Reviews of cameras for the average amateur

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Gonini
Forum MemberPosts: 63Gear list
Like?
Re: A phone could take that picture.
In reply to Richard, 5 months ago

Richard wrote:

brianj wrote:

samfan wrote:

brianj wrote:

I am one, and I never buy any camera over $200 these days, so all the reviews on this site are completely useless to me.

Brian

The last 3 cameras I bought had all cost about 250 Euros each.

These are a DSLR, a high-end compact and a mirrorless camera. All new.

Wanna get a good $200-$300 camera, look for reviews of $600-$800 cameras from 2-3 years ago.

You'll get much better value than a latest $200 camera, all of which are guaranteed to suck badly. Yes, so badly they're not even worth reviewing. Seriously.

You mean suck like this $AU169 camera OOC shot?

Brian

Lots o light, motionless subject. Any phone could take this snapshot.

But why spend 169au for junk. A D200 could do a much better job and be able to shoot fast moving objects with good af with lens for double the price, why waste your money.

http://denver.craigslist.org/ele/4555668084.html

Thats a good tip on buying the Nikon D200, very nice camera, however you forgot to mention the size, with a p/s usually you wont notice your carrying a camera but when taking pictures. In some type of photography like landscape with good light and a nice p/s you are going to have a hard time recognizing a p/s picture vs the dslr. Another advantage is that a p/s you can take it anywhere with you. People who compare cellphones to p/s do have a point however I enjoy taking pictures with a p/s but up to this date never with a cellphone. So no I would never consider a good p/s camera being a waste of money.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow