09-21-2004, 10:29 PM
I tried for about the last six weeks to convince myself the D-70 would be a good investment. Fact is, I'm more in the situation described a few posts higher up :) and since in Canada the D-70 retails for ~$1800 (although, to be fair, a buddy was going to get me a VERY nice deal), I simply couldn't justify that kind of purhcase for my own needs.
For someone in your situation, Munkay, I highly recomend anything from Canon. Not sure what their lower end digicams are going for in the states at the moment, but a smaller 3 megapixel one shouldn't break the bank. They're not as good for raw beginers as, say, a Fuji, but for someone with a little experience (such as yourself) they're simply great cameras. I personally own (and love) a Powershot S110, which I bought at the very end of ITS lifetime. And even though it's 'only' 2 megapixels, it easily prints up 8x10 shots with great clarity. The only times I've wished I had something with a little more ooomph was (1) landscape shots or anything requiring some zoom. The 2x optical zoom simply doesn't cut it, and compounds the second problem, namely (2) anytime I wanted to digitally blow up a specific part of a picture afterwards. This is where a 2 megapixel camera really shows its limitations. Granted, for myself that translates to about a dozen shots in the last 600 or so, which is why going from a 2 megapixel digicam to a 6 megapixel SLR behemoth would have been simply a colossal waste of money. Althought Roland is right, it IS a damn fine piece of equipment.
gekko
For someone in your situation, Munkay, I highly recomend anything from Canon. Not sure what their lower end digicams are going for in the states at the moment, but a smaller 3 megapixel one shouldn't break the bank. They're not as good for raw beginers as, say, a Fuji, but for someone with a little experience (such as yourself) they're simply great cameras. I personally own (and love) a Powershot S110, which I bought at the very end of ITS lifetime. And even though it's 'only' 2 megapixels, it easily prints up 8x10 shots with great clarity. The only times I've wished I had something with a little more ooomph was (1) landscape shots or anything requiring some zoom. The 2x optical zoom simply doesn't cut it, and compounds the second problem, namely (2) anytime I wanted to digitally blow up a specific part of a picture afterwards. This is where a 2 megapixel camera really shows its limitations. Granted, for myself that translates to about a dozen shots in the last 600 or so, which is why going from a 2 megapixel digicam to a 6 megapixel SLR behemoth would have been simply a colossal waste of money. Althought Roland is right, it IS a damn fine piece of equipment.
gekko
"Life is sacred and you are not its steward. You have stewardship over it but you don't own it. You're making a choice to go through this, it's not just happening to you. You're inviting it, and in some ways delighting in it. It's not accidental or coincidental. You're choosing it. You have to realize you've made choices."
-Michael Ventura, "Letters@3AM"
-Michael Ventura, "Letters@3AM"