Which camera do I want?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/3/10/pentax645d

Times have changed.

That's not even on Amazon yet. I doubt I can afford it.

[Cunt]

I am fairly confident that you can't. I haven't looked up the price yet, but I don't even want to try my friends 645. I tried his K5 and guess where I am now? K5 country.

Check out how well (or poorly) Pentax does at dxomark (or whatever that site is that BrettA told you about). I think it compares quite well, dollar for dollar.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I am fairly confident that you can't. I haven't looked up the price yet, but I don't even want to try my friends 645. I tried his K5 and guess where I am now? K5 country.

I was introduced to the medium-format cameras by a professor of photojournalism at Ball State University, in the town where Kristie lives. I spent one summer learning to shoot, develop and print with him. It was a lot of fun. When I got to Japan the first thing I did was buy a 645. People thought it was a video camera. (This was 1981.)

Check out how well (or poorly) Pentax does at dxomark (or whatever that site is that BrettA told you about). I think it compares quite well, dollar for dollar.

Will do.

[FBM]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/3/10/pentax645d

Times have changed.

Focking hell.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/3/10/pentax645d

Times have changed.

That's not even on Amazon yet. I doubt I can afford it.

Yep, I was right.

[Calilasseia]

In answer to 'Zilla's original post ...

The principal points to remember here are these.

[1] The Nikon D3100 will probably produce better quality stills than the Canon EOS Rebel T3, and if you need to produce quality stills, the Nikon will deliver massively in this regard. However, at this level, the differences will only be noticeable by someone with some pro photography experience.

[2] The Canon will probably shoot movies better than the Nikon, as this has always been a strong point with the Canon EOS DSLRs. However, according to the advert, the D3100 shoots proper 1080p HD movies, whereas the Canon you've picked only shoots 720p HD. The BIG advantage that the Canon will have, is that it'll be more user-friendly than the Nikon when shooting movies, and the user interface will be more intuitive, as Canon perfected their user interface for this a long time ago. Nikon still has a bit of catching up to do.

[3] Canon EOS camera score better on user friendliness generally, but the manual is still going to be a sizeable one. The Nikon may have more features, but getting to them will be slightly more clunky.

[4] Nikons have a slight advantage over Canons in the ruggedness stakes. Nikons are screwed together with military levels of robutsness, and the model you're looking at will probably survive everything short of a direct hit with an anti-takn weapon. The Canon is likely to be a little bit more delicate, which could be a consideration with respect to the planned working environment.

[5] However, for that ruggedness, you pay extra, both for camera bodies and lenses, when buying Nikon gear. I'll outlast you, your kids, and possibly your grandkids as well, barring major disasters such as being dropped into the crater of an erupting volcano, but you have to ask yourself if you want to pay the extra for this.

[6] Canon lenses will be cheaper if you need additional lenses, and if you already have older Canon gear, EOS cameras are backwards compatible to a greater extent than Nikons with legacy lenses, which means that with the Canon, you can pick up perfectly good, serviceable second hand lenses for older models, that will still work with the new body, and pay a LOT less than you would to add kit to the Nikon body. Be advised that if you take this route, with some legacy Canon lenses, you'll be restricted to manual focusing or the loss of some progam mode features, but that shouldn't be a worry if you know what you're doing.

[7] Nikon's customer relations sometimes leave a bit to be desired if you need repairs. Canon have a reputation for being more friendly in this regard, but it's worth checking out some of Nikon's own maintenance plans, which, whilst expensive, cover you in situations you probably can't even imagine right now. Plus, if you take up one of Nikon's own plans, and something happens to your camera, they'll ship a complete replacement within 48 hours. Canon's terms, though cheaper, aren't quite at this level.

[8] If you're shooting still footage, but need to shoot a sequence of frames, Canons have always had an advantage over the competition - faster frame rates in each camera class. The top flight Canons now boast a truly mind-blowing 15 frames per second, and this cascades down the range, so the Canon you're looking at in that shop window probably boasts a 5 fps mode (though as always, check the specs in advance!).

Summary:

Pick the Nikon if:

[1] You want a camera that will survive anything up to and including battelfield crossfire;

[2] You decide you need that 1080p HD movie feature;

[3] You don't mind spending the extra loot;

[4] You want a camera that oozes quality the moment you take it out of the box;

[5] You don't mind shelling out a lot of money if you need extra lenses in future.

Pick the Canon if:

[1] You need to work within a fairly tight budget;

[2] You're willing to shop around for legacy 2nd hand lenses to extend your photographic range on within that budget, instead of going for the shiny new option each time;

[3] You want a camera that more intuitive and user-friendly to use;

[4] You want a camera that shoots frame sequences at a decent rate (the digital equivalent of using a motordrive on a film camera).

Meanwhile ...

Sell everything you own and buy a Nikon D3x and some nice lenses.

Whoa. Steady on there!

I've read several reviews of the D3X, and the early ones out of the factory had build quality issues, which does NOT inspire confidence in a camera costing $8,000 body only! Plus, the lenses that you'll need to get the best out of that beast will boast similarly eye-watering price tags, and I don't think 'Zilla wants to sell himself into slavery to own one. Put it this way, D3X kit suitable for 'Zilla's requirements will end up costing him as much as a new BMW, and does he need that level of sophistication and image quality for the job? If he did, he wouldn't be asking about lower models, he'd have bought the D3X and boasted about it.

It is impossible to give advice without knowing how much you have to spend.

Say $600-$1,000. If the camera comes in at ~$700 the remainder would go for goodies.

You could possibly get Nikon kit (the D3100 shown, plus an extra lens) within that budget, but it would be a tight squeeze. On the other hand, if you bought the Canon, you'd have more options for bolt-ons afterwards. For example, a flash unit for the hot shoe would cost less for the Canon, and you could get away with a generic flash unit costing a pittance compared to the dedicated units. However, if you need a dedicated flash, then the Nikon would probably be the best quality of the lot.

Oh, and something else to watch out for. If your DSLR has a Live View facility, this eats battery power. Something to consider, especially if the camera uses a proprietary, dedicated battery instead of taking several generic AA rechargeables. Recharge cycles will be an issue if you use Live View a lot. Best to switch it off and just rely on conventional viewfinding if you're going to be spending a lot of time in the field.

Oh, and for the record, if you ever find yourself with a lottery win, don't buy a Nikon D3X just yet, until they've sorted out the productionising issues. Instead, if money is no object, get a Hasselblad H4D medium format DSLR. 60 megapixel sensor (the size of a 120 negative!), the ability to change to a Hasselblad film back if you want to shoot film, and more accessories than you could even dream about. Just one problem ... the price tag, which is why you should only think about this when you've won the lottery. I hopped over to Hasselblad's web site, input my "wet dream" options for macro work with this camera, and the final tally came to about the same money as a brand new Mercedes S-Class. (Ouch). A fully loaded H4D with all the fruit I wanted when virtual window shopping, came to close on £80,000 here in the UK. Put it in perspective, for the money it would cost you in the US, you could buy a brand new Corvette ZR1 and drive it out the showroom, fully paid for, taxed, insured and filled with petrol.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Finally, a Cali post where I understood every word.

[Cunt]

You might want to accesorize first, just to make sure you have room. I would strongly suggest as spare battery or battery grip. A battery grip allows you to shoot comfortably in portrait orientation.
A flash is useful, but not as useful as a tripod. A got what I think of as a good one for about 170 from B&H.
I just bought a neoprene camera strap and it is the best 20 bucks I have spent in my camera bag in a long time.

Oh, and camera bags are expensive, specialized and funny-looking. Do you know anyone who can make you leather stuff?:)

May I ask, Calilasseia, why Pentax didn't make your list? I ask because I have trusted you longer than I have trusted DXO mark...

[Schneibster]

Everything Cali said, and:

Canon has the fastest and best-tracking autofocus
Nikon has the most accurate, but slowest autofocus
Sony/Minolta has the inbetween- faster than Nikon, more accurate than Canon

Sony/Minolta has the highest resolution but isn't cheap and isn't easy to use
Nikon is the most rugged (Cali mentioned this too)
Canon is the easiest to use
Sony/Minolta has the best metering and light source color matching
Nikon is "standard" if you're a photojournalist
Canon has good repair reputation

That's most of what I know that differentiates them. Keep in mind that Sony makes the best CCD chips.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'd also like to get a remote shutter release. Do cameras come with the adapters for these nowadays? Ideally I'd like to be able to trip the shutter from 100-200 feet away. This is to allow the wolves to "relax" after I set up the camera.

[Schneibster]

I'd also like to get a remote shutter release. Do cameras come with the adapters for these nowadays? Ideally I'd like to be able to trip the shutter from 100-200 feet away. This is to allow the wolves to "relax" after I set up the camera.

You can mostly download the manuals from the manufacturer's site. There're three types:

IR (TV and stereo remote type)
Long electrical cable with an electric switch
Short mechanical shutter cable (probably not appropriate but mentioned for thoroughness)

You should also consider the time-delay options on the camera itself
You should also be aware of the fact that target acquisition is impossible remote so it will have to have a preset focus point and you'll shoot at high f-number to get depth of field and avoid out-of-focus problems

The IR will work to perhaps 20 feet, maybe 50 with brand new batteries.
I have a 50' electric cable remote switch; I could probably solder up a 200' one without any trouble, and this is your best bet, I think, though it requires custom modifications.
You can try to modify the remote to get more powerful IR out of it, and increase the range, but remember that it will also be seeing reflected IR light from the surround so you could have some weird problems getting it to work right depending on the encoding and the nature of the surround, I wouldn't care to speculate. I recommend you only go here if the wires are just absolutely up your nose and burning.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This would be shooting things like wolves feeding on a carcass, so I'd know the range, etc., in advance. I could shade the IR receptor.

[Schneibster]

Hyperfocal techniques, and good high f-stops, will give you good focus, as well as the autofocus. Keep in mind that losing focus can stop a movie on some cameras.

IR is not yet ready for stuff like this that I've seen. If someone were gonna make it really rock I'd look to Canon before Nikon, but I could easily be wrong. Check that out; they have been making some advances in LEDs lately and may have new "hot" IRDA LEDs and an order of magnitude more range. Download and read manuals for the range of IRDA remotes. This sounds like it's an important criterion so I'd make sure I checked it out quite carefully. But be prepared for it to be not ready for primetime and to fall back to wires.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I could always fall back on a blind, I guess. Fewer variables that way.

[Schneibster]

The wires will go as far as you want.