ozzy

I'm looking at replacing my Fuji 2400 zoom digi camera with something that has:-

a) better optics
b) better resolution
c) advanced control of shutter speed, focus, etc..

My budget is around £400 and after a bit of research I've decided on the Canon PowerShot G3 which Warehouse Express have for £399 inc.VAT.

The only bit that's putting me off so far is it's weight (410g).

Has anyone any experience of this camera?

I do a lot of hill walking and my trusty old Fuji digi-cam has served me well (even at -5 on the top of munros in the Scottish winter), but the quality is pretty average (2.1 Mp), but there tends to be a lot of noise in the pictures (especially landscapes) and it just doesn't capture the size and scale of the mountains as well as I want.

My m8 showed me some 35mm slides of the Swiss Alps taken on his Canon EOS5000 about 8 yrs ago and they were stunning.

I'm looked at the Canon EOS300V and this fits my budget for an SLR. How do digi cam pics compare to an SLR?

The camera deal usually supply a 28-90mm USM lens. Is there much benefit going for the 28-105mm USM lens instead (offered by Jessops)?

Stefan

andym172

Isn't there now a G5? - May be worth looking into getting that or the G4.

www.dpreview.com

I have a Nikon Coolpix 5700 which is out of your price range but is very good.

Luke

I use a Cannon G1.

I like the whole series. They are as strong as hell .Good manual controls. And the flip screen is a must. Forget the fancy plastic cameras.. get the 3 or 4 and enjoy.

BOB.T

I've got an EOS300V and I think it's great! I got mine from warehouseexpress for about £350 ish, that was with a 28-75 and 75-300, bag and two films

I use it for taking pics from rallies, it works in the cold, heat and rain which'll do for me! Plus it stands up to being battered about by me

Some of my pics are in the gallery, you may have to search a bit though

Good luck!

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Best site for reviews of cameras is www.dpreview.com. The review of the G3 is here - it comes highly recommended.

How do digi cam pics compare to an SLR? It depends. In terms of technical quality, an SLR with a good lens will blow away a digicam. You'll notice the difference if you blow pictures up to 8x6 or above. An SLR also gives a lot more control over exposure, depth of field and choice of lenses.

A digicam, by comparison, will likely yield pictures that are noisier and probably won't enlarge as well. It also won't offer the same control over exposure and depth of field. It does, however, offer the huge advantage that you can see an image as soon as its taken, and can re-shoot a picture if you don't like how it's come out. They also don't offer any option to exchange lenses, so you're stuck with whatever piece of glass the manufacturer chooses to stick in. Normally the lens isn't half as good as the sensor - so whatever you do, don't choose a camera based on its megapixel count.

That's not to say that digital is worse than film - far from it. You're not really comparing like with like here; a better comparison would be between a digi and a 35mm compact camera. This is a much fairer fight, and I'd pick the digi every time.

The results you get from a film SLR will also depend enormously on where you get the film processed. A high street retailer is likely to do a good job of ruining every film you give them. Use a pro lab like www.peak-imaging.com and you'll get the results you've worked for.

For what it's worth, the 28-90 is made of old beer bottles. The 28-105 is a much better lens.

Dougster

Stefan, I have recently bought a Sony DSC-F77 with 4.0mega pixels.

I also have a 20 year old Fujica STX-1. Print quality and controlability of my SLR is much better but Sony fits in my pocket!

Depends what you want to do m8. Still got the rb5?

[Edited to keep Brendan happy. ]

[Edited by Dougster - 7/22/2003 7:46:05 AM]

ChrisB

Hi Ozzy.

I've got the Canon Digital Ixus 400 as a pocket sized, take it anywhere camera. Lovely piece of kit.

If I don't mind lugging a bit more weight and size around, I've got a Minolta Dynax 5 SLR with 28 to 80mm and 70mm to 300mm lenses. I've got some fantastic shots with it.

I hanker after a digital SLR though - AndyC doesn't help at all

[Edited by ChrisB - 7/21/2003 11:06:37 PM]

john_s

iTrader: (1)

I'd really like one of the canon eos 10D's, but they are too ££££ at the moment.

I think for now i'll get something like a 2nd hand eos 5 so i can start collecting eos kit ready for when i've saved up enough for whatever the current digital eos is when i get the cash.

John

Brendan Hughes

That is SERIOUSLY high res!

ozzy

Hi lads,

Thanks for all your info. I'd love a digital SLR and was almost justifying the cost to myself, before I finally asked my brother to give me a good slap upside the head and came to me senses

Digital SLR's are great, but they are just too expensive and pretty heavy for what I'm looking for.

Basically I want a general purpose, do everything digi cam for holiday snaps, family occasions and weekend breaks - the usual do-everything family camera. The Canon gets rave reviews, but it's a bit on the heavy side (like my current Fuji with it's 4xAA batteries)

After seeing my m8's SLR slides I was gobsmacked with the sheer size and scale shown in his landscape pics. Since I do a lot of hill walking I want something that'll capture the whole experience; especially when I go off to Switzerland in a month or so.

Andy,

I get what your saying when comparing the formats, but what I'm really asking is whether an SLR will give much better results than any of the compact digi cames ever will ???

I suppose if I'm a cr@p photographer, even the most expensive bit of kit won't make me an expert

One of the lads @ work is an amateur photographer and has a Canon digi SLR, so I'll ask him for some advice. One of the lads I know through my hill running also does amateur photography. He took some stunning pics last month from the Isle of Skye, so I'll ask him on Wednesday what he used.

Stefan

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Don't discount the s/h market - there are used DSLRs around and trade-in prices are very low. Try calling Park Cameras and asking about a used D30 or D60. If you're feeling brave there's always eBay too.

A DSLR is certainly heavy, even compared to a film SLR, but it's the lenses and other accessories that really weigh you down. Personally I think it's worth it, though. Click.

Will a digi ever give better results than an SLR? Not sure what you mean here. Given a few more years' development, image quality will certainly be up there. They're already better than film in some ways - a digital shot taken in good light is clean and smooth in a way that scanned film struggles to match. Sharpness and detail are still on the SLR's side, though, simply because you have the option to fit a quality lens.

You mention landscape photography, in which case you'll certainly be better off with an SLR and a good wide-angle lens. Pocket cameras in any format won't really go wide enough, so you'll be into stitching digital shots together which is a pain.

What's the ultimate use of your pics? If you want to share them over the net, you're much better off with a digi in the first place. Film scanners are expensive and scanning prints reduces quality (though not as much as I expected - I've just done a few to hang on my walls!).

At the end of the day you do make trade-offs for portability. If size and weight are a problem then you'll certainly get better results from a lightweight camera that you do actually bother to carry around than a big, heavy SLR that sits in a bag at home. Your choice

A.

Nevetas

The Sony P10 5m true pixels.

It's the new sony, takes PRO memory, video, sound.

It's the daddi of the point and shoot camera's.

ozzy

I guess you've already answered when you mentioned replacement lenses. I think the SLR has the flexibility I'm looking for.

Maybe I need to try a higher quality digi camera first to see how the lenses and capture quality has improved since my old Fuji.

I noticed the Canon (and other high-end digi's) can save the image in RAW format rather than processing it as a JPEG. Is there a huge difference in image quality with this format?

I haven't ruled out 2nd-hand, in fact Dave our resident amateur photographer bought his Canon digi-SLR 2nd-hand, but even then it was around £2K.

Stefan

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

2k?! That must have been a while ago. Trade in value for a D30 against one of the current models at Park is about £350. That's why I'm keeping mine - it's depreciated even faster than the car.

The benefits of RAW format depend on the specific camera. On the D30 the RAW format is 12 bit, which is great for making adjustments to brightness, contrast and gamma without getting the banding that can sometimes become visible if you adjust an 8 bit image. It also lets you change white balance after the shot has been taken, doesn't give JPEG artifacts, and on some of the later models you can even change exposure. I don't know which, if any, of these benefits will be available on a G3, though - sorry. Best to read the review.

For what it's worth, I use RAW all the time.

A.