Hey guys, well after a long wait I finally bought my first digital Camera (I know in this day and age everyone has got one) but I am utterly disappointed with the results. I should have done more research into the whole digi-cam phenomenon prior to buying one. Any how my first purchase was a Sony DSC-M2. I like the versatility and the cool features such as movie mode, slide show etc. Over all the picture quality is not that bad that I should rant but its the white balance issue that’s driving me up the wall. I know I might have had bigger expectations than I should have had with a basic starter camera. I recently read a few online reviews on this product and they all mention the white balance issue that most Sony products are plagued with and mine is no exception.

I am planning on selling this one off and thinking of upgrading to something better may be even a DSLR. The thing is that I am completely illiterate when it comes to digital cameras and photography in general, how they work, different options on lenses etc. So here I am asking for your input on what shall I shoot for next, literally. Any input would be greatly appreciated, I am no pro but I still want something that I will be happy with and would look forward to use every time. So may be a starter SLR? I have heard a lot about the Canon Digital Rebal XTi, any thoughts?

 

First of all, go to a camera store, and play with some cameras.

The biggest criteria is, how big of a camera are you willing to carrry when you want to bring a camera with you. Getting a camera that is bigger than that is a bad idea.

DSLRS are nice, but probably overkill unless you are interested (or are interested) in studying photography.

 

What exactly about the white balance is driving you nuts? I could be wrong but if setting the white balance is giving you a hard time, then getting a DSLR might drive you even more nuts. Like ChodTheWacko said, if you are not interest in studying photography, then a DSLR might not be for you. It takes alot of studying and practice to get great looking pictures from a DSLR (trust me, eventhough I'm getting better, I'm still constantly trying). Your expectations might be way too high and you may be disappointed with the first shots you take with it. I mean if you didn't even take the time to research the camera you have now before you bought it, I don't know if you will be willing to take time learning how to use a DSLR.

If you are not happy with this camera, could you return it? I have a Canon A620. It's a great camera. It has lots of advance manual features built into it if you want more control over your pictures. Going outside of full auto may still drive you nuts, but if you know what you are doing, the results are pretty good. It still needs you to study about exposures, white balance, and stuff but it was pretty easy to use. I know Canon has newer ones out now, so maybe consider those. I'm not sure what your intentions are but I think starting with a good point and shoot would be better than going for a DSLR. Unless you reached the limits of the latest point and shoots, you probably do not need a DSLR. On the other hand, a DSLR give you more creative control and it is quite fun to use, but unless you want to take time to practice and study, getting great pictures will be hard. Although the auto mode is like taking pictures with a point and shoot, but why spend the money just to do that?

Anyway, bottom line is you need to do the research. There are plenty of great cameras out there. Only you know what your expectations are and how much work you want to put into it. You want fast quick snapshots, get a point and shoot. You want to get more creative and have more control over your pictures, get a DSLR. I'm no expert myself, so all of this is just my opinion and coming from my own experiences.

 

Considering you are completely new to the digital world entirely, I would not jump right to a DSLR simply because you were unhappy with your first P&S purchase. IMO, this experince shouldn't force you to abandon the idea of a P&S all together. Why do you think jumping to a DSLR would benefit you more? I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this.

There's a huge difference, in many ways, between a P&S and a DSLR. My advice would be to go to a camera shop, or store with a wide variety of P&S models, and try them all out. Try going with an open mind, take your time, learn about each of them, their potential, their ease-of-use, their ergonomics, and what feels comfortable in your hands. If you really want to do your research, take note of which models you liked best, and read up on them at home before making a final decision.

I actually walked away from a camera shop after going in with high hopes of buying my first SLR (years ago). After playing with them and hearing all the lingo from the sales person, I found I just wasn't knowledgeable enough to really grasp what all the features and functions did or meant. I felt it was the best for me to go home, read, learn (at least the basics), know the lingo, and head back to the store for a second trip many months later. This helped my confidence and definitely made the experience a lot more beneficial as I actually understood what the sales person was talking about and was really able to narrow down what was important to me and what was not. I don't know about you, but an SLR was a big investment (+ realizing it would cost more for extra gear down the road), and I really wanted to be able to make informed decisions. If I were you, I wouldn't go into a purchase like this completely blind.

 

Hey Dan / Street Spirit,

Knowing what you know now ... would you advise the to-be photographer that wants to enter the world of SLR ... would you recommend a DSLR or a regular SLR? Brief expalantion as to why would be great.

I wish to learn more about photography. I am more inclined to go DSLR since I am a computer geek and at the same time, I could learn how to use Photoshop. And money isn't a problem for me right now (ie C$1500 budget).

My thoughts: Canon 20D

 

Shortest Response Evar:

DSLR

More Like the Typical-Street-Spirit-Response:

Many years ago, I really couldn't see myself going digital. This was probably around the time the Canon 10D was announced. Quite honestly, I wasn't considering it even a few years ago either. But after having some experience using Dan's camera(s), I can truly see its benefits. Film is now considered 'ancient' to most. I don't think I'll ever completely give up my film SLR (Dan seems to notice a difference between my B&W prints vs. his digital B&W prints), but I do see myself adding a DSLR to my gear within the next few years. Film is still a lot of fun, but even the cost of film/processing/darkroom time is definitely something to consider. I used to shoot TONS of film, and I've found myself a lot more picky about what I shoot now since putting it to film = money. This doesn't even cross my mind when I borrow Dan's camera. Also, shooting film can be trickier since you can't simply erase/edit/change/correct images (or parts of it) in the same way you can with a digital image. There are some neat things you can do with negs and film, but if you're just going to be the 'average'/'novice consumer, you'll likely never even venture that far.

I think a 20D would be a great purchase for you, if you're willing to learn about and take advantage all of its benefits vs. a lesser model.

 

^ Thanks for the response, street spirit. I have debated about the (economic) merits of the Digital Rebel XTi but I think the 20D allows more room for growth.

I am a Canon fan (my point & shoot A60 works well -- see pics I post in 2nd gen TL). However, I do have an AF Nikon film camera -- it takes flawless shots (provided batteries aren't weak) and the Nikon D50, D70 or D80 has crossed my mind (and an hour of online research).

I'll wait until the Boxing Day sales to pick up one up (when I finally decide).

 

Based only on physical shape, ergonics, size, the grip, the feeling of the material they used for the casing, etc (and having nothing to do with its improvements over the Rebel XT or its specs), I actually don't like the Rebel XTi. It feels too small in my hands, and I have tiny hands. That's why I always suggest going to the store and playing around with a bunch of brands and models and not basing everything solely on specs.

 

If you have small hands, the XTi is an amazing camera. If I was just entering the market today, I would have a hard time picking either the XT or XTi simply because they are just too small. They might be better with the optional battery grip, but I haven't tried it yet. The 20/30D is a much better size for the average shooter.

 

If SS thinks the XTi is small then it must kinda feel like this to Dan:

 

 

The DSC-M2 might just be todays most peculiar digital camera. I've never used it but just by looking at it I'm not surprised it would have some "issues".

 

I wouldn't say I have small hands, quite average maybe, but I really haven't noticed how small the XTi is. I held a 30D before buying and they felt the same at the time except the 30D was heavier. Hmm. Maybe since I'm all new to this that it just wasn't a factor. The XTi feels great in my hands, or atleast I don't think it's too small. My only complaint is that my left eye hurts after shooting for a long time. LOL.

 

^^ And that's why people need to go out and try potential models so they can make a decision based on THEIR needs and preferences.

 

it's a common "complaint" that the XT/i is "too small". some love it, some hate it. personally, i kind of like it.

that said, most of the Canon line-up isn't known for setting the benchmark in proportional comfort.

right now the Nikon D80 and Sony's DSLR are considered among the most comfortable bodies.

ultimately, it's one of those things that comes down to the power of persuasion. if enough people complain/note/say something... people tend to consider it true (i'm as susceptible to this as anyone). most people on the internet, frankly, don't speak from experience.

in the end, it's all in the hands of the beholder. go to the store and try out all your options.

PERSONALLY, i find the form factor of my Sony F828 and it's "swivel body" to be the most comfortable camera ever conceived. all that comfort aside though, the camera itself sucks. so ultimately i wouldn't worry tooooo much about form factor.

 

Your old Rebel XT felt perfectly fine to me (even though different from my Elan 7). It's the XTi that feels way too small to me. I don't like the grip.

 

they're virtually the same size. the XTi is even a little larger.

the biggest difference would be button positioning, which is probably why it feels diff. that can play as big apart as actual dimensions.

check the bottom of this page for a 400/350 comparison: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page4.asp

 

also, the larger LCD on the XTi probably makes the body feel smaller as there is less room for your thumb.

 

I didn't have an XT, just a plain old Rebel.

 

Note the size difference between the 20D and XT:


If the image doesn't work, check this page out to see the difference between the Rebel, Rebel XT, and 20D: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Cano...debyside02.jpg

Soopa is right, the grip is slightly thicker on the XTi, but the height of the grip is my main issue. I have to tuck my baby finger under the body while shooting since there isn't space for it on the grip. I don't think SS had that problem, but I know my finger would get tired that way after a day of shooting. Of course, your mileage may vary. You should always try before you buy, because I know everyone has different tastes in bodies.

 

gawd that olympus is fugly

 

Their flagship E1 isn't much better.

 

My apologies. I've been comparing two cameras, but mentioning the wrong model. I've been thinking of Dan's old camera (now corrected as the Rebel) vs. the Rebel XTi. I guess I didn't realize how old Dan's previous model was!

 

The grips feel completely different. It stuck out and is more rounded (so your fingers "cupped" it more vs. the wider, larger grips I am used to), it was shorter, and it didn't leave for much room between where your fingers held the grip and the lens. Just felt like my hands and fingers would be squished or in the way. And that did throw off the button position too. Just preference, I guess. I much prefer Dan's old Rebel, my Elan 7, and his new 30D vs. the XTi in terms of shape, size, and feel of the material. The grip just feels completely different, as you can even see in the pics.

 

I think I have big hands. I can't handle the XT/XTi at all.

I assume you are looking through the viewfinder with your right eye and squinting your left? Something apparently unusual about how I shoot is that I look through the viewfinder with my left eye. It's fantastic though, because I can leave my right eye open and it's very comfortable. Give it a try.

 

I don't think it's as uncommon as you might expect. I'm right-handed but left eye dominant as well. True for both cameras and my telescopes. Several people in my astronomy club are the same way.

 

Yeah I know alot of people who shoot with their left eye...... freaks!

 

Dan and I use opposite eyes for the viewfinder as well. And I never close or squint my other eye -- don't need to. I use my left eye, while he uses his right. I could use my right eye too, but it doesn't feel nearly as natural, and isn't what I do out of instinct.

 

Its been so long since I used a viewfinder to take pictures I can't remember which eye I use.

 

:troutslap

 

I tried using my left eye last night. It actually isn't that bad and I may start to prefer to shoot that way. My only problem is right now I'm wearing glasses and my right hand is in the way. I could still do it but I will have to keep cleaning my glasses. I'll have to go get more contacts soon so I can fully evaluate this shooting method. Also, I tried shooting with my right eye and covered my left eye with my left hand and I can't seem to focus as well. Does that mean my left eye is more dominant?

BTW, now that everyone has brought the size of the camera to my attention, I paid more attention to how I'm holding the camera and atleast I still think the XTi is fine in my hands. I was afraid everyone will get me to think that the camera is too small and it will bother the heck out of me. I glad that didn't happen. My pinky very slightly sticks out at the bottom but it's not uncomfortable. So it's okay but I will pay more attention to it next time I buy a new camera, when ever that is.

 

so far as i know, i've been told that people tend to favor one eye over the other for distance and the other for close sight.

 

Well it is peculiar indeed, i like the camera dont get me wrong but the few issues that it does have, drive me up the wall. As mentioned earlier it suffers from the white balance issue that almost all sony P/S cameras have, i tried playing around with the white balance settings to see if i can get some better results but it just seem to make it worse.

As most of you guys suggested, i stopped by at the local camera store and spoke to the rep there for a good 10 to 20 minutes and played around with the Nikon D50 and the rebal Xti. I really like the idea of being able to play around with the settings to get the best picture but as most of you also stated that if all i want is a p/s camera then i shouldnt go and spend money on an SLR.

Since the M2 is my first digi-cam I have nothing else to compare it with that i might have owned in the past. Thats another one of the reasons why i want to get in the SLR world. I am afraid if i get another p/s camera i would be disappointed yet again. Meanwhile i am planning on doing a bit more research before committing myself to any more technology.

 

What exactly is this W/B issue you speak of? I've never heard of it and don't feel like researching. Having owned several Sony cameras, I can certainly say I've never experienced it.

 

Check out the following picture taken around noon time yet seems like it was captured at midnight.

 

That's not a white balance issue, it's just metering the light wrong... that's probably worse than a white balance issue actually.

 

The white balance looks fine.

The problem is it's simply too dark...

This is what happens when you buy a camera with a small lens objective (gathers less light), inability to operate at high ISO, and you don't understand the settings.

That photo was shot at ISO100, which is just about the maximum speed a Sony camera will shoot at automatically. Reason being, anything above ISO100 on a Sony camera will be noisy as hell... but it'll be brighter!

It was also shot at a really low exposure.

My guess is, if you messed around with the settings a bit... you could get sufficiently bright shots.

Someone with a little better understanding of all the EXIF data should be able to give you better advice (even though alot of the EXIF is empty...?). Dan, any advice?

In either case, like I said, white balance is NOT the issue here.

 

Yeah, harder to fix in Photoshop. Nonetheless, it can be fixed in the camera.

Yeah, good point on the metering mode. That's a sure bet, as it's one of the few functions that Sony cameras allow to be manipulated in Full Auto mode.

 

Well most of the pictures that i have taken so far were taken in "Auto" mode. I guess i need to spend more time reading the owner's manual and play around with the setting in order to get better results.

 

Does Sony make this camera anymore? I was trying to find it on Sony Style to grab the owners manual.

In either case, I'm betting a large portion of this issue is operator error and not a camera fault. Especially viewing the photos from other people with your cam.