Well I was checking out Circuit City for any good store closing sales and I noticed all cameras were 25% off. I have wanted a DSLR for awhile now and spotted a few good deals. I really wanted a Canon XS that they had for $449, but the only one they had was the display model and I wasn't too interested in one that could have potential problems from everyone playing with it.

I finally settled on the Sony a300. So far I have been fairly happy with it and am still getting used to all the little features. I've gotten a few good shots so far with the stock lens. I'm thinking that the next lens purchase will be the Tamron 90 macro lens. This will be quite a ways away since they aren't cheap, but I've heard good reviews on them.

Well here's a few shots that I have gotten with it.
Ugg my LMB


My female occy

Acan

Tubbs Blues





More samples when I get some time to upload them. Constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.

Those look ok , but I think you would have been much more impressed with the Canon.
I don't know much about cameras but I've never heard anything good about a Sony.


My gf has a Canon SX10 ( not a slr) and it takes pretty good macros.



NR squeezes the image some , it looks better through the LINK

I'm sure I would have been more impressed with the Canon. But I wasn't going to buy a display camera that could've been sitting there for a year or more. It was an all sales final situation so I wasn't going to mess with the Canon. I'm actually pretty impressed with it far and can't wait til spring so I can try out some nature shots. I'd be outside taking some but it's too cold here in Michigan, I swear it's colder this year than ever before.

Sweet, congrats on the new cam.

well couldnt have been there for a year..the canon XS only came out a few months ago.

Meh few months, still had everyone ad their brother messing with it. Plus I was told NO display camera by my parents. So I'll make do with it, anyways it's way better than my Kodak z712 IS. One downside is no video so I'll have to keep my Kodak for that or find my old Olympus.

Plus I think it will pair well with the Tamron 90 for those macro shots I want.

nice shots!

Don't be discouraged with Sony, although relatively new to the dSLR market they have received a fair amount of praise. If you are moderately new to serious photography the camera body itself isn't going to be a limiting factor for you. Also its fairly safe to say that any SLR, even the cheapest you can find, is going to be miles ahead of any point and shoot camera. So you are going to be fine with what you have, don't sweat it at all. A good macro lens will be an asset for certain though, Im still lacking in that department as well. That being said I wouldn't have gone anywhere near a Canon myself, but primarily because Im a Nikon snob.
Have fun with it

Thanks for the kind words. I did notice that the Sony's wee fairly new to the market. I think they are overlooked by people because of that. It probably won't be til summer or later before I get the Tamron since they aren't the cheapest lens. I do think I will give this prduct a try. Link. Worst comes to worst, I'monly out $30.

Thats worth buying, not cause the pictures are going to be good, cause they wont come anywhere close to an actual lens. However any exposure to new equipment is going to develop your understanding of optics in general, and thats worth $30.

dont waste your money on that...Look into getting some extension tubes instead..they cost a little bit more but the photos wont look like a blurry mess and they will not degrade IQ at all since there is no optics in them.

Hopefully you didn't let Circuit City talk you into their extended warranty..LOL

Haha, no. But if their extended warranty works ours at work it goes through a seperate company which is unrelated to the company selling the product.

Turbo Blues.... *mmm*

honestly for the money you really cant beat a tamron lens they actually are really nice lenses
if you look on ebay they have some great deals on tamron and nikon lenses that should work for your camera
ive got the nikon d40x and i love it and am still learning more and more about it even though ive had it for about a year and a half

He has a Sony a300...WTH is a Nikon lens going to do for him?

I was wondering the same thing. I believe the only ones that will work are lenses specifically made for the Sonys and I also believe many Minolta lenses will work since Sony bought out Minolta.

nice! i got an xs from B&H and i love it!

Sigma makes lenses for Sony, I presume Tamaron does as well. I just got a 105mm Sigma Macro for my Nikon yesterday, its pretty good. If they make that with a sony mount I would recommend it.

I'll have to check into that. I haven't started to look into lenses too much since I don't have the spare cash for any lenses and probably won't for awhile. Tuition + new laptop + low hours at work=no extra money for me.

Yellow porites

FTS

Pistol/shrimp pair, not a great pic but the pistol is seldom seen so I snapped a few.

Your pics look nice and your tank setup is cool. You cannot use other brand lenses for you camera other than sony, tameron (for sony), and sigma (for sony). If you put a nikor lense on your camera, nothing would happen lols. I personally use a nikon d50 that I bought of ebay years ago. It's old now, especially compared to your new sony but it still takes amazing pictures. I'm a nikon person, so I really like the nikon d80 as well. The new d40/d40x are nice too, good family cameras. and I'm a little behind on checking out the d60 and d90... Anyway, do you use a tripod when taking macro pictures? Your pics might be a little blurry due to shaking slightly..? just curious. if you have any other slr digital camera questions, feel free to ask

Also, not many people notice, but the canon sd point and shot series all have very nice macro modes. I used a canon sd770is to take all the photos in my thread, if you're curious, you can go take a peek Good Luck!

Thank you. I had looked at the d60s but the 6.1 mp was a little bit of a dissapointment. If I get good shots I like to have a good resolution to be able to blow them up to a pretty good size without loosing quality.

Majority of the pictures were taken using a tripod and a 2 second delay to avoid any shaking of the camera. The blurry ones were probably from my nano cube. Its in a bad spot to set up a tripod so I've just been taking them by hand.

The real test of the camera will be once I get outside for some shots. Weather has been prohibitive and college comes first. I am anxious to see how the stock lens does with outdoor shots.

I'll be sure to check out your thread sometime, but its 3am right now and I should be sleeping so it'll have to wait.

no offense but thats a typical noob mistake when it comes to picking a dslr
your not supposed to look at the megapixel as much as you would on a point and shoot

Shouldnt look at MP on ANYTHING...6mp and up is FAR more then what anyone really needs unless your a pro..and ESPECIALLY avoid those high MP on P&S...cause if you get one of them and most of the time anything above ISO200 looks like crap. trying to cram the amount of MP in the P&S that have a sensor about 1/4 the size of a DSLR your going to sacrifice IQ with faster ISO speeds.. Then again most people buying P&S seem to only compare the MP count and feeling the higher the better the camera

None of it really matters because you all ready bought your camera anyway, but; The d40x, d60, and d80 all have the same 10.2MP CCD. Your sony is fine regardless.

could you sound a little more elitist?

Well it's easy to make a dslr noob mistake on a first dslr purchase. Ohh and that's the first time I've ever been called a noob on here.


Sorry, it must have been the the d40 that I looked at, I remember it was 6.1mp.

SLR purchasing isn't that hard.

Step 1: Is it a Canon EOS or Nikon? Yes? Proceed to Step 3 No? See Step 2

Step 2: Is it a Canon EOS or Nikon? Yes? Proceed to Step 3 No? See Step 1

Step 3: Purchase your selection.

Have you taken pictures with either of those or are you just saying that because they are the more popular brands? Sony may be new to the dSLR market but reviews on them are pretty good.

This thread wasn't intended for everyone to bash me for my choice of camera, it was to show pictures that I have taken with it and to get a little advice. NOT to have people say I bought the wrong camera.

Chazde, in the end, who cares what others think............ you wanted a dSLR, you bought one, you like it, you take pictures, end of story........ besides, ,you asked people for an opinion on your pics, not on whether or not you bought the right camera....... enjoy.

Exactly what the last post was about, thank you. It just seems like there are too many people that are Nikon and Canon snobs that think they are the only companies that make cameras of any qualilty.

Besides, a camera body is a camera body. It's the lenses that make the pictures. And although there isn't a large selection of lenses at this time for the sony cameras I expect more will come out. And I should be able to find some good quality ones for what I want to use the camera for.

I own a Canon EOS Rebel XT 8mp model.

One of my close friends is a professional photographer, uses the Nikon D3x.

He recommended the Rebel XT for me to get started.

I bought a kit from Dell for 500 bucks that included the body, 18-55mm lens, 75-300mm lens, carrying case, 2gb memory card, cleaning kit and I added a nice tripod for a total of 550. That was a year ago.

The reasons he recommended it for me:

1. Suprisingly stunning point and shoot capability for a non professional...

2. Ability to take some creative stuff too...

I can give examples if necessary.

I'm by no means a professional. My camera suprises me though.

The lens and filter variety were other reasons I went with Canon.

Each to his own.

I use Apple because I got sick of Service Packs, Antivirus software, and blue screens.

I've owned 1 apple in the time I used to have 3 $499 PC's. How much to they really cost?

Am I an Apple snob? Or do I believe in you get what you pay for??

It's the same with camera's.

yes

Thanks.

anytime

LOL...no its called the TRUTH..Lets go get pretty much 90% of the P&S out there with high MP count and shoot them about ISO200..plain and simple they will be noisy as hell..2nd..Why dont you tell me HOW many people actually shoot and use the full MP of the camera..6mp would be good to like a 15x20print..Thats like SOOO much bigger then anything anyone ever post on the internet..and we all know thats where pretty uch all the pics are posted at..at around 1024x768 res..soo since I am SUCH an elitest where is the need for these HIGH MP count other then to be like ohhhh I got more MP then you. Give me lower MP and cleaner ISO ANYDAY of the week. But then again no one seems to like to hear facts on this site..they just like to BS and make comments to feel special and whitty

Exactly.

And because you didn't go out and pay .99 for a camera, or buy the cheapest thing that rolls of the assembly line, somehow you are an elitist and wipe your butt with 100 bills.

Oh well.

If it's an SLR you are way ahead of the game. Doesn't matter what brand. A good lens helps.

A large portion of wanting to take nice pics with professional stuff is:

1. HUGE memory card, take LOTS of pics, you can always delete what you don't want. If you have a small card, go buy a second larger one and keep the old one for backup.

2. Keep the Quick Reference guide to your camera handy. Usually they are small enough to fit in the case with the camera. It's really nice to pull it out when you aren't sure what setting to shoot at or how to adjust a particular setting.

3. Shoot your pics in RAW format, for easy editing later on. You don't lose quality like jpeg's.

4. Have fun! (that's actually a step in my Canon's manual)

Good Luck!

no, it's called condescending, or maybe just plain grumpiness. no one minds your facts, but your way of bashing people over the head with them gets old quick. a little consideration (maybe **you** should try being witty) would go a long way.

secondly, it is a disservice to every camera enthusiast to be lumped into the same group as the people who just want to click a button and get a snapshot. the idea that none of these people are worthy of the top technology and the best equipment simply because they aren't making a decent wage from photography is a bunch of crap. i, for one, enjoy prints larger than 16x20. go to any decent photography forum, and you can find plenty of examples of other enthusiasts who enjoy large prints as well.

Similarly, it's a disservice to lump all P&S cameras together - the latest G-series cameras from Canon are nothing like the $80 discount camera.

you should really lurk more noob.

no one has any issue with his personal choice of camera...

however, several times 05x's rather brash choice of words and arrogant tone (intended or not) have been pointed out to him because, while his opinions and knowledge of photography are great, his tone turns off many who may find that information useful. My apparently poor attempt at wit was simply my way of trying to remind him of those previous conversations and pleas to consider how he posts the information.

everyone likes large prints...but tell me how often do you REALLY think that is being done by hobbiest?
Personally I have never printed anything above 8x12....Go back and read it again..its more along the lines of explaining why the most MP dont matter. It just seems anymore no one looks at the actual specs of cameras and just goes by MP to determine the quality of the camera..Like I said 90% of the P&S the G series seems like its pretty nice.
Like I said before MP are pretty much the least important factor of ANY camera these days.

I come off harsh cause its just getting my point across..No different then how HARSH people get around here about tangs and mandarins in smaller tanks.

Personally, I print a 16x20 a month on average - for local exhibitions, wall "art" (this is why i shouldn't get a tattoo - change my mind too much), or just for the heck of printing it. With print prices these days, it gives me a cheap thrill to see one of my photos on a huge glossy. I couldn't begin to hazard a guess how often other hobbyists do such, but I don't think any of them would mind having the technology to do it if/when they wanted. In that way, I consider it a factor, of which the importance depends on the final product the person wants to achieve. Certainly, for the majority that makes it the least important factor, for all the reasons you mentioned.


I can understand the harshness - I have the same tendency (which is why I goof off as much as I'm serious). Unfortunately, I think the harshness makes people just ignore the person instead of listening to their advice - that can be seen in any mandarin/tang in a pico thread out there. It's a shame that someone might skip over your posts, especially in this forum, since your information is good stuff.

While there is a foundation that in some circumstances in the dSLR realm a 6MP camera actually takes a better photo then I higher resolution sensor, print size is not the only advantage to a high resolution sensor. Shooting with a 10, 12 or larger MP sensor does allow for printing of some giant prints, but it also allows for a fair amount of crop as well. Which on a day to day basis is generally a lot more advantageous then being able to print big.

So keep that in mind being that you have your Sony, and can't afford to get a macro lens yet. Shoot in RAW, knowing that you can crop in for a faux macro shot sacrificing some resolution until you spring for you macro lens.

There really isn't a bad choice when purchasing dSLR equipment, everything is better then a P&S and you have a unlimited number of upgrade paths to get your camera system the way you want it. Plus the body is the least important part of the entire setup. The glass you get in general is going to be far more valuable then the body, and will be part of your collection even after you have replaced your camera body 2 and 3 times over.

Vesper - Very good point regarding the higher megapixel count being useful when cropping images.

Thanks, I find it both a handy tool, and at the same time a crutch that you should not have rely on when your composition isn't spot on. But I suppose as your eye gets better its an option so long as you keep it in the back of your mind that you should generally be trying to compose your shot properly while in the field.

more pitchers of corals,pls?

nicely stated, vesper.





on topic???????? what???????????????????/