# Advice on purchasing new professional Camera



## CapotesMom

I'm looking at investing in a new camera for my business.. something more than my 8.0 mpx kodak..lol. 

I need something that I can take professional pics with but I really don't want to break the bank.. nothing over 800...even that is stifling. I need something that would fit a wide angle lens and I want digital.. anyone have professional photography or real estate photography experience that could give me their two cents?


----------



## pjewel

I take all my own real estate and design photos. I currently use a Nikon D60 and a Panasonic Lumix for some of the wider angle shots. My next camera will be the Leica D-Lux 4. The Nikon has a wide range of lenses that you can purchase separately. It can get pricey for some of them. I got my kit with 2 lenses.


----------



## Skye

My brother is a photographer; he loves questions like this! I am posting a link to his blog for info, but feel free to contact him. Hope it helps! I know he has info on this posted before:

http://davidburkeblog.com/


----------



## mintchip

I really think you need to go to a good camera shop and try/hold them etc. 
I was all set to buy a Canon camera but it just didn't feel right to me. I ended up with a Nikon D40.


----------



## Wildflower

I shoot with a Nikon D40 and a Nikon D5000. Also have a Nikon P6000 that I keep in my purse when I don't have time to grab my big camera bag...

If I were you, I'd start out with an entry level DSLR and learn the basics. Maybe consider the Nikon D40. It's coming down in price now and usually will come with at least one lens. It is a great camera and I know a few pros who will still use their D40 occasionally even though they have some of the best stuff out there.

(BTW, that P6000 is an _amazing_ little camera! I'm not a fan of any of the other Coolpix but I DO love this one!)


----------



## Sheri

I just went in to our camera shop to drool over the Nikon D40 I dream about, and was told they are now gone, not available, and that the nearest one available for what I want is the Nikon D3000. Any thoughts on that?


----------



## TurboMom

I have a Canon Rebel Xsi...I love it. The price has gone down tremendously since I purchased (when it was released).


----------



## Flynn Gentry-Taylor

Sheri said:


> I just went in to our camera shop to drool over the Nikon D40 I dream about, and was told they are now gone, not available, and that the nearest one available for what I want is the Nikon D3000. Any thoughts on that?


Wonder if you can still find the D40 at Sams, Costco, or Amazon? Ken Rockwell recommends it as the best one to start with..visit his site www.KenRockwell.com for more than you want to know on cameras...great site..


----------



## mintchip

Flynn Gentry-Taylor said:


> Wonder if you can still find the D40 at Sams, Costco, or Amazon? Ken Rockwell recommends it as the best one to start with..visit his site www.KenRockwell.com for more than you want to know on cameras...great site..


 Ken Rockwell and I agree on this point--most pocket cameras are to SLOW for any action (RLH) photos!
_"I always have a compact camera in my pocket to catch whatever happens around me. I use compact cameras for scenic photos, travel and landscapes, which hold still."_ :frusty:


----------



## Flynn Gentry-Taylor

Sheri said:


> I just went in to our camera shop to drool over the Nikon D40 I dream about, and was told they are now gone, not available, and that the nearest one available for what I want is the Nikon D3000. Any thoughts on that?


Ken says to check out Amazon.com and also had this that I copied from his site,under what's new...
Adorama had a special kit with the D40, 18-55mm lens, case and memory card for only $439.95 for Christmas 2009. Adorama also had the camera and lens alone for the usual price if the special runs out, as does , too. Adorama sometimes has them as a do-everything kit with 18-55 and 55-200 VR lenses, and occasionally as factory refurbished for $375. It helps me keep adding to this site when you get yours through these direct links. Thanks! Ken


----------



## Wildflower

Sheri said:


> I just went in to our camera shop to drool over the Nikon D40 I dream about, and was told they are now gone, not available, and that the nearest one available for what I want is the Nikon D3000. Any thoughts on that?


You can still buy the D40 online at various stores...

I looked at the D3000 and can't remember why now, but I decided against it. I read lots of reviews on it and some of them must've turned me off.

The D90 is what I had planned on buying as my next camera but the D5000 is very similar to it for less money.


----------



## Wildflower

Sheri said:


> I just went in to our camera shop to drool over the Nikon D40 I dream about, and was told they are now gone, not available, and that the nearest one available for what I want is the Nikon D3000. Any thoughts on that?


Another place to look is ebay... I've seen some great prices for the D40 on there. (Especially for the body only if someone were looking for a spare.)


----------



## Leah

Flynn Gentry-Taylor said:


> Wonder if you can still find the D40 at Sams, Costco, or Amazon? Ken Rockwell recommends it as the best one to start with..visit his site www.KenRockwell.com for more than you want to know on cameras...great site..


A Nikon D40 is $624.89 at Amazon. It's a little steep for my picture taking needs.


----------



## MopTop Havanese

I love my d40- I don't think you would be disapointed!


----------



## CapotesMom

Flynn Gentry-Taylor said:


> Ken says to check out Amazon.com and also had this that I copied from his site,under what's new...
> Adorama had a special kit with the D40, 18-55mm lens, case and memory card for only $439.95 for Christmas 2009. Adorama also had the camera and lens alone for the usual price if the special runs out, as does , too. Adorama sometimes has them as a do-everything kit with 18-55 and 55-200 VR lenses, and occasionally as factory refurbished for $375. It helps me keep adding to this site when you get yours through these direct links. Thanks! Ken


...that doesn't sound bad.. the thing is is I know nothing about good cameras.. lol... it was all jargon that you were talking about on the lenses.. What are those various ones?? Is one of them a wide angle?? That's one that I know I need..

I need to break down and buy photoshop too.. much to my chagrin. They charge entirely too much for that program... probably because too many people pirate it..lol..


----------



## harrach

I have a Nikon D40x and love it. I use it for my stained glass pics. BUT, Nikon quit making them only after one year. Their new replacement model is the D60. I'm thinking if you look on Ebay you could get the D40x cheaper since they aren't made anymore? Just a guess. They still make the D40 so make sure you look for the D40x. The D40 is really good too it just has less pixels than the D40x.


----------



## mintchip

MopTop Havanese said:


> I love my d40- I don't think you would be disapointed!


I agree with you Katie !!!!!!


----------



## Leah

You guys have peaked my interest in a Nikon D40. How camera savy do I have to be to operate it?

Also, the price on this camera must have gone up a couple hundred dollars. The reviews I'm reading say it sells for about $450, but the price on Amazon is $624.89. Which price sounds right?

EDIT: This is very interesting. If I buy this camera from an authorized Nikon dealer locally it costs $399, from Amazon it is 624.89. I've never seen such a thing.


----------



## mintchip

Leah said:


> You guys have peaked my interest in a Nikon D40. How camera savy do I have to be to operate it?
> 
> Also, the price on this camera must have gone up a couple hundred dollars. The reviews I'm reading say it sells for about $450, but the price on Amazon is $624.89. Which price sounds right?
> 
> EDIT: This is very interesting. If I buy this camera from an authorized Nikon dealer locally it costs $399, from Amazon it is 624.89. I've never seen such a thing.


The Amazon price includes the lens and the other price is the "body" only
Nikon D40 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera Kit with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens by Nikon


----------



## hartman studio

I bought a Nikon D60 last Fall right before they discontinued it. They had already discontinued both the D40 and D40x, but they had the D40 when I bought mine. My sister and I are both taking a photography class and she just bought the nikon 5000. I like my camera and it takes great pictures. You would not have trouble with any of the entry level Nikon dslr cameras as you can use them in auto mode-in other words just point and shoot. You may want to add a wide angle lens for real estate photos,but the kit lens may be enough. You certainly could wait and see.
Now, on the other hand, I wish I had done a little more research before I bought my camera as I would have bought the Nikon D90. There are several lens that will not autofocus with entry level Nikon cameras as the body of the camera does not have the motor- the lenses do. Therefore some of the lenses are MUCH more expensive for my camera-more than making up the difference in price of the initial purchase of the more expensive D90 . Also the D90 has many controls that are more readily accessible to change than changing everything thru the menu. Now if you don't plan on buying a bunch of lenses, and think you will shoot the camera mostly in one of the auto modes, stick with a D40,D60, 3000, or 5000 as all of them will give you good pics!! Also they are slightly smaller and lighter weight. You may want to check Cannon also-they make great DSLRs. Although my former cameras were all Cannon (which I loved)- I preferred the "feel" of the Nikon. Have fun looking!!! I have been to camera stores almost daily looking at all the things I want to add- I just ordered a 50mm f/1.4 prime lens that I can't wait to try!!!!


----------



## Leah

mintchip said:


> The Amazon price includes the lens and the other price is the "body" only
> Nikon D40 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera Kit with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens by Nikon


Thank you. I see what you mean. The camera without the lens looks a bit naked.


----------



## mintchip

hartman studio said:


> I bought a Nikon D60 last Fall right before they discontinued it. They had already discontinued both the D40 and D40x, but they had the D40 when I bought mine. My sister and I are both taking a photography class and she just bought the nikon 5000. I like my camera and it takes great pictures. You would not have trouble with any of the entry level Nikon dslr cameras as you can use them in auto mode-in other words just point and shoot. You may want to add a wide angle lens for real estate photos,but the kit lens may be enough. You certainly could wait and see.
> Now, on the other hand, I wish I had done a little more research before I bought my camera as I would have bought the Nikon D90. There are several lens that will not autofocus with entry level Nikon cameras as the body of the camera does not have the motor- the lenses do. Therefore some of the lenses are MUCH more expensive for my camera-more than making up the difference in price of the initial purchase of the more expensive D90 . Also the D90 has many controls that are more readily accessible to change than changing everything thru the menu. Now if you don't plan on buying a bunch of lenses, and think you will shoot the camera mostly in one of the auto modes, stick with a D40,D60, 3000, or 5000 as all of them will give you good pics!! Also they are slightly smaller and lighter weight. You may want to check Cannon also-they make great DSLRs. Although my former cameras were all Cannon (which I loved)- I preferred the "feel" of the Nikon. Have fun looking!!! I have been to camera stores almost daily looking at all the things I want to add- I just ordered a 50mm f/1.4 prime lens that I can't wait to try!!!!


You will love the 50mm f/1.4! hoto:


----------



## DanielBMe

You should first ask yourself what kinds of pictures do you take? Indoors with low light, family pics, fast moving action. At this point in time, I'd go with a Nikon D3000 or D5000 and get a good lens. The lens is far more important than the body. If you want multipurpose, you could grab the 18-105VR lens which will give you some reach and maybe a 50mm 1.4 for portraits and low light.

The asking price for a D40 is way too much. I'm looking at upgrading my camera at the moment too, a Nikon D80 with an 18-70 lens. Both are only one I year old and in mint condition and I'm selling for $700 CDN or about $650 US.


----------



## mintchip

DanielBMe said:


> You should first ask yourself what kinds of pictures do you take? Indoors with low light, family pics, fast moving action. At this point in time, I'd go with a Nikon D3000 or D5000 and get a good lens. The lens is far more important than the body. If you want multipurpose, you could grab the 18-105VR lens which will give you some reach and maybe a 50mm 1.4 for portraits and low light.
> 
> The asking price for a D40 is way too much. I'm looking at upgrading my camera at the moment too, a Nikon D80 with an 18-70 lens. Both are only one I year old and in mint condition and I'm selling for $700 CDN or about $650 US.


WOW nice deal. Daniel what are you getting?


----------



## DanielBMe

I haven't decided yet. Maybe a D90 or D300. I may also wait until end of May to see if a new model comes out which would replace the D90. If you know anyone who's looking for a good deal on a camera and lens, let me know  

The 18-70 lens is super sharp but got a really good deal on a 16-85 so bought it. Don't need the 18-70 so figured might as well sell it with the D80.


----------



## mintchip

Hmmmmm! I've been wanting to get the Tamron 90 mm macro f/2.8 lens
PS-I LOVE the D90!


----------



## hartman studio

Sally, the Tamron 90 macro will be next lens,too!!! I just ordered my 50mm 1.4(I ordered the Sigma-more expensive than the Nikon,and heavier, but I love the creamy,dreamy bokeh of that lens). I'm hoping that I like it when it comes. If not, I'll exchange it for the Nikon-which one do you have? So, it may be awhile before I can get the Tamron. I love macro photography-unfortunately as well as the lens price there is the tripod, lens mount, etc. I see a bottomless spending pit!!!

We have an unbelievable unique garden and nursery close to us- Plant Delights that is mainly an online nursery for exotic and interesting plants. Several weekends a year their gardens are open for viewing and they have unbelievably gorgeous flowers( and all the critters that go along with flowers) that would put a macro lover in heaven-I have seen several photographers there in the past, not to mention we have the Duke Gardens, and several others around. I get so excited thinking of all the possibilities!!!

My name is Jocelyn and I'm addicted to photography......


----------



## mintchip

50mm 1.4 :clap2:
Jocelyn I love photography too! Happy hoto:
PS-got some great hummingbird photos in my yard yesterday


----------



## Sheri

Sally, I read your post and thought "hummingbirds?!?!?" Then, looked at your location and remembered, "oh, yeah, San Francisco!" How odd to think of seeing them already.


----------



## Beamer

Mindy,

If you are going the Nikon route, they have 5 wide angle lenses that range in price from $300 to $1500.

Ryan


----------



## krandall

The entry level DSLR's, whether canon, Nikon or one of the "other" brands are not really "professional" cameras. There's a reason they are considered entry level. If youa re only going to use a camera casually, they are absolutely fine. But they are light weight (which is what entry level users typically want) and will not stand up to the abuse of a better made, more expensive DSLR. The higher end cameras tend to have more external buttons and switches, easily available where you can reach them, where the entry level DSLR's often have the same functions, but you have to navigate through menus to get to them. This is unwieldy for a pro who needs to shoot on the fly. I'm a Canon person... have been since WAY back in the film days, but Nikon is just as good. It's a matter of personal preference between those two lines.

As far as a good wide angle lense is concerned, I would strongly advise you to look into the Tokina 11-17 2.8 lens. It's not an image stabilized lens, but it's such a fast lens you really don't need it. It's available in Nikon and Canon mounts, and possibly some others as well. This lens has been praised widely for its edge-to-edge sharpness, and for those who shoot cameras with APS size sensors, it will still give you close to 180 degrees of coverage. If I remember correctly, it's in the $600 range. Be careful of cheap wide angle lenses. Many are slow and have TERRIBLE barrel distortion and vignetting. This is one lens where Tokina not only competes with, but out-performs the "big name" manufacturers.

Someone mentioned the Leica D-lux 4. I recently bought this camera, and I have NEVER been happy with a small point and shoot before. I LOVE this camera!!! The 2.0 Summicron lens is fabulous, and noise is amazingly well controlled at middling ISO's (400 is very good, 800 quite useable), especially for a camera with a small sensor. At this point, NO point and shoot is as fast as a DSLR, even an entry level one. But the Leica comes close. I haven't really even noticed the lag, which says a lot... this is one of my big frustrations with most point and shoots. The picture quality is fabulous, and if you don't want to use Leica's (very good) internal processing, you can shoot RAW as well as JPG. I haven't shot a JPG in years with my DSLR's (I currently own Canon 50D and 20D's) and I haven't felt the need to take the Leica off the JPG setting. 

The Leica's built-in lens is pretty wide angle (more so than most P&S's) and could be all you need. It's not as wide as the Tokina, however.

As a plus, it also shoots HD video, though I know many of the new DSLR's are coming through with this feature too. It's not a cheap camera... It was $700 when I bought it, and I believe the price has gone up to $800. So you can actually get an entry level DSLR with a kit lens for the same price or a bit less. But theya ren't as much fun, and you can't put one in your pocket!:biggrin1:

I'm stuck in Frankfurt overnight due to plane delays, but when I get home, I'll see if I can post some pix off the Leica and some with the Tokina so that you can see the HOW wide angle the Tokina is.


----------



## pjewel

Karen,

All the reviews I've read by professionals using the Leica (and it was I who posted about it) have said how surprised they were at the quality. I'd love to see your photos when you can.


----------



## krandall

pjewel said:


> Karen,
> 
> All the reviews I've read by professionals using the Leica (and it was I who posted about it) have said how surprised they were at the quality. I'd love to see your photos when you can.


It's a fantastic little camera... I had a hard time keeping my hands on it at the conference I just returned from... All my friends (who typically shoot with DSLR's) wanted to try it. It snowed almost the entire time I was in Europe, and I just didn't want my Canon 50D or my expensive lenses out in that. I shot with the Leica everywhere.


----------



## pjewel

Oh you're killing me. I really want that camera. I'm trying really hard to be practical (something I'm not particularly known for ) I'd love to see some shots you took with it when you have time. I can drool till I can actually hold it in my hot little hands.


----------



## Sheri

Karen, I'd love to see some of your pictures with the Leica D-Lux 4! That is an awful loft of money, but I'd love the small size! I've been waiting till I can buy a Nikon D40, which is now not available, but wonder if this camera would be as good or better. I am not a photographer, but want real good photos that I can zoom and crop when needed, and with a fast shutter speed--the main reason I'd wanted the Nikon D40. What do you think? How's the red-eye on Kodi? Has he moved on before the camera takes the picture?


----------



## DanielBMe

Personaly I think the Leica is way to expensive for a point and shoot. It still doesn't compare to the quality of a D40. Go to dpreview and check out the photos of those still using a D40. For the Leica you're paying for the name. Just about every dslr will give you a fast shutter. If you take a lot of photos under bad lighting or indoor lighting, a D90 would be your best choice for high iso and low noise.

Just going to throw this out again. Anyone know someone looking for a 1yr old used Nikon D80 and 18-70 lens?


----------



## mintchip

DanielBMe said:


> *Personaly I think the Leica is way to expensive for a point and shoot. It still doesn't compare to the quality of a D40.* Go to dpreview and check out the photos of those still using a D40. For the Leica you're paying for the name. Just about every dslr will give you a fast shutter. If you take a lot of photos under bad lighting or indoor lighting, a D90 would be your best choice for high iso and low noise.
> 
> Just going to throw this out again. Anyone know someone looking for a 1yr old used Nikon D80 and 18-70 lens?


Daniel I agree. 
PS-I took this picture of Oliver with my D40


----------



## Sheri

Sally, I love that picture of Oliver--it is absolutely incredible!

Isn't the D90 bigger than the D40? And, I'll look up the price, but it seems it is a lot more expensive, too... I thought the D40 was bad enough. I have to find work/income (ha!) first, so I'm not able to check into your D80, Daniel, otherwise I'd be asking how it compared to the D40. 

I really appreciate your advice, both of you!

ETA, Sally, did you use the auto focus on that photo, or did you get that shot because you know how to use settings?

I've now saved the dpreview site, comparing the D40, D80, and D90. I know with the D40 you can only use a couple lenses... Is that the same with the D80 and D90? I'm pretty sure I will only point and shoot. (Even though I can't buy now, I like to research really well, and don't understand cameras.)


----------



## mintchip

Yes Sheri the D90 is bigger and heavier than the D40. I also have access to a good friend's D80 and I love it too.I love using the Nikon cameras


----------



## Sheri

Sally, I cross-posted an edit, would you check, too?

Is the D80 also bigger? Never mind, I found the weights...

If I found a D40 somewhere in the future, do you think it would still be worth getting?

Is the D40 the only one with the auto-focus?


----------



## mintchip

Yes the D80 is bigger
I will check out the review but I would buy another D40 (as a backup) in a minute! I thought I would just be a point and shoot person but I quickly grew out of that stage.
I love the lens Daniel is selling but I'm not getting another camera :frusty: at least right now.
I have a series of hummingbird photos I took (with D40) from a nest till the day they flew
Check with your local camera store they may sell some second hand cameras


----------



## Sheri

Thanks, Sally, that tells me a lot!!


----------



## DanielBMe

The D40, D60, D70, D80, D90 will all autofocus. The AF is on the lens not inbody. So no need to worry about that. All Nikon lenses can be used with most Nikon bodies. To be honest though, if you are just going to keep your camera on Auto mode, then you might as well get a good point and shoot. If you are willing to learn to use some features and most importantly the A and S mode, you will really be doing yourself a favor.

The D40 is definitely still worth getting if you can. Most likely you will be getting a used one as it's been discontinued for years. If you can get one with a low shutter count, then by all means do so. One thing to do is go to a camera store and try out a few different cameras, just to see what how they feel in your hand. Some people like the Canon's feel and some like Nikons. Some like smaller, lighter cameras and some like larger, heaver cameras. The D80 is heaver than the D40 and the D90 is about the same as the D80. Keep in mind that we aren't talking pounds here.

The one thing to remember is the bodies are all pretty much the same. In other words the two most important things are the lens and even more importantly the photographer. Bodies generally loose their value pretty quick but good lenses keep their value for a long long time.


----------



## krandall

DanielBMe said:


> Personaly I think the Leica is way to expensive for a point and shoot. It still doesn't compare to the quality of a D40. Go to dpreview and check out the photos of those still using a D40. For the Leica you're paying for the name. Just about every dslr will give you a fast shutter. If you take a lot of photos under bad lighting or indoor lighting, a D90 would be your best choice for high iso and low noise.
> 
> Just going to throw this out again. Anyone know someone looking for a 1yr old used Nikon D80 and 18-70 lens?


No question that the D-lux can't compare with a DSLR... It's comparing apples and oranges. But neither can any other point and shoot. IMO, (and I'm not the only one, the D-lux is the best in its class... and it fits in a pocket, so you can have it with you anywhere. I wouldn't trade it for my Canon 50D for the world. But that's not why I bought it. I bought it to fill a niche the big DSLR with a good quality, fast lens (AKA NOT a kit lens) can't. I can bring it places that a big camera is just a pain to lug around. I haven't been anywhere without it since I bought it... can't say the same about my (extensive) DSLR gear.

But the OP was looking for something under $800 which would fit the bill for wide angle real estate shots... not taking fast, on the fly dog photos (not that the Leica is shabby there either, but as I said, it can't compare with a DSLR with a good lens. The Leica is a small, portable option, and one where the out of camera image quality is superb. It's not in the same class as other "point and shoot" cameras. Read the reviews (here's one site with an extensive review):

http://www.stevehuffphotos.com/Steve_Huff_Photos/LEICA_D-LUX_4_REVIEW_AND_SAMPLES.html

and if they don't convince you, find one to handle and shoot for yourself. Oh, and if the price is too steep, the Panasonic Lumix LX-3 is essentially the same camera, though the firmware is different. (some say the lens coatings too, though Leica has neither confirmed nor denied this) I prefer the "look" of the out-of camera Leica images, and for me, that plus the extended warranty on the Leica were worth the extra money. But the Panasonic version is made in the same factory and is a couple of hundred less. A lot of people wouldn't even be able to see the difference in photos, others might prefer the more saturated colors that come out of the Panasonic version.

Once again, IMO no compact camera is ever going to be equivalent to a DSLR (at least the top names... Canon and Nikon) However that's not the point of a compact camera. It serves a different purpose. I really don't think that the majority of people who buy compacts do so because of the lower price... they do it because they want a smaller, simpler camera. (not that the D-lux doesn't have LOTS of bells and whistles if you want to access them) This was true in film days too.


----------



## krandall

Sheri said:


> Sally, I cross-posted an edit, would you check, too?
> 
> Is the D80 also bigger? Never mind, I found the weights...
> 
> If I found a D40 somewhere in the future, do you think it would still be worth getting?
> 
> Is the D40 the only one with the auto-focus?


All the DSLR's have auto-focus, (actually, it's the lenses that are auto-focus, not the cameras themselves) and most people, even most professionals use it most of the time. On the better cameras (assuming good lenses) modern autofocus is fast and accurate under most situations. The places that you sometimes see people having to resort to manual focus are either high speed events (think race cars here, not RLH:laugh and high magnification macro, where it's very important to get a very specific part of the photo in focus. Where "settings", i.e. aperture, come into play is when you want selective focus. for instance, when you want a person or dog in sharp focus, but then want a shallow depth of field to throw the background out of focus.

The speed of auto-focus has more to do with the lens than the camera. Both Canon and Nikon have very fast-focusing lenses, and less expensive slower focusing ones. Most are fast enough for anything you're doing with pets as long as the light is decent.


----------



## Sheri

Thanks, Karen! That is very good info to have about all the DSLR's having auto focus!! And, that it should be good enough for our RLH's, which is the fastest thing _I'd_ be taking pictures of---that and grandkids, which aren't as fast as that.

I appreciate you all breaking down things that must be common sense for you photography specialists into something that is useful for me.


----------



## mintchip

Sheri said:


> Thanks, Karen! That is very good info to have about all the DSLR's having auto focus!! And, that it should be good enough for our RLH's, which is the fastest thing _I'd_ be taking pictures of---that and grandkids, which aren't as fast as that.
> 
> I appreciate you all breaking down things that must be common sense for you photography specialists into something that is useful for me.


The best thing about the "small pocket cameras" is the fact you can carry it with you at all times. (The picture may not be the best but at least you have a photo)
I was at a camera show last weekend and some sales man said "Wouldn't it be great to have one lens to do everything?" "Yes said I but that is impossible :juggle:" No he said "Check out this new lens for only $1,899 this lens will....."
:frusty::frusty:


----------



## Sheri

Sally, 
The salesman obviously has unlimited income... ha! :suspicious:

I'd like to put in my order for a small, lightweight camera that I can drop in my pocket, that takes pictures like the Nikon D40, for under $500. 

So, if there's someone out there designing away, just let me know when it's ready! 
:biggrin1:


----------



## mintchip

Sheri said:


> Sally,
> The salesman obviously has unlimited income... ha! :suspicious:
> 
> *I'd like to put in my order for a small, lightweight camera that I can drop in my pocket, that takes pictures like the Nikon D40, for under $500.
> 
> So, if there's someone out there designing away, just let me know when it's ready!
> *:biggrin1:


*Me too!!!!* :biggrin1:


----------



## krandall

mintchip said:


> The best thing about the "small pocket cameras" is the fact you can carry it with you at all times. (The picture may not be the best but at least you have a photo)
> I was at a camera show last weekend and some sales man said "Wouldn't it be great to have one lens to do everything?" "Yes said I but that is impossible :juggle:" No he said "Check out this new lens for only $1,899 this lens will....."
> :frusty::frusty:


Even for THAT price, I doubt it would do EVERYTHING _well_.:wink:


----------



## krandall

Sheri said:


> Sally,
> The salesman obviously has unlimited income... ha! :suspicious:
> 
> I'd like to put in my order for a small, lightweight camera that I can drop in my pocket, that takes pictures like the Nikon D40, for under $500.
> 
> So, if there's someone out there designing away, just let me know when it's ready!
> :biggrin1:


Unfortunately, at this point it's just not possible. The tiny sensors used in point and shoots just can't record the amount of information as a larger sensor, and they are noisier to boot. That's why I suggested the Leica D-lux 4 to someone earlier in this thread. It comes closer to what you want than any other point and shoot. Well, except for the price.:biggrin1: But the Panasonic LX3 is essentially the same camera with different firmware, and is under $400 (free shipping) at B&H.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ic_DMC_LX3S_Lumix_DMC_LX3_Digital_Camera.html

JPG's will look slightly different between the two (and I prefer the Leica) but if you shoot RAW, it won't make any difference at all, since you'll make your adjustments in post-processing.


----------



## Sheri

Karen, what is "shooting raw" and "JPG's looking slightly different?"

I think I'll look into the Panasonc LX3. It's not recommended very highly on the review site I've looked at...don't remember it at all, actually. But, the little Canon compact that was rated well didn't have pictures I liked at all. (I bought one for my daughter and tried it out.)


----------



## krandall

*Leica D-Lux 4 Photos*

OK, I promised I'd post some photos off the D-Lux 4. Sorry, no Havs... all these photos were taken on my trip to Germany and Denmark last week. All were taken with no flash, and most indoors. The ISO varied from 400 to 800. The 800 was very usable, *top 2 photos) the 400 was GREAT!!! (bottom 3 photos of the aquariums... no noise at all)

I was particularly and pleasantly surprised by the aquarium ones, as these were grab shots, hand-held in between my judging sessions. I went back the next morning before the show opened to take photos with my DSLR on a tripod. Unfortunately, the sun came out for the first time in two weeks and the reflections made photographing the tanks a real challenge. I'm REALLY glad I have the Leica photos to fall back on!


----------



## krandall

Here are a few more. Again, all are hand-held, at 400 or 800 ISO. The last is with flash, just so that you can see it in action. It's harsh, as are all on-camera flashes, but not too bad. It acts more as a fill-flash than anything else. It's not my preferred way of shooting... I far prefer available light. But in a pinch, the flash can help. 

The camera also has a hot shoe, (unusual for such a small camera) so you CAN use a bigger flash if you want, but so far, I haven't wanted. I figure that if I'm going to bring along a bunch of equipment, I'll bring the DSLR.


----------



## Sheri

Karen, those are beautiful pictures! I love the top two...what fun to see such places.

You took these "hand held," do you usually use a tripod or something? And, how did those work indoors with no flash? Does you Leica have manual settings that you used?

What were you judging over there? I kind of thought maybe horses...but not if there were aquariums, ha!


----------



## pjewel

Well Karen that did it for me. I definitely want that camera. Of course to get those great shots I may have to take you along with me.


----------



## mintchip

Sheri said:


> Karen, *what is "shooting raw" and "JPG's looking slightly different?"*
> 
> I think I'll look into the Panasonc LX3. It's not recommended very highly on the review site I've looked at...don't remember it at all, actually. But, the little Canon compact that was rated well didn't have pictures I liked at all. (I bought one for my daughter and tried it out.)


*RAW is not an abbreviation but literally means "raw" as in "unprocessed". A RAW file contains the original image information as it comes off the sensor before in-camera processing so you can do that processing afterwards on your computer with special software.*


----------



## krandall

Sheri said:


> Karen, those are beautiful pictures! I love the top two...what fun to see such places.
> 
> You took these "hand held," do you usually use a tripod or something? And, how did those work indoors with no flash? Does you Leica have manual settings that you used?
> 
> What were you judging over there? I kind of thought maybe horses...but not if there were aquariums, ha!


Typically, in the "old days" with slow films or the lower ISO's that were usable on digital cameras, to get a good sharp photo indoors (or in other low light conditions) without excessive noise (grain in film days) you would need to have the camera on a tripod and use a slow shutter speed. Nowadays, the newer DSLR's do GREAT at much higher ISO's... I regularly shoot my D50 at 800, and don't have any qualms about pushing it to 1600 or even 3200 in a pinch. Small compact cameras have a much smaller sensor which is much more likely to show noise at even fairly low ISO numbers. There are very few compact cameras that I would shoot over ISO 200. The fact that the Leica has well-controlled noise even at 400-800 is really exceptional. You add a fast, 2.0 lens, the great firmware they use plus image stabilization, and you have a camera that is very useful even hand held in low light.

Yes, the Leica has all the manual settings you want, including manual focus. (though this is a bit clunky) I did not shoot it on full manual, but often did some exposure compensation (really easy, and you can see the results on-screen) and occasionally used it in either aperture priority of shutter priority mode. I think for all the photos I included here, though, I only set the ISO, adjusted the exposure compensation if needed and left the camera in "P" mode. (which lets the camera make a lot of the decisions for you)

I was judging aquascapes. I specialize in aquatic plants and aquatic gardening, and lecture and judge internationally on these subjects. I was both lecturing AND judging this time at a big pet trade fair there. I even got my "Neezer" fix each day, as there was a Havanese booth in the dog section, and I just "happened" to wander down there during breaks from time to time.:biggrin1:


----------



## krandall

mintchip said:


> *RAW is not an abbreviation but literally means "raw" as in "unprocessed". A RAW file contains the original image information as it comes off the sensor before in-camera processing so you can do that processing afterwards on your computer with special software.*


Yes, and there is generally much more information available in a RAW file than a jpg. When the camera gives you a jpg, it has already made decisions about how IT thinks the photo should be processed (which you may or may not agree with) Still, unless you are proficient with a good image editing program, you'll probably be happier with out-of-camera jpg's than anything that you can produce yourself.

I haven't read the LX3 reviews, but I did see a number of side-by-side comparisons of photos from the two cameras, and for my taste, I much preferred the Leica. Id' be VERY surprised if the Canon you are talking about controls noise as well as the Leica and or LX3. There is one Canon compact that is supposed to do very well in poor light, the G11. I seriously considered this camera, but it is MUCH bigger than the Leica, and I was really looking for something more pocketable. I already have a Canon Powershot S5 IS, and it is too big. (I also wasn't all that thrilled with the image quality)


----------



## galaxie

BUMP!

I'm thinking of investing in the Nikon D90, opinions - GO!


----------



## mintchip

galaxie said:


> BUMP!
> 
> I'm thinking of investing in the Nikon D90, opinions - GO!


*I love that camera!!!!!!*
Looking forward to seeing your photosop2:


----------



## Flynn Gentry-Taylor

mintchip said:


> Daniel I agree.
> PS-I took this picture of Oliver with my D40


Which lens did you use on this photo? I love it, sorry I am late to the partyon this thread.


----------



## mintchip

which photo?


----------



## Flynn Gentry-Taylor

mintchip said:


> which photo?


Sorry, it was the one with the bubbles!!


----------



## krandall

galaxie said:


> BUMP!
> 
> I'm thinking of investing in the Nikon D90, opinions - GO!


It's a very nice camera. You can't go wrong with either Nikon or Canon SLR's.


----------



## mintchip

Flynn Gentry-Taylor said:


> Sorry, it was the one with the bubbles!!


Nikon 55-200


----------



## Flynn Gentry-Taylor

mintchip said:


> Nikon 55-200


That is an extra lens, not the one that comes on it? Sorry, I am not up to speed on them. Thanks


----------



## galaxie

Well, I decided on the Nikon D5000 and ordered it last night!

I was initially going to buy the D90, but after some careful consideration (and sticker shock), I decided that it was a better investment to get the D5000 since I'm a beginner. I figure that once I actually become skilled, there will be something smaller, better, faster, and more advanced than the D90 at the same price point.

I got a kit with two Nikkor lenses, the 15-55mm VR and the 55-200mm VR from B&H.

Flynn, if you're interested in a kit, the one that I got is by far the best value available on the internet, plus B&H is widely regarded as the most reputable internet supplier. I couldn't believe the deal I got, it was $826 for the kit with the two lenses (plus bag and dvd), plus an 8gb SD card and AC/DC charger for the battery.

The $150 discount ends MAY 1!

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/628096-REG/Nikon__D5000_Digital_SLR_Camera.html


----------



## galaxie

By the way, I'm just going to go ahead and plug my very good friend Alvin Nguyen who helped me through the whole process.

He is an amazing professional photographer and extremely talented artist based in Seattle, WA. Check him out!

http://alvinnguyenphotography.com/


----------



## krandall

galaxie said:


> Well, I decided on the Nikon D5000 and ordered it last night!
> 
> I was initially going to buy the D90, but after some careful consideration (and sticker shock), I decided that it was a better investment to get the D5000 since I'm a beginner. I figure that once I actually become skilled, there will be something smaller, better, faster, and more advanced than the D90 at the same price point.
> 
> I got a kit with two Nikkor lenses, the 15-55mm VR and the 55-200mm VR from B&H.


You are right that over time digital cameras continue to get better and have more options (though with good lenses focus time is already much faster than a human can do it... some cheap lenses are slower) If, by "fast" you mean the ability to stop motion, this is a factor of using fast lenses... not directly a function of what camera the lens is attached to.

The high-end cameras are not likely to get substantially smaller, simply because the majority of people into SERIOUS photography are men, and men often have big hands. I often hear guys at my camera club complaining about the (small) size of some cameras. That's one of the biggest complaints some of them have about my little Leica. Leica actually makes an optional "hand grip" so that guys with big hands have more to hang on to.

Also, unless you get VERY serious about photography, you might ALWAYS be perfectly happy with the entry level Nikon DSLRS. Both Canon and Nikon entry level DSLR's "borrow" technology from their "big brothers". Often the important internal parts of the cameras are very similar. Where you sacrifice something is on build and (depending on the model) sensor size. The entry level DSLR's are invariably plastic, and don't hold up to the abuse that professionals who are using them all day every day in adverse weather conditions give them. Unless you decide to go pro, you may never need or want to put that kind of wear and tear on a camera. Plus the plastic is lighter to carry around.

In terms of sensor size, unless you are planning on printing a large number of your photos at poster size or bigger, an APS sized sensor is FINE. Those who want cameras with full frame (35mm)sensors pay the price with even more size and weight. (not to mention cost) While I do a LOT of photography, and sometiems lust after a full frame sensor camera, when I think of the TYPE of photography I do (often schlepping a lot of gear on my back up rocky streams) I realize that I can't justify the added size and weight of a full-frame camera.

If there is one piece of advice I can give you and other people getting into DSLR's for the first time, it is to invest in glass, not bodies. In two years, a camera body is basically worth very little. Good lenses hold their value VERY well. Not only that, but the camera is actually the SMALLEST part of good images. Good glass and good technique will get you much farther. Oh, and if B&H didn't already suggest it, get yourself a good circular polarizer for both lenses. Especially living in Florida, with all that sand, you will find that the polarizer really helps cut down on reflection and glare. I also like to have a spare battery on hand, so I know I always have a charged one if I run out during a day of shooting.

The only other decision you need to make is whether you will buy lenses dedicated to the smaller sensor, or full frame lenses. Full frame lenses can be used on a camera with a small sensor, but not vice versa. The small sensor lenses are smaller, lighter, and a lot less expensive, but if you upgrade to a full frame camera, you'll be buying all new glass. I compromise... I buy full frame lenses when I am buying telephoto lenses, as the 1.6 factor of the smaller sensor gives me even more "reach", (a 200mm lens has the reach of a 300mm lens) and if I do go for a full frame camera some day, these will still work with it. For the wide angle range, I go for lenses meant for APS sensor cameras, just because you don't get a very wide angle view using a full frame wide angle lens on a small sensor camera.

Oh, and B&H is a wonderful company. I've been doing business with them for years, and have had nothing but positive experiences with them. Getting their catalog reminds me of getting the Sears Christmas catalog when I was a kid. (but I bet you are too young to remember that... when _I_ was little, you could still order a pony from Sear Roebuck :redface

Have fun with your new camera, and we expect to see LOTS of adorable Roscoe pix!!!


----------



## hartman studio

Congragulations on your decision for the D5000!! I've been buying from BH photo and they have been great to deal with. I've been trying to decide whether to buy the Nikon 18-200 lens for a good all purpose lens. Anyone have this lens? I'm going to Alaska and have heard that it's good to have an all purpose lens so as not to miss photo ops (or bring 2 cameras instead-LOL). However, I could just rent the lens for the trip and buy the little Leica d-lux 4-so I'd have 2 cameras!!
Karen, I think that's the Leica you have isn't it? What kind of shutter lag does it have? I can't find any stores around me that carry it or the Panasonic which I'm thinking would have the same shutter lag, so that I can try it out


----------



## krandall

Super zooms tend not to be the crispest lenses, and they tend not to be really fast focusing, particularly at the long end. Why not get the Leica to cover your wide angle stuff (it does this job beautifully, particularly because you have the option of the 16:9 framing ratio) then get a better quality, hopefully faster long lens; something in the 70-200 range, and if you can afford it, get something fast... a 2.8 lens if you can. I'd also get a 1.4 tele-extender if you're going with a lens as short as a 200mm. You'll need it for wildlife. (many people use a 400 or 500, sometimes with a tele-converter, for wildlife)

Yes, I have the D-lux 4, and absolutely love it. It will handle any wide angle of macro stuff you want to do. It just doesn't have much telephoto length. There is VERY little shutter lag. More than a modern DSLR, which has virtually no discernable shutter lag, but W-A-Y les than ANY other P&S that I've ever handled. I HATE shutter lag, and I haven't really even noticed it with the D-lux 4. It's only when I really concentrate on it to do a comparison that I notice that there is a tiny bit. That said, it's a camera that is at it's glory at the wide angle end of things, where there is less need for exact shutter timing. If you're doing wildlife, you'll be using your long lens on the Nikon. The only place I notice a real slow-down on the D-lux 4 is when saving files IF you shoot RAW... I can count to 5 before it finishes saving a RAW, and if you shoot RAW plus full size jpg, I can count to 6. This is too slow for me. But it does such a beautiful job processing jpg's, I've been shooting that way continuously. (and I shoot RAW ALWAYS on my DSLR's)

If you buy from B&H, I believe they will let you return anything within 30 days in like-new conditon with all original packaging material. So you could buy the D-lux 4, try it our for a few days and if you find it doesn't suit your needs (which I doubt ) send it back.

I've attached a few photos showing what the D-lux-4 can do with landscapes and macro. I was about 4" from the crocuses.



hartman studio said:


> Congragulations on your decision for the D5000!! I've been buying from BH photo and they have been great to deal with. I've been trying to decide whether to buy the Nikon 18-200 lens for a good all purpose lens. Anyone have this lens? I'm going to Alaska and have heard that it's good to have an all purpose lens so as not to miss photo ops (or bring 2 cameras instead-LOL). However, I could just rent the lens for the trip and buy the little Leica d-lux 4-so I'd have 2 cameras!!
> Karen, I think that's the Leica you have isn't it? What kind of shutter lag does it have? I can't find any stores around me that carry it or the Panasonic which I'm thinking would have the same shutter lag, so that I can try it out


----------



## hartman studio

Karen, that's what I was thinking, too. Use the Leica for wide angle and hopefully low light shots and put a long lens on my D60. The problem I am running into is weight on the longer lenses. I rented the Nikon 70-300 (not a real fast lens, but I think it's a good lens) and found that it was too front heavy and long on my little DSLR(for me). It was very hard for me to hold it steady. Also that 300 is not nearly long enough for wildlife- add a teleconverter and it will be (I think) 1 and 1/2 stops slower. Can't really use a tripod on the ship and don't want to buy a monopod right now...sooo I still can't figure out a long zoom lens which will work. All the fast lenses will be even heavier. The cruise I'm going on is a small ship (about 125 people) and part of the time we will be in zodiacs for viewing so handheld will be the only option. Any suggestions??


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> Karen, that's what I was thinking, too. Use the Leica for wide angle and hopefully low light shots and put a long lens on my D60. The problem I am running into is weight on the longer lenses. I rented the Nikon 70-300 (not a real fast lens, but I think it's a good lens) and found that it was too front heavy and long on my little DSLR(for me). It was very hard for me to hold it steady. Also that 300 is not nearly long enough for wildlife- add a teleconverter and it will be (I think) 1 and 1/2 stops slower. Can't really use a tripod on the ship and don't want to buy a monopod right now...sooo I still can't figure out a long zoom lens which will work. All the fast lenses will be even heavier. The cruise I'm going on is a small ship (about 125 people) and part of the time we will be in zodiacs for viewing so handheld will be the only option. Any suggestions??


I hate to tell you this, but there is no such thing as long+fast AND small+light.  It's just the nature of the optics

I don't know Nikon lenses at all, but I have a reasonably good 70-300 4-5.6 IS (same a Nikon's VR) that is a LOT smaller and lighter weight than my L-series (pro) 70-200 2.8 lens. My guess is that Nikon would have something similar. This lens has pretty good range, and is easy to hand-hold. (especially with the image stabilization) Obviously the lens isn't as fast as my bigger 2.8 lens, but with newer DSLR's you can usually push the ISO up to at least 400 (sometimes 800) and still maintain reasonable image quality. That allows for faster shutter speeds. You can't mount a tele-converter to this lens though... I'm not sure why, but they don't mate.

Below are a few pix taken with the 70-300. The first 3 were on a river rafting trip in Costa Rica. (I won several awards for the Tiger Heron) I took the 70-300 because it's a MUCH cheaper lens, and I didn't want to take a chance of my L lens ending up in the water.<g> They were taken on a Canon 20D, which was what I had at that time.

The last one, is, I think, amazing, considering the conditions. This was taken through a kitchen window, with the lens fully extended (300mm, F5.6) at about 4:30 on a dark, snowy afternoon. (you can see the snow falling) The big difference here is that I was shooting with my 50D. Camera technology has come such a long way that I was able to push the ISO up to 800, allowing me to shoot at 1/125 and still hand-hold. It took some cropping and post processing, but I think it's a very nice image.


----------



## krandall

The other thing is that with a newer camera, if you don't have a lens with enough reach, you can usually crop in and still get quite acceptable, if not award winning, results. Certainly fun vacation shots! Below, I've posted two photos, the Kingfisher in Costa Rica, and the Puffin from Egg Island in Maine to show the full-size shot and the crop. The kingfisher would look even better if shot with a modern camera - this was back on the 20D.

I suspect that the Puffin shot will probably come close to what you will experience in Alaska. This, again, was shot with that 70-300 lens, from a small boat, with lots of movement; both the boat and the birds. (if you haven't seen them up close, Puffins are MUCH smaller than you might think!!!) Oh, and I probably took 50 photos of the Puffins that I threw away for every keeper. (Moral of that story? Bring LOTS of media cards and extra batteries!!!)


----------



## krandall

Oh, one more thing. A Gorilla Pod or a bean bag support can help a lot when you don't have space for a tripod or at least monopod. HOWEVER, none of these supports work well on a boat with the engine rumbling. The vibration of the motor will make the photos soft. So you are actually better off hand-holding... your body will absorb and compensate for some of that vibration without you being aware you are doing it. Just make sure to keep the VR on and the shutter speed fast.

In those times where the light just won't work, instead of fixating on the camera and getting frustrated, put your camera down and just enjoy living in the moment and soaking in the memories through your own eyes.


----------



## hartman studio

Karen, great pictures!! and thanks for the advice. Maybe my best option is the Nikon 70-300 3.5-5.6 vr. It is the best lens in that catagory for my camera. Although I felt it was too heavy for my D60 when I rented it, the pictures I took with it turned out quite well and it would give me a longer reach than the 18-200. I can't do the longer fast lenses-they are way too heavy to handhold. I thought about bringing a gorillapod-I'll see how the packing goes. Maybe a Nikon 35/1.8 for shipboard pics with low light. It's a nice light,good lens and leave my favorite sigma 50/1.4 lens home. I don't want to pack bunches of camera lens and equipment. My dh is not quite into lugging lots of equipment!! I want to make this a fun vacation for both of us!


----------



## DanielBMe

If you are going to Alaska, you'll definitely want the 70-300vr if you will be going on land viewing wildlife. Not sure what you will actually be seeing though from the zodiac. But I would definitely have a wide angle telephoto for those amazing landscapes. Something like a 12-24 or maybe a 16-85. For all my trips I use the 16-85vr and the 70-300vr on my Nikon D80. I'm going to Bolivia and Peru this August and will be taking those lenses. Not sure if I'll take my 35mm. I've decided to get a P&S as well for the late night pics in the bars. Don't want my dslr stolen.


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> My dh is not quite into lugging lots of equipment!! I want to make this a fun vacation for both of us!


That's what husbands are for! Mine calls himself my Sherpa!


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> My dh is not quite into lugging lots of equipment!! I want to make this a fun vacation for both of us!


That's what husbands are for! Mine calls himself my Sherpa!

And yes, the Nikon 70-300 sounds like a good choice... similar to my Canon 70-300. It's really quite a nice lens. (as you can see) If I have to travel lighter, I bring that one along, and leave my 70-200 2.8 at home.


----------



## krandall

DanielBMe said:


> If you are going to Alaska, you'll definitely want the 70-300vr if you will be going on land viewing wildlife. Not sure what you will actually be seeing though from the zodiac. But I would definitely have a wide angle telephoto for those amazing landscapes. Something like a 12-24 or maybe a 16-85. For all my trips I use the 16-85vr and the 70-300vr on my Nikon D80. I'm going to Bolivia and Peru this August and will be taking those lenses. Not sure if I'll take my 35mm. I've decided to get a P&S as well for the late night pics in the bars. Don't want my dslr stolen.


I agree with you completely if she can afford both. She was talking about possibly getting the D-lux 4 for the wide angle end, and renting a lens for the tele end. Of course, the 70-300 is so much less expensive than the 70-200 2.8, maybe she could afford both!


----------



## maryam187

Karen, in post #54, are those pictures on the inside of the Reichstagskuppel in Berlin?


----------



## krandall

maryam187 said:


> Karen, in post #54, are those pictures on the inside of the Reichstagskuppel in Berlin?


Yup! Really cool place. My Dad and his family were caught in Berlin at the beginning of WWII as Americans.(long story) He was 16 when the war ended. It was really interesting to be able to go back and see the places he remembers from when he was a kid. He lived in Steglitz, and the apartment building is still there. (though in lots better condition than in his photos from the end of the war!) Steglitz is in the part of Berlin that the Russians occupied, and things were actually worst right after the war ended.

The first thing he told me when he saw my photos of the Brandenburg Gate was, "You know, those horses are supposed to be looking the other way... the Soviets turned them around."<g>


----------



## Flynn Gentry-Taylor

galaxie said:


> Well, I decided on the Nikon D5000 and ordered it last night!
> 
> I was initially going to buy the D90, but after some careful consideration (and sticker shock), I decided that it was a better investment to get the D5000 since I'm a beginner. I figure that once I actually become skilled, there will be something smaller, better, faster, and more advanced than the D90 at the same price point.
> 
> I got a kit with two Nikkor lenses, the 15-55mm VR and the 55-200mm VR from B&H.
> 
> Flynn, if you're interested in a kit, the one that I got is by far the best value available on the internet, plus B&H is widely regarded as the most reputable internet supplier. I couldn't believe the deal I got, it was $826 for the kit with the two lenses (plus bag and dvd), plus an 8gb SD card and AC/DC charger for the battery.
> 
> The $150 discount ends MAY 1!
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/628096-REG/Nikon__D5000_Digital_SLR_Camera.html


Thanks! It is a good deal!


----------



## hartman studio

Well, I ordered my Leica d-lux 4 today from B&H photo, I can't wait for it to come!! I also went and played with the Nikon 70-300 lens. It's not that much heavier than the Nikon 18-200 and has much better image quality-so I am leaning in that direction. That should cover me for my trip-still might bring my Sigma 50/1.4- I just love that lens! thanks Karen and Daniel for your advice!


----------



## mintchip

hartman studio said:


> Well, I ordered my Leica d-lux 4 today from B&H photo, I can't wait for it to come!! I also went and played with the Nikon 70-300 lens. It's not that much heavier than the Nikon 18-200 and has much better image quality-so I am leaning in that direction. That should cover me for my trip-still might bring my Sigma 50/1.4- I just love that lens! thanks Karen and Daniel for your advice!


I volunteer to carry your bags and cameras!


----------



## hartman studio

Sally,
Is that because you want to go to Alaska or would I not see my new little Leica again?????


----------



## mintchip

*Alaska!!!!!!*


----------



## Tom King

Karen, Is the second photo in your post #72 in this thread our rock quarry? If so, I'd love to have the full version of it sent to us. I've never taken a picture of it that good! The date on the photo says 3-10-2010, so I guess it's not ours, but it sure looks an awful lot like it.
Thanks,


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> Well, I ordered my Leica d-lux 4 today from B&H photo, I can't wait for it to come!! I also went and played with the Nikon 70-300 lens. It's not that much heavier than the Nikon 18-200 and has much better image quality-so I am leaning in that direction. That should cover me for my trip-still might bring my Sigma 50/1.4- I just love that lens! thanks Karen and Daniel for your advice!


Good choices!

I STRONGLY advise that you also purchase the book:

Photographer's Guide to the Leica D-Lux 4: Getting the Most from Leica's Compact Digital Camera by Alexander S. White

The manual that comes with the camera is very confusing, and unless I'm really mis-reading it, I think it's actually (frustratingly) wrong in some places. The book is also available for Kindle if you're a Kindle person. You can use it in a very basic way without either manual, but to get the most out of the camera, get the book.

Also, a great place to ask questions and learn is the Leica L Forum:

www.l-camera-forum.com

Finally, upgrade the firmware when you get the camera. The upgrade has some nice enhancements over what ships in the camera.


----------



## krandall

Tom King said:


> Karen, Is the second photo in your post #72 in this thread our rock quarry? If so, I'd love to have the full version of it sent to us. I've never taken a picture of it that good! The date on the photo says 3-10-2010, so I guess it's not ours, but it sure looks an awful lot like it.
> Thanks,


Hi Tom, no, it's not your quarry... it's one near us up here. Yours is actually prettier. This one is in a fairly urbanized area, and there's tons of junk in the water and graffiti on the rocks.

I do have one photo of your quarry, but I only brought one lens with me on that trip and it wasn't a wide angle.... Silly me, I was totally focused on puppies.<g> Little did I know what an incredibly beautiful area it is... It's worth a trip down just to take (non-puppy) pictures! I'll send you the one I do have, though you might well have better.


----------



## hartman studio

Karen, I already ordered the book!! I ran across it on the Leica rumour site and thought it would be a good idea. Didn't know about the forum site you gave me-I'll check it out-thanks!


----------



## hartman studio

It came last night!!! My Leica d-lux 4 is here- I'm charging the battery and will start playing with it this weekend!!!!!!! I saw a rumour that Leica is not making any more and they are now on "run out", so I may have bought mine just in time! This may be true as B&H Photo has dropped the price on the leather cases and is offering a package deal that throws in the cheaper leather case, extra battery, (which package usually sells for $68.00) and 2 sandisk 4gb ultra cards for only $4.00 more than just buying the camera alone. Also my local Leica dealer told me they were sold out and were not sure they could get anymore, so if anyone else is thinking of buying one, you may want to do it soon. 
The manual is not very good- I hope my book gets here soon!!


----------



## Nanny

I have the Nikon D40 and love it!!


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> It came last night!!! My Leica d-lux 4 is here- I'm charging the battery and will start playing with it this weekend!!!!!!! I saw a rumour that Leica is not making any more and they are now on "run out", so I may have bought mine just in time! This may be true as B&H Photo has dropped the price on the leather cases and is offering a package deal that throws in the cheaper leather case, extra battery, (which package usually sells for $68.00) and 2 sandisk 4gb ultra cards for only $4.00 more than just buying the camera alone. Also my local Leica dealer told me they were sold out and were not sure they could get anymore, so if anyone else is thinking of buying one, you may want to do it soon.
> The manual is not very good- I hope my book gets here soon!!


I have read the same, and I am totally unimpressed by what I've read about the new V Lux 20... It's just any other point and shoot. It doesn't even shoot RAW. The D Lux 4 has developed a serious, almost cult, following, like the Digilux 2. (which I can't quite understand, because I think the D Lux 4 is such a MUCH better camera in all ways!) I am quite sure that the D Lux 4's will have a very good resale value for a long time to come. (look at what people still pay for the Digilux 2, which has been out of production for years now!)

Sounds like you got a fantastic deal on the "extras"! I was very pleased to be able to get the cheaper case and battery at regular price. (the combo was still cheaper than an extra brand-name battery alone, and I ALWAYS want a spare battery)

What is the price on the camera now? I was so surprised when they INCREASED the price after Christmas (fortunately just after I bought mine), and now they are out of production.

Oh, and you're right, the manual is terrible. But you'll still have fun playing with it in a simple way this weekend, and the big book is MUCH easier to understand.

_I'm_ waiting for delivery of my 3G IPad this afternoon! (my Mothers Day/ Birthday present form DH!!!)

Happy shooting! hoto:


----------



## hartman studio

Karen, congrags on your ipad!! The price on the Leica d-lux 4 remains $799.00 everywhere I looked. It used to be $699.00,right? No one would discount the camera, but I did think that for $4.00 I got alot of great extras!! I also am not impressed with what I've read about the v-lux 20. Not sure that I'd buy an x1, either. But I am lusting over an M9!! Maybe someday...


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> Karen, congrags on your ipad!! The price on the Leica d-lux 4 remains $799.00 everywhere I looked. It used to be $699.00,right? No one would discount the camera, but I did think that for $4.00 I got alot of great extras!! I also am not impressed with what I've read about the v-lux 20. Not sure that I'd buy an x1, either. But I am lusting over an M9!! Maybe someday...


An M-9 is out of the question price-wise, but I recently saw a used M-8 for about $2500...<g> I need another camera like I need a hole in the head, but there's always something to dream about. (I also want a Canon 7D and a Canon 5D. Then there's the new Canon 2.8 Macro, and if I actually HAD the money for an M-9, I'd probably spend it on the Canon 500mm that all the bird people say is a "must"... Decisions, decisions! )

Oh, and yes, when I got my DL4, it was $699... But then I bought the case and battery and a couple of HDSD cards (my Canons take CF cards) so in the end, we probably spent about the same amount of money for the same amount of stuff! I actually LIKE the fact that the case doesn't say "Leica" on it. I figure it might just as well say, "steal me".<g>


----------



## hav2

Hey Y'all

Got a question. I am looking for a smaller camera, smaller than my Nikon D5000. I love it but sometimes it can be a little inconvenient. I was reading this thread because I love cameras. All of them I would like something that takes real quality pics. I was wondering what y'all like about the Leica d-lux 4 over the v-lux 20.


----------



## krandall

hav2 said:


> Hey Y'all
> 
> Got a question. I am looking for a smaller camera, smaller than my Nikon D5000. I love it but sometimes it can be a little inconvenient. I was reading this thread because I love cameras. All of them I would like something that takes real quality pics. I was wondering what y'all like about the Leica d-lux 4 over the v-lux 20.


The quality of the lens, the firmware, the fit and feel of the camera, the size, and MOST important... The v-lux 20 doesn't shoot RAW. I think there are many other MUCH less expensive cameras that will give you similar zoom range and picture quality as the V-lux 20. The D-Lux 4 is a very special camera. The picture quality is astounding, even among Leica small sensor cameras and it's ability to handle low light is is unrivaled.(except for its Panasonic sibling)

Read some of the reviews on the Leica forum. If you want the "Leica experience" get the D-Lux 4, often called the "son of the M8". If you want anything else, consider a cheaper camera that will do at least as well as the V-Lux 20. Another great p&s camera is the Canon G11. I actually seriously considered this before settling on the D-Lux 4, but decided it was just too large for my purposes. I wanted something that was truly small enough to carry around in my purse all the time. The G11 is a nice camera, but it.s a brick!


----------



## hav2

Okay....one more question. If the Panasonic version (I think it's the lx3 right?) is the same as the d-lux 4, why in the world is there such a price difference? I have seen some really incredible shots taken with the d-lux 4, but can you get the same shots with the lower priced panasonic counterpart?


----------



## hartman studio

Good question!!! and one that has seen alot of debate. I have seen side by side pictures from both cameras and it is hard to tell the difference in most cases. There is a difference in the jpeg processing within each camera with the Leica having superior color. There is also a difference in software that comes with each camera. Many people prefer the "sleekness" of the body styling in the Leica over the Panny. Also it is rumoured that Leica keeps the best lenses for their own cameras. Also much higher resale value. As Karen said it has become almost a "cult" camera- and it's an affordable Leica. So only you can decide if that is enough of a difference. I am still evaluating mine and will let you know what I think after a few days.


----------



## hav2

Thanks for the info! I have also heard the lens rumor It's kind of a hard decision at this point. All the reviews on both cameras are nothing but great, and if you do a side by side specs comparison, it's like they are the same camera. So I am trying to find the justification to spend that much more, ya know?


----------



## krandall

hav2 said:


> Okay....one more question. If the Panasonic version (I think it's the lx3 right?) is the same as the d-lux 4, why in the world is there such a price difference? I have seen some really incredible shots taken with the d-lux 4, but can you get the same shots with the lower priced panasonic counterpart?


I would say that for the casual photographer, you wouldn't see enough of a difference between the two cameras to make a difference. There _is_ a difference in the firmware for sure, and some say also in the lens coatings, though Leica does not confirm this second assertion. The Leica also comes with a warranty twice as long as the Panasonic, plus, for sure higher resale value, just because it's a Leica. Most P&S digital cameras are basically throw-aways... even a good Nikon or Canon DSLR body that's a couple of years old won't bring much. People are still paying $500 for Leica Digilux 2's, that are wicked slow, have terrible noise above ISO 100, and only shoot 5mp files. Who would guess?

If you do Google search for comparisons between the Leica and Panasonic versions, you will find several sites with side by side photos taken with both cameras. I did a lot of research before deciding to pay the extra for the Leica. For me, the differences in image quality, though subtle, were big enough that the price difference was worth it. For many people it wouldn't be.

I am finding that this is the camera I have in my hand all the time. Here are another couple of recent shots. Notice, in particular, how fantastically well it has held the details in Kodi's white AND black areas... very difficult for ANY camera, almost unheard of in a P&S. To get that, I _did_ have to shoot in RAW and do some post processing, but that's the nice thing about either of these cameras... you have that option. The snapping turtle is a straight from the camera JPG.


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> Good question!!! and one that has seen alot of debate. I have seen side by side pictures from both cameras and it is hard to tell the difference in most cases. There is a difference in the jpeg processing within each camera with the Leica having superior color. There is also a difference in software that comes with each camera. Many people prefer the "sleekness" of the body styling in the Leica over the Panny. Also it is rumoured that Leica keeps the best lenses for their own cameras. Also much higher resale value. As Karen said it has become almost a "cult" camera- and it's an affordable Leica. So only you can decide if that is enough of a difference. I am still evaluating mine and will let you know what I think after a few days.


Plus the much longer warranty. But you're right. For many people, the advantages are not worth the extra cost. It's also not what I'd call a "beginner" P&S. (but neither is the Panasonic) To get the most out of these cameras, you need to THINK about how you want the photo to come out and use all that's build into the camera. You've seen some of my pix. Attached is one where I made the mistake of putting my DH in the driver's seat. The flash doesn't pop up automatically, and he didn't know enough to either put up the flash or increase the ISO to make up for the low available light. And it took quite a bit of PP to get it as good as this


----------



## krandall

hav2 said:


> Thanks for the info! I have also heard the lens rumor It's kind of a hard decision at this point. All the reviews on both cameras are nothing but great, and if you do a side by side specs comparison, it's like they are the same camera. So I am trying to find the justification to spend that much more, ya know?


I think that if you feel that way, you should go with the Panasonic. It will STILL be the best P&S you've ever owned. You can always paste a little red dot on it if you want!:wink:


----------



## hav2

See that's the other thing....It is really hard to get a quality photo of Fergus, because he is mostly black. Especially the face and his expressions, and that kills me when I can't take pics of him that turn out as good as the ones I take of Izzy, she is all cream, so she's easy. Does the Leica take good motion shots, like when Kodi is playing or running around? Fergus is always in motion


----------



## hav2

P.S. I love all your pics of Kodi, he is such a flashy boy!


----------



## krandall

hav2 said:


> See that's the other thing....It is really hard to get a quality photo of Fergus, because he is mostly black. Especially the face and his expressions, and that kills me when I can't take pics of him that turn out as good as the ones I take of Izzy, she is all cream, so she's easy. Does the Leica take good motion shots, like when Kodi is playing or running around? Fergus is always in motion


I wouldn't say that's it's strong suit... but I wouldn't say that about any P&S camera. The D-Lux 4 has less shutter lag than ANY P&S I've ever seen, and the focus is fast too. However, the telephoto doesn't have a lot of reach, which is hard when you are taking pictures of small dogs moving fast. I usually have to really crop in.

Here are some moving photos all taken with the Leica. The one on the far right with the blown highlights and blocked-up shadows was taken in TERRIBLE lighting conditions, with him running in and out of shadows. And being lazy, I had the camera set for just jpgs. Most of the time, the jpg's are lovely, and I wouldn't do anything different if I processed the RAW file myself. But in very contrasty conditions like this, a 16 bit RAW can give you the extra information to save an image. I learned my lesson, and keep the camera set for RAW _AND_ full sized JPG's now. Memory is cheap these days.


----------



## hav2

Karen,

All of this is really helpful! I think those are great pics! Are you a pro photographer or take classes? Did you learn all of these things from playing with the camera and trial and error? I would like to eventually take some classes and learn more about photography. I might purchase the Leica to motivate me to learn everything about it. I also heard that Leica may not be making any more of the D-Lux 4 and with everyone saying that this is a camera to have, maybe I should go ahead and pick it up before they take it out of their line. Might be worth more than what we paid when they quit making it!


----------



## hartman studio

Jenn,
here are a few photos I just took with the Leica. I am not the photographer that Karen is, but what impressed me was that all photos were taken indoors with NO flash on fairly dark days (ISO no higher than 400).The ones of Cocotini and Mindy together and Cocotini greeting my DH coming home from work were just taken in basic snapshot mode, jpeg, and no post processing. The one of Cocotini by herself was in Aperture priority, jpeg, and dynamic color mode-again no post processing.
I could never get her eyes (or eye in this case) so clear against her brown hair with any other point and shoot.


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> Jenn,
> here are a few photos I just took with the Leica.


Beautiful! I just love the color and "feel" of the photos out of this camera. So are you going to send it back?


----------



## krandall

hav2 said:


> Karen,
> 
> All of this is really helpful! I think those are great pics! Are you a pro photographer or take classes? Did you learn all of these things from playing with the camera and trial and error? I would like to eventually take some classes and learn more about photography. I might purchase the Leica to motivate me to learn everything about it. I also heard that Leica may not be making any more of the D-Lux 4 and with everyone saying that this is a camera to have, maybe I should go ahead and pick it up before they take it out of their line. Might be worth more than what we paid when they quit making it!


If by "pro" you mean making a living at it, Heavens no!<g> I have sold a number of photos to magazines in the past, but in a very specialized field, where there isn't much competition. (aquatic plants)

But I've been taking photos since I was a little girl with a Kodak Brownie and B&W film. I've always tried to improve my photography, and one of the things that really moved things up several notches was joining a really good camera club with a group of PHENOMENAL photographers willing to share their knowledge. If you want to check out some of our club's work, go to:

www.bwps.org

and poke through the competition results. The "B's" are our beginners, and you'll even see fantastic photos in that group.

Take a class and you'll learn from one person... join a club and you'll learn from MANY different, often very talented people.


----------



## hartman studio

Karen- I'm leaning towards keeping it right now!!


----------



## Nanny

I use Pisca to download my photos from my Nikon d40..it is free download on the internet.


----------



## hartman studio

Just noticed that B&H Photo lists Leica d-lux 4 as "temporarily unavailable". Wonder if they will get it back in stock or not- I may have just gotten mine in the nick of time!!


----------



## krandall

Well, they are on run out... there may be some shifting around from one distributor to another, but they aren't making any more.


----------



## gabdyl

I am so glad I found this thread! Thank you, Karen, for your suggestion. I looked up the Leica D-lux 4 and I am leaning towards this camera.

The best camera I ever had was a gift from my DH about 7 yrs ago, the Canon G3. I don't think I ever took a bad picture with that camera. They were just beautiful! Well, when it came time to replace it, I got a tiny Canon Elph SD900 and then also got a D40.

The Canon is nice because it is in my purse and I can grab it for a picture ANY time but the picture quality is so-so and just forget about taking any low lighting pictures w/o flash. I got the prime lens with the D40 and which I love but I don't ever have that camera ready to go. I honestly only use it to take our christmas card portrait.

I have been thinking about going back to the Canon G11? but I don't think it does the HD video. I am thinking the Leica would be the right compromise for me...but I would probably have to sell/trade my D40 to justify the expense... any feedback is welcome. Thanks!!


----------



## gabdyl

PS the pic in my signature was taken with the D40/prime lens combo (here it is again). Love the low light and shallow DOF (lingo? I am not a pro)... Just need something smaller to carry in my purse all the time.


----------



## krandall

gabdyl said:


> I have been thinking about going back to the Canon G11? but I don't think it does the HD video. I am thinking the Leica would be the right compromise for me...but I would probably have to sell/trade my D40 to justify the expense... any feedback is welcome. Thanks!!


Not sure about the video, because I wasn't really interested in it... I do very little of it. I did look very carefully at the G11, especially since I am a "Canon person" at heart. But it is just too big and heavy for what I was looking for. I also really preferred the 2.0 lens of the Leica. It's a very nice camera, though, if you don't mind the extra bulk and weight.

Can't say anything about the D40, except that I know they don't make them any more. My Dad has one, which he has since replaced with a high-end Rebel, which he likes much better... He's planning on having the D40 converted for IR. (I'm going to do the same with my 20D)


----------



## mintchip

gabdyl said:


> PS the pic in my signature was taken with the D40/prime lens combo (here it is again). Love the low light and shallow DOF (lingo? I am not a pro)... Just need something smaller to carry in my purse all the time.


I love that photo! 
I'm still looking for a good purse/pocket camera however the problem I find is the lag time. I'm so use to the DSLR taking photos so quickly that the pocket ones are just disappointing :Cry: but at least I get a photo


----------



## gabdyl

Thanks mintchip! I love your pics over in the "Body Language" thread  I hear you, I think the D40 takes some nice pics, it can do the really high ISO w/not much noise, etc. but unfortunately I hardly take any pics with it...so that's why I need to go back to a point and shoot...  

Karen, tks for the invo ~ I will look into the reviews on the video part. I have a video of Peanut as a baby that I will upload, but that's taken with the Canon Elph and it's not too bad. I heard it's gotten much better to where you don't need a separate video camera anymore, which interests me as we are going to disney in the fall...

thanks again!


----------



## hartman studio

At first I wasn't sure about keeping the d-lux 4, but after getting the book, I started to realize everything this little gem is capable of. There are some settings I just love including dynamic blk and white, pinhole,and nostalgic to just name a few. In camera jpeg processing is great-not much need to take raw with it. And the low light capability is wonderful to have- I hate flash. There is a little shutter lag,so I do miss some shots,especially of fast moving Cocotini, but I have my D60 for that, so not a big deal. It can do many things my D60 cannot and it is TINY!!!! I really LOVE it, so I'm so glad I bought it. I've ordered the lensmate adapter and an infared filter to play with, also the Richard Freniac(not sure of spelling) grip which is being discontinued after the supply runs out- I think my DH will be able to hold it better with the grip attached. Also ordered the little joby gorillapod for it. I highly recommend the camera- it is alot of fun!!


----------



## pjewel

Aw, please don't torture me. That camera has been on my major wish list for a *long* time.


----------



## krandall

mintchip said:


> I love that photo!
> I'm still looking for a good purse/pocket camera however the problem I find is the lag time. I'm so use to the DSLR taking photos so quickly that the pocket ones are just disappointing :Cry: but at least I get a photo


That's another good thing about the D-Lux 4... It has less shutter lag than any P&S I've ever tried. Not quite instantaneous, but very close.


----------



## krandall

hartman studio said:


> At first I wasn't sure about keeping the d-lux 4, but after getting the book, I started to realize everything this little gem is capable of. There are some settings I just love including dynamic blk and white, pinhole,and nostalgic to just name a few. In camera jpeg processing is great-not much need to take raw with it. And the low light capability is wonderful to have- I hate flash. There is a little shutter lag,so I do miss some shots,especially of fast moving Cocotini, but I have my D60 for that, so not a big deal. It can do many things my D60 cannot and it is TINY!!!! I really LOVE it, so I'm so glad I bought it. I've ordered the lensmate adapter and an infared filter to play with, also the Richard Freniac(not sure of spelling) grip which is being discontinued after the supply runs out- I think my DH will be able to hold it better with the grip attached. Also ordered the little joby gorillapod for it. I highly recommend the camera- it is alot of fun!!


I want to get a Gorilla Pod for it too. I don't really need the grip... I don't have a problem handling it, and it's not for my husband.. Besides, it wouldn't fit in the nice leather case with the grip. I do want to get an optical view finder though, (it's on order) this is my first camera with just an LCD screen, and I just find it too hard to see in bright sun. I tried using a Hoodman with it, but that's kind of unwieldy I think a finder that fits in th hot shoe will work much better for me. I ordered the Panny one, since it's aa lot less expensive than the Leica one.


----------



## krandall

pjewel said:


> Aw, please don't torture me. That camera has been on my major wish list for a *long* time.


Get one soon or they'll be going, going, gone!


----------



## pjewel

krandall said:


> Get one soon or they'll be going, going, gone!


I've already bookmarked the page. Just waiting for a check to come in.


----------



## mintchip

krandall said:


> That's another good thing about the D-Lux 4... It has less shutter lag than any P&S I've ever tried. Not quite instantaneous, but very close.


I got to use the D-lux 4 this weekend. Karen I agree with you but with fun pictures like this----you can't beat a DSLR.  Point and shoot are great but I love that instantaneous factor


----------



## krandall

mintchip said:


> I got to use the D-lux 4 this weekend. Karen I agree with you but with fun pictures like this----you can't beat a DSLR.  Point and shoot are great but I love that instantaneous factor


Absolutely! I love the DL4, but it's not a DSLR... I'm not trading mine in any time soon! ;-)


----------



## hartman studio

I agree that I wouldn't give up my DSLR for the d-lux 4, but it is really nice to have both as there are many times I don't take my DSLR with me due to size and weight.
Karen, I miss having a viewfinder,too. My problem with the viewfinders for the d-lux 4 are I understand the view does not change with zooming. I think that would drive me nuts!! Let me know how you like yours. I also understand the handgrip does fit in the case, so I'm hoping that's true-because I do like the case. I may return the grip if it doesn't fit in the case!!!

Here are a couple of pics of dynamic black and white- no post processing or cropping(which they need). Not my best pictures,but you may get the idea of why I like this mode (I programmed it into my mode dial for easy access).


----------



## hartman studio

and one of "nostalgic"- I love the soft colors and focus


----------



## gabdyl

I sent in my D40 and prime lens to Adorama ~ they said they would give me @ $600 for it! anyway I am pretty sure I will get the Panasonic Lumix LX3 if they have it, which is supposed to be almost the same camera as the Leica. Can't wait!


----------



## hartman studio

You will love it if it's anywhere near as good as the dlux 4 (which it is supposed to be!) I just got back from Alaska and took both my Nikon D60 with a long lens (70-300) and my Leica. The leica photos are UNBELIEVABLE!!! I was at the Apple store this afternoon starting to work on a photo book of the trip. There were a couple of professional photographers in there who were absolutely blown away by the quality of the photos from the Leica. For the most part they far surpassed the Nikon pics!! I'll post some photos soon- I took over a 1000 so it will take me awhile to get through them!!


----------



## Sheri

I'm looking forward to your Leica photos, Jocelyn!


----------



## gabdyl

I can't wait to see your pics! You are getting me excited for my new camera!


----------



## mintchip

hartman studio said:


> You will love it if it's anywhere near as good as the dlux 4 (which it is supposed to be!) I just got back from Alaska and took both my Nikon D60 with a long lens (70-300) and my Leica. The leica photos are UNBELIEVABLE!!! I was at the Apple store this afternoon starting to work on a photo book of the trip. There were a couple of professional photographers in there who were absolutely blown away by the quality of the photos from the Leica. For the most part they far surpassed the Nikon pics!! I'll post some photos soon- I took over a 1000 so it will take me awhile to get through them!!


:clap2:Welcome back
Looking forward to seeing your photos!:clap2:


----------



## galaxie

Hmmmm....now I want a better PNS since I am loving my DSLR, but I can't whip it out fast enough to get candids! 

Obviously the DLUX isn't available anymore...I need some input on the best PNS for around $300 max - cheaper would be better. I want something that is good in low light!! My PNS is great during the day outdoors, but otherwise I'm not thrilled with it. It's 4 years old so it's about time for a new one...


----------



## krandall

galaxie said:


> Hmmmm....now I want a better PNS since I am loving my DSLR, but I can't whip it out fast enough to get candids!
> 
> Obviously the DLUX isn't available anymore...I need some input on the best PNS for around $300 max - cheaper would be better. I want something that is good in low light!! My PNS is great during the day outdoors, but otherwise I'm not thrilled with it. It's 4 years old so it's about time for a new one...


The D Lux 4 is definitely still available, even though they have stopped manufacturing it. Amazon has them for sure... I just checked. The Panasonic LX3 is also essentially the same camera, (same fabulous 2.0 Leica lens) though the firmware is a bit different, and the warranty is shorter. And the LX3 is cheaper... $395 at B&H Photo and Amazon.

Unfortunately, there is NOTHING in the $300 or less category that will do well in low light. In fact, for low light situations, the only other recommendable P&S is the Canon G11, which is quite a bit more expensive than the Panny LX3. (but less than the Leica D-Lux 4) If you want low light performance, you are really not going to be happy with a P&S other than these 3.

If, in spite of this advice, you decide to choose a cheaper camera, at LEAST don't get sucked into the mega pixel race. The fact is that the more pixels you stuff onto a small sensor, the worse the performance will be in low light conditions. Try to find a camera that sticks to around 10 MP. Any more than that and the noise is going to be awful at ISO's over 200. (and that might be generous)


----------



## Sheri

Karen and/or camera buffs...
What do you do with the ISO choices? In simple terms... I've seen how in the amateur Lumix ZS7 model (more in my price range) that above ISO 400 the photos get blurrier. What would be the purpose of using higher ISO numbers? Seems like I'd just need to leave the ISO on 80 or 100 or such. Does it have to do with how fast the shutter speed is?

And, the pixels are 12 on that camera, but I like the additional zoom distance because of taking photos of dogs...


----------

