Camera SLR or HD Video Camera

Hi, the SLR I would recommend is Canon EOS 1DS Mark III, if you don´t like to invest in the bigger size Hasselblad and Phase One.

A new hi-end video camera from Sony is PMW-350 K with 16x Fujinon-lens.

good morning captainzim,

i've been in the commercial photography business for over 22 years, and while i agree with amg on the brand of slr digital cameras, i would consider looking at the EOS 7D. it's half the cost at almost the same pixel resolution. plus it has many of the same features and durability of the Mark III.

while megapixel count is important with regards to image quality, choice of lense is equally important. the better the lense, the better the initial image contrast and color fidelity that hits the ccd, so i rather see you invest in a good quality primary lense. part of the reason i agree with amg is that canon makes some of the best quality optics out there, as does nikon(which is what i use), so make sure you buy their manufactured lenses. i would look at canon's 24 - 105mm f/4 for my general all-purpose lense(the lense i keep on the body 80 % of the time), and their brilliant 100 - 400mm f/4.5 - 5.6 zoom lense with image stablization, as my second lense choice. if i needed anything with a wider scope or closer reach, i would look at single focal length lenses.

hope that helps.

Nikon D90.
Does everything in amazing quality, and then some.
Pay very close attention to your optics, and less attention to megapixles. Give me a lower MP camera with better optics any day over a 20 megapixle camera with an average lens.

propbet is right on the money. are you realistically going to use 20 plus megs of image? most of the time you will be scaling down the image size for reproduction or posting to a website. if you can get a 12 - 18 megapixel for far less money than a 20 plus megapixel camera, you'd be better served investing into better quality optics.

and ideally most pro shooters prefer single focal length lenses over zoom, but for most who don't shoot for a living, it can be strategically(read - changing lenses all the time) and financially limiting. but if you can afford - single focal length lenses offer superior quality images. light passing through fewer lense elements translates into less image degradation - brighter colors, snappier images!

if you want best quality images, also consider using tripod, or least a monopod when shooting with longer focal length lenses.

i like the choice of the nikon D90. again i am a nikon user, but think canon has better feature for value pricing than nikon. sorry propbet.

Further (on the topic of the D90) what sold me on it was 4.5fps in sports mode. Amazingly quick power up time to shoot first image / basically 1 second. Fantastic video (HD) quality at 24fps at 720p resolution. The CCD chip they use is very nice / one of the best in the industry. And finally, while not the least expensive camera, they are outstanding for SCUBA diving. Although the housing is as much as the camera itself! (sans lens). Costco was selling the D90's a while back for $875 with some basic accessories. I spent $1200 on the housing for it, and another 1500 or so in other accessories and another lens. (underwater strobe, land based carry case, battery, memory, etc.)

I'll put my setup up against anyone shooting with a 20 megapixle camera. Prior to this, I had the D80, which I was very happy with as well, until I (like an idiot) dropped while diving in Saba. (Free camera for anyone who's willing to find it. It's near the Tent Reef dive site in +/- 300 feet of water. It comes free with some wonderful images preloaded on it!)

As professional DSLR I only consider full-frame sensor cameras. The ones you are suggesting are also good cameras on a consumer level, but can never compete with full-frame cameras in picture quality.

But if you are only using computer screens as medium, they are good enough.

Three years ago I was looking for a good DSLR and at that time, they usually didn´t have the live-view feature. So I bought one of the first that got it, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1, developed with Leica. It has been pretty good, easy to handle, but a little too big for bringing everywhere. It is with half-size sensor, why the pictured 7-14 lens represents a 14-28 mm wide angle.

Recently I bought the new Lumix GF-1, a much smaller camera, still DSLR but with only live-view built in. Still corresponding as half-size, so this 14-140 lens equals a 28-280 mm on a full frame camera.

The good thing is that I can use all the lenses from the old camera with an adapter.

The GF-1 also has a video feature, capturing 1280 x 720 pixels at 30 fps.

It is a good all in one camera and with the 20 mm "pancake" lens, it is in pocket size. But it is not to compare with a full-frame camera...

BTW, my everyday pocket camera is a Canon G9. The best they have ever made!

I use the 16-85mm VR
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/16-85mm.htm

and the 18-200mm VR
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm

Mine also came with the standard Nokon packaged 80-200 however it's a somewhat slow lens, hence the purchase of the 18-200 later.

For the housing, I use Aquatica. I've had both Ikelite and Sea and Sea, but on this camera I went with the Aquetica single bulkhead housing.
http://www.marinevisions.com/Aquatica-D90-Underwater-Camera-Housing-.html

If you don't spend the money on the Aquetica, then I'd probably go the way of Ikelite. I had an Ikelite case for two different cameras (Nikon D80, and an Olympus)

For all things photography underwater, check out wetpixel. There is enough there to overload even the connoisseurs brain.

(sorry admin for the links, but I figured they'd be OK considering they are of a completely different topic than boats)

Just picked up a Nikon D90 and loving it. Had a D50 for 3 years and used the heck out of it (took over 60,000 photos, well past the shutter life). Was looking to upgrade anyway. The D90 has great features, easy to use and is a serious piece of machinery. Get one or two lenses and take advantage of all the camera's features. Tripod essential for nighttime shots, mono stick helps with heavy lenses or windy days.
I like to shoot at night, so the backlit display as well as the onscreen display for settings is essential.
Here's a sample from a shoot I did onboard Solstice I this week.

I've been using Nikon's for over 3 decades. Recently I had an opportunity to try something different, and bought a Canon 5D MkII.

I have to say that I find the picture quality far superior to my Nikons - I've had, amongst others, the F3, F4, F5 & the D200.

Cheers

i've been using a nikon D50 for the last 3 years, i've done a lot of pictures, 30.000+ and it's doing it job like on the first day, now i've settled to a nikon D200 and i've to say this camera does it, it's far better that the Canon 450 or 5D of a friendm, but most of all this comes from the lens.
the best hassleblad can't work without a good lens - i've a sigma 15-30 and its my favourite lens, it's perfect for any kind of pictures.

so if you buy a camera, don't just look at the camera, also look at the lenses you can buy with it.

when considering photo equipment keep in mind that the best photographer can create/capture a wonderful picture with the most rudimentary equipment while the most expensive equipment will do little but take a picture in the hands of someone who doesn't understand composition, lighting, etc.

Both Nikon and Canon are recognized leaders in their respective fields, offering various bodies and many lenses. The lens is more important than the body. It is better to splurge for a better quality lens and a less expensive body as any camera made today by Nikon, Canon, etc will capture the same information. Unless you are posting billboard size images, you don't need anything over 12 megapixels.

The Lumix (Panasonic) cameras that AMG references take a different approach and offer a different [and higher quality] experience. One of the interesting aspects that Luix is offering is stitching (not panoramic stitching to create a wider 'scene' image but to make available more pixel information by stitching together more compacted images into one larger image, each smaller image containing more pixel info for higher detail, etc.

I have used Canon and Nikon for 30 years. The D70 was my first DSLR when they first came out an frankly have never found a reason to upgrade. I have instead chosen to invest in lenses. I shoot a lot of indoor hockey (kids) and for anything indoor you need a min aperture of 2.8 (fixed). When you start to look at tele, wide angle or zoom lenses with fixed aperture, you are generally getting into better quality lenses. The difference is quite noticeable.

For shooting outdoors or where a slower speed suffices, you want to look at the VR range of lenses, with built in stabilizers to minimize shake. Both Nikon and Canon offer VR zoom lenses that are great all around lenses. you can put 2 in your bag and you are good to go for 95% of your needs.

Make sure you discuss with the seller - both Nikon and Canon sell 'kit' lenses with their bodies and these are crap.

I do not know why anybody would quote $300 for a D70 - they have not been worth anything on the resale market for more than 2 years and any reputable dealer will tell you the best thing you can do with them is keep them as a second camera. There is nothing wrong with them - they just don't have resale value.

One other consideration is that if you look at the sidelines of any sporting event, 90%+ of the equipment is Canon. That should tell you something.

I have a camera question and figured I'd add to this thread instead of starting a new one.

I'm a yacht broker. I would like to buy a new camera to use in shooting "yacht for sale" photos for the web and print advertising. Wide angle is important for the interior shots and a decent flash would be nice. I have pretty much ruled out buying a SLR type and have decided that a good quality point and shoot is probably my best bet.

In reading what other have said here, particularly Lars mentioned the older Canon G 9, I have found the Canon G 11. This camera seems to have the wide angle I need, and the ability for a "better" flash to be added. What am I missing?

If anyone has a better/different suggestion, please advise. Thanks in advance!

Hi, the Canon G11 is a good camera with more wideangle than the G9 which has a tad longer tele instead. Here is a picture I took at the Düsseldorf show with the G9 yesterday:

That's a nice looking shot. From what I read on the net, It does seem like the G 11 has a bit wider, wide angle feature than the G 9 which is good for what I need. I'm interested in being able to use a flash for interior shots that I can aim up at the headliner so the light bounces around. I only know enough about photography to perhaps get me into trouble.

Yes, you need to do this, and I think you will also need a diffusor, like a milky box that is fitted on the flash to soften out shadows. The good thing with digital cameras is that you know instantly if the picture is good or if you should try again.

Good idea. But if you're at the point of taking things that seriously, I think a DSLR is in order. The least expensive ones are not much more than a G11. Kit zoom for most of these is on the order of 27mm (35mm equivalent). If a good liveview LCD is key for you, try Olympus, Panasonic, and Sony.

Kelly Cook

missed:

A pro DSLR must work with RAW files, you have a resolution from 12 to 14 bits per color chanel, so I use only RAW files and convert it later to jpg etc..

For post processing there are a lot of progs: Adobe Lightroom, Capture One and DxO Pro (my favorite), etc. Looking at the supported camera and lens lists is a good advice what to buy ( The latest cameras need some time fin enter the lists).

All together camera, lens, post processing gives the right equipment - plus a good photographer