It sounds like you really want a DSLR. Certainly it will serve you
better than a fixed lens small format digicam. Almost all of us
started with a digicam and quickly moved to a DSLR and seldom use the
digicam any more. It seems to be an intermediate step that is sort of
a waste of time and money. You might consider a new Pentax K110 with
kit lens for just a little more than the Fuji you are talking about.
Or wait a couple of months for the D40 which will be even a bit cheaper.
B&H new prices:
Finepix s6000fd(they don't list the 6500 yet) - $400
Pentax K110 w/lens - $525
O. E-500 w/ lens - $600
Canon 350D w/lens - $649
N. D50 w/lens - $649
Used Canon 350D w/lens from reputable store like Keh - $546. More
money than the new Pentax.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Nov 17, 2006, at 3:13 PM, Allan Mee wrote:
>
> Hmmm regarding my Canon 350D,
> I had to cancel the cheque I sent to the seller as he says he hasn't
> received it - despite the Royal Mail track and trace facilities
> saying it
> was delivered and signed for). In telephone conversations, he said
> he gave
> me the wrong post code - the address he emailed me on eekbay was
> his company
> address but the post code is for his home address. The cheque is
> now stopped
> and marked as 'stolen' by the bank - so shouldn't be any problems
> there I
> hope. There hasn't been sufficient time for any transfer of funds
> and as an
> added precaution, the funds haven't been put in the bank yet!
> But I've decided I'm not taking chances like that again - will buy
> a digital
> camera from a bona fide shop like Jessop's, or Curry's. At the
> moment I'm
> not in a mood for doing any more saving up so I'm tempted to go out
> and just
> buy a SLR lookalike such as the Fujifilm Finepix S6500fd Zoom (Digital
> Camera), but I know if I did I'd probably regret it later - no
> matter how
> good a fixed lens the digital camera has. The lens on the S6500fd
> is equiv.
> to an SLRs 28-300mm - which is wide-angle, through normal, to
> reasonable
> telephoto and would ensure no dust gets in the camera to block
> pixels. It's
> 6.3 MegaPixel resolution is adequate for serious photography work
> and it's
> macro facility lets you get as close as 100mm to the subject (about
> 4 inches
> away) and so is comparable to the macro facilities of my film SLRs.
> The
> camera has 10.7x 'optical' zoom - which is nice :)
>
> There are three obvious 'cons' to it:
> An electronic viewfinder rather than a SLR optical viewfinder.
> Fixed lens (even if a good one).
> The rather diminutive size of the camera - it fits in one hand I
> think.
>
> The 'pros' for it are:
> It is brand new and affordable - with full warranties.
> It has Fuji quality (and Fuji are good, if underated camera
> manufacturers
> with a long and proud history in photography)
> The fixed lens is equiv. to 28-300mm and Fujica are renowned for
> the quality
> of their lenses. The fixed lens prevents dust etc. getting into the
> camera.
> It can take filters!
> It has a manual focusing mode, which coupled with its manual
> exposure mode
> means it should feel like using a real SLR - and give similar creative
> control.
> It has a 'face' recognition software that can identify and
> recognise two
> eyes and lips as belonging to faces and will automatically ensure
> that any
> 'faces' it sees are properly focussed and exposed - noyt always
> what the
> photographer wants (e.g. when shooting silhouettes, say) and I'm
> not sure
> how well it work even when that is what is desired.
> The controls and menus seem reasonably simple to use - and I've
> used my
> friend's Fuji S3500 so I'll probably feel right at home with the
> camera
> straight off.
> It 'looks' like a tiny DSLR - most people who are the none wiser
> would think
> it was a small DLSR - purely on looks. Photography wise, it is well
> capable
> of the main role what I want a DSLR for - 'instant' portraiture -
> but it is
> important that customers accept the camera as being suitable.
> That's the
> biggest issue.
> Allan (who is still wondering what's the best course of action)
>
> PS No trees were harmed in the sending of this message and a very
> large
> number of electrons were asked their permission to be terribly
> inconvenienced. (And threw a party for them afterwards for being
> really cool
> about it).
>
> Disrupting the unnatural balance that you, as a conscious human
> being and a
> confused mass of energy, have created.
> -Disturb the mind -
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free
> newsletters!
> http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|