compare classic to ultra What makes the ultra worth $40 more? It seems the only advantage is the tripod option. What am I missing that makes it that much more expensive? Please help.
752140
thank you for posting. I had the same question about how the classic compares to the ultra, in considering it as a christmas gift for my husband. this was exactly what I needed! The Ultra, it is!
752141
Try this link from their websiteI bought the Ultra yesterday.http://www.flipvideo.com/products_flip_ultra_specs.II.shtml
1672481
You can get super deals on the d3100 now because of the age, and they are starting to turn up in the used market. That means they are having/ maintaining a re-sale value.No one mentions how light weight this camera is for a SLR [no top screen] which makes a huge difference when you have it around your neck all day.
867254
Seems like "Arush" answered appropriately. The newer version, that I have, is a really nice tripod. However, if you aren't going to use it heavily you would probably be fine getting the cheaper model.
642370
The Sony Bloggie Touch blows the Flip away. The quality of the Sony is far superior. I bought one for my Father-In-Law and one for my wife. My wife had a Flip, so I am speaking from hands on experience. Neither one of the Sony units has given us one bit of problems. Don't know why the other person went through ten of them. I tend to think "user error". I'd get one for myself if I didn't already have a larger hand held Canon that cost me like $600.
740329
It has been working fine with my photo equipment. I am very careful with my cameras and the tripods (yes I have three tripods). I have not had any problems neither with the head nor the legs of this one. But I am an old man in my mid 60's so I am careful and fully "cognizant" of what I am doing with a 6K to 10 K camera systems. So, my tripods are neither abused nor mishandled. Now, if you are to invest in a "better", hence more expensive, ball-head, then go ahead and spend some more and get a much better tripod. I hear that the best carbon fiber tripods from Europe cost close to $1000.00 or more. I declare that I am neither the manufacturer nor the seller of this item. Therefore, I have no data on its strength and endurance. Contact the manufacturer for such unwise questions instead asking another customer of this tripod unit. I have been happy with it.
1044998
I just went through the same decision process, in fact I literally bought the D60+ lens kit and returned it (package unopened) for the D80 (body only) + the fabulous 18-200 VR lens. Why? 1) I wanted the additional metering controls vs. the D60 and in fact used all of them on my recent trip to the Hoh rain forest. 2) Keeping to my budget, I opted to spend the money on the 18-200mm VR, and yes, I used its FULL RANGE without having to change lenses. A great way to go when outdoors and taking advantage of opportunities as they present themselves (e.g. deer twins walking right towards us while on the trail!). 3) Quickly realizing the super-zoom wasn't going to get me a FAST lens, I was able to pick up the 50mm f/1.4 right before my travels (which would NOT have AF working with the D40 or D60). If I had the $$$ I might have opted for a D300 and picked up the D40/60 for a lightweight second body, but as the only Digital SLR that I'll be using for the next couple of years, and the small price difference, I am extremely happy with my purchase.
730278
I was trying to make this very desicion, I did tons of research and found that the 40D was the better option. Repeatedly I read that the upgrades to the 50D just didn't justify the cost upgrade.
1820313
It works good but can shake a little. The 24-105 ft L has image stabilization but if you need the 2.8 for low light then that's out. With a tripod you should be good but even with a good fluid head the 2.8 will show shake on the pan. The mono depends on your skill. The trade off might be the 4.0 is $1000 less and might perform better in most situations. I hope this is helpful.
2078344
I own both. Bought one of first 18-200s made in Japan to go with my first dslr: D50 that I got for a trip to the Bahamas. Have wonderful images I still enjoy. Now have lightweight D5000 and super D7000. Bought 18-140 for light weight to hike w/D5000. Use 28-200 w/D7000 otherwise. Both focus quickly, iq is similar. Both have VR but 200 has active mode for shooting while moving, which I love. So 140 wins on weight, price, while 200 adds focal length and versatile VR.
180826
Thanks to both of you. I have about decided on the 50G10, but it will be about a month or six weeks before I move on it so it will be interesting to see what happens to the price. I just hope we don't get a rave review from CU like the Sammy A650 did, or the price will probably increase.Thanks again. lYou both helped make up my mind.
466905
For me it was price, the IS was a little over my reach. You know you have a great camera you can push that ISO comfortable past 1600 . I recently did a wedding with only a spot light and no flash at 1600 at 5.6 or 2.8 between 15th 125 sec hand held it came out fantastic. Hand held is a trick to learn. I would think you will need to be above 125 second and higher with a depth of field f8 f16 and you said no tripod and I assuming no flash hand held. I think the IS would be worth the stretch if you can. For me it is beach pic on a tripod with weddings and party's One other thing I dont know what speed your camera sync for flash my Canon 60D sync at 250 or less but you can hyper sync flash above 250 but then you pick up a hard grain. If you intend to use flash the flash freeze the movement above 250 in hyper for no flash diffidently if you have the bucks I will assume the IS is as good or better in ether case you will have a top of the line lens good luck
305386
I recently purchased an XT myself. My understanding is that if your not making posters, those 2 MP are not worth the difference in price. In all the research I did (and I did a lot), most everyone has said save your money for the lenses. A good lens is what's really going to make the difference in photography with the Canon Rebel.
1609774
PD,Thanks for a really informative review. I'm in the process of trying to make this decision. I'm getting a 70-200. I just don't know which one. On your 2.8 w/o IS, and adding a 1.4 teleconverter, do you miss the IS? I know you said you use a tripod or monopod a lot. Is that how you overcome that? Or do you find yourself still able to shoot hand-held? I'd love to get that combination of the 200 + 1.4tc.Thanks!
122905
I just bought a 40D and I think it is a great camera. As posted, there is not best choice but I am sure if the extra (few) bucks is not an issue, we should go for the 40D. It is also the latest sensor and I found it to be really good. Took some shots and it is great.
320129
The zoom here is digital zoom not optical zoom so going much over 2x is pretty useless as quality plummets quickly. The Flip is the only camera Id recommend but the zoom is not too useful. Zooming in and out on any of the cameras is going to be rough and shaky at best. Cameras like this are super easy to operate and give fantastic results. Id say stick with flip and go ultra then if its not your bag resell it as theres a hungry market to buy from you. I have used flip for most all the videos at 90secondsuccess and will be buying another one any day now. Hope this helps. rb
774987
Hi Mr. Hewitt (I wonder if we have any relation?) Anyway, for a true beginner (as in you've never used anything but a point-and-shoot) I'd recommend you get a Nikon D40 and an 18-200 VR. Keep the 18-55 kit lens, you'll find it lighter when your just taking snapshots of the family or whatever. The D40 is an excellent starter camera, it has almost all the tweaks of this much more expensive camera without the weight and cost. The D300 has many advantages over it, but I really feel you'll learn a lot faster with a simpler camera, and step up to this when your ready. I actually started out with a D40 a bit over a year ago, it made starting out quite fun. The 18-200VR will follow you as a great lens on the D300 too, and you can use any newer AF-S lenses on it. If you have older AF-D Nikon lenses lying around that you want to use, a D80 is also a good place to start. It's easier to make the custom tweaks you'll learn about in your photography classes on the D80, but it still has Auto modes as well to get you started. Checkout www.kenrockwell.com, especially his recommended camera page. He's a bit more eloquent than I am. And I wouldn't be so fast to recommend the D60 to anyone, it's just the D40x's guts (plus active D-Lighting, but without the other enhancements of the D300/D3) with a different name stamped on it. I wouldn't recommend the D40x or D60 to anyone, they exist to fill a price point to compete with Canon. If your eyeballing either, jump to the D80 and don't look back.
349708
Todd-I've talked to a few professional photographers and semi-professionals and they've all said the same thing...the XT is an excellent camera and the differences between the two are not worth the extra money. Buy the XT and invest in a good lens. Those with "is usm" have autofocus and image stabilization. By chance, have you ever ordered a camera through Amazon before? I'm wondering if it will contain the original USA Warranty.Thanks and Good Luck!