I'm new

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
T

TrizzleTree

Feeder Fish
Mar 28, 2006
19
0
0
41
California
Hi all! New at this...
Right now I'm looking for a decent digital camera... I've been looking around the forum, and I'm leaning towards: canon 300d
cannon 350d
nikon d50
nikon d70
I plan to photograph fish... and other things. I have Red Tail Giant Gourami's, an Arowana, tiger Shovelnose Cats, Plecos, Angels, Tetras, Guppies, Corys, Etc.
Right now I'm working with a point and shoot kodak, but it doesn't give me the option to play with manual settings. It's old, and cheap.
Any ideas advice be wonderful. Thanx.
 
Nice to see you made it here! Out of those cameras I would either go with the 350D or D70...either will give you plenty of growing room if you don't mind spending the extra dinero.
 
Welcome aboard Trina. You will find that the folks here at APF are a friendly bunch eager to lend a helping hand.

Something to think about while making your decision on which camera to buy. If anyone in your family has a 35mm SLR camera, they may be willing to separate or lend out the lenses for it. For example, most Nikon lenses are interchangeable and can be used on the D70. So if you already have someone using the Nikon platform in the family, then the D70 would be the logical choice. The same can be said for the Canon and the 350D.

Since I am a Nikonian, I would definitely recommend the D70 over the D50. Main reason is the flash capabilities of the D70. For aquarium photography, remote flash is the best way to go. With the D70 you can use a remote wireless flash SB800 sitting on top of the tank without using any wires. A great advantage and more cost effective than the Canon platform because you have to buy additional equipment to fire the flash wirelessly.

Each brand, Canon and Nikon, have their own pros and cons. But, sticking to one of those two brands, makes the most sense. Buy the best your budget can handle. And remember to allow for a good flash system in your budget too. In fact, most of us agree here, that a good flash should come before a better lens. The best initial investment for aquarium photography should be the camera body, a inexpensive lens like the 50mm f/1.8d, and a good flash that can be fired remotely.
 
I concur with everything said above. Specially Mel, between those 4, the two she mentioned are the only ones I would look at. D50 has major problems for aquatic photography because of its lack of commander mode, and 300d is just way too outdated, you are much much better off with the 350d. Other than that, both are fine choices. I would spend a bit more and get Canon 20d over 350d but that is a personal choice, and has marginal value.
 
paradise said:
I concur with everything said above. Specially Mel, between those 4, the two she mentioned are the only ones I would look at. D50 has major problems for aquatic photography because of its lack of commander mode, and 300d is just way too outdated, you are much much better off with the 350d. Other than that, both are fine choices. I would spend a bit more and get Canon 20d over 350d but that is a personal choice, and has marginal value.
Click to expand...

Yeah, on AP she had mentioned a price limit of $500 so I had originally said 300D because of the limit. But if she wants to spend more then the 350D or even 20D is much better. However, the hobby gets very expensive and very addicting very fast!
 
Thanx you guys. I decided to bump the price range up. Maybe a body and then getting goodies! I just wanted to see what everyone had to say. I'm thinking I might just use that tax return and dive into a Canon EOS 20D!! Thanx again!! My dad has a Canon 20D. He suggests I get my own, since he's always using his, and I get into moods where I want to shoot all the time. The upside to this is when he's done with his he might pass it down...:)
 
MissTrina said:
My dad has a Canon 20D. He suggests I get my own, since he's always using his
Click to expand...

:-)
Thats the point - you won´t give it away, that precious little thing ;-)
20D is worth the extra cash, but before you order it, compare all possible candidates in your hands.
 
agree with andreas. Something to consider. 350D is very similar to 20D in features. 20D is slightly better in almost everything, plus it has a bigger and much sturdier body. At first, as a female, you may think that 350d's smaller size is a benefit that you consider highly. And I dont mean that as an anti-female thing, god forbid, just an obvervations, that females have smaller hands :). The thing is, some of the better lenses you may get later will be heavy, and will overwhelm the small body, making it unbalanced. Think about that before you get your body, but yeah, you should try both out in a store.
 
paradise said:
agree with andreas. Something to consider. 350D is very similar to 20D in features. 20D is slightly better in almost everything, plus it has a bigger and much sturdier body. At first, as a female, you may think that 350d's smaller size is a benefit that you consider highly. And I dont mean that as an anti-female thing, god forbid, just an obvervations, that females have smaller hands :). The thing is, some of the better lenses you may get later will be heavy, and will overwhelm the small body, making it unbalanced. Think about that before you get your body, but yeah, you should try both out in a store.
Click to expand...

I have big hands:lol: I would love the 20D but then again, the 350D is nice too... Decisions decisions...
 
Also, I dont like the build of 350d. It's like a plastic toy, they call it plastic-fantastic for that reason. 20D is built like a rock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom