Photograph Of The Day

I am not into photography but my gf says I should buy a decent one. So I am buying Canon SX40 H... its cheap. Is it any good? Any good photographer here?

Terrible. For the cost of that, you could get a used slr. Looking at keh, you could get a D3000 and 18-55 for a little over $300, but what camera lens is best really depends on you. What's your max budget and what type of photography do you generally do?



I'm considering going camping tomorrow, so i may have some new pics soon. Oh, how i dread carrying the 4x5 camera around on top of normal backpacking gear.
 
I am not into photography but my gf says I should buy a decent one. So I am buying Canon SX40 H... its cheap. Is it any good? Any good photographer here?


I am not a professional photographer, and by no means a camera expert. I'm just a guy who enjoys taking wildlife photos as a hobby. Very relaxing.

Unfortunately, I find that expressing one's opinion about a camera, or lens, etc., is like venturing an opinion about a graphics card. There always seems to be someone, laying in the weeds, waiting to tell you you're crazy.

Here's my 2 cents. I really enjoy using, and recommend a "hybrid" camera for someone who wants great photos, but is not a camera fanatic. A hybrid, is simply a camera with many of the features of a more expensive and sophisticated, $800.00 DSLR, blended with all of the automatic, and simplistic features, of a simple $89.00 point n' shoot. Hybrids usually sell for around $400.00 new.

I am currently using the Sony HX100V. (Some pics below) It has recently been replaced by the HX200V. Same camera, but rated at 18mp, rather than 16mp. I buy a new hybrid every 3 years or so, when it's worth the price of the upgrade. Canon, and Nikon also make hybrids.

The two snaps below were taken at considerable distances. I am often 20' to 50' from my subjects, as I was in these photos, and I think I get really nice snaps. The camera also has a 1080p HD video mode with great sound as well. Panorama mode for really wide landscape shots, and a rapid fire "burst" mode, for holding down the shutter button, and taking snaps at the rate of 10 frames per second. Awesome results. Hopes this helps you in making a decision. What ever you buy, good luck!
 

Attachments

  • ScreenShot001.jpg
    ScreenShot001.jpg
    63.9 KB · Views: 1
  • ScreenShot005.jpg
    ScreenShot005.jpg
    44.2 KB · Views: 1
  • ScreenShot007.jpg
    ScreenShot007.jpg
    64.1 KB · Views: 1
  • 6.jpg
    6.jpg
    90.3 KB · Views: 2
  • Gold Macaw Head downsized.jpg
    Gold Macaw Head downsized.jpg
    92.1 KB · Views: 3
Agreed that if we want to offer any type of suggestion we'll need to know a budget and what types of photos you want. Do you want to "get into" photography or just be able to take nice pics?

I have a T2i. It's since been replaced by the T3i but this is a great article on it: Canon Rebel T2i Review: This Should Be Your First DSLR



Speaking of my camera.....Christmas is fast approaching and I know my wife/mother-in-law will be looking for ideas. I'm ready to move on from the kit lens I got with it (18-55) and the 55-200 lens I bought (which is basically the kit lens for the other end of the spectrum). Both lens work well enough but I'm looking for some other options. Since they will be gifts, I'd like to keep the price around $100-150. Are there any lenses at the price range I should consider?
 
Last edited:
@ jmacavali & foothead,

His question clearly states that he's not into photography, and just wants a decent camera. Did I misunderstand something?
 
No I don't think so. But I wasn't into photography either when I bought my T2i. :lol:


Oh, I hear that! :)

How did you like that head shot of the Macaw in a tree from about 30' away?

I thought it was pretty good. Again, I'm no photo expert, I just know what looks good to me.
 
I think it's spot on. Look nice and sharp around his head and fades out nicely. Looks great.
 
I am not a professional photographer, and by no means a camera expert. I'm just a guy who enjoys taking wildlife photos as a hobby. Very relaxing.

Unfortunately, I find that expressing one's opinion about a camera, or lens, etc., is like venturing an opinion about a graphics card. There always seems to be someone, laying in the weeds, waiting to tell you you're crazy.

Here's my 2 cents. I really enjoy using, and recommend a "hybrid" camera for someone who wants great photos, but is not a camera fanatic. A hybrid, is simply a camera with many of the features of a more expensive and sophisticated, $800.00 DSLR, blended with all of the automatic, and simplistic features, of a simple $89.00 point n' shoot. Hybrids usually sell for around $400.00 new.

I am currently using the Sony HX100V. (Some pics below) It has recently been replaced by the HX200V. Same camera, but rated at 18mp, rather than 16mp. I buy a new hybrid every 3 years or so, when it's worth the price of the upgrade. Canon, and Nikon also make hybrids.

The two snaps below were taken at considerable distances. I am often 20' to 50' from my subjects, as I was in these photos, and I think I get really nice snaps. The camera also has a 1080p HD video mode with great sound as well. Panorama mode for really wide landscape shots, and a rapid fire "burst" mode, for holding down the shutter button, and taking snaps at the rate of 10 frames per second. Awesome results. Hopes this helps you in making a decision. What ever you buy, good luck!


You're mixing hybrid cameras (normally called bridge cameras) with superzooms. A bridge camera has a large, SLR-type sensor and optics to match. They have non-removable lenses and usually use an electronic finder, hence not being a true SLR. The cameras you and hamiejox mentioned are superzooms. These are pretty much point-and-shoot cameras with a massive zoom range, designed to look professional to non-knowledgeable purchasers. Sure, they're okay if you need the huge range and don't want the bulk of a real slr with a tele lens, but 95% of the people who buy them seem to take most photos in the normal (~28-70mm equivalent) range. The main advantages of an entry-level slr over a normal point and shoot are superior optics and a non-microscopic sensor. Superzooms have neither of these.

Also, we're way beyond the point where megapixel counts matter for non-professionals. Anything over 8MP is more than good enough unless you want gigantic prints.


Speaking of my camera.....Christmas is fast approaching and I know my wife/mother-in-law will be looking for ideas. I'm ready to move on from the kit lens I got with it (18-55) and the 55-200 lens I bought (which is basically the kit lens for the other end of the spectrum). Both lens work well enough but I'm looking for some other options. Since they will be gifts, I'd like to keep the price around $100-150. Are there any lenses at the price range I should consider?

For $100-150, you won't have a lot of options. The 50mm f/1.8 is a seriously good lens for the money, but the focal length on APS-C is a bit awkward for an all-purpose type lens. Still, every canon shooter should have one. It's great for creative stuff and low light. There's also the new 40mm STM which is a very good lens, but it's $200.


So the camping trip is definitely on. I'm leaving around midnight tonight to go here. I decided to just bring the Pentax 645 this time, since my field camera is still taken apart for a modification i've been doing.
 
Last edited:
You're mixing hybrid cameras (normally called bridge cameras) with superzooms. The cameras you and hamiejox mentioned are superzooms....


I stand corrected, mine is a "superzoom", I just learned something. I told you I wasn't into cameras. :)

I will say this to hamiejox, I love this thing. Especially because I really enjoy wildlife photography, and the lens on this is incredible. It's rated as being comparable to an 800mm lens. It's fantastic to take a photo of something tiny like an insect from 20' away where you can barely see it. Then you come home, and display it on a large monitor, and sometimes I'm amazed at what the camera saw, that I could not.

I've spoken to many people who are deeply involved with the photographic hobby. Most have a high quality DSLR that cost them $1,500, and lenses costing as much as $3,000, and ya know what they all say....it's not so much the camera as it is the eye behind it. I've had many people tell me my photos are as good as anything they've seen.

Don't misunderstand, I am well aware of the technical superiority of a DSLR, no question about it. I'm simply saying that it is not necessary to spend a lot of money on a DSLR to take high quality photos these days.

Here's a couple of examples.

The first is a photo of my wife's orchids in the kitchen in the early morning sunlight. All I did was remove the kitchen back ground, and replace it with solid black.

The second I took early in the morning while in the woods. I was standing on higher ground than the Raccoon. About 4' higher. I couldn't get any closer than about 25' or I would have scared it away.
 

Attachments

  • Orchid 3 Flowers.jpg
    Orchid 3 Flowers.jpg
    65.5 KB · Views: 3
  • Raccoon downsized 3-9-12.jpg
    Raccoon downsized 3-9-12.jpg
    102 KB · Views: 3
Back
Top Bottom