Dwain77
quality posts: 4
Private Messages
speedoo wrote:Or, instead of wading through all the details, just read the final section, entitled "Conclusion". This is a very mediocre camera, as evidenced by the 69% score given by dpreview.
This is dpreview your talking about. They deal with all cameras, so keep in mind they'll compare this to much more expensive/high end bodies. For reference a couple days ago they reviewed the Nikon D600 ($2,100 body only) gets rated as 87%.
Also they say 'Good for: Beginners who want a solid entry-level camera for general photography'. Anyone that's already into photography knows this may not have all the features for them, but your beginner or casual shooter won't use 1/2 of what this body will do.
Bottom line is, if you aren't familiar with DSLR's and your asking about the quality of this camera or the pictures I'd bet it's good enough for you.
I'm 1 of the infamous "Honest 200".
Dwain77
quality posts: 4
Private Messages
tachapman wrote:[quote postid="5242048" user="radi0j0hn"]Attention "gym photographers:" This outfit is not going to deliver the results YOU want if your goal is to get frozen-action shots of your kid scoring the winning basket in the high school tournament.
Buy the body, invest in the glass. Yes, this kit lens won't deliver that action shot inside a gym, or on the night-time football field, but the right lens with this camera will. I shoot lacrosse and football games with this body and an EE70-200mm 2.8L USM and they've been published.
Loose the snobby attitude, and teach instead of lecture.
Agreed.
I actually have an older Nikon, lower specs than this Canon. I've shot in contests against people using multi-thousand dollar body/lens combos. My pictures scored higher in the contest than a lot of the high end gear.
I'm 1 of the infamous "Honest 200".
amyjg
quality posts: 0
Private Messages
wilderf353 wrote:I think you can get a better deal at Sam's Club next week if you can wait and you are a member and you are lucky enough to grab one on Black Friday...
$499:
- Canon EOS Rebel T3 12.2MP
- EF-S18/55 IS II Lens
- EF75/300 III Lens
- Canon Bag
- 4GB SD Card
I've been previewing Black Friday ads, this camera is offered by several retailers (Target, WalMart, Sam's, Best Buy) as a $499-$599 deal with extra lens, memory card, and other accessories that vary by store.
Guitar Hero Encore: Rocks The 80's quotes...
"If your hair moves while headbanging, you didn't use enough hairspray."
"It's not how WELL you sing, it's how HIGH you sing!"
Dwain77
quality posts: 4
Private Messages
kavoelker wrote:How does this camera compare with this Nikon camera?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003ZYF3LO/ref=ty_Week46NikonD3100?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-4&pf_rd_r=19GW5GTWMCC5VE3Q5PY5&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1413498782&pf_rd_i=761198
I've not used either of these cameras. Plus I'll admit I'm a Nikon guy but I'll try to keep that out of the post.
From looking them both up the cameras are pretty similar spec wise. The Nikon has a few more megapixels and more video resolutions. Also something maybe worth noting is the Nikon has a higher ISO meaning you could shot in a darker environment.
For more information you can look at the reviews from www.dpreview.com and can compare the 2. You'll see that the Nikon is the same or slightly higher in all the areas rate. They rate the D3100 at 72% and the T3 at 69%. In the real world I'm not sure how much you'd really notice a difference.
The best advice I can give is to go somewhere and actually look at the cameras, hold them and get a feel for how they work. Personally when I started I was open to Nikon or Canon (or others). Although after holding the different models and playing with them a little I didn't like the way the Canon felt. The Nikon, to me, seemed far more solid and a much better build. Again that was years ago and things change all the time. You should really go and find out for yourself what you think of each brand.
I'm 1 of the infamous "Honest 200".
Dwain77
quality posts: 4
Private Messages
charliecarroll wrote:Both are good entry level cameras and I am sure your post along with my answer will fuel the great Canon vs. Nikon war that has been going on forever. lol With that said, I like the Canon better. Many (as I do) believe Canon went past Nikon a while back with quieter and faster operating lens. By faster I mean how fast the lens would come into focus. Also, Canon right of the start was building the auto focus motors in the lens instead of in the body. The war there was easier to settle. If a motor went bad in a lens, you were only without auto focus on that lens and the rest you had would work find. The Nikon in the body lens gave you the problem, if it went out, you lost auto focus no matter what lens you used. Nikon recovered on that also but Canon seems to be the leader today. Now all the Nikon lovers can blast away at me as I would certainly expect as well as respect. 
NIKON! just kidding
It's hard to really say 1 is better than the other, like I said above the buyers opinion is most important I'd say.
Another point though:
If you have friends/family that use either Nikon or Canon you might have an advantage to choosing the same brand so you can borrow, buy or swap lenses.
I'm 1 of the infamous "Honest 200".
Dwain77
quality posts: 4
Private Messages
prateek6bansal wrote:Hi all,
I am new tot he entire woot concept and this woot community
can anyone please suggest me with two things
and I am really interested in buying an entry level SLR
1. Are the woot products new and genuine(pls dont kill me for this question)
2. Will I get a better deal in best buy or any other electronic store on black friday
Hope to hear from you
Prateek
Woot lists the condition next to the price, in this case NEW. I've never had anything that wasn't genuine from Woot. As always you can return an item to Woot if you're not satisfied.
As for black Friday, I don't know what deals are out there. Maybe you'll be able to find a better deal at a store, then go wait outside for 3 hours to try and buy one.
Honestly you'll just have to look around at your local deals and make that decision.
I'm 1 of the infamous "Honest 200".
radi0j0hn
quality posts: 78
Private Messages
mhommer wrote:I though that was the point of the SLR body, ability to interchange lenses. I have the model previous to this and with a 200mm telephoto you can get very good action shots indoors. I also have 400mm and get very crisp shots from across the soccer field. It is a good camera body to start with, learn the basics, determine what kind of photos you want and get a lens that will best suite your desires.
You are correct, but many beginners do not realize that one should "learn the basics, determine what kind of photos you want and get a lens that will best suit your desires." They think that digital=magic. Many people grew up with point and shoot cameras using film with enormous latitude, and expect digitals to be even better. Some day they will be, but right now you still need to do the work to learn the basics.
I see it every week, with folks describing camera shake, subject movement etc., as "blurry pictures" and they blame the camera.
You need to expend at least as much time and effort learning the basics as you do watching Honey Boo Boo.
acpress.com Not cute, but useful.
radi0j0hn
quality posts: 78
Private Messages
tachapman wrote:[quote postid="5242048" user="radi0j0hn"]Attention "gym photographers:" This outfit is not going to deliver the results YOU want if your goal is to get frozen-action shots of your kid scoring the winning basket in the high school tournament.
Buy the body, invest in the glass. Yes, this kit lens won't deliver that action shot inside a gym, or on the night-time football field, but the right lens with this camera will. I shoot lacrosse and football games with this body and an EE70-200mm 2.8L USM and they've been published.
Loose the snobby attitude, and teach instead of lecture.
Apparently few of you have worked in cameras stores lately. It's insane!
I'm condensing down to brass tacks what I deal with every week. People buy these cameras with genuine but unrealistic expectations, and then get frustrated when the shots are "blurry" and still have no understanding why.
I try to explain the limitations of f/stops and how it is slowly getting better due to increasing ISOs, and I can see their eyes glazing over...they simply don't want to know this stuff, just take award-winning photos with no effort on their part.
One person bought one of these cameras on Monday, expected to learn all about it in an hour and was shooting a WEDDING with it on Saturday! [When I told her it wasn't a good idea she said, "That's OK, the marriage is probably not going to last anyway!"]
Also,these folks just ain't gonna buy a EE70-200mm 2.8L USM that costs more than the camera outfit.
For those who take the typical outdoor shots, this outfit will be perfect and far better than a compact point and shoot. Add that $100 50mm 1.8 and it will open up a whole new world of available light photography. But I suspect some of you seasoned photographers are out of touch with the wild expectations of current newbie customers.
acpress.com Not cute, but useful.