File :-(, x, )
Alright starter DSLR camera? Anonymous
Ok so I think I found a good deal on a Pentax K100D camera, it will be my first SLR camera, but before I go spend 450$ on it, can I get any opinions on the camera?
>> Anonymous
It's very good, but check reviews rather than ask /p/ if you didn't know that. $450 is a bit steep, though.
>> fohdeesha !!Dcn0dXtb8BN
     File :-(, x)
I like mine, a wholeeeee lot. Haven't had any problems, and have gotten a decent amount of really cheap and awesome second hand lenses for it.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern662Focal Length (35mm Equiv)42 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:04:18 00:24:01Exposure Time1/1500 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length28.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1586Image Height1024RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
>>194780
Where'd you take this?
>> fohdeesha !!Dcn0dXtb8BN
     File :-(, x)
>>194790

my boring town of Carmel, Indiana

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern662Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:04:12 21:04:00Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias1/2 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width494Image Height640RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>> Anonymous
inb4 AA batteries
>> fohdeesha !!Dcn0dXtb8BN
in during rechargeable aa batteries
>> Anonymous
Magnificent..definitely kicks my canon powershot's ass
>> Anonymous
You like it?
It feels good when you hold it?

Buy it.
>> Anonymous
>>194821
Just like every dSLR made after 2003.

OP: look for a used Nikon D50 or Canon 350D. Doesn't matter which one, get whatever "feels" better.
>> Anonymous
If you're just starting out, and have never owned a DSLR, you'll be amazed at ANY DSLR, for the most part. I suggest a Canon Rebel, used one the other day and I love it for a starter DSLR.
>> Anonymous
I have a k110d because I'm a cheap bastard... its a good camera.
>> Anonymous
Personally, I'd get an Olympus E-420/520 over a Pentax.
>> Anonymous
First SLR i've used. The Super version anyway. Heavier than the Nikon D40 and nowhere near as comfortable to hold.

The menu system is non-sensical.
No meter gauges to be seen anywhere.
No way to change the flash mode that I know of.

Other than that, it's okay...
>> Anonymous
>>194771

The K200D has some pretty significant improvements if you can afford it.

>>194924

Same
>> Anonymous
>>194914

This, Pentax K100D/Nikon D40/Canon Rebel XTi are all pretty much the same as entry level DSLRs. If you like the Pentax, go for it.
>> Anonymous
>>194969
/signed.

If any stores still got the e410 you'll get that incredibly cheap.
e410>d40.
>> Anonymous
oh wow lol

the olympus fags sure are strong in this thread
>> Anonymous
>>195471
As far as I'm concerned the E-500 is the best deal in DSLRs right now for a couple of reasons.

One, you can get them cheap as fuck.

Two, with how the four thirds system is setup, you will get much better results from kit lenses than you will from other brands because the four thirds system 'crops' the edges of the glass off the sensor. You won't get aberrations shooting wide open and you won't get vignetting shooting wide.

The tradeoff with the smaller four thirds sensors is a little more noise at higher ISOs, but I suspect that won't be an issue with beginner photographers.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>195710the four thirds system 'crops' the edges of the glass off the sensor. You won't get aberrations shooting wide open and you won't get vignetting shooting wide.
>> Anonymous
>>195711
>>195710
>>195710the four thirds system 'crops' the edges of the glass off the sensor. You won't get aberrations shooting wide open and you won't get vignetting shooting wide.

Uhm, yes you will. 4/3rds camera companies make fucking small lenses to suit their fucking small sensor. You'll still get your vignetting and aberrations. They consider their tiny system to be "full frame".
>> Anonymous
>>195711


'crops' was a bad term. From the wiki article:

"Telecentric optical path means that light hitting the sensor is traveling perpendicular to the sensor, resulting in brighter corners, and most importantly improved off center resolution, particularly on wide angle lenses."

Sorry
>> Anonymous
>>195710the four thirds system 'crops' the edges of the glass off the sensor. You won't get aberrations shooting wide open and you won't get vignetting shooting wide.

because Olympus is the only company in the world to make "for digital only" lenses

rofl
>> Anonymous
>>195723

Who said that?
>> Anonymous
>>195710you will get much better results from kit lenses than you will from other brands because the four thirds system 'crops' the edges of the glass off the sensor. You won't get aberrations shooting wide open and you won't get vignetting shooting wide.
>> Anonymous
Well, Sigmas and Tamrons, if made in the appropriate mount, could pretty much avoid vignetting as a whole because the lens is usually made for a larger sensor.
>> Anonymous
>>195730


It's got nothing to do with the lenses being made for digital. It's more that the design is more likely to give better results off-center, even with cheaper kit lenses.
>> Anonymous
Fuck, posted this in the wrong thread.
Basically, a smaller sensor inherently has a more perpendicular exposure to incoming light at the endges of the sensor.

Using 'crops' was a mistake on my part. An unintentional troll. My bad.
>> Anonymous
>>195738It's got nothing to do with the lenses being made for digital. It's more that the design is more likely to give better results off-center, even with cheaper kit lenses.

every crop camera does this

it's not just the magical 4/3 system
>> Anonymous
I don't know specifics, but the Four-Thirds system is designed specifically around getting the best performance out of digital sensors. IMO, that's actually the best approach; there would be transition issues for people, of course, and it would be nice if camera companies would find some way to retain backwards compatibility, but the potential for new, innovative camera design and better sensor performance from digital-specific systems is worth it, I think.

Too bad Four-Thirds botched the potential. Too few prime options, too small viewfinders to manually focus.
>> Anonymous
>>195756
Too bad Four-Thirds botched the potential.
I see what you're saying. Unless Canon or Nikon were the ones doing it it would catch on more easily. Given the current market I'd say Olympus did pretty well...all things considered.
>> Anonymous
>>195756
> Too few prime options, too small viewfinders to manually focus.

Why are they that fucking small? The ONLY thing I hate about my e410 is the fucking tiny ass viewfinder.
>> Anonymous
>>195789
2 things. It's meant for autofocus and they have tiny sensors.
>> Anonymous
>>195789


If you wear glasses it becomes an issue. I'm lucky my eyesight is so good so the smaller viewfinder doesn't affect me that much.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>195792


They're really not THAT much smaller than APS-C sensors. But, yes, that's part of the reason they're small.
>> Anonymous
>>195810

that's not viewfinder size

that's sensor size

their vfs are noticeably smaller than even the smallest aps-c vf
>> Anonymous
>>195788
Well, it's more the result of choosing a small digital-designed sensor.

Olympus has continued the tradition it's had since the 1960s of innovative camera design very well. Live view and many other digital-exclusive features were introduced by them. Unfortunately, that one design decision undid them: stupid gearheads bitch about more noise, photographers who have shot 3:2 for years don't want to switch to 4:3, and people like me who hate zooms and/or autofocus won't go for it because it doesn't have the primes we want and the viewfinders are too small. A 1.5 or 1.6x crop can make a perfectly good viewfinder; you'll find good ones in everything above the entry-level. But 2x is just too much.

There's also how everyone seems to be wet for ultrawides today, where the Four-Thirds system is handicapped.

It's not really a matter of who introduced it; it all comes down to one design decision that just doesn't sit well with anyone. Which is a shame, because honestly and truely, Olympus has done more than any other company to develop and innovate with the new potential digital gives camera designers.

>>195792
This. IMO, it would be nice if we actually moved away from SLRs to good electronic viewfinders, which can be any size and magnify themselves for focusing or whatever, and which don't need a mirror box. An M-mount digital camera (for backwards compatibility with a ton of lenses) with a rangefinder and an EVF that plugs into the shoe, like some Ricoh point and shoots have, would pretty much be my ideal camera. 1.5x crop is fine. Stick a 28mm on that for "true normal" 42mm equivalent and I'm good to go.
>> Anonymous
>>195817
Not true. The Olympus E-3 has a larger finder than most APS-C DSLRs, even slightly larger than the Nikon D2 series. But that's still too small. The consumer models are definitely way too small, and are smaller than any APS-C DSLR. Out of current models of 1.5x crop camera, the 40D, D300, K20D, A700, D80, and S5 surpass it.

The viewfinder on the current Panasonic DSLR, the L10, is designed to be used with a supplied magnifier that brings it up to par with a D60 or XSi, and the E-300 and E-330 are the same size as the XTi, D70, and D50 (for example), but again, that's still too small.
>> Anonymous
>>195792

Why can't the viewfinder be bigger even though the sensor is small?
Noob here
>> Anonymous
>>195961
The image you see in the viewfinder is projected on a matte focusing screen, which for obvious reasons has to be the same size as the sensor/film frame.
Of course, you can magnify the image using lenses and specially designed prism in the viewfinder, but the total amount of light isn't going to change, so a magnification of 2x (linear) will make the image 4x dimmer.