he had a change of heart and only wanted to sell the lens for $925, do not like dealing with people that fickly so i told him no. Lame, I'll keep hunting :)

I will be in Tokyo in a couple of weeks, are cameras cheaper there?

Steve
That 18-200mm lens seem to be the best thing since sliced bread from what i read. I figure i will spend the bulk of my budget on that lens and a 60mm macro and squeeze a little on a used D50.



Alf

Noticed the 18-200 VR is in stock at amazon.com for $870 delivered (you get hit for $70 tax).

Useful Nikon forum on fredmiranda.com . Maybe find some good advice on a body there. Nikonians has a good used equipment mall, I hear.

Great zoom range, but f5.6 seems extremely slow for a 200mm.

A consequence of being relatively small at 3.0" x 3.8" in size. The VR feature is supposed to be equivalent to 1.5 stops, and you can use higher ISOs. For me, the nice thing is almost never needing to change the lens and introducing dust into the camera, since it goes down to 18mm.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1160330978.jpg

Makes sense about the ISO. I was thinking more about depth of field. I'm addicted to fast lenses for that reason.

Check CircuitCity.com D80+18-55 $1049, D80+18135 $1299, same more or less at Ritz Camera

I LOVE my Canon EOS 20D a lot to learn but so much you can do.
got the EFS17-85mm EFS 10-22mm and a EFS 70-300mm and take it everywhere. shoot in jpg and raw can do anything with in in photoshop.

I'll go against the grain here and say that not everyone or every shot requires a digital SLR. It all depends.

Manufacturers usually don't provide a decent lens for CU photography with their standard camera/lens kits, so you'll have to dig deeper for the better glass; and digital glass can get expensive. Budget about $1000 or more for a camera/lens combo. The better point-and-shoot camera can be placed perilously close to a CU subject with pretty good results. One can obtain pretty clean pics with a tripod and enough light.

$250 Olympus C4000 P&S, 4Mp, handheld, daylight (not really fair at undemanding web resolution)
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1160375312.jpg

That said, the Nikon D50 should be cheaper now that the D80 is coming out.

Sherwood
Oly E330
http://members.rennlist.org/911pcars

OK, got my package...

Used Nikon D50 body from local shop (Kenmore Camera) $400
Used Nikon 55mm f2.8 Micro/Macro from same local shop $200
New Nikon 18-200mm from Best Buy, coming on Wed $900 ($200 over MSRP)
2MB SD card from Staples $40

With tax and shipping i am into the package $1678, $178 over mostly for the tax man :(

Took some shots with the 55mm today, wow, i could not get that sort of depth and clarity with my P&S in the best of light. And the speed, it is like shooting a film camera with a winder. Thanks everyone for the great advise.

Alf

Congrats Alfred, that sounds like a fun setup.

FWIW I currently have 5 Nikkor lenses and the 18-200 is on the camera nearly all the the time due to the sheer convenience/portability factor. I may even sell/trade 1 or 2 of the others.

Every lens is a compromise and the ability to get glass that is optimized for one purpose or the other is one of the cool things about the SLR vs P&S. Also keep in mind you can change the ISO "equivalence" with a flick of a switch on a digicam (not just SLR's) so some of the 'slow' consumer or prosumer grade lenses are not by any means useless in low-light.

Last I saw, the MSRP on the 18-200 was 799 so @ 900 you are not doing too badly considering the severe supply shortage.

Sherwood and others above also make great points that P&S digicams can go very wide and very close at a fraction of the cost. I have a little Canon SD400 that can fit in a shirt pocket, lives in my car or briefcase all the time, and has taken some wonderful pics.

Have a M3 as well and most of the old M series are like that on reloading.

For a new digital camera, the Leica Digilux 2 is unbelieveable. Sorry but I am sold on Leica's as their optics and such are excellent. Bought this one used for $900 (list is almost $2000) and its worth every penny.

Shooting in raw format I have blown prints up over 10x with no graining. Hard to fault that...

Chris
I have an Canon IXY 3.2 (SD400 in US i think) that is with me most of the time, do not see that changing with the new SLR :) Love the little P&S but it has its limits.

Joe
Leica is like a really expensive drug; i know some Leica-nados and i really do not want to get into that because i will be so sucked in i will find no way out :) I do dig it though.

I'm in lust for a Leica M8. Traditional Leica RF look and feel, but a high-pixel-count digital camera, takes standard Leica bayonet lenses, 1.5X crop factor IIRC.

Expensive, but hey. there's no reason for both the kids to go to school this year, is there?

http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/m8/

John
That is one beautiful camera, great classic lines. I dare not touch one, in fear that i fall in love and gotta have it.

You have two kidneys.

I have several Leica cameras and I think they are the BEST cameras out there but my next one it must be the new V-Lux 1

http://www.leica-camera.us/assets/image/related/related-link-c5dc26f64a686ba4d6f489f42d7c8318-2.png