Reading mode: Light Dark

16 year old seeking advice on good & long lasting DSLR Camera

Go to last post
P

Phiber Optik

Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Dear Forum,

Greetings Professional Photographers! I am a 16 year old kid from providence, RI. I have been a dpreview.com visitor and a newbie photographer for 2 years now. My first camera was Nikon Coolpix 995 and it is still. I took photos these past 2 years from time to time just for fun, friends' birthday party, weekend getaway with my Mom & Dad, etc.

These few weeks, i have been thinking of becoming a serious photographer even though i am still a kid. I have read the whole review of Canon D60 and Nikon D100. Even though both have tradeoffs, for example, The D60 despite having a sharper jpeg output, the D100 has better AF system. Well, of course, a lot of people will say that if you favor better quality picture, then get the d60 and the "rule" also apply to the D100 with its advantage. Overall, they are both standing on the same ground with each camera has minor advantages and disadvantages. I just want to make the right decision before putting down my saving...for a long run.

Well, this equipment is very expensive plus you have to consider the extra lenses and flash, which might be even more expensive that the camera itself. i have to work with my uncle if i am serious to becoming a professional to support the lenses financially.

I guess, I just want a DSLR camera that WILL SUIT a newbie or beginner like me. a camera that will not make me regret a few years or even a few months from now. for example: maybe Canon's lenses may be more advanced than Nikon's or maybe Nikon has a reputation of rugged and long lasting lenses, etc

whether you are a newbie like me or a professional, an advice or suggestion from all of you on the experience of Canon D60 and Nikon D100 is appreciated.

thank you for your time reading this message and i wish you many happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
 
Phiber Optik said:
Dear Forum,

Greetings Professional Photographers! I am a 16 year old kid from
providence, RI. I have been a dpreview.com visitor and a newbie
photographer for 2 years now. My first camera was Nikon Coolpix 995
and it is still. I took photos these past 2 years from time to time
just for fun, friends' birthday party, weekend getaway with my Mom
& Dad, etc.

These few weeks, i have been thinking of becoming a serious
photographer even though i am still a kid. I have read the whole
review of Canon D60 and Nikon D100. Even though both have
tradeoffs, for example, The D60 despite having a sharper jpeg
output, the D100 has better AF system. Well, of course, a lot of
people will say that if you favor better quality picture, then get
the d60 and the "rule" also apply to the D100 with its advantage.
Overall, they are both standing on the same ground with each camera
has minor advantages and disadvantages. I just want to make the
right decision before putting down my saving...for a long run.

Well, this equipment is very expensive plus you have to consider
the extra lenses and flash, which might be even more expensive that
the camera itself. i have to work with my uncle if i am serious to
becoming a professional to support the lenses financially.

I guess, I just want a DSLR camera that WILL SUIT a newbie or
beginner like me. a camera that will not make me regret a few years
or even a few months from now. for example: maybe Canon's lenses
may be more advanced than Nikon's or maybe Nikon has a reputation
of rugged and long lasting lenses, etc

whether you are a newbie like me or a professional, an advice or
suggestion from all of you on the experience of Canon D60 and Nikon
D100 is appreciated.

thank you for your time reading this message and i wish you many
happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
Click to expand...
jumping from a coolpix to a d60 - is like jumping from a vw bug to a masarati --- too much power too quickly, and it's very expensive.

right now i use a pro90 - way better then any coolpix (excpet for cool pix's close up abilities). this is next to a camera like the d60.

i'm still going to wait as i'm not totally impressed with the d60. and there's no way i'm getting the nikon (not compatible with my equipment).

unless your going pro, and are willing to dish out the $2000+ for the camera 400+ for the lens, 300+ for 1 flash, more for the tripod - bags, reflectors, etc - get yourself a pro90 like mine and get used to that first. an slr is nice. but very expensive, rather heavy, and quite a jump from the kiddy camera you have now. (not insulting you, just the camera).

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/

http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
 
in my opinion, if you can afford it and don't mind the weight, get an SLR... it has a way larger CCD than most, if not all consumer level camera... it also has a faster almost instantaneous auto focus and faster shot to shot times... in other words, an SLR is not gonna keep you waiting like some consumer level cams (like a Pro90...)
 
yohannes,

If you can afford either the Canon D60 or the Nikon 100 then by all means go for it. But the way to find out which one is right FOR YOU, if you can go out and get your hands on both of these and compare them.

As far as longevity goes, who knows yet. DSLR's have not been out that long so the verdict is still out as to how many years (shots) that they will be durable.

Good Day,
Steven
 
Professional photography is a broad arena, do you have any idea asto which branch to select, this may help you choose the complete system that more closely matches the discipline. I would have thought that Canon's telephoto lenses with IS are the tools for sports and nature work, there are many of the studio photographers shooting with Nikon kit. I am not aiming to start a battle as to which is best, but you need to consider which areas or professional photography are most appealing to you. In the early years it will be your determination to succeed in your chosen field that will likely drive you to acheive.

Have you thought about a second hand D30?

PowerShot User
http://www.benel.com/powershot/pic-of-the-day.php
Steven Harlow said:
yohannes,

If you can afford either the Canon D60 or the Nikon 100 then by all
means go for it. But the way to find out which one is right FOR
YOU, if you can go out and get your hands on both of these and
compare them.
As far as longevity goes, who knows yet. DSLR's have not been out
that long so the verdict is still out as to how many years (shots)
that they will be durable.

Good Day,
Steven
Click to expand...
 
Long lasting is an ambigious term. Do you mean how long will it last or how long will the technology be current. The field of digicams is evolving rapidly, right now and I would be willing to bet that today's technology will be obsolete in 12-18 months.

If I were 16 and relatively new to photography I would look hard at the prosumer cameras that are out there right now. Learn with one of them and save your money for the day your sure of which direction you want to move in photography. Any digicam with 4 or more mega pixels will give you a lot of quality images and keep you challanged for some time to come.

MHO Mike
Phiber Optik said:
Dear Forum,

Greetings Professional Photographers! I am a 16 year old kid from
providence, RI. I have been a dpreview.com visitor and a newbie
photographer for 2 years now. My first camera was Nikon Coolpix 995
and it is still. I took photos these past 2 years from time to time
just for fun, friends' birthday party, weekend getaway with my Mom
& Dad, etc.

These few weeks, i have been thinking of becoming a serious
photographer even though i am still a kid. I have read the whole
review of Canon D60 and Nikon D100. Even though both have
tradeoffs, for example, The D60 despite having a sharper jpeg
output, the D100 has better AF system. Well, of course, a lot of
people will say that if you favor better quality picture, then get
the d60 and the "rule" also apply to the D100 with its advantage.
Overall, they are both standing on the same ground with each camera
has minor advantages and disadvantages. I just want to make the
right decision before putting down my saving...for a long run.

Well, this equipment is very expensive plus you have to consider
the extra lenses and flash, which might be even more expensive that
the camera itself. i have to work with my uncle if i am serious to
becoming a professional to support the lenses financially.

I guess, I just want a DSLR camera that WILL SUIT a newbie or
beginner like me. a camera that will not make me regret a few years
or even a few months from now. for example: maybe Canon's lenses
may be more advanced than Nikon's or maybe Nikon has a reputation
of rugged and long lasting lenses, etc

whether you are a newbie like me or a professional, an advice or
suggestion from all of you on the experience of Canon D60 and Nikon
D100 is appreciated.

thank you for your time reading this message and i wish you many
happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
Click to expand...
 
What about a film SLR? (I know, that's blasphemy around here ;-))

You can get a Canon EOS for a few hundred dollars with a lens and any lens you buy for it you could use for the Canon DSLR as well. PrimeFilm makes a 4mp scanner to digitize. You could be snapping and scanning for about $600. Of course, it's film and the costs tend to add up but I'm just throwing out ideas here. Best of luck!

--
Eric
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
Phiber Optik said:
Dear Forum,

Greetings Professional Photographers! I am a 16 year old kid from
providence, RI. I have been a dpreview.com visitor and a newbie
photographer for 2 years now. My first camera was Nikon Coolpix 995
and it is still. I took photos these past 2 years from time to time
just for fun, friends' birthday party, weekend getaway with my Mom
& Dad, etc.

These few weeks, i have been thinking of becoming a serious
photographer even though i am still a kid. I have read the whole
review of Canon D60 and Nikon D100. Even though both have
tradeoffs, for example, The D60 despite having a sharper jpeg
output, the D100 has better AF system. Well, of course, a lot of
people will say that if you favor better quality picture, then get
the d60 and the "rule" also apply to the D100 with its advantage.
Overall, they are both standing on the same ground with each camera
has minor advantages and disadvantages. I just want to make the
right decision before putting down my saving...for a long run.

Well, this equipment is very expensive plus you have to consider
the extra lenses and flash, which might be even more expensive that
the camera itself. i have to work with my uncle if i am serious to
becoming a professional to support the lenses financially.

I guess, I just want a DSLR camera that WILL SUIT a newbie or
beginner like me. a camera that will not make me regret a few years
or even a few months from now. for example: maybe Canon's lenses
may be more advanced than Nikon's or maybe Nikon has a reputation
of rugged and long lasting lenses, etc

whether you are a newbie like me or a professional, an advice or
suggestion from all of you on the experience of Canon D60 and Nikon
D100 is appreciated.

thank you for your time reading this message and i wish you many
happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
Click to expand...
 
Dear PowerShot user,

Thank you for your advice and kind suggestions. What i have heard from people and read from magazine is contary to what you believe in. Nikon, especially her lenses are geared towards nature and outdoor photograpy because they have more rugged body and can sustain minor abuses. on the other hand, the canon, is more towards sports and indoor because they seems to have more advanced system. either brand of lenses of course can operate in both conditions or activities. i don;t really believe in what people tell me or what magazines wrote. it's just that people who shot a lot outdoors use nikon lenses almost all the time and sports photographer use canon.

but anyway, thank you for your advices and suggestions. I have learned quite a bit from yours. i wish you many happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
PowerShot User said:
Have you thought about a second hand D30?

PowerShot User
http://www.benel.com/powershot/pic-of-the-day.php
Steven Harlow said:
yohannes,

If you can afford either the Canon D60 or the Nikon 100 then by all
means go for it. But the way to find out which one is right FOR
YOU, if you can go out and get your hands on both of these and
compare them.
As far as longevity goes, who knows yet. DSLR's have not been out
that long so the verdict is still out as to how many years (shots)
that they will be durable.

Good Day,
Steven
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Dear Code Monkey,

Thank you for your advices and suggestions in advance. I totally agree that ProConsumer grade camera such as the nikon coolpix 995 that i have been using has quite slow auto focus lens. I have been using it for 2 years now. But don't get me wrong, it's one capable camera. The first time i bought it, it takes me 4 days to get comfortable with all the functions and capabilities of the 995. Without any doubt, this particular camera can serve as a professional camera albeit the limited lens. that is the primary reason i am planning to switch to DSLR camera which allows me to change lenses.

of course, it;s not really important, what camera you use. what determine the quality of the photos is of course the eye of the beholder. but i believe that proconsumer cameras such as the 995 or powershot pro90, etc can't match the flexibility and quick response of DSRL lenses.

sincerely.
yohannes
Code Monkey said:
in my opinion, if you can afford it and don't mind the weight, get
an SLR... it has a way larger CCD than most, if not all consumer
level camera... it also has a faster almost instantaneous auto
focus and faster shot to shot times... in other words, an SLR is
not gonna keep you waiting like some consumer level cams (like a
Pro90...)
Click to expand...
 
Dear Mike Savad,

thank you for your advices and suggestions. I see your points on your messages. I am not trying to start a debate or anything but simply relate my experience with the nikon coolpix 995. I think it's one outstanding camera. It has all the features and capabilities a pro want albeit the limited lens. i think everyone agrees that the coolpix 995's feat/cap are identical or surpass other proconsumer digital cameras. even Phil Askey give its features rating 10 out of 10. but i really don't like the lens though, they have slow autofocus system, a contary to what Nikon is famous for.

But anyway, thank you for your kind advices and suggesetions once again. i wish you many happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
mike savad said:
Phiber Optik said:
Dear Forum,

Greetings Professional Photographers! I am a 16 year old kid from
providence, RI. I have been a dpreview.com visitor and a newbie
photographer for 2 years now. My first camera was Nikon Coolpix 995
and it is still. I took photos these past 2 years from time to time
just for fun, friends' birthday party, weekend getaway with my Mom
& Dad, etc.

These few weeks, i have been thinking of becoming a serious
photographer even though i am still a kid. I have read the whole
review of Canon D60 and Nikon D100. Even though both have
tradeoffs, for example, The D60 despite having a sharper jpeg
output, the D100 has better AF system. Well, of course, a lot of
people will say that if you favor better quality picture, then get
the d60 and the "rule" also apply to the D100 with its advantage.
Overall, they are both standing on the same ground with each camera
has minor advantages and disadvantages. I just want to make the
right decision before putting down my saving...for a long run.

Well, this equipment is very expensive plus you have to consider
the extra lenses and flash, which might be even more expensive that
the camera itself. i have to work with my uncle if i am serious to
becoming a professional to support the lenses financially.

I guess, I just want a DSLR camera that WILL SUIT a newbie or
beginner like me. a camera that will not make me regret a few years
or even a few months from now. for example: maybe Canon's lenses
may be more advanced than Nikon's or maybe Nikon has a reputation
of rugged and long lasting lenses, etc

whether you are a newbie like me or a professional, an advice or
suggestion from all of you on the experience of Canon D60 and Nikon
D100 is appreciated.

thank you for your time reading this message and i wish you many
happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
Click to expand...
jumping from a coolpix to a d60 - is like jumping from a vw bug to
a masarati --- too much power too quickly, and it's very expensive.

right now i use a pro90 - way better then any coolpix (excpet for
cool pix's close up abilities). this is next to a camera like the
d60.

i'm still going to wait as i'm not totally impressed with the d60.
and there's no way i'm getting the nikon (not compatible with my
equipment).

unless your going pro, and are willing to dish out the $2000+ for
the camera 400+ for the lens, 300+ for 1 flash, more for the tripod
  • bags, reflectors, etc - get yourself a pro90 like mine and get
used to that first. an slr is nice. but very expensive, rather
heavy, and quite a jump from the kiddy camera you have now. (not
insulting you, just the camera).

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
Added - More Closeups, Flowers, Buildings, and Still life.

http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
Click to expand...
 
Dear PB,

First of all thank you for your suggestion and advice. I am trying to say that i may be 16 years old. i don't think your point DSLR and 16 year old kid does not mix is anything accurate. There may not be alot of kids my age taking snapshots. they rather choose to play ps2 or xbox. you see, i am not the type of person who follows. my parents may be a little rich but i am not. i use my own savings from working with my uncle and some allowances from parents i saved to buy my own nikon coolpix 995.

i don't believe that age has anything to do with whether i can try to learn to take photography seriously.
but anyway, thank you for your "motivating" words.

ps: i am not, by the way, a loser. a loser is in fact someone who thinks they are right all the time.

sincerely,
yohannes
PB said:
Loser. You'd save a lot more money by buying a Canon 35mm EOS SLR
instead.

Don't buy the kit, the stock lens suck.
--
http://printerboyweb.net/G2
Click to expand...
 
MJCall said:
Long lasting is an ambigious term. Do you mean how long will it
last or how long will the technology be current. The field of
digicams is evolving rapidly, right now and I would be willing to
bet that today's technology will be obsolete in 12-18 months.
Click to expand...
I agree. In just a month, the Sigma SD7 will be available and
we'll be able to see just how good the foveon technology is in
a full SLR camera. Expect a sea change in the market in about
six months as all the vendors jump on the foveon bandwagon.
Then another six months to a year after that expect various cameras
to be introduced with foveon chips at different price levels. And
remember that the second-generation foveon-based cameras
will be coming out a year or so after that.

Even though I am 38 years old, I feel that I am in the same position
you are in. I had become familiar with digital photography with an
older camera, and considered moving up to an SLR, thought about
film vs. digital for this, and finally decided to get a Canon G2,
mainly, because I wanted a camera I could use for about 3 years
while I wait for the technology trends to warp their way through the
marketplace. I didn't want to get a digital SLR based on the current
technology because I wanted a camera worthy of many years use
(maybe a decade) and I'd like to be able to produce poster-sized
prints at some point, something I expect a 6 megapixel foveon
chip to do nicely.

Lots of luck!

Stanley Allen
[email protected]
 
Dear Mr. Stanley Allen,

Thank you for your advices and suggestions once again. I have heard about Foveon X3 sensor technology from PC magazine a few issues ago. It is definitely a groundbreaking technology for cameras if executed and engineered well. the only player right now favoring the foveon may only be sigma, but i think canon, nikon and other major players may wait-and-see approach to see whether the new tech will indeed be evolutionary. i can;t wait to see review on this particular camera from Phil Askey when the prototype or beta becomes available.

I noticed that you have had the canon G2 for sometime. I have been using coolpix 995 for 2 years now. during the period you use your G2, has the thouht of limited lens bother you? i was in several soccer tournament in my school, brought my coolpix 995 and a telephoto lens TC-E3, but i wasn't able to go very far unless of course i stepped into the playing field which may be embarassing and may result in "red card". the telephoto lens of the coolpix 995 is simply an "extender". that's the primary reason why i am thinking of switching to DSRL which allows me to change lenses at different circumstances.

thank you for your advice and suggestion once again. i wish you many happy snapshots.

sincerely,
yohannes
Stanley Allen said:
MJCall said:
Long lasting is an ambigious term. Do you mean how long will it
last or how long will the technology be current. The field of
digicams is evolving rapidly, right now and I would be willing to
bet that today's technology will be obsolete in 12-18 months.
Click to expand...
I agree. In just a month, the Sigma SD7 will be available and
we'll be able to see just how good the foveon technology is in
a full SLR camera. Expect a sea change in the market in about
six months as all the vendors jump on the foveon bandwagon.
Then another six months to a year after that expect various cameras
to be introduced with foveon chips at different price levels. And
remember that the second-generation foveon-based cameras
will be coming out a year or so after that.

Even though I am 38 years old, I feel that I am in the same position
you are in. I had become familiar with digital photography with an
older camera, and considered moving up to an SLR, thought about
film vs. digital for this, and finally decided to get a Canon G2,
mainly, because I wanted a camera I could use for about 3 years
while I wait for the technology trends to warp their way through the
marketplace. I didn't want to get a digital SLR based on the current
technology because I wanted a camera worthy of many years use
(maybe a decade) and I'd like to be able to produce poster-sized
prints at some point, something I expect a 6 megapixel foveon
chip to do nicely.

Lots of luck!

Stanley Allen
[email protected]
Click to expand...
 
Good thinking.. i, for one, support you in making the purchase. I'm a little older than you but my parents arn't rich, I haven't gotten any allowance since I was in Grade 7, and the 6k I'm making this summer is going to be used for my tuition next year. U should be happy u can afford it.. i wished i could.. heck i can't even afford a g2 yet.. stuck with an elph. Good luck.

T
Phiber Optik said:
ps: i am not, by the way, a loser. a loser is in fact someone who
thinks they are right all the time.

sincerely,
yohannes
PB said:
Loser. You'd save a lot more money by buying a Canon 35mm EOS SLR
instead.

Don't buy the kit, the stock lens suck.
--
http://printerboyweb.net/G2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Phiber Optik,

I think PB choice of word for "Loser" does not aim at you, but at the comment from Ed, about getting Canon EOS - Film - as a kit, which come with pretty low grade stock lens. Well may be I am a looking at the world trough a rose color glasses.....

just my $.02 worth

pj
Phiber Optik said:
ps: i am not, by the way, a loser. a loser is in fact someone who
thinks they are right all the time.

sincerely,
yohannes
PB said:
Loser. You'd save a lot more money by buying a Canon 35mm EOS SLR
instead.

Don't buy the kit, the stock lens suck.
--
http://printerboyweb.net/G2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I've read your posts, Yohannes, and you are definitely not a loser! But you knew that already ;-). You make a very intelligent, thoughtful and polite impression.

When I was 15, I had a small telescope, and looked at the stars and moon from time to time. Then one night I spotted Jupiter with its moons, then Saturn, with its rings, and I fell in love with astronomy. I bought a telescope which was for me, at the time (late 70's), very expensive - about $5000. If forums like these had been around then, I'm sure lots of people giving 'wise' advice would have told me that a 'kid' shouldn't spend that much money nor have a professional telescope.

I got so interested in astronomy - up all night on many a cold, Canadian winter night looking at planets, galaxies, and photographing nebulae - that decided to go all the way across the continent to go to university to study it (I had a love-affair with computers however, and ended up graduating with a degree in computer science! :-)).

In any case, more than 20 years later (I've lost track of my exact age ;-)), I still have the telescope, and still enjoy using it when viewing conditions permit. In fact, it'll be neat when the price of DSLRs drop enough that I can get one and attach it to my telescope, and start taking shots again, like I did with my old Olympus SLR.

Figure out how much it will cost you to buy all the components you need (including loads of hard-disk space!). If you can afford the camera without going into debt (very important) and without sacrificing other things you want to do (like studies), and you think it will help you break new creative ground and you'll get good use out of it, then don't compromise, get the one you want and enjoy it.

Sincerely,
Scott.
Phiber Optik said:
ps: i am not, by the way, a loser. a loser is in fact someone who
thinks they are right all the time.

sincerely,
yohannes
PB said:
Loser. You'd save a lot more money by buying a Canon 35mm EOS SLR
instead.

Don't buy the kit, the stock lens suck.
--
http://printerboyweb.net/G2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Later is too late.
http://www.ScottOwen.org
 
hi yohannes,

your diplomacy and tact in responding to some of the posts show a maturity beyond your years. but i for one don't see how your age has anything to do with buying or not buying a DSLR if you can afford it. now, re: the D100 vs. D60 decision...i think either would be a great choice and agree with your handling vs. image quality assessment. just because i have a canon flash, extra G2 batteries, am already familiar with canon menus, and have one canon lens, i'd personally lean toward the D60 although the size and shape of the D100 would suit me much better however. i wish you luck in your decison. happy shooting!

-norm
 
Personally, for longevity and potential capabilities I would go for something like an EOS3. I have an EOS-1V + 18mm + 28-135 and 100-400 and a Canon Canoscan FS4000, this combination suits me, and allows me to undertake a wide range of things with photography, and gives me in my opinion a much greater quality than that which digitial SLR's can provide me with. I spent 3 years selling camera's, and you wont get me to move to DSLR's yet, they are still a young product, with what I would expect to be very good things appearing in the next few years. The word is YET, when one comes along that offers me the same as my EOS-1V, then I will consider swapping.

As far as age discrimination goes, I think that 'loser' comment was dispicable. I am 19, I first got my EOS1V kit when I was 17. I saved an awful lot of money to get the best camera I could - (I did get a discount because I worked in a camera shop!). The camera has never let me down -I have let myself down on a few occaisions though !!

I tried to join a local photographic club, they turned me away, saying that I could never be a photographer because I knew nothing about photography and relied on 'automatics' to get my good photographs!! So I know all about how offensive age discriminiation can be !

Whatever you decide, decide on it because it is what you want, not what other people dictate to you.

BTW, you can check out some of my military aviation photographs through my website (link in signiture)
Phiber Optik said:
ps: i am not, by the way, a loser. a loser is in fact someone who
thinks they are right all the time.

sincerely,
yohannes
PB said:
Loser. You'd save a lot more money by buying a Canon 35mm EOS SLR
instead.

Don't buy the kit, the stock lens suck.
--
http://printerboyweb.net/G2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Stephen French
http://www.hotdogone.net
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top