Please give me input ! I am debating 2 Nikon cameras, the P500 or the L120 So far this is the pros//cons for each model that i can think of P500 - View Finder, macro,22mm-810mm lense//price, less pixelsL120- better Pixels, cheaper//no view finder , 25mm-525mm,no macro i have never used a camera with no view finder and i love the macro feature but i am turned off by the fact that the more expensive camera has way less pixels. any thoughts??? Please give me input ! I am debating 2 Nikon cameras, the P500 or the L120 So far this is the pros//cons for each model that i can think of P500 - View Finder, macro,22mm-810mm... » Read More Please give me input ! I am debating 2 Nikon cameras, the P500 or the L120 So far this is the pros//cons for each model that i can think of P500 - View Finder, macro,22mm-810mm lense//price, less pixelsL120- better Pixels, cheaper//no view finder , 25mm-525mm,no macro i have never used a camera with no view finder and i love the macro feature but i am turned off by the fact that the more expensive camera has way less pixels. any thoughts??? « Show Less
922565
thank you all so much i had already decided but you just totally put me at ease. the P500 it is. / THANK YOU !
422106
The D60 does not seem that much better a camera for the difference in price. I will say, however, that I like the fact that the rear display on the D60 goes off when you put the viewfinder up to your eye.
1679834
http://www.flickr.com/groups/d40slr/discuss/72157602509321717/?search=sigma+vs.+nikon i know it's been a while but that may give some insight. i have the sigma version and it's great value for the price paid.
567353
I have the Sony. (Took 3 thousand photos and video on an international trip). It is mostly fine, but there are 2 complaints with which I agree on the message boards. 1. Blue purple tint and glare from the lens coating in bright sunlight. 2. In general, not perfectly sharp pictures usually. (I have 5 year old Kodak 5mp that is often more sharp). The good...amazing motion stabilization. 'Able to take photos in almost any light condition without the flash!! I also have some good photos from moving vehicles. Very compact and no protruding lens or lens motor. Quick startup. HD movie is ok also. Acceptable battery life. FYI. There are assorted complaints about the Canons also. I have now read enough not to expect perfect photos from ANY point and shoot, but like you, I hate to drag around that Nikon. (You might try one of the new cameras with a bit larger sensor, like 4 3rds).
1803406
I had a D40 before the D60, the D60 is MUCH better, just my personal thoughts 1-Dust, if you live in a dusty environment is a BIG ONE 2-Active D-light, Say good bye to underexposed photos, the camera produces very consistent results, not so with the D40 3-Expeed produced lower noise at higher ISO 4-THE VR Lens is SOOO much worth it, my pictures are always sharp I considered the D80, but... 1-No Active D-light "a big one" 2-more focus points yes, but you can do anything with 3 if you use them well 3-the D80 has a motor, but Nikon will be updating most of this primes to AFS this year, I tried the camera motor its slowwww 4-I was planing to get the D80+50mm 1.4 lens for low light, got the sigma 30mm 1.4 its a much better lens to keep on the camera IMHO 5-Expeed processing on the D60 seems to produce more saturated/vivid pictures vs.. D80 I shoot RAW/convert with capture NX, tried all the options, capture NX is slow and ugly, but it gives you the BEST picture period.
458494
I'm between the same two models, and was also considering the Canon SX30IS. I recommend you read the in-depth reviews on www.imaging-resource.com. Unfortunately, despite all the great features of the Panasonic FZ100 and the Leica lens, it's image quality doesn't compare to the Nikon. Compare the noise and detail of the sample images in both of these reviews. It's too bad, I was about to get the FZ100 until I saw how poor the image detail was up close. But that website ended up giving the Nikon P500 a high recomendation, while they could not in good conscience give the FZ100 any sort of recomendation at all. I'm between the same two models, and was also considering the Canon SX30IS. I recommend you read the in-depth reviews on www.imaging-resource.com. Unfortunately, despite all the great features of the Panasonic FZ100 and the Leica lens, it's image quality doesn't compare to the Nikon. Compare the noise and detail of the sample images in both of these reviews. It's too bad, I was about to get the FZ100 until I saw how poor the image detail was up close. But that website ended up giving the Nikon P500 a high recomendation, while they could not in good conscience give the FZ100 any sort of... » Read More I'm between the same two models, and was also considering the Canon SX30IS. I recommend you read the in-depth reviews on www.imaging-resource.com. Unfortunately, despite all the great features of the Panasonic FZ100 and the Leica lens, it's image quality doesn't compare to the Nikon. Compare the noise and detail of the sample images in both of these reviews. It's too bad, I was about to get the FZ100 until I saw how poor the image detail was up close. But that website ended up giving the Nikon P500 a high recomendation, while they could not in good conscience give the FZ100 any sort of recomendation at all. « Show Less
326235
Thanks for your recommendation of the Panasonic Lumix LZ8. (Like others in this dialogue, I'm looking to replace a Nikon that was very disappointing.) It's been three years since your post, and I've noticed that it's hard now to find an LZ8. Is there a newer Panasonic you'd recommend with the same enthusiasm now? Thanks for your help.
241543
Both should be optically excellent, and I like the 1.4 aperture to keep away from flash, especialy around newborns. My preference would be the longer lens, because I prefer to get a closer image while maintaining my distance. The quality of high end Nikkor zooms has gotten to just about stop using primes but back in the day, my preference for this was 105mm 2.8 Nikkor lens. You would get about the same reach mating the 85mm to a DX chip, but with FX I would even think about a slightly longer lens, smaller maximum aperture and kick the ISO up a little bit. My favorite thing about this camera, compared to the D300 it replaced, is the superiority of images shot in low light. Both should be optically excellent, and I like the 1.4 aperture to keep away from flash, especialy around newborns. My preference would be the longer lens, because I prefer to get a closer image while maintaining my distance. The quality of high end Nikkor zooms has gotten to just about stop using primes but back in the day, my preference for this was 105mm 2.8 Nikkor lens. You would get about the same reach mating the 85mm to a DX chip, but with FX I would even think about a slightly longer lens, smaller maximum aperture and kick the ISO up a little bit. My favorite thing about this... » Read More Both should be optically excellent, and I like the 1.4 aperture to keep away from flash, especialy around newborns. My preference would be the longer lens, because I prefer to get a closer image while maintaining my distance. The quality of high end Nikkor zooms has gotten to just about stop using primes but back in the day, my preference for this was 105mm 2.8 Nikkor lens. You would get about the same reach mating the 85mm to a DX chip, but with FX I would even think about a slightly longer lens, smaller maximum aperture and kick the ISO up a little bit. My favorite thing about this camera, compared to the D300 it replaced, is the superiority of images shot in low light. « Show Less
231727
I agree with the Nikon choice - feels natural in my hand too. From what I've read, you really can't go wrong with a Canon or Nikon - it depends on which feels best. If you do go Nikon, however, I would suggest you also consider the D40 (which I bought as a first time DSLR). I doubt that you'll miss the extra mega pixels, and the $100 you save over D40x could be used toward better lenses, which you will definitely notice. Once you go with an SLR, you may quickly realize that the quality of photos you create depends on 1) your ability, 2) the lens quality, and 3) the camera body.
1796824
The Canon G12 is a nice camera but it appears it will be allowed to fade away (prices remain high, easily available, no one buying). I've noticed many cameras (including Nikons) have reduced build quality --- even the Elph 310 vs. the Elph 300. So, don't wait for the G13 or G1a. Get this or the Fuji (I also like the viewfinder). (The Fuji is better built, costs more, and is made by a company with no customer service.) The G12 has been replaced by the SX40 --- so say even Nikon techs. Want a 5x lens (with great video thrown in) and a non on the mantle camera --- get the Elph 300 (in black) for $149. (Just live without the viewfinder and have a beer first.) :-) The Canon G12 is a nice camera but it appears it will be allowed to fade away (prices remain high, easily available, no one buying). I've noticed many cameras (including Nikons) have reduced build quality --- even the Elph 310 vs. the Elph 300. So, don't wait for the G13 or G1a. Get this or the Fuji (I also like the viewfinder). (The Fuji is better built, costs more, and is made by a company with no customer service.) The G12 has been replaced by the SX40 --- so say even Nikon techs. Want a 5x lens (with great video thrown in) and a non on the mantle camera --- get the Elph 300... » Read More The Canon G12 is a nice camera but it appears it will be allowed to fade away (prices remain high, easily available, no one buying). I've noticed many cameras (including Nikons) have reduced build quality --- even the Elph 310 vs. the Elph 300. So, don't wait for the G13 or G1a. Get this or the Fuji (I also like the viewfinder). (The Fuji is better built, costs more, and is made by a company with no customer service.) The G12 has been replaced by the SX40 --- so say even Nikon techs. Want a 5x lens (with great video thrown in) and a non on the mantle camera --- get the Elph 300 (in black) for $149. (Just live without the viewfinder and have a beer first.) :-) « Show Less
199905
if money is no object , buy the d5300 , i had the d3200 and it was a great camera you can routinely make really nice 20-30 size pictures ,specially with the prime lenses like the 50mm 1.8g , i bought the d3300 because the new sensor is scarper and the new lens is really much more portable and last but not least the included lightroom 5 software was in a refubrished package deal, between the 5200 or the 3300 the 5200 with its swiveling screen might be more camera to grow into , how ever if you only are doing basic photograhy the the d3300 or d3200 are more then enough for any photografer
363697
I was worried about not having a view-finder on my digital camera when I first switched to the Nikon l1. And really, it hasnt bothered me at all. You can always adjust the brightness of the screen so you can see the image and its got a matte not glossy screen so you are not reflected in the image. I've had to buy a new camera since mine got stolen, and I find that the swivel abilties of the s10 will come very handy if you are concerned with the LCD screen.
2009521
I'm a bit of a lens snob too, being a contax shooter. I bought the Lumix fz50 for my wife and it arrived yesterday, and let me tell you, it is fantastic; best digital camera I've ever held. We considered the nikon d80, but my wife preferred the LCD preview on the Lumix, and although it is easy to use, the manual options are versatile. FZ50 is not lighter than the nikon, but on the other hand, it has a 420mm Leica lens, so it does the job of two lenses.The price is incredibly low, I think because once you get out of the 300 dollar range, people think they need skip over to a DSLR. They're wrong! Lumix provides all you need with a Leica lens. I'm a bit of a lens snob too, being a contax shooter. I bought the Lumix fz50 for my wife and it arrived yesterday, and let me tell you, it is fantastic; best digital camera I've ever held. We considered the nikon d80, but my wife preferred the LCD preview on the Lumix, and although it is easy to use, the manual options are versatile. FZ50 is not lighter than the nikon, but on the other hand, it has a 420mm Leica lens, so it does the job of two lenses.The price is incredibly low, I think because once you get out of the 300 dollar range, people think they need skip over to a... » Read More I'm a bit of a lens snob too, being a contax shooter. I bought the Lumix fz50 for my wife and it arrived yesterday, and let me tell you, it is fantastic; best digital camera I've ever held. We considered the nikon d80, but my wife preferred the LCD preview on the Lumix, and although it is easy to use, the manual options are versatile. FZ50 is not lighter than the nikon, but on the other hand, it has a 420mm Leica lens, so it does the job of two lenses.The price is incredibly low, I think because once you get out of the 300 dollar range, people think they need skip over to a DSLR. They're wrong! Lumix provides all you need with a Leica lens. « Show Less
1736084
I would get the Nikon Coolpix L120. By far the best choice out there, and it's affordable!
1935412
Hello Kathy I love the sony camera. It is a great value for an intro camera. The ability to interchange the lens is great and will be where a lot of the money will go in terms of accessories. Sony also offers carl zeiss lenses which is amazing. And they are very affordable at $100-300 a piece Although sony does lack a lot of the lens options that nikon and canon offers, it is more than enough for a novice like myself. If you are looking to step up, this camera will not give you that ability. You will need to change camera body and maybe lenses. I am not too familiar with the nikon but from a cursory review online it doesnt seem people are very enamored with it. But i am biased since i love my camera. I have used a wide angle lens to take pictures of nature (flowers). With blurred background as well as pictures of my newborn daughter. Blowing them up to poster size (20" x 30") the resolution is more than enough to take great photos. And the body and lenses are small enough to be travel friendly. Hope that helps. Congrats on this (future) purchase and have fun. Wil
1324961
The D50 was a wonderful camera in its day, and will still give beautiful photos. I still own mine as a backup camera. However, I would consider something with 12MP. The main problem I have with 6.1MP is cropping... the detail isn't there on a small-window crop. In my opinion the D50 gives a more vibrant image. So follow your budget. The D50 has an internal focus motor so it accepts older and third-party lenses. The view screen is a little smaller and the menu options aren't as great as newer cameras. By today's standards the D50 is obsolete so don't pay too much.
75253
http://www.flickr.com/groups/d40slr/discuss/72157602509321717/?search=sigma+vs.+nikoni know it's been a while but that may give some insight.i have the sigma version and it's great value for the price paid.