Search the Community

I have decided on getting the Nikon D3200 as the price for a bundle was good. However, now that I have looked into it a little more I have come across something that isn't clear to me. The Kit that I bought contains the camera, a 18-55mm lens and a 55-200mm lens and the zoom ratios are 3.2 and 3.6 respectively. What isn't clear to me is what differentiates these two lens as their zoom is almost identical. Any input would be appreciated. -Adnan

I've narrowed it down for these two options in terms of what I'm looking for in my next DSLR. I'm currently using a T3, and the specs just don't cut it for my usage scenario. I need sharper image quality and FAR sharper video quality, as well as more features within the camera itself. Here is basically what I'm doing atm, but I may move into other forms of photography/video work: Timelapsing (Using both still images and video) Long exposure shots (such as at nighttime) Other kinds of video work (not sure what I'll get into) HDR Overall functional DSLR for everyday photography (so a zoom lens with a lot of zoom variance would be preferrable.) I am leaning toward the 70D for these reasons: Lens compatibility - I don't have to sell all my lenses (I can keep my 50mm f1.8 ) 18-135 lens gives me plenty of options in one lens (I hate switching between a 18-55 and a 75-300, for example) Continous autofocus in video mode (Big +1) HDR functionality More choices in terms of lenses in the future Familiar with Canon But I am also interested in the GH3 for these reasons: Built in intervelometer (timelapsing device) Non-stop video recording until the card is full Cheaper than the 70D (slightly) Smaller, lighter, and more portable Keep in mind my interests may change in the future, but what do you think would be a better camera for my uses? I'm still leaning on the 70D a bit more for not having to sell my lenses, but what do you guys think? Thanks.

I am trying to get my freinds dslr to be used as a camera on windows 8 but I don't know any decent camera apps for windows that I could do this with , any suggestions?

Well hello! Im going to buy my first DSLR. I will be using it for picturing airplanes and other stuff. My budget is around 500$. I was thinking about buying used Canon 1000d which is around 2 years old, and it has done around 10.000 photos. I will also get default 18-55 lens and 75-300mm lens. Is that good for beginner or i should choose other DSLR. Thank you for answers.

I'm looking into getting my first Camera. What I will be going for is Landscapes, Nature, and random stuff but the end goal will be astrophotography. Will a Canon D60 be a good way to go? I don't want to be to cheap 1100-1200$ is my budget for now. Will this be Ok for my first DSLR? I am open to suggestions so please don't hesitate to chime in.

Hi guys, Hopefully someone can help me out I'm in need of some microphones, one for my pc to record some podcasts with friends and the other would be for my Dslr camera. My question is can I use a Microphone for both a Dslr and for my PC? The microphone I've been looking at is the 'Rode videomic pro' http://www.amazon.com/Rode-VideoMic-VMP-Shotgun-Microphone/dp/B004K8WPUQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1385578300&sr=8-2&keywords=rode+videomic+pro Do you think this will work well plugged directly into my pc via a Creative Sound Blaster ZX sound card? Any suggestions would be appreciated, thanks!

Here I will be posting pictures of my trip and share my thoughts (on the places and the pictures) I am almost done with my vacation so feel free to ask any questions.

Pentax Q review ($240 $200 price point considered) http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-Black-Standard-Zoom-Lens/dp/B007SQB896/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380812131&sr=8-1&keywords=pentax+q I'm writing this for a number of reasons, firstly because the Pentax Q is my favourite camera, secondly, because I want to debunk the bullshit that sensor size directly correlates to image quality, thirdly because I want to debunk the bullshit that bloody brilliant cameras don't exist at the ~$240 $200 price point, fourthly because I love reading my own stellar and impregnating handle of the English language and fifthly because I've actually never used the word fifthly before. I'm not even sure it's a word. Fifthly. I'm exposed to perpetual genius in my seasoned travels and adventures. For example (and speaking of seasoned), just last night I found a joint that makes nacho pizza - I'll let your tiny minds absorb the sheer genius of that for a second before sinking my teeth into the delicious molten cheese body of the review. Pentax's Q is of the same genus as this genius. Like Slick, it's powerful, utilitarian and arguably sexy, and like Linus it's small and cheaply bought. It's exciting, but measured at the same time, and given this brief overview you should be fricken enthusiastic about this camera - even more enthusiastic than Pentax was at my suggestion of using the Slick/Linus comparison for the review section on their website. Build & Handling Starting with the basics, it's an interchangeable lens, mirrorless camera and it's the smallest one in the world. It has on board, extend-able flash (guide number ~7, the extend-able arm will prevent a shadow cast by longer lenses in your shot and eliminate red-eye) and a standard hotshoe, an ample scattering of buttons and dials, a stabilized 1/2.3" CMOS sensor and uses Pentax's Q mount. The Q, in typical Pentax fashion, it's built as well as any professional jobbie out there. A magnesium alloy exoskeleton wraps around the whole unit, with a flush and thick glass panel occupying most of the rear of the camera. Function buttons are small and recessed, however give a great tacticle click when depressed, and honestly are the correct decision as it effectively adds to the longevity of the buttons as they can't get caught when being removed from your bag or pocket. Yes, pocket, it will fit in yours. It's 98mm across, 57mm tall and 31mm in thickness, however I want to point out that after you whack a lens on it it will be considerably thicker, so I'd only pay attention to the width and height, as parting the lens between shots really isn't practical. The screen is okay. In sunlight it's serviceable but the pixel density nor brightness is going to knock your socks off. The dials click nicely - a bit heavy for my liking, but their propensity to static only adds to the solid feel of the camera. Doors are plastic but nice and solid and the shutter release button is awesome. I also want to point out that Pentax's Q mount is one of the nicest mounts I've experienced. The clasping ratchet is powerful, and there is absolutely no movement once a lens is mounted, so props to Pentax for that. It's small, however comfortable, and the buttons will never be accidentally depressed due to the heavy, polar state switches used. tldr; The build quality is second to none. Image Making I used the word "exposed" as the second word in the second paragraph of this review, which is good for two reasons, primarily because it makes for a fucking brilliant segue and secondly because I can now talk about the point of its existence. Image making. The Q spits out raw DNG and/or JPEG files at 12.4 megapixels, and if you suddenly lost interest at the respectively low megapixel count then you already have something in common with this camera's megapixel count, and that would be your age. The camera fires at a maximum shutter speed of 1 8000th of a second and will expose to 30" on board, with single stop rungs between these two polars, so nothing surprising here. It also includes manual exposure timing (BULB). Iso ranges from 125 to 6400. The camera can be shunt into full manual mode for both stills and video, which is basically unseen on a camera at this price point, and features aperture and shutter priority, which is bloody useful. It sucks in full hd video at 30p, however auto focus is disabled in video mode. This isn't as crippling as you might think, as the small sensor gives you tonnes of hyperfocal room, and the inclusion of focus peaking (update your firmware if you don't have it) makes manual focus terribly easy. There is an on board interval shooting mode, which will accept up to 999 photos to be taken between 1 second and 24 hours apart, and a bunch of filters and effects for you to play around with (which surprisingly function really well here. Hell, I'd say they're class leading). Also has an in built neutral density filter which can be toggled on via the menu, and a trailing flash optionm which are two awesome surprises, which are surprising awesome! Auto focus works well too. It's fast enough, doesn't hunt too much and can be switched into zone, center, spot and grid modes. Auto exposure metering can likewise be switched to center, zone and grid. The camera can burst at 5fps for 1 second also, which is too limited to be a terribly useful function though it's there. I don't want to talk about JPEG too much as I don't use this function, however from what I have used, the JPEG compression algorithm is nicely executed here. It isn't anywhere near as harsh as Sony's implementation in the outputted sharpness and dynamic range, and doesn't obliterate shadows and blacks like Canons', which is nice. I think the low megapixel count probably helps the Pentax out here, so it may be a bit unfair to make those comparisons. I personally think the JPEG's are too vibrant, however I think this was Pentax's way of catering for the people who might use this camera as a point and shoot and not work on the images in post, which kind of makes sense, as people who won't use it as a point and shoot should know that RAW is where it's at, yo. To be honest, I'm not a fan of the DNG format, as I prefer a separate xmp profile to be created when importing my photos into editing suites so the original file is completely untouched, so another format like ARW would be appreciated however this is just a clerical complaint, nothing more. It's worth talking about the video mode in more depth, as this is a very capable video camera. As I mentioned before, no auto focus in video mode, which is poo poo. The video it spits out, however, is clear and compression isn't harsh. It's encoded in H.264 and is nicely wrapped in the MP4 container, which isn't at all surprising, as every lad and their snapback uses this. No mic input or headphone out, and is limited to 25 minutes record time per file, which is more robust than Canon dSLRs, however still limited. I dislike how vibrant the video profile is, as it can lead to colour artifacts and I like to grade my own footage, but it's still a vastly more capable video camera than any competitive options at this price point. I'm not going to throw any more numbers at you, as I think judging a camera by statistics is monumentally stupid so here are a bunch of sample images. (Captured raw, processed in Photoshop CS5. I own 5 lenses for my Q, the 01 standard prime, 02 standard zoom, 06 standard telephoto, as well as a couple of vintage c and d mount lenses for fun. Barrel distortion is fairly harsh on the 01 prime, however the camera can rectify this in-body, and photoshop has auto profiles included, so don't worry about it. Interestingly the 02 zoom is basically distortion free, however being a zoom it's naturally softer than the prime. Chromatic aberration is minimal, and center to corner sharpness is maintained on both lenses. The 06 is an maintains a constant, fast aperture at 2.8 (e f15) throughout it's range, is insanely sharp and absolutely distortion free at all focal lengths. This isn't a lens review, so I'll leave it at that, however I thought I should mention them, seeing as the Pentax Q ecosystem is very VERY tightly integrated. I would now ask the reader to make a note of the fact that I've just written a list of dSLR features and functions for a camera that performs like a dSLR, that sells at $240 $200 and isn't a dSLR. gg. tldr; gg.

hello guys, I'm going on vacation in a few weeks and would like to hear some recommendations of things that I can't go with out for taking great pictures or maybe some good tips for shooting in very bright environments. Cheers

So the Canon T3i (and other cameras) is on their site for $336 right now. Refurbished, of course, but it's "guaranteed" to work and comes with a one year warranty and a lens. Albeit being a standard starter lens, it's still a nice addition. Thoughts? I personally love the camera, and have used it tons. I think it's a great deal, as opposed to the ~$550-600 you can get it for elsewhere.

I want a DSLR and I've been looking around and kind of been doing some homework. So far I found the Nikon D5200 and the Pentax K-50. The other day the D5300 was on sale for $550 for just the body. I would throw in some boundaries like maybe under $800 including lens, like a basic 18-55 lens works <3

I'm planning on buying a DSLR. I'm a beginner and have been using digital cameras for a few years. I'm planning to buy it for taking pictures from family vacations and some videos school projects, and probably some cool things too I was having in mind the Canon 700D 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Kit Set Wound you recommended or is there any thing that suits me more that is from Canon Any help would be appricated Thxs in advance

I was taking some pictures with my Nikon D5600 the other day. Last time I checked the gallery on my camera, it had around 990 pictures, all shot in RAW, in a SanDisk 32GB Extreme Pro. Only after shooting a couple more pictures, I checked my gallery again, only to see I only had 8 pictures in the card. I freaked the hell out. There were some really important vacation photos on that card. I expected the camera to give me something along the lines of 'memory card full' error, hence why I kept shooting, expecting the error message to pop up at any moment. I then immediately switched to my other SD card. So my understanding is, what happened was the SD card got full and it deleted all previous photos to make space for newer ones. This doesn't make sense to me. Why would that happen??? Camera has 1000 pictures, nope, gonna delete all 1000 to make space for newer ones. I'm 1000% sure I did not accidentally format the memory card. So, here goes my questions: 1. How can I prevent this from happening in the future? I did look through the menus on my camera but did not find any option related to that. 2. Is there any way I can recover the photos? I guess the first 8 photos have already been overwritten, but what about the other ones? I'm willing to pay for a recovery software if it's gonna retain at least the majority of the pictures. 3. Was this supposed to happen? Note: I'm not back from vacation until Tuesday the 18th. So, I still didn't check the SD card contents on my computer. I feel stupid saying this, but I still kind of have a tiny bit of hope that the other pictures are inside the card, in some hidden folder. All the help is appreciated guys, thanks in advance.