SLR Digital Camera

[scotttmason]

Prices are always coming down: (ballpark, but you get the idea)
1982
Nikon FE - $250
Nikon 105mm macro - $500

Built to last and still working great - would love it if they offered a "databack" with a 5 megapixels for it; only databacks available to my knowledge are used by AP photographers and run $20,000.

[jacon12]

If you want pictures for the web, most any camera that will do closeup will work fine.
The picture below was taken with my Nikon dslr and a Sigma wide angle lens. The lens was stopped down to f/22 for max depth of field

The next shot was taken with a prosumer model that was half the price..

I like the prosumer model, a Nikon 5700, because of its fold out lcd screen that can be rotated for easy viewing, especially when the camera is sitting in a hard to get to spot. The f/stop for it was f/5.6, I believe. I set it for it s smallest aperture, f/8.. but when I zoomed the lens a little to get to the 'sweet spot' for close ups it automatically opened the lens an fstop.
Jarrell

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dickiee

Just to let know, those who are interested in my decision...I haven't made one yet and probably won't until Fall or later. In the first place I'm not far enough along with my layout to really need it. Secondly I need to let things percolate in my mind before I jump. If I had to decide right this minute I would probably go with the Canon Digital Rebel. Fortunately, I don't have to decide right now.

Perhaps a good thing because in reading all the responses I didn't see anyone answer one critical question for Model Railroad photography. Since you said you had a 35mm before I'll assume you understand apeture settings. For getting good close ups of your model trains you need a close focusing lens with a very small aperture ideally f32. This also means a tripod mount and remote trigger are ideal (so you don't shake the camera while releasing the shutter). As a reference see the requirements for photo submission to Model Railroader.

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kickinhorsepass

One thing that no one seems to have touched on is that you need a digital camera that can maintain an extended exposure (most good ones will max-out at 30 seconds, even in "bulb" mode. This, combined with a typical F11 maximum, yields a decent photo (see below), but still lacks the depth of field.)

You need this range because in order to get a somewhat realistic looking photo, lower light, F-stop around 30-40 range, and 1+minute exposures will yield knockout photos. My layout gets photographed by visitors who try and use the flash, or those who dont and try it on a moving train. Both lead to very dissapointing pictures. Flash assisted shots in normal light lead to a crisp, lifeless, and visually bland photo, with only the absolute center of the image in focus. The latter yields a warmer looking picture, but with the subject entirely out of focus. Bang for your buck, with magazine quality results... Minolta Dimage A2.. 8 megapix and Macro, anti-shake. You can probably get a brnad new one on ebay for less than $550.00 US (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48540&item=7522304852&rd=1)

just found a link for ya. Its a great cam, and the latest issueof "Canadian Railway Modeler" has the feature article which was shot entirely with it. I posted some on line here: http://www.thesiding.com/khmrc.htm ----Enjoy---

I took this photo on my layout with a Minolta Dimage A2, 30 seconds @ F11, Low-med light. I now have a Minolta Maxxum D7, which accepts all my regular glass, and will expose for as long as you wish.
http://www.thesiding.com/9301catheast.jpg

Wow, I wonder how many trees are on that layout!
Jarrell

[RMax1]

Some more good suggestions. Film cameras can be had for about half to a third the price. I've seen new consumer Nikons for under $300. If you go used have the camera checked out really well. I liked the Canon A-1 but beware of the early ones. This camera was one of the first electronic cameras and they had a few problems. Repairing this beast could be expensive. One of the companies I worked for supplied me with 2 Canon AE-1P's and then I switched to the Minolta X700's both good cameras just the metering on the Minoltas was better. The Minolta lenses I was using at the time were also a little sharper. Film processing is another problem. Around here the quality is getting really bad. I'm a Kodachrome fan R.I.P. There isn't a camera store in my area that is worth anything. They have all been replaced by Ritz. Custom processing you can find but it carries custom prices. I'm building in a section of my wife's work shop for a b&w darkroom. This may keep me pacified until I want some real color shots. I've seen the Panasonic/Leica's and have never shot one. I'm really interested in these. Mostly it is the same reason I bought the Sony DSC75 above. The Carl Zeiss lens on that camera is really nice. It's a good bang around train travel camera.

RMax1

[tutaenui]

If you are only are only taking photo's for your own use you need not go to the expense of a SLR but could choose a 5-8 megapixel prosumer camera. I have seen photo's in MR taken with a 3 megapixel Sony DSC75 and honestly you could not tell what sort of camera was used. Also with compact camera's it may be easier to get the lens down to track level for great realistic shots.

[eridani]

I'm a professional photo editor.
A couple of thoughts.
I have always stuck with the Minolta system since I got my first Minolta SLR for my birthday when I was 16.

I am currently using a couple of cameras.

A Minolta A2 fixed 8 megapixel fixed lens digital prosumer camera. For someone who is used to the Minolta system the A2 is a good start since the control system is somewhat similar to the Minolta camera system.

The advantage for Model RR shooting is the A2 can use the standard screw in closeup lenses. (Since I m just planning my pike at the moment, I haven't tried to take any pictures yet).

As for film Minoltas, I still use the X700 I bought 20 years ago as well as a Maxxuum.

But the camera that I would HIGHLY recommend is the Panasonic Lumix series.
I currently use the Lumix FZ series. I bought my first one a couple of years ago after a rave review in the Wasington Post that said the then FZ 3 megapixel was better with the Leica lens than a 5 mega pixel camera with a cheap lens. I am now using the FZ 5 as my carry everywhere camera. (and there now newer ones on the market with more megapixels). It doesn't take close up lenses at this point, but has a good macro setting.

Robin

[ben10ben]

QUOTE: Even the legendary Canon AE-1 has a plastic shell

All the more reason to use an A-1 with a brass shell rather than a plastic AE-1[:)][:)]

In all seriousness, digital SLRs probably won't come below $500 or so for a little while. If you don't want to shell out $800-1000, you might want to look at a film SLR that will set you back anywhere from half to a tenth of this. Even a Canon A-series model(AE-1, AE-1 Program, A-1, etc.) will do everything you want minus autofocus for less than a new camera. FD mount lenses are dirt cheap, especially for the more common ones. Canon made a 50mm macro lense that sells for under $50, or various add-on lenses for the front of most standard lenses that add macro functionality. I paid $140 for an A-1. An AE-1 or AE-1 Program with a macro lense would probably cost about the same.

[Anonymous]

One thing that no one seems to have touched on is that you need a digital camera that can maintain an extended exposure (most good ones will max-out at 30 seconds, even in "bulb" mode. This, combined with a typical F11 maximum, yields a decent photo (see below), but still lacks the depth of field.)

You need this range because in order to get a somewhat realistic looking photo, lower light, F-stop around 30-40 range, and 1+minute exposures will yield knockout photos. My layout gets photographed by visitors who try and use the flash, or those who dont and try it on a moving train. Both lead to very dissapointing pictures. Flash assisted shots in normal light lead to a crisp, lifeless, and visually bland photo, with only the absolute center of the image in focus. The latter yields a warmer looking picture, but with the subject entirely out of focus. Bang for your buck, with magazine quality results... Minolta Dimage A2.. 8 megapix and Macro, anti-shake. You can probably get a brnad new one on ebay for less than $550.00 US (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48540&item=7522304852&rd=1)

just found a link for ya. Its a great cam, and the latest issueof "Canadian Railway Modeler" has the feature article which was shot entirely with it. I posted some on line here: http://www.thesiding.com/khmrc.htm ----Enjoy---

I took this photo on my layout with a Minolta Dimage A2, 30 seconds @ F11, Low-med light. I now have a Minolta Maxxum D7, which accepts all my regular glass, and will expose for as long as you wish.
http://www.thesiding.com/9301catheast.jpg

[davekelly]

dickiee,

I understand the wife's point - but there is one thing to realize in the digital world. When the price of your camera you decide on does come down, they'll come up with a new and even better one! It's that never ending cycle - which is why I never look at computer ads for at least six months after I purchase one.

Seriously, glad to see your don't have to jump in right now. As I'm sure everyone who has posted would agree with - an SLR, be it digital or film, can be a major purpose. On the other hand it will last for years and years. Spend the time doing some research talking with folks that already own one (camera loyalty is second only to DCC loyalty).

I do think that, just like DCC, if you pick one of the major brands - you can't go wrong - they're all good.

Dave

[dickiee]

Just to let know, those who are interested in my decision...I haven't made one yet and probably won't until Fall or later. In the first place I'm not far enough along with my layout to really need it. Secondly I need to let things percolate in my mind before I jump. If I had to decide right this minute I would probably go with the Canon Digital Rebel. Fortunately, I don't have to decide right now.

Thanks, again, for all the input and interest.

My wife wants me to wait until the prices come down!!!!

[RMax1]

SLR stands for Single Lens Reflex. The lens you are taking a picture with is the same one you are viewing thru. Things to look for when buying an slr. Plastic is not always bad. Even the legendary Canon AE-1 has a plastic shell! It is embedded with a metal powder but still plastic. Plenty of those things still running around. A stainless steel lens mount is better than a polycard or plastic one. I have never seen a plastic lens mount break. I have seen plastic body shells crack. Minolta aluminum body shell at one time had a splitting problem. but plastic shells shatter or crumble. The real money you will spend is in lenses. Make sure you can live with the lens line. Canon and Nikon both have at least 2 levels of lens lines. Third party lens while most of the time are ok they are still hit and miss. Be careful of manufacture kit lenses some are cheap, some are good and some are cheap and good. Then again some are bad. I have a cheap Quanttaray fla***hat kicks butt. The lenses are ehhh????? Do your homework.

RMax

[grandeman]

Guys, help out a photography newbie, wha does SLR mean? I'm taking pics with a $150 Sony CyberShot and can see where a nice camera would come in handy. I'd like to get something better but don't want to spend a grand on it. Thanks.

[davekelly]

Dickiee,

Be sure to let us know what your decision is!

[tjsprague]

Nikon has just announced a omewhat less expensive model in its prosumer line, the D50. I own the D70 and love it, though i could see how the cost is enough to scare many away. For a review fo the D-50, and many others chekc out
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d50.htm

Good luck.

Tim

[Anonymous]

Keep in mind, with a digital cam, taking pictures doesn't cost anything. I bought my first digital camera 6 years ago. It is still my primary digital camer, although it is getting a bit long-in-the-tooth.

When my family went to disneyworld on vacation, I took the digicam and a few memory cards. I could take up to about 200 or so pictures per day. Changing memory cards took less time than reloading a film camera. When I got back to the hotel room, I plugged the camera into the hotel room TV and flipped though the pics, discarding any that were bad. Then I downloaded them to my laptop, wiped the memory card, put the batteries on charge, and I was ready to go the next day.

I was MUCH freer in taking pictures, and taking multiple pictures of the same thing, hoping for one good shot. I ended up getting lots of really good pics.

It is possible to make a pin-hole attachment for some digital cams, and the higher end ones can use the nicer lenses.

I would never go back to film cameras again.

Rob

[Anonymous]

The nice thing about digital cameras is that you can try them out at the store and see some level of immediate results. Using the camera for MR is somewhat of a specialized use (e.g., closeup capabilities may be more important than fast action shots). Most of the cameras mentioned are higher end. It is possible now to get less expensive 5 megapixel cameras for around $300. Some of the discriminators are the quality of the fixed lens and whether the camera has both digital and physical zoom capabilities. A time lag may not be a big issue if you are only shooting fixed scenes. Setting up a digital camera for quality shots is different than a SLR standard film carmera. PC magazine has excellent articles in their archives about this (e.g., setting white point). There are both expensive (e.g, Photoshop) and inexpensive applications (e.g., Picasa2 (free from Google)) for working with and cataloging digital images. Another factor to consider is how you are going to publi***he photos - printing on inkjet or color laser printers and/or publishing on the web. If you are publishing on the web, high megapixel cameras are overkill. Quality web photos can be generated with even 3 or 4 megapixel cameras. If you have a laptop computer I'd take it to the camera store when you look at cameras. The picture may look different on the laptop screen than on the small camera display. A lot of lighting issues can be overcome with the image manipulation applications. The one big advantage the high end digital cameras with separate lenses have is better control over depth of field.

[Anonymous]

One thing to look at is the cameras ability to adapt to changes available light in a room. The Nikon D70 takes it in stride. Lesser quality has a noticable time lag which may be overcome by using movie clip mode. Froogle and Pricewatchers are too good sites when looking for best deal.

[jacon12]

I've been using Nikon digitals since 1999, starting with the 990, the 5700 and now the D100. You mentioned depth of field was important, and it surely is for layout shots. The 'prosumer' grade camera have more depth of field than the dslr group due to the size of the ccd. One of the best cameras I have for depth of field is one of my oldest, the 990. You can, of course, get the dof required by using wide angle lenses and the smallest lens opening you can.
As mentioned earlier, I would look at the D70 and the new D50 in the Nikon line and the Rebel in the Canon line. Just be prepared to lay out some major money for the lenses.. :}
Jarrell

[Anonymous]

lens
go with 28 -70 short zoom
70 -210 long zoom
camera go with the better canon or the nikon d70 or new d50
stay away from rebel I have been to it doen'nt hold up as well ( Plastic)
Go to dpreveiw.com and compare features
also buy a flash for darker times ( when pop up flash is to small )when you have funds
remember to use the red reduction feature when using pop up flash

[Anonymous]

I purchased a Nikon D-70. SWEET SLR!! Very easy to get great results from this camera. It has a lot more features than I'll ever use. The camera is very lightweight, and has a lot of goodies out there for it too!!

[davekelly]

RMax brings up some excellent points that I discovered when I bought my SLR three years ago. Every line has its tradeoffs. When researching you should also check out what lenses are available from third parties - while arguably not as good as the Canons, Nikons etc, they can be quite a bit cheaper.

Given the dollar amount your talking about spending - be it a film or digital SLR - I would highly suggest spending a good amount of time researching - both in print, on the web and anyone that you know that owns such cameras. Although they can be pricey - they last forever - my AE1 is hitting 25 years and my dad's Konica probably about 33 or so - both are running strong and still taking excellent pictures.

While the point and click cameras have a place in the market - I own a few and love them - once you start taking pics with an SLR - there's no turning back!

Dave

[RMax1]

Nikon has the D70 digital slr. It was rated camera of the year by Popular Photography if I remember correctly. It's around $1000 with lens. The Nikon flash system is awesome and the lenses are excellent. I've shot with most brands of 35mm cameras over the years . The Pentax and Minoltas are fairly nice usually for less money than the Nikons and Canons. I wouldn't own a Canon film camera.(AE-1 or F1the exceptions) They are however producing the leading edge of price and features in the digital slr market. The digital rebel is nice featured and well priced. The thing that bothers me is it is cheap feeling and flimsy. The early ones had problems. Figure out what you want as important features. Then figure out the price range that fits. Look at the lines rather than the camera. When you buy an SLR accessories are important. I love my Nikon F100 for it's features but the Canon lens line fits the way I work better. They have a little better selection as opposed to quality. I just hate the Canon camera bodies.

RMax1

[davekelly]

dickiee,

I think you'll be surprised on the advances made. I think my AE1 weighs about 25 percent less than my dad's Konica, and my new EOS Elan weighs about 1/2 of the AE1. It's amazing!! Perhaps you might want to check out some camera stores in your area for a used SLR. Gives you something to play with at a relatively cheap price.

I think I spent about 3 months researching before deciding on my Canon Elan! I've been totally happy with it - even if it is a film camera!

I don't know if this is true for digitals, but when checking out prices for film SLR's you'll see that there is quite a difference for the same model. It is my understanding that many of the retailers that have really cheap prices sell cameras that are imported by them and can sell them less than the U.S. version of the same model. It is my understanding that the warranty on those cameras are not good in the U.S. - you have to ship the thing overseas. At least this is my understanding - maybe someone more in the know can tell me if this is correct or not.

(Of course in over 20 years I had not one problem with my AE1 so perhaps it isn't a big deal - but then you never know).

[dickiee]

First of all, I want to thank everone for their input!. Secondly would be to ask for opinions on which would be the most versatile lens to purchase for MR photography. Keep in mind I have access to a "snapshot" type digital camera.

[rrinker]

The Canon Digital Rebel is probably the best deal in 'consumer' digital SLRs out right now. It has most of the fetures of canon's higher end DSLRs, and I beleive there are ways to unlock some of the features the DRebel doesn't have.
The camera's not what's expensive - it's the lenses!

--Randy

[tstage]

My father-in-law has the Canon SLR (I think the EOS) digital camera and has been very happy with it. He's been doing amatuer photography for years.

Tom

[dickiee]

davekelly
I'm sorry that I did not make myself clear...I no longer have the Minolta camera or the lenses. I need to purchase a new camera and am having trouble deciding what to buy. I guess the basic functions have not changed....only the technology.

[davekelly]

I have a Canon EOS Elan 6 SLR. It is a fantastic camera - but of course it is film. I also have an old Canon AE1 (circa 1980) that still takes fantastic pictures as does my Dad's old Konica SLR (circa 1970). Those old SLR's still take great pics and I'm sure your Minolta is no different. The Canon Digital Rebel looks like a fantastic camera and of course it can use all my lenses but the price is still a little out of reach for me given the functions available.

Perhaps what you can do is to use a digital camera to set up the scene and check out the composition and then use your SLR to take the final picture - making sure you properly bracket the f-stops.