Users like you can add images, links and other relevant information about this topic.
posted: Aug. 5, 2008 @ 11:08a
churwitz
New Member
posted: Aug. 5, 2008 @ 12:34p
I ordered this. I tried ordering an xti from us1photo and it was a terrible experience, so decided to cancel and go for the better camera at a better store. Learned my lesson - stick to Amazon if you want a reasonably priced product without any hassles.
Yes, I believe that a better deal might be available to some people via Cash Back program. BuyDig, JR, eBay, and etc.
This thread is just simply meant to tell everyone that XSi is available at Amazon at such price.
BTW, I did struggle with the eBay 25% deal, but I ended up used it for a EF 24-70mm and let my 300D live longer.
ili0psoas
Senior Member
posted: Aug. 5, 2008 @ 10:57p
I'd like to pick up photography as a hobby and am wondering what's a good starter DSLR camera. I understand the lenses are key. Taking that into account, is the Canon XSI a good choice? What about Nikon (possibly D80)?
ili0psoas said: I'd like to pick up photography as a hobby and am wondering what's a good starter DSLR camera. I understand the lenses are key. Taking that into account, is the Canon XSI a good choice? What about Nikon (possibly D80)?
I've done quite a bit of research lately, and IMHO with the latest price drop the XSi is the clear winner. The D80 is a bit older technology. Pretty much any Canon or Nikon DSLR will give you great results, it just comes down to how much you want to spend. Also I recommend going to a camera shop first to see how they actually feel in your hand. This is a pretty important parameter and something you can't do online.
ili0psoas said: I'd like to pick up photography as a hobby and am wondering what's a good starter DSLR camera. I understand the lenses are key. Taking that into account, is the Canon XSI a good choice? What about Nikon (possibly D80)?
Why would you get a D80 over a D40?
secretasianman999
Member
posted: Aug. 5, 2008 @ 11:52p
From a beginner standpoint, my POV is that any of the latest entry level DSLRs (Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Sony/Pentax) are capable of taking great pictures. Look at the various review sites and check out the side-by-side comparisons. I think you really need a pro photographer's eyes to even notice some of the details they're testing. Isolated, I'd imagine anyone would be satisfied.
It's more of a matter of what's the potential for upgrading to new glass. All have options, but Canon gives you the most options for cheap/used lenses to change your palette, but I think you'll be moving past the beginner level (moving to serious amateur) the minute you start spending serious money on lenses. Of course, around that time, you'll probably end up thinking about upgrading to a pro-level camera. I think entry level equipment serves it's purpose.
Believe it or not, there are plenty of pros shooting with the XSi. Not all pros have unlimited budgets, and the XSi makes for a great second camera. For example, it gives you some extra versatility with the crop factor. Plus, it's not all about the gear. A good photographer will take better shots with the XSi than a newbie will with any camera, period. Heck, I know a photojournalist shooting for print with a pocket Leica (well, technically, he travels with seven of them...but you get the meaning).
CactusPete
Member
posted: Aug. 6, 2008 @ 2:48a
ili0psoas said: I'd like to pick up photography as a hobby and am wondering what's a good starter DSLR camera. I understand the lenses are key. Taking that into account, is the Canon XSI a good choice? What about Nikon (possibly D80)?
It comes with a fine starter lens. You can leave it on Auto or Program if you're just starting out, and get excellent shots. Give yourself plenty of time to learn it and you'll be amazed. I've had it for 3 weeks, though I paid $43 more. Excellent camera!
Would you mind to share your experience? They have a decent ratings on resellerratings.com. churwitz said: I ordered this. I tried ordering an xti from us1photo and it was a terrible experience, so decided to cancel and go for the better camera at a better store. Learned my lesson - stick to Amazon if you want a reasonably priced product without any hassles.
ili0psoas said: I'd like to pick up photography as a hobby and am wondering what's a good starter DSLR camera. I understand the lenses are key. Taking that into account, is the Canon XSI a good choice? What about Nikon (possibly D80)?
The two systems (Nikon and Canon) are not identical. They each have their particular strengths and weaknesses. But either is much more than adequate for your needs as a newbie. And just for the record, Pentax isn't a bad choice, either.
Buy whichever one feels best in your hands. If both feel equally good, buy the less expensive one.
Then ignore the whole "Which is best?" thing for a year or two. In fact, ignore all debate over the relative merits of various camera bodies. Instead, if you want to read about photography, go read about the technical aspects of exposure, the art and science of lighting, the fundamentals of post-processing, the work of accomplished photographers (both currently active ones, and those long gone - and it's NOT cheating to learn from the work of past masters, as most artists, musicians, writers, and other creative artists will readily admit), the process of meaningfully analyzing and critiquing photographs, etc.
Don't read equipment reviews. So long as you have an acceptable SLR and 2 or 3 modest lenses (a wide angle to short tele kit lens, an affordable tele zoom, and just maybe a single fast prime), you're fine for now. And when you finally do go and buy some more camera gear, it probably ought to be a good tripod and a quality flash unit, not a new body, nor the lens that everyone says is a "must own." Go and learn and practice. Take lots of pictures and figure out why they disappoint (and most of your photos will disappoint, if you're honest and have high standards). Figure out what you should be doing better, then go and do it. Learn from your mistakes (and from your occasional successes). When you come across situations that can't be easily handled by your limited camera equipment, figure out ways around your equipment's limitations. Sure, sometimes there's just no way around them, and that's too bad. But almost always, there is some tolerable alternative, and if once in a blue moon you just can't get the shot because you don't own a 600mm f/4 lens or a camera with an 11 fps burst capability, well, shrug your shoulders and move on to another challenge.
Do NOT second guess your equipment purchase decisions. Do not worry that you should have gone with Nikon instead of Canon, or vice versa. Do not convince yourself that you'll never create good photos unless you buy the $4200 fast zoom that you saw some Sports Illustrated photographer use at the Olympics, or the $2600 ultra-wide angle lens that all the professionals photographing Antarctica this winter just rave about. Because for a newbie, the biggest limitation by far will be your lack of understanding, experience, and ability. NOT lack of top notch equipment. Sure, an abundance of first rate equipment can be a nice thing to have; I never knock quality tools. But for a beginner, the important thing is to obtain some adequate tools and gain a lot of skill at using them well. It's all too easy to convince yourself that the answer lies in having more and better camera gear, but frankly that's not the right answer for probably 95% of beginners.
Well, I suppose you'll ignore most of my advice. But I do happen to know what I'm talking about on this topic.
12345Michael54321 said: ili0psoas said: I'd like to pick up photography as a hobby and am wondering what's a good starter DSLR camera. I understand the lenses are key. Taking that into account, is the Canon XSI a good choice? What about Nikon (possibly D80)?
Okay, I'll quote what I wrote in http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/hot-deals/849723 , in response to yesterday's "I'm a newbie; which DSLR should I get?" question.
<begin quote>
Either would be a perfectly sound choice.
The two systems (Nikon and Canon) are not identical. They each have their particular strengths and weaknesses. But either is much more than adequate for your needs as a newbie. And just for the record, Pentax isn't a bad choice, either.
Buy whichever one feels best in your hands. If both feel equally good, buy the less expensive one.
Then ignore the whole "Which is best?" thing for a year or two. In fact, ignore all debate over the relative merits of various camera bodies. Instead, if you want to read about photography, go read about the technical aspects of exposure, the art and science of lighting, the fundamentals of post-processing, the work of accomplished photographers (both currently active ones, and those long gone - and it's NOT cheating to learn from the work of past masters, as most artists, musicians, writers, and other creative artists will readily admit), the process of meaningfully analyzing and critiquing photographs, etc.
Don't read equipment reviews. So long as you have an acceptable SLR and 2 or 3 modest lenses (a wide angle to short tele kit lens, an affordable tele zoom, and just maybe a single fast prime), you're fine for now. And when you finally do go and buy some more camera gear, it probably ought to be a good tripod and a quality flash unit, not a new body, nor the lens that everyone says is a "must own." Go and learn and practice. Take lots of pictures and figure out why they disappoint (and most of your photos will disappoint, if you're honest and have high standards). Figure out what you should be doing better, then go and do it. Learn from your mistakes (and from your occasional successes). When you come across situations that can't be easily handled by your limited camera equipment, figure out ways around your equipment's limitations. Sure, sometimes there's just no way around them, and that's too bad. But almost always, there is some tolerable alternative, and if once in a blue moon you just can't get the shot because you don't own a 600mm f/4 lens or a camera with an 11 fps burst capability, well, shrug your shoulders and move on to another challenge.
Do NOT second guess your equipment purchase decisions. Do not worry that you should have gone with Nikon instead of Canon, or vice versa. Do not convince yourself that you'll never create good photos unless you buy the $4200 fast zoom that you saw some Sports Illustrated photographer use at the Olympics, or the $2600 ultra-wide angle lens that all the professionals photographing Antarctica this winter just rave about. Because for a newbie, the biggest limitation by far will be your lack of understanding, experience, and ability. NOT lack of top notch equipment. Sure, an abundance of first rate equipment can be a nice thing to have; I never knock quality tools. But for a beginner, the important thing is to obtain some adequate tools and gain a lot of skill at using them well. It's all too easy to convince yourself that the answer lies in having more and better camera gear, but frankly that's not the right answer for probably 95% of beginners.
Well, I suppose you'll ignore most of my advice. But I do happen to know what I'm talking about on this topic.
FatherTed said: $675 at CC after coupon (see seperate thread)
Tax kills it.
jidteach
Broke Member
posted: Aug. 7, 2008 @ 10:28p
XSi $699 at Amazon!!!! I bought it yesterday at 716.84, but I get the price match guarantee for thirty days. How low will it go? I really do love Amazon.
Kenjimaru
Member
posted: Aug. 8, 2008 @ 12:48a
exactly! got it price adjusted too! Maybe it will drop more!
bigtisas
Senior Member
posted: Aug. 8, 2008 @ 3:25a
Good points 12345Michael54321. I've been shooting photos for 30 years and had owned so many cameras and lens. At the end, it's your skill and creativity that make a good photo. Go practice a lot and read European photography magazines.
jidteach said: XSi $699 at Amazon!!!! I bought it yesterday at 716.84, but I get the price match guarantee for thirty days. How low will it go? I really do love Amazon.
niao said: Should I get skylight or UV for digital SLRs?
In practical terms, they're pretty much interchangeable for digital cameras. And used solely for protection of the front lens element, since neither filtering out UV via a filter, nor adding a touch of warming via a filter, is needed when shooting digital. Although once upon a time the lightly tinted skylight filter was the more popular of the two types, these days the clear UV filter seems to hold the #1 spot by a comfortable margin.
Are all "multi coated" created equal? thanks
No, they're not. The quality of the glass may differ, the quality of the coatings may differ, and the quality of the ring may differ.
These differences may or may not matter to you. You may even maintain that you can't detect any difference. Fine. In many situations, even the cheapest and lowest quality filter would probably suffice. But in at least some situations, paying more for higher quality can be worth it. (And just for the record, yes, fully multicoated will, in some situations, be far better than non-multicoated.)
As for whether you should even use a protective filter, some photographers say yes, and some say no. Many seem to be of the opinion that while such a filter has its place if you're shooting in harsh environmental conditions (sand, salt spray, etc.), in more mild conditions you're simply slapping an unnecessary piece of glass over your lens. Personally, I no longer use protective filters unless I'm going to be in specific situations calling for added protection. And about 15 years into this policy, I haven't lost a lens yet due to damage that a filter would have prevented. But hey, to each his own. (I would add that I almost always use a lens hood, so I do get some protective effect from that. Not identical to that which a filter would provide, nor is the primary purpose of a lens hood a protective one.)
btw- this is a really great entry level DSLR. The new 55-250 Canon IS lens is a good addition too; admittedly, there are higher quality lenses, but it gives great telephoto range at a good price point and is user friendly wrt size and weight. Definitely worth considering, IMHO.
jidteach
Broke Member
posted: Aug. 12, 2008 @ 12:37p
m61376 said: The new 55-250 Canon IS lens is a good addition too; admittedly, there are higher quality lenses, but it gives great telephoto range at a good price point and is user friendly wrt size and weight. Definitely worth considering, IMHO.Another excellent "walk around lens" (can be had for under $400 if you look a bit) is the 28-135mm IS.
I have now taken an identical landscape shot (with a foreground element in it to test sharpness) using my 28-135mm IS and my 17-40mm f/4L on the XSi. At 100% crop, I notice only very slightly better sharpness in the 17-40mm. I believe that the 28-135 can deliver near "L" quality shots for hundreds of dollars less.
(I still use the wider end focal length of the 17-40mm a lot more, but that is a composition issue, not an image quality one.)
Oen thing about the XSi I have noted in my first week of use is that it is a little TOO easy to switch the "picture style" settings (located on the four-way navigation buttons to the right of the LCD screen). I have inadvertently (I really don't know how, heel of my thumb?) switched styles twice, once to monochrome as I took it out of the bag to get a fast picture of a hummingbird. I got the shot, but it was in "M" style - black and white...
Dealguy123
Senior Member - 2K
posted: Aug. 12, 2008 @ 12:50p
Ok, seeing as how this thread has drifted a bit towards dslr related stuff, I have a question for the experienced folks.
I've been debating on buying a filter for my 28-135IS lens, and have been thinking of a Hoya polarizer lens.. Now, for general outdoor shots, what generally is the best type of lens to use? I understand how/what the polarizer does, and it seems to add a bit of contrast to shots which seems to help (especially for sky/water) shots. Anyone have any thoughts?
Also, if anyone could recommend a good portable/solid tripod I'd love to hear any recommendations. It'd be great if I could find a compact one that I could carry along with the camera bag and not be too large/heavy. Thanks.
Still much cheaper to get the XSI on eBay with 25% CashBack. As for my walk around lens...I went with the Tamrom 17-50mm 2.8...SWEET! For my tele needs...a Canon 55-250mm 4.5-5.6 (for now). Now all I need is a godo price on a 1.4 50MM fixed
jidteach
Broke Member
posted: Aug. 12, 2008 @ 2:45p
Dealguy123 said: Ok, seeing as how this thread has drifted a bit towards dslr related stuff, I have a question for the experienced folks.
I've been debating on buying a filter for my 28-135IS lens, and have been thinking of a Hoya polarizer lens.. Now, for general outdoor shots, what generally is the best type of lens to use? I understand how/what the polarizer does, and it seems to add a bit of contrast to shots which seems to help (especially for sky/water) shots. Anyone have any thoughts?
Also, if anyone could recommend a good portable/solid tripod I'd love to hear any recommendations. It'd be great if I could find a compact one that I could carry along with the camera bag and not be too large/heavy. Thanks. I live in sunny SoCal and I rarely shoot landscapes without my polarizer filter. Other than that refer to the other posts in this thread.
Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.
Members of our community may attach files to a post in accordance with the User Agreement. FatWallet is not responsible for the content, accuracy, completeness or validity of any information contained in any attached file. Files have *not* been scanned for viruses. Be especially wary of Excel files which may contain malicious content.
