Digital Cameras...anyone Into Them / Sell Them?

Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum

Help Support Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

pokolbinguy

The Pokolbin Brewhaus and Winery.
Joined
7/4/06
Messages
3,027
Reaction score
11
Hey folks,

So before someone says "this is a beer forum...lah de dah"......I have already looked elsewhere and am doing my own research but AHB has such as great mix of people you never know what info you may be able to get out of a crazy crowd like this.

Anyway I am looking at buy a digital SLR camera...looking at the Pentax K-X and wondering if anyone has any info that I should know..especially if I should not be buying this camera for some strange reason.

The other reason....does anyone work for a camera store/retailer and able to tell me what I should be paying.

Anyway thanks for any help in advance guys....and I'll make sure I take some good brewing shots with my new toy when I get it.

Cheers, Pok
 
Check officeworks.com.au, they have it listed online and they match & beat any advertised price by 5%, they have it for $774 so try and find someone who is cheaper than that (teds is listed at $799). if its not in store they will ship to your local store usually same / next day

I got a D-SLR (olympus twin lens kit) for the wife for her xmas pressie and a couple of IPod touches (got them to price match the lot, then used my 5% coles staff discount too ;) )

I am no expert on D-SLR's or photography in any way. So can't advise on the camera choice itself, I am sure there must be digital camera nut on here somewhere !

Andy
 
Check officeworks.com.au, they have it listed online and they match & beat any advertised price by 5%, they have it for $774 so try and find someone who is cheaper than that (teds is listed at $799). if its not in store they will ship to your local store usually same / next day
Andy

Cheers, I had actually thought about officeworks....JB have it for $777, and found it online for $739 (DigitalCameraWarehouse)... so 5% better than those are $738 & $702. I'm hoping I can get it for $700 from JB or something like that.

Sort of hoping someone on here will know of a super duper price.
 
Depends what you want it for. If you're just a point-and-shooter then get one that's comfy, with a nice clear menu, easy-to-access buttons, and a reasonably cheap multi-purpose lens (an 18-70 telephoto should cover most of what you'll want to do). I can't stand live-view screens (where's the art in that?), but that's my opinion.

If you have no intention of buying more lenses, stop looking at DSLRs right now. You can get everything you want in a pro-sumer (cross between professional and consumer) camera. Loads of functions, some zoom, but no interchangeable lenses.

If you plan on doing something a little fancy (and learning how) including buying more lenses then have a look at the maximum burst speed (photos per second), memory type (I prefer compact flash, but others have other opinions), cost of lenses (for whatever you want to do - super long range, macro, wide-angle, etc), image stabilization (in-camera or in-lens?), ability to shoot RAW, file compression when not shooting RAW, and if you want to get really fussy, dust-prevention mechanisms, ports for remotes, and costs of the same brand flash guns.

I got my Sony alpha-100 in the USA for a steal (with 18-70mm tele, 75-300mm) but I didn't look into the cost of lenses back here (ouch!). Thankfully though, Sony couldn't be bothered making their own cameras, so they bought out Minolta, and all the old lenses still fit. I even managed to work together an adaptor from an old lens cover and fit a perfectly good 10mm macro lens from crime-converters for a total cost of $2.

I would also recommend investing in a short-course in photography from your local adult education centre (for you pok, the WEA does a pretty good course run by a distinguished nature photographer).

In the end, the analogy to brewing is apt - you can spend whatever you want, depending on how sophisticated you want to be and how much control you want, but in the end you can make a great beer / take great photos with the simplest setup.
 
Ive got a Nikon D40 with a 50mm prime on the front and love it. A proper flash also makes a huge difference to your photos so leave some money for that. Go to a shop where they will let you hold the different models and fire off a few shots. I have a pentax small camera thats ok but cant tell you any more on the one your after. It all depends how far you want to take it. If going into it a fair way then go Nikon or Canon. The real money is spent on lenses as bodies get upgraded. The lenses can last for years and years. I went bottom end on my Nikon the body was about $400.The lens was more higher end at $600. Most top end zoom lenses for the Nikon are over $2000. So look at the whole picture of cost when buying a brand. I can vouch highly for Nikon D90, D300. My friend has a Pentax and a Sony and has just got a Nikon D300 and loves it.

Good Luck

d-d-photographics.com.au is a good place to look for Nikon and Canon
 
Photography has to be the biggest money sink imaginable.

I picked up a Canon EAS20D for a fairly nice price a couple of years back. Bought a lens (22-50mm). Then another (50mm F1.8). Then another (28-300mm). Then my son broke one of my lenses (the 50mm), so now I need to buy a new one, but of course I can't just get the cheap one like last time, now I have to get the better one. And the 7D is out and is a million times better then the 20D and I could probably get it from america for just under 2k. But then my 2 remaining lenses would be revealed for the crap they are so I'd need to get some nice L-series lenses (prices starting around $1k...)

Basically, I've spent about $1500 so far, and about to spend $500 on a new 50mm prime. If I had my way though, without SWMBO reining in my spending, I'd be closer to 10k - and still not happy with what I had and wanting to go all out and spend 50k on assorted lenses, flashes, etc.

But I do love playing with it. But love fiddling with all the bits and seeing what they do, and playing with different techniques, etc. Hate taking actual photos though - I'm all about the tech.

If you just want to take good photos, there are heaps of awesome cameras around. I bought my mother a great little compact for under $400. She's right into her orchids, and this camera takes beautiful sharp macro shots, great colour reproduction, etc. It's a killer camera. To get similar results with my DSLR I'd need to spend about $1k on a lens.

To me, there are two main reasons to go DSLR:
1. You're a tech nerd. Like me.
2. You take lot's of low light shots, or need to do specialised flash photography

If you don't fall into those categories, there is HEAPS of options out there that are worth looking into. But if you must, the biggest concern IMO is lens availability and pricing.
 
Thanks for the replies guys, greatly appreciated.

The idea on doing a short photography course is a good one...Might look into that one. Last time I read about them I think they even teach you using your camera...could be wrong though.

On the lenses front, half the reason I want to buy a DSLR is for the whole lens side of things, I find technology interesting (little bit of a tech nerd like Zebba) and my Dad has some older Pentax lenses that he has for his old Pentax Spotmatic that I would love to have a go playing around with.

I think I will go into town today and talk to someone who really knows their stuff.

Pok
 
my Dad has some older Pentax lenses that he has for his old Pentax Spotmatic that I would love to have a go playing around with.
Just double check that the older lenses will actually work with newer cameras (i.e. that the mounts are the same). Looks like they will but I'd confirm that if you haven't already.

Photography is a great hobby for embracing that inner geek.
 
Just double check that the older lenses will actually work with newer cameras (i.e. that the mounts are the same). Looks like they will but I'd confirm that if you haven't already.

The should work with a ring adapter. The lenses that Dad has are screw mount, while the new ones are "K" mount or something..sort of a bayonet....only down side is that you have to manually focus and may have to set the right aperture...but all in good fun and learning. I'll suss this out today....Im going to head to town to ask the big questions. Anyway what I am getting at is you can use an adapter to mount the lenses.

Cheers, Pok
 
Pok

I used to run Pentax gear a few years ago (actually a lot of years ago). The thing with old lenses with the screw fitting is that while you can get an adapter to attach them to a K mount body, you get no autofocus or exposure. That was OK for me back when I was doing landscape work on film as I used manual meters but the newer DSLRs won't play at all with a non-auto lens.

If the old lenses are the reason you are looking at Pentax then I wouldn't put too much weight on that as they are unlikely to work.

Pentax make good solid cameras. I used them for years as a pro landscape photographer. I use Canon now. They make very good gear. I used canon film cameras when I was a pro portrait photographer. Now I use a DSLR (D40) for the occasional job I still get.

Any of the good camera brands will give you a good dependable camera. Canon, Nikon, Pentax...

The important thing is to go into the camera shop, have them out batteries in each of them and have a play with them. What works and feels comfortable for me will feel terrible to you. If they won't let you play with them, go somewhere else.

Cheers
Dave
 
Bit the bullet today....purchased a Pentax Kx, twin lens kit....going to have a look at my 1st photos now :D
 
Have fun. Photography is a good bit of fun. Im into landscapes as I cant shoot portraits to save myself.
Night photography is my game.
Buy yourself a decent "weighty" tripod. Long exposure really shows up any movement. IR or radio remotes are a good tool as well. Look for second hand kit too. Penty of good gear comes up second hand. Photography guys seem to upgrade gear all the time. Lenses will be the hardest items to come by as people buy lens for their kit and keep them. Typically lens will cost you 2-3x what your body is worth! which is why people tend to choose a brand and stick with it because they have conciderable investment in lens.
I'm a nikon kid, my old man is minolta film and canon digital.
Like you've already picked up most older lens are still compatable with D-SLRs but you wont get the features you get with newer lenses (mostly anti vibration stuff)
 
Come on... post em up for critique ;-)

Here's one for you....is the only one I have on my computer. Resolution has been reduced to make the file smaller.

Not the best photo but I still like it considering it was about photo number 3 that I took with the camera.

Got to get myself a bag etc so I can safely take this baby places.

I'll put some more up when I take some decent ones.

Cheers,Pok

flower.jpg
 
Here's one for you....is the only one I have on my computer. Resolution has been reduced to make the file smaller.

Not the best photo but I still like it considering it was about photo number 3 that I took with the camera.

Got to get myself a bag etc so I can safely take this baby places.

I'll put some more up when I take some decent ones.

Cheers,Pok

View attachment 34467

Not bad detail. Does that camera have an option to shoot in raw mode or just the jpg? If it has a raw mode its well worth using it. Do all your editing in raw then export to jpg for final display.

Cheers
Dave
 
Yep can do RAW...I dont know anything about it at all yet, as for editing...haven't started getting into that at all either. All my photos have been purely...dump on compute from camera and print etc
 
You might want to ask yourself what is the intended purpose of your photos?

For most it's to view on screen, share with friends, print occasionally. In this case RAW just isn't worth it. File size alone is a pain and burst shooting will slow down.

High resolution JPG set at max quality (superfine) will suffice.
 
You might want to ask yourself what is the intended purpose of your photos?

For most it's to view on screen, share with friends, print occasionally. In this case RAW just isn't worth it. File size alone is a pain and burst shooting will slow down.

High resolution JPG set at max quality (superfine) will suffice.

Thats what I thought. RAW is I assume better when doing large prints etc??? Feel free to explain what is better about it....got to learn sometime. At the moment I am keen to learn how to take better shots, most will be stored and viewed digitally...but I guess I should start a printed collection.
 
Back
Top