Hi to all. Newbie to the forums.

[ERdept]

I just wanted to say Hello! I'm a member of other forums and know that current members hate repetitive questions being asked. I don't react that way or say, "have you used the search function". Some folks have and didn't find the answers they were/are looking for.

I've always liked photography and have been taking pictures since I was a 10 years old. Nothing high quality or professional. I just asked for and recieved cameras when I was a kid and remember want a Nikon F1. I didn't get it. I did get a Kodak Disk camera. This had the film in a circular disk. When printed the negatives and film both were on a little disk. Nothing special. I had an Olympus digital later in life, again, nothing special. Well I never did get any good camera and still don't have a great camera (Nikon Coolpix 4300). Still I loved that art of photography.

Now I have the resources to finally get a nice camera and I want a digital. Here goes the repetitive question........I tried the search function but couldn't find concensus on what was a good camera to start out with and not have to upgrade.

Could you guys recommend 1 and only 1 camera that I can take high quality DIGITAL photos with. It must be able to take macro, telephoto, and have all it's abilites contained not requiring extra flashes, lenses, or equipment, and be less than $1200.

I'm thinking the Rebel series. Is that alright to get and stay with for my uses. Taking macro photos with a lot of detail. Taking everyday photos that are of great quality and the ability to blow them up to 8 1/2 by 11. Taking photos that anyone would be proud to post on this forum such as the ones I've seen?

Sincerley,

Cliff

[JSPhoto]

First off, Welcome

Now on to your question. In my case, I started to get into this photography seriously in 2001. Since then I have been through several cameras, all digital. The first was a Polaroid P&S. It got me hooked. From there I upgraded to a $1500 Olympus C2100UZ, then a year later I fell and hit my head... waking up with a Canon 1D. Then I needed a backup, so I wound up with the DRebel aka Digital Rebel 300D. Recently my 1D died and had to go off to the service center and I found the DRebel not able to do my backup work. So yesterday, I fell and hit my head again, ordering a 1D MKII N, a new 70-200 USM IS, a 28-300 USM IS and a 580EX flash....
My point, well, one is that you will always want something better, whether it's lens or body wise (camera body ). And the technology is changing daily, choices are outrageous now.
In your price range you can do several things. Get new gear, a Rebel is in your range, but for a few hundred more you can get a 10D or 20D. Or you can go used and get something too.
I know, more to think about! And keep away from "grey market gear". Also check out sellers before purchasing anything. Better safe than sorry!

JS

[mjs1973]

Welcome to the forum. Based on what you say you're looking for, I don't thing the Rebel series is what you're looking for. Don't get me wrong, I think they are great cameras and would recomend them to someon looking for a DSLR, but I don't think it will meet your needs without getting an extra lens or two. You might find something that meets your needs in the advanced digital market, rather than getting an SLR. I did a quick search at B&H and found this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

I have never used one of these so I know nothing about them, other than what I read in the specs page. That being said, it has macro capabilities, a zoom range from 28mm-300mm, 9 megapixels, built in flash...

I'm sure there are others that will meet your needs without all the extra gear to cary around. This is just the first one I saw.

Good luck with your purchase.

[another view]

Hi and welcome. I second what Mike said above. A DSLR is a whole different experience, and it doesn't sound like the right choice for you. You will need a couple/few extra lenses to do what you want, and although there is a built-in flash with this one you'll get much better results in many cases with an external flash.

Here's a link to Nikon's cameras and you might want to look at the 8800. The one Mike linked to is supposed to be good too. I have an older Coolpix 5000, which is two generations older than the current 8400. 8x10's look great from it, and it does macro very well. It doesn't have anywhere near as long of a telephoto on it though. Again, lots of choices out there. If you don't see what you want out there now - just like the weather, wait five minutes!

[ERdept]

Thanks guys/gals. Sometimes I think that something is right for my according to my perceptions. With the light of correct information, I have a better understanding and thus can make a better decision.

So I take your word that DSLR (new lingo for me I've just learned today) may not be what I'm looking for.

I did the research on the narrowed reccommendations between Fuji and Nikon and have concluded that the Nikon is the one for me.

That's why I love these forums. Informed decision making from end users.

Sincere thanks,

Cliff

[another view]

DSLR = digital single lens reflex

Basically, the advantages are that the images will have less noise at higher ISO's (important if you shoot that way, but software can help too), faster response time and more available accessories. The disadvantages are more stuff to buy and carry, and dust on the sensor is a problem that will have to be dealt with (see the post in Help about this).

I use both, and they're different tools for different jobs. Actually, I've been shooting a lot with my Coolpix lately - from studio product stuff, to nature stuff on a kayak trip, to people shots at events. It's nice to not have to carry a lot of gear but still have something to shoot with. Without it, sometimes I probably wouldn't have a camera with rather than having to carry all that stuff.