E-Bay: Is this the answer? Transitional DSLR needed...

[carregwen]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Approx 100% of photographers transfer images to a PC by using a card reader

Really Colin, I'm surprised at you, especially being a scientifiky-type person. How can you have 'approximately 100%' of something? It's either 100% or it isn't.

Removing your card from the camera on a regular basis to use a card reader is not a good idea. I know two people who in the past year have had to send their Canons back for repair for bent pins when re-inserting the cards in the camera. Always use the software.

[Colin Southern]

Originally Posted by KentDub

A card reader? really? What's wrong with simply plugging the camera stright into the computer via USB?

A lot of people seem to have issues where the drivers stop working - or some other software tries to compete -- and generally it's a lot slower.

[Colin Southern]

Originally Posted by Ron

Card reader. Thats new to me. I just used Nikon and Cannon computer software for transfer. Where are these card readers. (don't send me to a gypsey)...jus to lighten.

Hi Ron,

Is the Cannon software used for aiming it? (unless of course you mean Canon software? )

Card readers can be found almost everywhere basic electrical gadgets are sold - most of the newer ones only cost a few dollars and can read more types of cards than I ever new existed (I think I've seen 51 somewhere). In my home PC mine takes up a Floppy bay, whereas for my main PC it's built into the monitor.

[KentDub]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

A lot of people seem to have issues where the drivers stop working - or some other software tries to compete -- and generally it's a lot slower.

Yeah driver problems are never fun. Lukily for me Vista and Windows7 both had built-in drivers for my camera, just plugged it in, waited for the autoplay, clicked Import with Adobe Bridge and I was on my way. I can see a use for a card reader -- when you are using multiple memory cards, or you frequently have friends who want to dump their pictures to your system. For basic transfering of images though, it seems easier (both for me and on the camera) to just plug it stright into the computer.

[Colin Southern]

Originally Posted by carregwen

Really Colin, I'm surprised at you, especially being a scientifiky-type person. How can you have 'approximately 100%' of something? It's either 100% or it isn't.

I thought it was a more powerful way of saying "basically everyone"

Removing your card from the camera on a regular basis to use a card reader is not a good idea. I know two people who in the past year have had to send their Canons back for repair for bent pins when re-inserting the cards in the camera. Always use the software.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one Yes - occasionally - someone does manage to bend a pin, but (a) I personally think that you need to be pretty ham-fisted to do it (like which part of "it's not going in with the usual amount of pressure ... I'd better hit it with a hammer" first arouses suspicion that something might be wrong!), (b) if you have to change cards (especially if you subscribe to the "don't keep all eggs in 1 basket theory") (which I don't by the way) then the cards are going in and out anyway, and (c) I've also heard of people having to return cameras for repair after managing to damage mini-USB ports (presumably by managing to move it too far with the cable still attached) (stay away from these kinds of people when they're filling up their cars!.


Personally I just use a touch of care and common sense and I have to say that it's never been a problem

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Hi Ron,

Is the Cannon software used for aiming it? (unless of course you mean Canon software? )

Card readers can be found almost everywhere basic electrical gadgets are sold - most of the newer ones only cost a few dollars and can read more types of cards than I ever new existed (I think I've seen 51 somewhere). In my home PC mine takes up a Floppy bay, whereas for my main PC it's built into the monitor.

Yes. Aiming to selected files. Also some manipulation and storage sites. I looked up readers, and recall using one with the nikon at one time. Easy to go direct from camera. Ques: Years ago I tried to learn Adobe and didn't devote enough time. I have been told that GIMP (free) is almost as good.
Almost works for me. I only want to manipulate pictures, roughly, for painting. ..e.g. adding, subtracting features. The learning curves are are tough, especially in my age group. Thanks for the input. Good Group.

[Colin Southern]

Originally Posted by Ron

Years ago I tried to learn Adobe and didn't devote enough time.

I think most people could do a 3 year "Batchelor of Photoshop" and still not know all there is to know about it - it's one of the deepest and widest packages ever developed.

[carregwen]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

I think most people could do a 3 year "Batchelor of Photoshop" and still not know all there is to know about it - it's one of the deepest and widest packages ever developed.

Very true. I'm reading Scott Kelby's CS4 book and I'm amazed at how much stuff I don't know! It is an amazing product though.

[KentDub]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

I think most people could do a 3 year "Batchelor of Photoshop" and still not know all there is to know about it - it's one of the deepest and widest packages ever developed.

I pretty much have one. I have three degrees:
- BAS: Digital Visual Media
- AAS: Digital Visual Media
- AAS: Animation and Visual Effects

We lived in photoshop during school. I can tell you, I never go more than a week without finding a new technique or tool! The beauty of it is that you can use it for an extremely wide range of purposes. Most of my experiences with it are more geared towards compositing, texturing for 3d animations, web design, and logo cleanup. Working on digital camera photos is in reality a small part of photoshops capabilities! Add all of the capabilities together, plus the amount of changes that happen each version -- you should be scared () when anyone tells you they are a "Master" of photoshop

[arith]

Originally Posted by hoffstriker

Hello all, I have been shooting film again after an 18 year leave from all of photography and now am looking into buying a used DSLR. I've read a ton online, but see contradictory statements and find myself ending up even more confused. I am looking to buy (have been checking E-Bay for deals) a digital camera that gives me control to learn while yet doesn't lock me into "trusting" the dummy settings forever. I am mainly focusing on wildlife (birds, etc.) and have about a $300 (US) budget to spend on a used body. I've lost a lot of the information that once clouded my brain and am now forced to worry about things such as overexposure. I'm getting better and reading to relearn those things that were second hand, but it will take time. Right now I am shooting a Minolta X-700 and Canon Rebel 2000 (got the Canon for free), but feel that it may be easier (and cheaper) to learn on a digital where I can experiment for free. I am open to all recommendations and plan on buying cheaper body to allow for more expensive glass in the near future, but would like to make sure this body will allow me to do what is necessary to improve. Thanks to all for reading and helping. Chris

Look at the shops as well, you might be surprised. The top cost can be found from the manufacturers and this isn't surprisingly more.

If you buy from Ebay it is at a risk but generally I find the dealers give better deals, but a lot of luck is involved since they are all described as incredibly good.

I was looking for a Flash and haven't got one but now don't even want one, and a Jessops 360AFD went for £67. I didn't bid that far but asked the owner for a guarantee. She said she couldn't on account it was already four years old and the price reflected that: Jessops 360AFD brand new £99.

Another was a lens that went for £81 but cost it's owner £72 second hand.

You can get lucky, but I'm not. Add servicing costs for my camera £200 plus parts + vat and then consider It's worth. You will probably not get it I've seen a second hand Sigma lens go for more than a new one.

Look around at all the shops, then decide a bidding limit.

[Dave Humphries]

On the card reader vs USB cable discussion, I use the card slot built in the front of my laptop, it works a treat; plug in a card and it offers the Vista Open with.. dialog and I usually choose the Nikon Transfer software (even though not using the cable). When finished, I just use the "Safely remove SD card in G:" option from system tray. I always delete the files in camera.

Reasons for not using USB cable:
a) Finding it when I need it, it is kept in a drawer full of exceedingly similar looking black USB cables
b) Risk of yanking camera or laptop off the table
c) Speed (card reader is quicker - or so I believe)

Cheers,

[rpcrowe]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

I print most of my work 22 x 44" - and if my Canon 1Ds3 fell over on a trip and I had to use, say, a Canon 20D as a backup, I really don't think that you'd see one heck of a difference in the quality of the shots that I came back with.

I totally agree. Whenever a new camera model or type is introduced; many photographers seem to think that their present models have become obsolete and can no longer produce quality imagery.

Take a look at this collection of awesome imagery shot, in the most part, with a Canon 20D. So much for the folks who seem to think that a 5DII is the only camera that can be used for artistic and landscape photography.

http://www.micahimages.com/

[Bill44]

Originally Posted by Dave Humphries

Reasons for not using USB cable:
a) Finding it when I need it, it is kept in a drawer full of exceedingly similar looking black USB cables
b) Risk of yanking camera or laptop off the table
c) Speed (card reader is quicker - or so I believe)

Cheers,

I agree with you Dave, especially on point 3. Using the USB cable from the camera with a full 4Gig Sandisk Ultra III SDHC 30Mb/s card it takes about 20 min to download. Using my Sandisk USB card reader the same card downloads in about 3 min, living up to its claimed 24Mb/s transfer rate.

[KentDub]

Originally Posted by Bill44

I agree with you Dave, especially on point 3. Using the USB cable from the camera with a full 4Gig Sandisk Ultra III SDHC 30Mb/s card it takes about 20 min to download. Using my Sandisk USB card reader the same card downloads in about 3 min, living up to its claimed 24Mb/s transfer rate.

Maybe there is something wrong with your camera (or that entire model)? I can transfer 16gb from my 5dmkII directly from the camera in less than 10 minutes ("perfect" would be just over 5 minutes - but transfer speeds are never perfect due to too many variables). I'm using a 45mb/sec card.