Time for a new digital camera - what to get?

[RaffyK]

Well my Fuji S5000 stopped functioning. I really liked it when it worked.

So...what I am looking for is a camera that is small/compact, has good resolution, zoom, movie making capabilitry and doesn't have too much of a lag (setup) time from when it is turned on. Under $300.00.

On the other hand, I could spend some $s and get a higher end digital camera like with SLR type features and just snap pics when I stop.

Last option is a digital video camera with snapshot capability.

[DavidTaylor]

Kari was doing some research lat week on digital cameras. Olympus has or is coming out with a couple; I think they are the 500 and 550 (or 300 and 350, can't remember). They had all of the features you're looking for and the higher end one was 8 megapixel, but I think it's price was around $500. Supposedly they've addressed the lag of their earlier models (my biggest issue with the one we have).

I also have a Canon EOS 20D digital SLR that is an absolutely fantastic camera. If you go the SLR route I can highly recommend this option. It definitely gives you a new outlet for farkle funds - lenses, tripod, filters, camera cases, flashes, etc. ;)

[DaveDragon]

I have S5000 as well. It works great, it's just too big to use on the bike.

I purchased a Casio Exilim EX-S100. 3.2 mega-pixel in a tiny form factor.
Stainless and aluminum construction the size of a credit card.
Snap shots, movies, audio clips, etc,
Works very well.

I can take it out of the tank bag, turn it on and snap photos with one hand with little or no effort.

All my photos from this years trip were captured with the Casio.

[bmwhd]

Raffy,

I spent weeks researching my last purchase (two months ago) and ended up with the Sony DSC-P200. It is a kick butt little camera. Not only is it fast as hell, but the photos it takes are amazing for an ultra compact.

The most pleasant surprise of all, however, was the video quality. With a high-speed memory stick, it takes video every bit as good as my old 8mm video camera. Not bad for a shirt pocket-sized unit.

[hawg]

Raffy,
Any of the Nikon point and shoot digitals will be good. But, if you want more control, the DSLR is the way to go. You have two excellent choices in small body Nikon SLR's here: The D50 and the D70. Of course, it becomes a farkle in it's on right with buying more gear to go with it!

Of course, God will forgive you in you choose Canon. Heh, heh...

Just remember though, if you don't mind looking like a geek with the leetle screen held out in front of you and you just want to shoot and go...get a small digital point and shoot. If, on the other hand, you like looking through the lens ....definitely not geeky...get the DSLR! I hate those leetle screens and my eyes aren't gettin any better!!! But, that's just me.....YMMV

[scottydawg]

As you know I really like both of my Canon digitals. I have a SD500 and a S45 (Billy has the later model of that camera, the S50). I think a S80 or SD500 would be great choices. You can see sample photos, features and what comes with the cameras here: www.powershot.com .
I have an underwater case that Canon sells so I take mine scuba diving too :).

[Gino]

Spent many an hour at the following sites before purchasing my Canon Powershot A85 (they're onto the A95 now, or better).

http://www.dpreview.com/

http://www.dcresource.com/

http://www.steves-digicams.com/

My personal favorite is "Steves" site...

I needed something for the wife to use (full AUTO function) and something I could play around with (manual modes), plus has a nice "flip-out" screen for those self portraits, uses CF cards (not such a big deal these days), and with rechargeable batteries (4xAA) I get 200+ shots from the thing (WITH flash) - not a bad little camera. I would have preferred something with a better optical zoom, but at the time these were bulkier.


Have fun!

[early1]

I'm in the same boat (different reason--theft).(Reall miss my Olympus 5050)
You might look at e-cost , they have been running some great specils lately.
http://www.ecost.com/ecost/eccamera/default_XML.asp

[docedkin]

The Canon SD400 has all the features you seem interested in and will save you a bit over the 500. The Canon lithium battery is attractive compared to the SONY which features one peculiar only to SONY and is harder to replace or charge.

[skyman172]

I really like my Canon A95. 5.0 Mega Pixels, and offers most of what you are looking for and affordable. The four AA NIMh seem to last forever... Duracell rechargeables... So many choices out there... Good luck!

[Wipedout]

We have had the Canon EOS Rebel for quite a while now and it is incredible. The quality is great - price has dropped. Big selling point for the slr type is no delay when you push the trigger. For a bit more money the 20D is the way to go. But you can't go wrong withthe EOS Rebel.

Great Camera - Great pictures.

[rspyder]

I have an Olympus C50 and have not been happy with it. Has broken twice. Olympus cameras also use XD memory instead of the more common SD.

I preferred my Canon's and will go back there for my next camera. The wife just bought a 7megapixel Casio EX-Z750, but I have not played with it.

Got a Canon SD300 for my son and he loves it. Small and takes great 4 megapixel picture.

[taylorjn]

We have 2 Olympus. Mine is the Stylus 340, 4MP, 3x optical zoom (I ignore digital zoom), and WEATHERPROOF! It rides in my left breast pocket of my 'Stitch, attached to a lanyard. Have had it out in a raging downpour with great results. W has the UltraZoom 5xx - 10x optical zoom with better low light capability than the Stylus. VERY happy with both. Have probably been updated since we got ours over a year ago. Quick start-up time, very nice shutter response time, too.

[mwnahas]

We have had the Canon EOS Rebel for quite a while now and it is incredible. The quality is great - price has dropped. Big selling point for the slr type is no delay when you push the trigger. For a bit more money the 20D is the way to go. But you can't go wrong withthe EOS Rebel.

Great Camera - Great pictures.

I second that its a great camera been wanting one of those for a while, but this darn LT MC hobby is cutting into my photo hobby funds.

[LodiHal]

I too have a Canon SD500 that I am VERY pleased with. Really outstanding pictures, I dragged it all around England with nary a problem...

[Bruce_Yates]

...what I am looking for is a camera that is small/compact, has good resolution, zoom, movie making capabilitry and doesn't have too much of a lag (setup) time from when it is turned on. Under $300.00.

On the other hand, I could spend some $s and get a higher end digital camera like with SLR type features and just snap pics when I stop.

Last option is a digital video camera with snapshot capability.

Raffy,

Let me attempt to address all three of your possible choices (based on the 3 paragraphs above), but first you need to really do some thinking about what's important to you, because they really serve 3 very distinct purposes. It depends on what your PRIMARY goal is. Partially because my other primary hobby is underwater photography, I own all three (a small point & shoot digital, a DSLR - actually two, and a digital video with still capabilities), and I use them for VERY different purposes.

1. If your primary concern is having something you can take everywhere, so that you are always ready and able to take good photos (as in Blazing Saddles - "Pardon me while I whip this out..."), then the small point & shoot is the best option, and I would highly recommend a Canon digital Elph.

I have an SD400 (5 megapixels) Elph that's several years old, and have been extremely happy with it. It easily fits in my pocket to take to dinner or wherever. However, for a few dollars more, they now have a 7 megapixel version (the SD550) that is even better (hell, just reading about it for YOU to see if they've reduced shutter lag and other such things, I got so excited that I'm probably going to have to buy one myself!). The Elphs are amazingly small, and yet have great optics and features. If you're going to go small, this is about as great a camera in as small a package as I know of.

This link has a detailed review of the SD550 - use the pull-down menu to skip to the "Conclusions" page for a summary of the key advantages (1.1 second startup-to-first photo, FAR less shutter lag than most point & shoots, larger screen, macro capability, etc.):
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/sd550.html

2. Digital SLR -- if your primary concern is being able to get the best photos, using a variety of lenses (true wide angle to long telephoto), such as to take wildlife photos from considerable distances, then DSLR is the best way to go. Without getting into the whole Nikon vs. Canon debate, I'll just say that there are excellent DSLRs from both makers, and I'd go one of those two routes (since they will always have the most upgrade options in the future).

If you choose to go with Canon (as Randy Prade and I have done), I'd suggest that you get the Digital Rebel XT (also known as the EOS 350D) rather than the original Digital Rebel (EOS 300D). While the 300D is a very good camera (I had one), for the few hundred extra dollars, you get a significantly better one in the 350D (8megapixel vs. 6 and an entire generation later technology). The next step up is the 20D (what I replaced my 300D with), but like Canon's professional cameras (e.g., the Mark II series, which is what I primarily use underwater), the 20S is considerably more money, and for your purposes probably unnecessary expense.

My suggestion if you go the DSLR route would be to get a 350D (Digital Rebel XT) or -- if you need to save a few hundred dollars, the 300D (Digital Rebel). In either case, buy just the BODY with NO lens, and buy a Sigma 18-200mm zoom lens separately. It is far superior to the lens Canon packages with those cameras, and it will cover 95% of all the shots you will typically want to take, so there's no use wasting the extra $100 on the lens that comes in a "kit" with the camera. Later, you can add the 10-22mm wide angle, 60mm 1:1 macro, and/or a longer telephoto lens if you really "get into" photography. Whatever lenses you do buy, be sure to buy a UV filter (primarily to protect the lens itself) and a polarizer.

Here's a comprehensive review of the Digital Rebel XT (you can also find the old Digital Rebel and other great reviews on this site):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/

3. The final option is to get a digital video camera that also takes fairly high res stills. You would choose this option if your primary goal is to take video, and you only rarely care to take stills. There are some very good camcorders that take good stills; I have a Sony DCR-PC330, which takes 3.3 megapixel stills, as well as excellent video (it was $1,700 or so when it came out, but one can now be had new for about $1,000). While something like this is a viable option, it is not necessarily the "best" option. Personally, I think it makes more sense to buy a good still camera, and if you really want to take video, get a good 3CCD video camera separately. But if you really want/need to take both video and stills, and want to do both at a reasonable price in ONE package, you can certainly do so.

One important thing to remember if you plan to take photos from your bike (or have a passenger do so) while moving is shutter speed. While you can take decent video from a moving bike (assuming you mount the camera somehow), you will NOT be able to get decent stills because you cannot manually select a fast enough shutter speed. With either option 1 or 2 above, you can use a high shutter speed (especially with the DSLR, with which you can set a specific speed like 1000th of a second) and likely freeze any scene you're riding past. Taking stills with a video camera while you (and/or the subject) are moving will result in nothing but blur.

One other suggestion. Once you decide what you want, if you plan to buy it online, I suggest that you use B&H Photo (www.bhphotovideo.com) (http://www.bhphotovideo.com%29). They're widely considered the most reputable mail order/online photo and video shop. In fact, if you're shopping prices online, and somewhere else is advertising a price significantly below B&H's, it's likely a scam (e.g., doesn't include a battery or charger, or isn't really in stock and they end up trying to bait & switch you to something else...). Most of the professional photographers I know order most of their gear (as I do) from B&H. (I have no financial interest in B&H - I just recommend them because I'm a satisfied customer...kinda like I refer lots of people to you for LT accessories, Raffy! ;).

I hope the above is helpful. I'm not sure you'll get what you're looking for for $300, but you can sure get a fine substitute for your last one for around $500 (B&H is currently selling the SD550 for $450)!

[RaffyK]

on what I should buy.

Special thanks to Bruce for the informative writeup.

Just so you know, photography is in the blood...grandpa was a professional photographer and used the hooded cameras and sold cameras for a living. Dad is/was a semi-pro having been around cameras all his life. I finally got dad to give me his old Canon with all the lenses, filters etc.

I'll check out the links.

Thanks,

[Bruce_Yates]

on what I should buy.

Just so you know, photography is in the blood...I finally got dad to give me his old Canon with all the lenses, filters etc.


Geez, Raffy -- if you've already got a bunch of Canon lenses, and some natural talent to boot, this seems like a pretty simple decision...get the Digital Rebel XT! Most or all of those Canon lenses will fit right on it (although they will "act" like they're 1.6x as long due to the "crop factor". That's good news for telephoto lenses (a 300mm lens acts as if it were 480mm!), but makes it tougher to get wide angle (so you might want to go ahead and get the 18-55mm lens that comes with the camera if one of your dad's lenses isn't 18mm or wider).

And if you still want a tiny point & shoot camera to carry in your pocket, PM me; I just ordered a SD550 and I've got that 5 megapixel SD400 that I'll sell you at a killer price. ;)

[Shogun54]

Raffy,

Check out the Panasonic line of digitals. They make the FZ series, which you can get a Circuit City and stores of similar ilk for a reasonable price. I use Nikon SLRs for my serious pics, but my FZ3 fits right in the tank bag and takes great pictures. Most people can't see the difference between the FZ3 pics and my D70 pics unless I show them really big enlargements. Of course, this may say more about my photographic ability than the camera, but I'm really happy with pics from either of them. My one word of warning: Get a camera that fits your hands...some of the little ones can be a real bear to operate. Fitting in your pocket is only a feature if you can take a picture with the thing once you remove it.

And Bruce is right: if you've got a bunch of Canon lenses, a Digital Rebel is a no-brainer. DPreview.com is a great site to compare features and prices otherwise.

Happy hunting,

and you probably thought there were a lot of farkles for LTs...wait until you get lens lust!

Brett

[pjessen]

What Gino said...use those links he added, and study some on those. There's a ton of info there.

The A95 is a good recommendation.

Don't get carried away with a certain gizmo that a certain model has, then forget about the important parts...1. Size; must be pocketable for you MC trips 2. Plenty of cheap storage; try to stay with a CF card 3. Good battery life; most have it now, but watch the reviews and comments in the dpreview forums for that camera 4. Quick focus and start up; very important for MC use. You can get a great camera, and even with quite a bit of abuse, I can't kill my old ones.

If you also like to go bigger, I love my Canon 20D. It is magnificent in every department. Such as 0.3 seconds from turn on to photo! With digital SLR's, its the camera body that's cheeep, its the glass that's expensive!

Good luck and happy shooting!

[Bruce_Yates]

... I love my Canon 20D. It is magnificent in every department. Such as 0.3 seconds from turn on to photo! With digital SLR's, its the camera body that's cheeep, its the glass that's expensive!

I agree, Pete. I love the 20D. However, I think as a first D-SLR purchase, the Digital Rebel XT offers more incremental value vs. the original Digital Rebel (for only a few hundred dollars more) than the 20D does vs. the XT (for about $500 higher price). Both the 20D and XT are 8 mp and use current generation Canon technology. And I know several professional photographers who use the XT and get amazing results, so for anyone with budget constraints, it makes more sense IMHO to get the XT and spend the extra $500 on glass (lenses).

But you are SO right about that (lenses) being where the biggest potential expense is! It is SO easy to start thinking you "need" those damned L lenses...:eek: Talk about a way to blow a farkle budget fast!!!

[beemerlt]

I'll second Bruce's suggestion of the Canon Powershot SD550 Digital Elph ($449.95 from B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=397421&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation)). I just received mine last week and I'm very happy so far. Still waiting for the screen protector to arrive. This was my only concern after reading of cracked screens with the previous model (SD500). I like the water-proof housing option too.

[rickcavanaugh]

I have had a Nikon D-70. Incredible camera. You can hardly tell it is digital. No boot up time and no shutter lag.

I just bought my wife a Nikon coolpix 7900. Even though it has more megapixels than the D-70, the D-70 Pictures are much clearer. The coolpix has a slight shutter lag and takes more time to boot. I was very surprised at how much clearer a 6 megapixels SLR's pictures are than a 7 megapixel compact. There is a difference.

The compact Canons have a reputation of cracked LCD's.

Google Canon cracked LCD and you will 647,000 hits! There is an issue and that is the only reason I went with the Coolpix. I think the compact canons are probably better.

If you have the room to carry it, get a digital SLR. Either the Rebel, D-50 or D-70. Much better pictures, easier to use interchangable lenses etc.

The only down side to removable lenes is dust on the ccd. Every so often you will need to clean the CCD. There is a kit you can buy for about $200 out of Canada that has everything you will need for just about any cleaning job. http://www.visibledust.com/

[rickcavanaugh]

I have a couple more comments

I did not notice a prior post where you have canon lenses, that makes the choice of Nikon v Canon very very easy. For me I had a bunch of Nikon lenes, so that is what I bought.

One thing that maybe an issue is that every time a new digital SLR comes out, they re invent the flash. It started out TTL then DTTL, ITTL, STTL. I think the only digital SLR that still is backwards compatible to TTL is Fugi.

For the photo gods, I know manual flash exposure is the best, but when you have a split second for the once in a lifetime shot some form of TTL works well.

I am just tired of rebuying flashes.

[Bruce_Yates]

I have had a Nikon D-70. Incredible camera. ...
I just bought my wife a Nikon coolpix 7900. Even though it has more megapixels than the D-70, the D-70 Pictures are much clearer...

Rick raises an excellent point; it's not JUST about the number of pixels. DSLRs will generally produce better photos (operator skill being equal) even with somewhat FEWER pixels. The reason is that DSLRs have larger sensors, so each pixel is BIGGER. There is also considerable difference between the quality of sensors among various brands of point & shoot digital cameras, so don't figure that because you can get a great deal on an "8 megapixel" camera vs a 5 or 6 megapixel of a reliable brand (such as Nikon or Canon), you're getting a "better" deal. Personally, I like Nikon and Canon because I know I'm getting top-notch optics, but the Fuji and Olympus point & shoots are excellent, too.

P.S. Rick - in your other post you said you didn't see where Raffy had Canon lenses...he did mention that in one of his prior posts - hence my suggestion that it was a no-brainer to go with Canon. I agree that if he'd had a bunch of Nikon lenses, it would have made more sense to go with Nikon (e.g., the D70, which is an excellent camera).

[scottydawg]

I went to Best Buy and bought some of those plastic stick on covers for PDA's and put one on my SD500 screen to protect it. Now I use them on my cell phone too.
Like these: http://www.compusa.com/products/products.asp?N=200674&ref=overture

[jpalamaro]

Raffy, get a copy of 'Digital Photo' magazine, or anyone of the Digital Mags. There are some vendors in the back pages that are selling last year type models for low dollars. My personal opinion is on with Compact Flash vs any other storage. Five (5) megapixels more than enough for excellent general photography, and woud try to stick with names like Nikon, Canon (I don't think they use CF), Sony (again, may not use CF), Olympic, etc. Unless you are a photo buff you probably won't need interchangeable lens. If you are gonna go the expensive route, the new Nikon D70 with a 35-200 mm zoom (f3.5) should meet most of your demanding requirements.

Regards,
John

[rickcavanaugh]

I massively agree Bruce, if you have Canon lenes, buy Canon. If you have Nikon lenses buy Nikon. Unless you have alot of money to burn!!

Off the subject slightly, but Bruce what housings do use for your cameras?

I have 2 subals one for nikon f100 and the other for the d70, Inon Strobes.

[Chick]

A little big, but I really like my new Canon Power Shot S2 IS. Stabilized, zoom, very nice but more than $300.00.

[bmwjason]

Raffy,

I spent weeks researching my last purchase (two months ago) and ended up with the Sony DSC-P200. It is a kick butt little camera. Not only is it fast as hell, but the photos it takes are amazing for an ultra compact.

The most pleasant surprise of all, however, was the video quality. With a high-speed memory stick, it takes video every bit as good as my old 8mm video camera. Not bad for a shirt pocket-sized unit.

Got one of these for my wife on father's day this year (really for her, I got the 42" plasma TV).

The camera works great, outstanding images. However, me being an advanced amateur with 35mm film, I'm disappointed with the lag between 'push the button' and 'capture the image'. Disconcerting to _me_ it may not be an issue to you. I can send some images from labor day dirt-riding mountain passes in CO if you want to see some samples of the images.

MUST HAVE: AC and DC chargers (My wife purchased these, so dont know the cost, other than damned expensive fore what they are) and at least a 1GB fast memory stick ($120 at various computer type places).

I'm trying to save for a 20D, or maybe a Nikon. (the Nikon digitals will take all Nikon lenses made since like 1959, not true for the Canon, sigh, which is what I now have for film.

YMMV, etc.

Jason.

[jpalamaro]

While the Nikon with its bayonnet style lens will fit all of the old(er) lens, they will not work in 'automatic' mode. I have a mint Nikon F with PhotoTN Finder . . . like new, but a dinosaur nevertheless.

[pjessen]

Yeup, Bruce and Rick, you've got it nailed. However, in a practical sense, for the point and shoots, compact enough for riding, anything over about 4 mp is wasted effort for 99% of the shots...you just don't end up doing much with them except view as snapshots. I downgrade mine most of the time to 3 mp, and waste most of that!

When it comes to the DSLR, however, you may find that those favorite old lenses just don't cut the mustard when you take the "negatives" to a pristine 21" monitor. In fact, they often Suck. One can get incredibly critical of an image when you use PhotoShop and a good monitor, where you have total control of the final look. It sells lots of new lenses these days!

I had a couple of 2.8's from my EOS days, and they are fine, but the other "daily drivers" are history. So, you might review on dpreview or Steve's or other good sites that are linked from those two before you count on the old lens versus some of the new ones available. And since you thought to ask, I would not waste my time with the cheap lenses that come "with" the DSLR. You pay extra, but not that much, and they are worth just that. Save the bucks for a really good and fast L lens...or two...or three.;)

(This is a fun thread to read. Can we have our own foto forum? :D

[jpalamaro]

Better than the "Piece of Mind" thread. Without getting all worked up again some @@@@@@@ put in, ah, forget it. I may have to read Mark's post about being nice.

Yup, new lenses, Photoshop, a good tripod, and lots of time heh heh go a long way to add to the joys of cycling.

[Tallyho]

Nikon has the finest glass in the industry and is without equal. I would stick with only "camera" companies in your ultimate decision. (Olympus, Canon, Nikon) For small, the Nikon 7900 cannot be touched for size, quality, and 7.1 megapixels. For larger and more flexible point and shoot, the Nikon 8800 takes the cake. Neither of these cameras are as easy to use as some other digital models. You will have to consider the directions and yet they come with outstanding and easy to use software once the images are captured. I believe Costco is currently running a package on the 7900 in black body. Mi dos centavos.

[scottydawg]

Nikon has the finest glass in the industry and is without equal.
I knew someone was going to try and claim that here eventually... BUT I want to see FACTS.
As far as Japanese camera/lens makers go, Canon and Nikon have consistently (and for years I might add) been back and forth on test in the trade magazines and labs regarding which lenses is sharper. Never have I seen that the Nikon is any better with their ED lenses then the Canon with their L lenses in overall test.
Then we could open up a can of worms and talk about the German glass.
I also would love for you to tell me which camera and lens shot a photo if I took a picture with 200mm 2.8 Nikon ED or the same lens in a Canon L with ASA 50 film and enlarged it 20 x 24. I went to Brooks for a year, did the test and know the answer, do you?
There are SO many variables to a photo besides having a sharp lens (which is important). A few to mention if your talking film photography are: what kind of lens is on the enlarger at the lab? I can tell you that Nikon does not make the best enlarger lenses, Rodenstock and Schneider are the best for that. Then the lab better have good grain scope and hopefully the guy in the lab uses it correctly, putting a piece of paper down first, locking the enlarger in place and focusing the lens carefully.
If your going digital, you may have a sharp lens but how's that CCD? And then what is the droplet size of the printer to give you a sharp picture?
Having said all that... Does anyone have some nice Schott Glass available :D to make a nice Ziess lens?

Also to throw another .02 cents in here, and give some history, after Minolta invented the first practical SLR autofocus camera in the mid 80's, Nikon and Canon played a bit of catch up. Nikon knew that they had SO many professional photographers with a lot of money invested in lenses that they decided to keep the same mount system for legacy while adding autofocus but it was not a great autofocus system. Canon decided to come out with the EOS system and invented the Ultrasonic autofocus. They did not make the system for old lenses work any where near as well as Nikon but they had the worlds fastest autofocus and in doing so won over many sports photographers, something Nikon was not ready for. Since that time both companies have been neck in neck with lens development and camera innovations which has made us as consumers the real winners.

[Bruce_Yates]

Off the subject slightly, but Bruce what housings do use for your cameras?

I have 2 subals one for nikon f100 and the other for the d70, Inon Strobes.

Subal makes excellent housings according to everyone I know who uses them (although I've never had one myself). Before answering your question, for the benefit of those in this group who are occasional divers and are thinking they might want to dip their toe (pardon pun) in underwater photography without blowing their budget (as you and I obviously have ;)), I'd suggest an Olympus point & shoot -- Olympus makes their own underwater housings that are amazingly inexpensive (only a few hundred dollars vs. thousands) and their cameras from the 5050 up do a pretty impressive job if you stick an external strobe on them. Of course, a housed DSLR is far superior underwater (to eliminate the dreaded shutter lag, which -- with virtually all point and shoots results in mostly fish butt photos), but the cost is multiple times as high, too...

Which brings me to my underwater photo gear. My primary underwater rig is a Canon 1DS MarkII (16.7 megapixels) in a Seacam housing. I'll attach photos of me with that outfit, both with macro lens/port (usually the Canon 100mm macro or Sigma 150mm macro) and wide angle lens/port (I use the 16-35mm L and the 17-40mm L).

My backup uw camera (and primary above water camera due to its far more manageable weight and size) is a 20D, for which I have an Aquatica housing. With both housings, I too use dual Inon strobes (outstanding for their size).

And when I really feel the need for video to capture moving action (less and less often I find) I use my Sony DCR-PC330 (Mini-DV with 3.3 megapixel stills) in a Light & Motion housing.

Obviously, motorcycles aren't the only expensive hobby available...:o

[Bruce_Yates]

Canon and Nikon have consistantly (and for years I might add) been back and forth on test in the trades magazine and labs regarding which lens is sharper...

Exactly. The fact is that an even slightly better photographer can take a better photo with either a Canon or Nikon rig than a slightly worse photographer can with the other. It's like arguing over whether you should buy a Ferrari or Maserati. When you're looking at the top end lenses by either Canon or Nikon, you're talking about outstanding glass that will only be limited by the abilities of the person controlling the shutter. I know that for underwater photography, Canon is increasingly getting the edge (they keep advancing their line faster and further), and more an more professional uw photographers are switching from Nikon to Canon. But for normal use, either brand will give as good a results as any of us are capable of producing...

[Bruce_Yates]

[to Raffy]... if you still want a tiny point & shoot camera to carry in your pocket, PM me; I just ordered a SD550 and I've got that 5 megapixel SD400 that I'll sell you at a killer price. ;)

I've gotten several e-mails from people saying that if Raffy doesn't want my SD400, they're interested. Thanks for the interest, but it's "gone."

[rickcavanaugh]

Motorcycles are a CHEAP hobby when compared to underwater photography. I think I have the same amount of money in underwater camera gear as I do the bike. If I include the atomic regs, tanks, wetsuits, fins, masks and other junk, I am way over the bike.

Once you get the camera gear and dive gear, then you get to pay for an expensive trip!

I do agree with Bruce, for those who do, want to take the plunge, there are cheaper ways. But if the bug bites you, and you have money left on the charge cards, there are alot of nice toys out there.

Bruce, very nice set up. I would be a little nervous flooding a Canon 1DS MarkII.

For me, so far....no floods.

[Bruce_Yates]

Motorcycles are a CHEAP hobby when compared to underwater photography. I think I have the same amount of money in underwater camera gear as I do the bike. ...

Bruce, very nice set up. I would be a little nervous flooding a Canon 1DS MarkII.

For me, so far....no floods.

Definitely more money in uw photography gear than bikes for me, but getting "the perfect shot" becomes a friggin obsession, so what can we do!?! :confused:

As for flooding, I've had three rigs flood over the years (which is why I always travel with a backup). That's one of the reasons I went with the Seacam for the 1Ds MkII; bayonet ports, moisture alarm, and a felt interior that absorbs a fair amount of water before allowing any to get on the camera. And that camera has o-rings around all it's openings, so hopefully it would survive a limited amount of water should that ever occur. OTOH, no amount of caution and care is as important as having a good rider on your homeowner's policy...:D

[scottydawg]

Here's a couple of photos taken with the S45 in the Canon housing, total cost was $500 but then there's that Light and Motion housing in my hand and my complete Nikonos set up that I didn't bring :eek: .

[Triker]

There are so many posts that you may never read them all.

My Sony DSC T-1 is really super. It has now been replaced by the T-3 I believe, but you can still find T-1s on ebay in the price range you're looking for and they're still in the box, unwrapped and brand new. Originally they sold for $450--$500.

It takes great still shots, is ready to shoot almost instaneously after sliding down the cover/on/off switch. Takes great movies. You can get various sizes of memory sticks for it. THe only downside is that they're not compatible with Flash memory sticks.

The sound recorded with the movies or pictures is excellent also. I've had mine for almost two years and really love it. My wife uses it behind me on the LT to take pictures as we ride and she's gotten some awesome movies and stills. It's about the same size as a pack of cigarettes although not quite as thick. No viewfinder, just a 1.5" x 2" LCD screen for viewing. Great screen too. Very bright. Optical 3x zoom and some digital zoom as well. Good flash, red-eye reduction, etc. More features than I can name or remember.

The newest Sonys in this size range are:
http://www.wholesaleconnection.com/productdetails.aspx?Product=3771
http://www.wholesaleconnection.com/productDetails.aspx?Product=3772
The T5 and 7. They're a little more expensive, but appear to be as versatile and improved as my T1.

[jorawro]

If you haven't made a purchase yet you may want to consider the Sony DSC-T5. I am very impressed with the size and the resolution. I purchased this one to leave on the bike and am able to "one-hand" it very easily.