Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: What is everyone shooting?

  1. #1
    Member H_I_L_L_B_I_L_L_Y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    452

    Default What is everyone shooting?

    Im looking to upgrade from my Panasonic FZ50 and was wondering what cameras you all are shooting. Its been a real good camera for most situations but only performs ok in low light. Ive been looking at the Nikons D3100,D90,D7000. Is anyone on here is using one of these? Thanks Gary

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    I shoot a "Cannon"

  3. #3

    Default

    I too shoot Canon.

  4. #4

    Default

    Sorry, shoot a Cannon two.

  5. #5
    Member H_I_L_L_B_I_L_L_Y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Wow no nikon fans so far. Im not dead set on a Nikon but I am more familiar with them.

  6. #6
    Member kodiakrain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kodiak, Ak
    Posts
    3,175

    Default

    OK, Canon, What........?? , are you guys shooting?

    I was drawn to this thread by the OP's question, figuring to get a plan for replacing my little Canon Powershot 1200,

    then see the brand loyalty thing going on,..... but No Specifics ??? (grin)

    Really, I'm thinking of finding a nice Digital Body to get back to using all the lenses I have for my old SLR EOS system
    So am interested in actually what Canon's are being used out there?
    Ten Hours in that little raft off the AK peninsula, blowin' NW 60, in November.... "the Power of Life and Death is in the Tongue," and Yes, God is Good !

  7. #7
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    I want a small digital camera that has a view finder. The cameras that you look at the screen on the back I can't ever see what I'm doing when its bright and sunny. Any suggestions?





    I'm taking a poll
    <--------click this star if you think I should run for Gov

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    I shoot Canon too. 20D, 40D and 50D. Plus a SX20IS that suffered some abuse in it's adolescence and is now acting out. But there is nothing wrong with Nikon DSLRs these days. The D7000 is pretty sweet and Costco has a good deal on them right now.

    Fullbush: I feel your pain. There are still a few point & shoots available with optical viewfinders, but they are so lame. I did hear that Canon's G series cameras still use a good optical viewfinder, but they are certainly not cheap for what amounts to a glorified point & shoot. There are also the DSLRs that have good viewfinders but the cameras are hardly compact. In between there are a slew of electronic viewfinder cameras like the Canon SX30IS or Panasonic's FZ series. These have good viewfinders, but are really just an electronic screen inside that you look at through what looks like a traditional viewfinder hole. They come with really wide ranging zooms and are smaller than a DSLR, but not as small as a tiny pocket point & shoot.

  9. #9
    Member RCBOWHUNTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Anybody shooting the Canon T2i? I am thinking about getting that camera as I break into the dslr world. I have a buddy who shoots a lot of video with it and loves it. Any thoughts/opinions?

  10. #10
    Member BobK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    20

    Default

    I picked up a Nikon D7000 when they were first released, and have been very happy with it and just the 18-105 kit lens and a 35/f1.8. No back-focus issues with my copy, and a very capable system to build on! I'm trying to decide between a 70-300 or a 12-24 for my next lens...

    I also carry a Canon S95 in my pocket for quick shots, and again cant say anything bad about it.

  11. #11
    Member H_I_L_L_B_I_L_L_Y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Bobk I would love to own a D7000. Its at the top of my budget and Im just wondering if its worth the extra $400-500 over a D90. Ive been reading lots of reviews and watching youtube reveiws. I think Im more confused now than when I started. Seems the D90 has a cult like following so lots of arguments for it even over cameras that cost twice as much.

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South Eastern Massachusetts
    Posts
    14

    Default

    The only thing that competes with guns and hunting is photography.
    I have a Nikon D300 with Zeiss Distagon 35 f1.4. This is somewhat similar to D7000, 12 MP vs 16 MP I believe, and probably tons of newer features on the 7000
    I hardly use the Nikon, and when I use both, I almost always choose photos from the Leica M8 with 28mm f/2 Summicron.
    http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/m8/
    It will sure shoot just about anyone's budget, just go for the M9!
    Here's some of my photos:
    http://dontphoto.zenfolio.com/p91443120

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    973

    Default

    Canon 20D & 50D here. Both are capable of a lot more than I am. Absolutely no complaints with either.

  14. #14
    Member BobK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H_I_L_L_B_I_L_L_Y View Post
    Bobk I would love to own a D7000. Its at the top of my budget and Im just wondering if its worth the extra $400-500 over a D90. Ive been reading lots of reviews and watching youtube reveiws. I think Im more confused now than when I started. Seems the D90 has a cult like following so lots of arguments for it even over cameras that cost twice as much.
    I agree, there are tons of people with D90's who are in the same boat you are. From what Ive read it sounds like if DSLR video is important to you, or low-light/high-ISO (3200+), then the move may be worth it. Otherwise, the D90 is still in the same ballpark as the D7000.

  15. #15

    Default

    I have a canon 50d and my wife has a 5d2 that i try to borrow daily. I like them both. Having said that, we continued on purchasing canons through film, point and shoots and dslr's. I will be a long time dead before I have a feeling that either camera body is limiting what I can/want to do. I have not had the opportunity to use a Nikon. I am sure they are very nice. Good luck with you selection.
    There's a fine line between fishing and just standing on the shore like an idiot.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    Canon 30, 40 and 50D's. Favorite lens in the IS 70-200 with Canons converters followed by the 500 F4 IS. Photographers are there own worse critic. People buying a photo rarely buy it on the images technical aspects.

    There are great photographs that sell, and there are photographs that sell well. Photographs that sell well do not have to be great photographs.

    Since my photography is my primary source of income I have the luxury of being able to buy equipment often but I just don't see any reason to constantly upgrade. When asked which equipment to purchase my standard answer is either Canon or Nikon because these are the two companies that will have what you need later down the road. I was told to purchase Canon when I started so I did. I would of been just as well off if I had started with Nikon.

    Another tip, if you are looking for a small camera to carry while in hunting, fishing, etc. Make sure it is small enough to fit easily inside a pocket otherwise it will stay in the pack and you will miss a lot of potenital shots. Been there and done that.
    Tennessee

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Canon 40D, but plan to buy a 5DII plus the EF 17-40mm f/4L in the near future. Will use the 5DII for things like portraits, pets, people in general, Auroras, and for landscapes. Will continue using the 40D for wildlife.

  18. #18

    Default

    I have a sony A200. Not as nice as some, but it works for me, can't see dropping more money! I am drooling over some nicer lenses, but whenever I see the pricetag I cry a bit!

  19. #19
    Member kodiakrain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kodiak, Ak
    Posts
    3,175

    Default

    So, I'd like some opinions from you guys, tho you are mostly in a league above where I am at,

    I'm curious, what you would advise, if upgrading to a DSLR from my little Canon Powershot 1200is with 10.0 Megapixels,

    to an SLR to use some nice lens I have from an old EOS system,
    I look at a T2i (18 megapixels) body only for $799 which is enough to have me waiting for a while to accumulate more extra cash,

    then see also a Rebel XTi (with 10.1 megapixels) for only $299 (body only) which I could swing much sooner,

    Do you guys see the advance in Megapixels worth it, for a non-pro photographer, not blowing stuff up for printing beyond internet posting etc.

    Is it WAY worth it to go for the higher resolution stuff, or just extra that pros only really need to take advantage of ???

    I am fine with the photos coming out of my little 10mp machine, but can hardly stand the lens I have sitting around not being used.
    Gotta go DSLR soon, but the advancing technology has me a bit frozen.....

    Opinions please ??
    Ten Hours in that little raft off the AK peninsula, blowin' NW 60, in November.... "the Power of Life and Death is in the Tongue," and Yes, God is Good !

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kodiakrain View Post
    So, I'd like some opinions from you guys, tho you are mostly in a league above where I am at,

    I'm curious, what you would advise, if upgrading to a DSLR from my little Canon Powershot 1200is with 10.0 Megapixels,

    to an SLR to use some nice lens I have from an old EOS system,
    I look at a T2i (18 megapixels) body only for $799 which is enough to have me waiting for a while to accumulate more extra cash,

    then see also a Rebel XTi (with 10.1 megapixels) for only $299 (body only) which I could swing much sooner,

    Do you guys see the advance in Megapixels worth it, for a non-pro photographer, not blowing stuff up for printing beyond internet posting etc.

    Is it WAY worth it to go for the higher resolution stuff, or just extra that pros only really need to take advantage of ???

    I am fine with the photos coming out of my little 10mp machine, but can hardly stand the lens I have sitting around not being used.
    Gotta go DSLR soon, but the advancing technology has me a bit frozen.....

    Opinions please ??
    Any of the two cameras above, plus a good lens or two (the best you can afford). Also, don't limit yourself to EF-S lenses for cropped sensors, since you can use EF lenses on both cropped sensors and FF sensors. The T2i has the advantage of video, and although this is not needed by a lot of people, it can be quite handy at a family wedding, or just if you have kids, pets, and so forth. With the added pixels, you have to consider buying larger external hard drives. However a 2TB WD hard drive at Sam's Club costs around $150.00 (less than that sometimes).

    That said, there is a fellow in this forum who has and continue taking amazing photos with a relatively old Canon 30D. Just think about this: Canon 10D, then 20D, then 30D, 40D, 50D, and now 60D Look at the webpages of Tull777, found right here in this forum. Just look at his photos.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •