Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 135917	2013-12-27 10:27:00	Entry level DSLR	sahilcc7 (15483)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1363725	2014-01-08 04:22:00	Not sure what the difference is but Noelleeming are doing the 600D triple lens for $1399 www.noelleeming.co.nz Wow, not (on the surface) to be sneezed at ! May require a deeper consideration (even though plod promotes pole dancing ;) )	Misty (368)
1363726	2014-01-08 05:53:00	5447 Here is the offer from Photo Warehouse, which would probably be the best offer in Auckland, apart perhaps from Hardly Normal, where I would not venture. This should give a pretty good comparison. Misty :2cents:	Misty (368)
1363727	2014-01-08 10:42:00	I am intune with dSLRs so I just get them off eBay off HKG. D7000 can be like $450US/AU. Body alone. You can pick up a 18-55 VR kit lens for maybe $100US at times esp the body is - free freight - potentially import tax but still cheaper. I got my D600 for $2.3k NZD approx. but NZ sell for $3k but grey importers in NZ does sell it for similarly. Comes a time when all SLRs are the same after a while .. .just a diff sensor and new features upgraded. Re: the question if much difference to that camera of yours, someone's pointed out 8MP up to ISO 400. Scenario: Landscapes or tripod work. For me. Even my 10yr old dSLR not much diff b/c I am shooting at the lowest ISO, I can make beautiful A4 and A3 prints. However. Other than lowest ISO is where the benefits really shine and the ability to swap lenses if you want. Indoor WB color isn't very good and it gets grainy if I am to hold the camera. Frankly, inside where I have been at home or in cafes ISO 1600 is the minimum I shoot at even witha fast 50mm F1.8 lens. At the New Yrs Camp we had a hall when the group of us used, sure the light didn't get all inside even afternoon I was at F2 ISO 1600 just to handhold the camera at 1/80. For general photo's outside sunshine beach - nope. But what you might find is that SLRs gives a more suttle image without too much post processing with the in-camera. You can go higher than ISO 400 so 1600 or more like 6400 these days with all the SLRs. ISO 1600 was the 2004 era man ... for SLRs. The difference is if you do all kinds of shooting - outdoors, indoors, walking around overseas without a tripod after dinner walk and pix, night street photographs, maybe a handheld shot of the Eiffel. A family group photo at night at a big city peak lookout. You can shoot ISO 3200 and get A3 prints done. And I heard that from a wedding pro. If you are a documentary pro and capturing life at night, or sports like basketball to get high shutter - you may be at ISO 6400 or 12,800 and use noise reduction software. Even if you print it, printing hides some of the effects :D Remember even the crop sensor dSLRs are larger than your old camera so the noise quality will be better too. And it's 10yrs newer that's how old generally 6 or 8MP cameras are. The last 10yrs most development have been in high ISO. Even the latest low level Nikon D3300 just released on the media, can do 5FPS - in the film era you had to get the top or the 2nd top SLR camera. My ISO 3200 on my D600 is lesser grain than my 6MP Nikon D70 at ISO 800. And that must be better than your camera. That is if you do a bit of all kinds of shooting.	Nomad (952)
1363728	2014-01-08 11:09:00	The biggest thing I saw my newer SLR in 10yrs is the out of camera the color. Just at home watching TV or at AKL INTL airport. The whites not that overblown, the blacks not that blocked up. The color was also just so much nicer, you had much less of that color cast from the lights - ie incandescent or florescent. You can shoot thing thing at ISO 3200 point and shoot. B/c of this the images required less post processing. With our new yrs camp, I did take my old D70 and I was at ISO 1600 it's maximum and with a 50mm 1.8 lens I was at 2.0 most of the time when indoors. I didn't wanna use flash b/c v distracting. I guess that would been the only way if I didn't have my 1.8 lens. Even with that b/c the shadows blocked up more on my older camera - I had to post process it more at times I had to increase the exposure in software and pull the mid tones back just to light up the low tones. But like these days they didn't want prints, so it was ok ... :D When we did the New Yrs countdown, we were all inside I had to get my wide lens which is a Sigma 10-20mm F4.5-5.6 I couldn't handhold it slower than 1/30 and that is slow already, I had to increase exposure in software in post at least 2 stops hahah and the grain increased :p But yeah - if you are like me who just shoots off a tripod outdoors and takes v little pix of people and general stuff then I guess the newer SLRs have fewer benefits - or maybe you only take pictures at the beach/picnic on a blue sky day - and that you don't really take pictures indoors with lights on etc .. so you don't get the color cast so you then only shoot in ideal lighting or you flood it up with studio lights and recreate the environment yourself. But I still think a SLR will give you more benefits even a old 6 or 8MP one. B/c you can use a sharp lens if you want to by swapping it in, the incamera settings is more gentle too.	Nomad (952)
1363729	2014-01-09 00:24:00	5447 Here is the offer from Photo Warehouse, which would probably be the best offer in Auckland, apart perhaps from Hardly Normal, where I would not venture. This should give a pretty good comparison. Misty :2cents: That's a good deal. Nice camera.	Alex B (15479)
1363730	2014-01-09 21:21:00	Here is the 700D offer from PB Technology 5457 However, if interested, it would pay to check whether it has a 1,2 or 3 year warranty. Misty :2cents:	Misty (368)
1363731	2014-01-09 23:20:00	Would it be better to get the 18-135mm lens or twin lens kit? 18-135mm would be more convenient than having to change out lenses all the time.	sahilcc7 (15483)
1363732	2014-01-10 00:09:00	For starting off definitely get the primary kit lens. It is so much worth it than buying it after, doesn't modern kit lenses cost $400-600NZ. It's quite a useful lens for casual stuff and travelling etc. Quite a no. of the travel photographer aka National Geographic use the higher mid lens but still not top of the line ie a Nikon 16-85mm (Bob Krist) with a crop sensor body (Nikon D90). In terms of which one, it's a personal call. If you are starting out I would get the 18-135 b/c it is more convenient and cheaper and you can try before you spend more cash. I did a google search and the 18-55 and the 18-135 share the same F3.5-5.6. After playing around with it you may have specific wants. You might find that you don't want want more than a 85mm or that you don't want wider than 18mm. I know a few people personally who are like that - b/c they are into street photography for that perspective they wanted or they are into children and wedding photo's mainly. Like them you might find you want fast apertures instead to the back is blurred out. Or like me you might want a super wide lens for scenic. If you are into sports you might want a longer fast lens or if you are into macro ....	Nomad (952)
1363733	2014-01-16 05:40:00	From Photo Warehouse FAQ Your prices are cheap are these Cameras parallel Imported ? No, All our products are brought through the official New Zealand distributor, this means you have a full manufactures warranty and full back and and support available right here in New Zealand. , We are new Zealand's largest specialist photographic retailer with stores nationwide, our buying power means great deals, great support all backed up by an official NZ warranty. Have sent an email just clarifying whether this is 3 years ? ;) Misty	Misty (368)
1363734	2014-02-08 04:05:00	No, just one year !! :annoyed: Next thing when you start looking at your PC, you will want an IPS screen. That may be a slight luxury but musts for a DSLR are (1) a tripod (2) a spare battery :D Its well worth it though ! :wub Misty	Misty (368)
1 2 3 4