***Chris,
Thank you so much for posting I was hoping you would. I have read so many reviews and although I have learned allot; I still am confused because their are so many different opinions out there. I have called several shops and everyone recommended a different setup. I value you judgment as you understand the fine points of herp photography and are a great assent to King snake.

>>I think the reason you haven't had many responses is that it is a difficult question to answer. Here's a few of my opinions on this issue....
>>
>>1. Image stabilization - this is a great thing. I would rather pay for it in the camera body than in each lens. The comparisons done say that in-body stabilization works as well as, if not better than in-lens stabilization for close up work.
>>

***This was one of my big issues, as the photography world is split over this and both sides seem very admit about their opinion. I was leaning toward in body. This is were your experience is really helpful. I feel more at ease going that direction.

>>2. Camera brands - I wouldn't worry about which brand you end up with as long as it is one of the big ones (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus). They have a large enough following that there are a variety of accessories and lenses available. In regard to available lenses/accessories, Nikon/Canon are about tied at the top, Sony is second (if you count older Minolta stuff), Pentax then Olympus. But frankly they all have enough for most herp photographers.
>>
***I planned on getting a good body with kit lens and one of the 90-105 macros that you have recommended to others so I think any of the major brands would have me covered.

>>3. SLR vs Fixed Lens - this is a contentious issue for some people. I think an SLR is a better investment of funds than even a semi-pro fixed lens camera. Why? Because when it comes time to upgrade, the DSRL user only has to upgrade the body and gets to keep all his/her lenses, flashes, etc.
>>
*** great that is the way I was going after much research, I just wanted to make sure I was not going overboard. I tend to do that!LOL
>>4. Ergonomics - make sure you handle each of the cameras you are considering. How it feels and how easily you can adjust what you want is a big deal. Most entry level cameras bury adjustments deep in the menu system, which is a pain. I would much rather have buttons, dials and knobs than have to search for something.
>>
***I have played around with the Canon, Nikon and Sony a little. I did not care for the feel of the Canon. It just felt awkward for me, I am not sure what it was. The Nikon and the Sony felt great.

>>5. LCD - the size and function of the LCD is a big deal. Get the biggest, brightest, highest resolution LCD you can. You will spend much of your time checking out your photos on this, so don't get an inferior one.
>>
>>6. Live view? The newest DSLRs come with live-view LCDs. This is a useful thing, although it wouldn't be a primary decision maker for me. I would be more concerned about image quality.
>>
*** From what I have read, it seems the Sony A300 has one of the most logical "live view systems". How is this feature important in the scheme of things?

>>7. Image quality and sensor abilities. I wouldn't buy a camera that doesn't produce good images at at least ISO 400 and really I think the threshold should be ISO 800. Even if you are using flash a lot, having the ability to use higher ISOs without sacrificing quality really makes a big difference. This is where a good DSLR blows a fixed lens camera out of the water.
>>
*** Here is where I need the help. Which camera will do this the best indoors, with flash and outdoor herps? Everyone seems to have a different opinion, but they aren't herpers. I have tentatively narrowed my choices to the Sony and the Nikon and am leaning toward the Sony. You recommend waiting for the A/350. Would you recommend paying the extra and getting the A700. Would the kit lens that comes with the A700 allow me to take pictures of hatchlings for my web site or would they be to small?

>>8. Cost and availability of accessories. Different camera lines price their lenses and accessories differently. Nikon tends to sell their lenses at a higher price than other brands, even though testing shows that the other brands or of equal quality. Canon is probably the cheapest in regard to quality for your dollar in lenses (and I'm not a Canon guy, BTW).
>>
*** Another reason I was leaning toward Sony.

>>9. Flash options. This is where Canon falls short, IMHO. Most of the other manufacturers offer wireless flash without any extra accessories. With canon you have to buy more stuff. Nikon and Sony have excellent flash systems.
>>
>>Do some comparisons on places like DPreview.com. Under their buying guide they have an option that lets you compare the features of different cameras side by side in a columnar format. It is a very helpful tool. And speaking of cameras to compare, I would be more inclined to look at the new Sony Alpha 300/350 rather than the Alpha 200. The 200 is just a replacement for the Alpha 100 without much improvement. The 300/350 shows quite a few big changes. I have the Alpha 100 as my backup body (my main camera is the Alpha 700) and although I like it as a backup, it probably wouldn't be my choice as a primary camera body due to the small LCD and noise above ISO 400.
>>
>>And don't be influenced by the photos you see taken with one camera or another. Good photographers take good photos, not good cameras. Here's a shot I took with a cheap Point and Shoot digital that I wouldn't recommend to anyone. I don't think the photo is as bad as the camera was -
>>
>>
>>
>>As for lenses, you probably will want to get a decent macro lens in the 90 to 105mm range. There are plenty to choose from and they are all very good lenses, including the major third party lenses like those from Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron.
>>
>>You could get by with a macro zoom, but most of those are neither good zooms or good macro lenses. An exception to this is the Sigma DG 17-70 macro. If I were to only own one lens, that would probably be the one.
>>-----
>>Chris Harrison
>>San Antonio, Texas
-----
PIJAC Member

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]