Dude, the reason why you see pixelated images on your digital camera when you zoom is because that is the camera's digital zoom. Normal digital cameras have two types of zoom. Optical and digital. Optical zoom is where the lens will change its focal length to become longer or shorter. Digital zoom is where the camera will attempt to "fake" optical zoom by using complex algorithms to manipulate the pixels.
DSLRs do not have the digital zoom capability. This is because to use digital zoom, some sensor must actually be "looking" at the image in order to apply the complex algorithms to digitally magnify the image. When viewing into the viewfinder in a DSLR, you're actually looking at reflected light that is passing through the lens.


Now you're trying to change the subject.
Do you even try to point out each brands' pros and cons. It seems to me that whenever people ask, your answer will be either a Canon or a Nikon or both. And surprisingly nothing is mentioned about the other brands.
I was pointing out that Sony does have an impressive lens lineup. And you not seeing Konica Minolta or Sony lenses being sold doesn't mean that it isn't common in Malaysia. It just means that you do not know where to look for it yet.

This post has been edited by joyyy: Dec 17 2008, 12:25 AM

Actually, the cheapest macro lens for Canon is around RM1k, which is the Canon 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro. http://yamiya.com.my/store/product.php?pro...&cat=251&page=1
The 50mm f/1.8 cant be used for macro. It has a lousy closest focusing distance of around 0.5m, and an image magnification of only 0.1x. From what I know the minimum magnification required for the lens to be considered a macro lens, the magnification should be around 0.5x

They're the same in terms of those things you mentioned.
They have almost the same image sensor size. They both have a maximum ISO of 1600.
Aperture is only affected by the lens you're using. So it has nothing to do with the camera.

A good photographer will not complain about the inferiority of his gear, only his creativity. (Although I frickin do )
Seriously, how good the picture turns out to be is 90% the photographer and only 10% his gears.
If you already have your eyes on the 450D, then just get it. Or if you have the budget to go for the 40D...
What I mean is you dont have to sell off one of your kidneys just to get the 40D/D90.

This post has been edited by joyyy: Dec 22 2008, 10:08 PM

Although still a decent camera, I personally think that the D40 is definitely outdated.
The D60 kit is about a few hundred bucks more than the D40 kit. For that few hundred bucks, you get 4 million more pixels, Image stabilization and a slightly faster burst rate.
If you're comparing the D40 and the 1000D, I'd say that the Canon wins in technical terms.
But if you're budget is limiting you to the price range of the D40, why not consider the Sony A200? Its price is around that of the D40 and the A200 is a very very good DSLR with In-body Image stabilization and 10MP.

Both are winners in their own right
The most important things to check are the condition of the camera and the lens. Check for any exterior defects. Then maybe you could test the camera's burst mode, just to make sure it's functioning properly.
If you're getting the Nikon, I think there's a function to check the shutter count. Refuse the camera if it isn't new. For the Canon....best of luck to you

Canon camera doesnt have any shutter count checking feature within the camera while Nikon does.
I've heard of a 3rd party software that you could use to check the shutter count, but then again you'd need a laptop with you when you purchase the camera, and that's er, inconvenient?

No problem man. Heck, I didn't even think about checking the shutter count when I was buying my camera xD
But if you're going for the Nikon, by all means do check, since the feature is already there

I call that spam

I call this spam too.
Please dont pop up from nowhere, mention 2000 and wait to be spoon-fed.
At least have some idea of what you want.

What do you think each and everyone here was when they first started out?
My advice is to do some research on DSLRs, then only decide whether a DSLR will suit your needs.
Then you test those DSLRs out in a shop and see which one you like most.
We offer advice to those who already know what they want but are in a dilemma as to which to choose.

You could look at the Panasonic Lumix series. For compact cameras, Panasonic has produced really excellent cameras, both in features and quality.
I'd say forget the Sony. They're top loaded with features but lukewarm when it comes to picture quality.

Er..I'm afraid I'm not familiar with compact cameras, but I'm pretty sure that there should be a Lumix that is within your budget. For compacts, I seldom see people recommending Nikons.

Heh, all the best with the new camera

The Lowepro Slingshot 100 AW might be a bit small if you want to store all that gear, but I think the Slingshot 200AW will be just nice
And yeah, it comes with a rain cover.

For a compact camera, an optical viewfinder is merely a novelty. Sure, it Might help you see more clearly in dark situations where the LCD screen is more or less dark. But heck, you wont be in those situations often.
WHat's more, in a compact camera, the optical viewfinder has a parallax. In lay man terms, what you see through the viewfinder and snap isn't going to be what the final picture turns out to be. So you'd be better off framing the shot with the LCD screen instead.
If you're looking at a compact camera, do take a look at Panasonic's Lumix series. While their features may lack out, they do make up with their superior image quality.

I'm really not familiar with compact cameras So I cant recommend you any specific models.
But it depends on your budget, there should be a Lumix available for various budgets.
Yeah, Sony does have the "looks", but when it comes to quality images, it lacks behind Panasonic
I'd say go to any camera shop and test out their cameras to have a first hand look at them.

Wanna hop onto the DSLR wagon?
For around RM1500 you could get a nice Sony A200 package.
Now I did mention about Sony's underperforming compacts, but for their DSLRs it's a different story altogether.

Lemme ask you this, WHY didn't you check the filter when you were buying it?


Not even if I tell you DSLRs produce better pictures?
Anyways, there's always a first

If you're looking at massive zooms and a tight budget, I'm afraid DSLRs aren't your cup of tea. DSLR kits come with a tiny 2x zoom kit-lens and if you want more than that, you gotta invest in expensive zoom lenses.
One problem facing DSLRs is the possibility of dust getting stuck on the image sensor, resulting in smudges and spots on the picture. But this can be solved by easy cleaning. Manufacturers have even implemented self-sensor cleaning mechanisms to further reduce dust build-up on the sensor.