thinking about going digital

[subhuman]

hopefully this is where I post this;
I am sure everyone is sick and tired of getting the same question,(what camera
do I buy?) hopefully this is not the same thing but if it is I am sorry......
I have had a Rebel T2 (film SLR) for about 2 1/2 years and I really like it but honestly
I am getting a little tired of buying film and then trying to remember to take them to
get developed then waiting, hoping & wishing that the pics turned out like I wanted them
my 13 y.o. son has a digital camera we go and take pics together...he let me try it
and I liked the instant gratification &especially the delete button....So now I am wanting
one but since I have had a SLR for a while I really like the way it feels in my hand, my
sons p&s was good but felt like a bar of soap in my hands......(uh oh here it comes)
So I have been reading endless review of DSLR' s and I am very confused.
I thought that since I have had a Canon for so long I would stick with the same brand,
I have 2 lenses , the kit lens Canon 28-90mm that came with the T2 and a 70-300mm
so I dont want to buy more lenses if I bought a different brand, reading review for
the XT & XTi there seem to be mixed results, and I dont want to end up like the person
whose ad I read on the classifieds here, advertising their new XTi for sale saying
" it's to much camera for me " I have gone to the circuit city here and tried those 2
the nikon d80 & also the olympus e-volt 500, I liked all but not the prices, I had decided
on the XT if it wasnt for the tiny 1.8 in. screen..............So what do y'all think, should
I go for the Canon or try to sell my T2 and try a new brand ? I have heard sometimes
it is difficult learning a new brand. Also what all do I need to expect going from film
to digital. I am so sorry this is so long I did not intend it to be............thanks

[WeirdPICS]

I am by no means experienced...but I'd suggest you stick with you're film, and add a digital.

[Franglais]

I would say go for a recent Canon DSLR (XT or XTi) but get it with the 18-55 kit lens. This is well worth the $100 extra. The view you will get from your film lenses is not the same on a DSLR like the XTi as it is on your film Rebel bacause the sensor is smaller than film. They become more "telephoto" (the 28-90 looks like a 45-150). The 18-55 has about the same view as the 28-90 and is optimised for digital.

If you're used to the Canon user interface then stick with it. By default DSLR's are set up with a "point-and-shoot" mode which makes them as easy to use as your son's camera. Other modes are more complex but it's your choice to leave point-and-shoot mode.

Be aware that there are two differences between a DSLR and your son's point & shoot:

- you can't use the LCD on the back of the DSLR to frame the shot, you have to use the optical viewfinder
- you can't do videos

Charles

[Photo-John]

I agree that it's best to stick with the brand you already know. Unless another maker has a feature or camera you really want, then it's best to keep the learning curve minimal. And there isn't going to be any huge performance difference in the cameras you're looking at. Charles' points about not being able to use the LCD to shoot and no video capability are very good. I'd like to add that you'll need to consider photo storage, too. It's good to have an external drive and a plan for how you're going to store and protect your digital files. You don't want to cook a drive and lose everything all of a sudden.

You're also going to find that color and exposure become your problem - not the photo lab's. Although you can use photos as they come out of the camera, you have a lot more opportunity - and responsibility - with digital. And no one will be lightening and darkening your images at the photo lab. If they're dark, you'll see they're dark. And it will be your job to correct them. For a lot of photographers, this used to be something they weren't aware was being done, as lab techs do it for you when you have prints made.

Between the XTi and XT, I'd go with the XTi. I actually own one. I don't think the LCD size is a deal-killer. But bigger is better with LCDs. More important, I think, is the dust-reduction system. Dust may not seem like a big issue to you. but when you've had dust on your camera sensor, you realize how big of a problem it is. The Canon dust-reduction system works wonderfully and it would be best if you never had to worry about the dust problem.

If you do want to look at other cameras, I'd encourage you to look at Pentax and Sony because of the built-in image stabilization. Image stabilization is a wonderful feature and really helps photographers get more usable photos in more conditions. I think it's worth paying a little extra for.

[WeirdPICS]

If you want the live preview like on point, and shoots.. I believe the Evolt 330 has it..(Olympus), and there may be more out, or down the line.

[Photo-John]

If you want the live preview like on point, and shoots.. I believe the Evolt 330 has it..(Olympus), and there may be more out, or down the line.

Thanks for mentioning that. And there are others. The Panasonic Lumix L1 digital SLR also Live View. Both of the Olympus digital SLRs that were announced at PMA, the E-510 and the E-410, also offer Live View. The E-510 has Live View and sensor-level image stabilization, which makes it a very attractive camera. Canon's new pro body, the EOS-1D Mark III also offers a live view mode. Of course, the new EOS-1D will cost about $4500, so it's in a different class. I think there's one other digital SLR that has a live view mode, but I can't remember which one. It may be the new Sigma SD14, but I'm not sure.

[subhuman]

Thanks everyone for the helpful advice, Yeah I had been thinking about cameras
with shake reduction, to bad they dont all have it. Lugging around a tripod everywhere
I go gets tiresome as well as painful on my decaying spine. I checked out the reviews
on Pentax seem to be pretty good, I just wished there was somewhere I could try one.
the 100D was a pretty good price but only 6 megapixels, compared to the 10D with
10megapixels but $300 more........Is more megapixels better as everyone says?
I dont know about the live view you were talking about, I have seen it on some camera's
it looked like it would be annoying, but I may be wrong I will see if I can try one.........

[Photo-John]

There are two main reasons why you'd want to use live view. One is, you're used to a point-and-shoot digital where you only use the LCD for composing. The second, and more legitimate reason, is you do some sort of shooting where using the viewfinder is awkward. I do a lot of tabletop product photography and not having to use the viewfinder would be very nice for me.

More pixels are not always better. That is especially true for compact cameras. But with digital SLRs, more pixels usually are better. The size of the individual pixels is the limiting factor. And digital SLR pixels are much larger than P&S pixels. The jump from 6 to 10 million pixels with the two Pentax cameras is absolutely worth some extra money. That's almost a 100% increase in resolution and you will see more detail and noise will be minimized because of the increased number of pixels.

You need to decide whether you will really benefit from the increased resolution. I found my 6-megapixel camera was great for portraits and product photography, where fine details aren't critical. On the other hand, my new 10-megapixel camera is much better for landscape photos where fine detail is very important. If you buy the 6-megapixel camera you could use the extra $300 for a second or better lens. That's also something to think about. The lens is a better long-term investment because it will be good with any camera you own (as long as you stick with the same manufacturer).

I think the Pentax is a really, really nice camera