«

I'm yet to take part in the Digital Revolution that has all but totally
taken over the world of photography (digital medium format?! -
maybeathere's hope for that old Horseman after all!). I've just cracked
open a piggy-bank in which I'd been saving for something special, turns
out I've got 1000 pounds to spend.

My current kit consists of EOS100, 24mm, 28mm, 50mm, 35-70mm, 135mm, and
300mm lenses. I hardly use any of them. The lenses that see most use
are 24mm, 35-70mm and 300mm - and out of those, the zoom is hardly ever
off the body. I've also a flashgun that sits on a bracket away from the
lens, a few Cokin Pro filters and a ton of "essential" bits (hot-shoe
spirit-level anyone?) that I back-breakingly carry around.

The sensible option, bearing in mind the oh-so-much compatible gear I've
accumulated, is the 30D. However, I'm just not up to carrying all that
stuff anymore. I could take the 30D and the 35-70mm with me instead, but
I just know that I'd find a reason to add another lens today, then
another and, hey, here I am in 10 years with a permanent stoop.

So, the Digilux-2. Hmmm.... Very expensive for a fixed lens camera. It
*is* a Leica though.... mmmmm, nice. It'd save my back and force me to
concentrate more on the image - no more wondering if I should use a
wider lense or close in on this part of the scene (yes, I do a few more
than my fair share of landscapes - but I enjoy portraiture too). With a
fixed lens I'm stuck with "that is the scene, make the best of it - or
start walking"... except, the lense isn't fixed. At least it *is* only
one lense, so I don't have to worry about which mounting ring for the
filters - right, that's a *major* plus, hmmm. One real plus is the
controls, all exactly where they were before we went auto-focus, I like
that idea.

Then there's the Panasonic... it's the Leica, but without the titanium.
Or is there more difference than that?

I'm really undecided here. I'd be grateful for comments or suggestions.
I'll try to give a quick round up. I want to lose the big bag and all
the gadgets. I want to get back to basics. I want a camera that'll be
ready when I am to seize the moment. I still want to be able to use my
filters. I'll be doing about 70% landscape, 20% portrait, 10%
candid/reportage/public. I'll also want to be doing a fair bit of that
in B&W (see the other thread I posted a little earlier).

I've probably not mentioned a whole bunch of things you'd like to know
to be able to constructively comment so feel free to ask away.

Thank you for your time, and thank you, in advance, for any suggestions
or comments.

Justin.

--
Justin C, by the sea.

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, Justin C wrote:

> The sensible option, bearing in mind the oh-so-much compatible gear I've
> accumulated, is the 30D.

Note, however, that the 30D will multiply the effective focal length of
your lens by 1.6 (due to the sensor smaller than a 35mm frame). So your
zoom will effectively become a 56-112 - possibly not the result you're
looking for?

You may need to go for a wide lens for your landscapes.

I can't comment on the other cameras.

Cheers,

Stu

Forget digital and stick to the Horseman.

Remember that the 30D uses a smaller than full frame sensor and existing
lenses from a 35mm camera have an effective 1.5 multiplying factor when
attached to a digital SLR. This would make your 35-70 zoom give coverage
equivalent to 50-105 lens when attached to 30D.

If you are going to buy a digital 'prosumer' camera check out the magazine
reviews as there may be others that meet your requirements.

TTFN

"Justin C" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:5870.441b5d2b.70a73@stigmata...
> I'm yet to take part in the Digital Revolution that has all but totally
> taken over the world of photography (digital medium format?! -
> maybeathere's hope for that old Horseman after all!). I've just cracked
> open a piggy-bank in which I'd been saving for something special, turns
> out I've got 1000 pounds to spend.
>
> My current kit consists of EOS100, 24mm, 28mm, 50mm, 35-70mm, 135mm, and
> 300mm lenses. I hardly use any of them. The lenses that see most use
> are 24mm, 35-70mm and 300mm - and out of those, the zoom is hardly ever
> off the body. I've also a flashgun that sits on a bracket away from the
> lens, a few Cokin Pro filters and a ton of "essential" bits (hot-shoe
> spirit-level anyone?) that I back-breakingly carry around.
>
> The sensible option, bearing in mind the oh-so-much compatible gear I've
> accumulated, is the 30D. However, I'm just not up to carrying all that
> stuff anymore. I could take the 30D and the 35-70mm with me instead, but
> I just know that I'd find a reason to add another lens today, then
> another and, hey, here I am in 10 years with a permanent stoop.
>
> So, the Digilux-2. Hmmm.... Very expensive for a fixed lens camera. It
> *is* a Leica though.... mmmmm, nice. It'd save my back and force me to
> concentrate more on the image - no more wondering if I should use a
> wider lense or close in on this part of the scene (yes, I do a few more
> than my fair share of landscapes - but I enjoy portraiture too). With a
> fixed lens I'm stuck with "that is the scene, make the best of it - or
> start walking"... except, the lense isn't fixed. At least it *is* only
> one lense, so I don't have to worry about which mounting ring for the
> filters - right, that's a *major* plus, hmmm. One real plus is the
> controls, all exactly where they were before we went auto-focus, I like
> that idea.
>
> Then there's the Panasonic... it's the Leica, but without the titanium.
> Or is there more difference than that?
>
> I'm really undecided here. I'd be grateful for comments or suggestions.
> I'll try to give a quick round up. I want to lose the big bag and all
> the gadgets. I want to get back to basics. I want a camera that'll be
> ready when I am to seize the moment. I still want to be able to use my
> filters. I'll be doing about 70% landscape, 20% portrait, 10%
> candid/reportage/public. I'll also want to be doing a fair bit of that
> in B&W (see the other thread I posted a little earlier).
>
> I've probably not mentioned a whole bunch of things you'd like to know
> to be able to constructively comment so feel free to ask away.
>
> Thank you for your time, and thank you, in advance, for any suggestions
> or comments.
>
> Justin.
>
> --
> Justin C, by the sea.

"Justin C" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> My current kit consists of EOS100, 24mm, 28mm, 50mm, 35-70mm, 135mm, and
> 300mm lenses. I hardly use any of them. The lenses that see most use
> are 24mm, 35-70mm and 300mm - and out of those, the zoom is hardly ever
> off the body.

Have a look at the Sony DSC R1, 24-120 mm equivalent which might suit you,
and a sensor that is big for a non-slr.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1/

Links to more reviews at: http://www.dcviews.com/cameras/sony_news.htm

--
Alan

( If replying by mail, please note that all "sardines" are canned.
There is also a password autoresponder but, unless this a very
old message, a "tuna" will swim right through. )