I have an older model Sony (4.3 megs) with the small recording discs. You have to initialize the disc on a flat surface (PITA) and then take your pictures then finalize (PITA) on a flat surface then remove the disc. The buttons for operating the menu are not too good. But it does work well. I take all of my stills at 2200 x 2200 in case I want to render them in HI-DEF. This also helps if you do any extensive zooming on the timeline.
JJK

Out of current mid-range Nikon models, I prefer the D200, a little less, is the D80. The Canon high-ends are nice too, the Sigma Cmos design chip is the best at the lower end but lacks a wide range of lens vs Canon and Nikon. The mid-to-high-end Nikons are programmable by PC on the fly which is what I like and use. But it really depends on your needs, small and light or big.... if you are going professional, I would suggest thinking about a couple of cameras, lens, filters(a must), flash units, lights, ...etc....
Plus buying Canon or Nikon, most auto-correction software for lens "problems" and noise have most models and lens combination already figure-out, saving a lot of time.

I never imagined 6 megapixels would not be enough, but after seeing some 10mp samples recently, 10 is what I want.

I posted because I was favoring the Canon EOS 400D / XTi / Kiss with a better lens, mainly because the price ($600 body only) is good and I will travel a lot and size does matter.

But then I saw some direct comparisons with the Nikon D80 and D200 which have more accurate exposure and slightly less noise. Pretty soon I settled on the D200 because of its superior sensors, but that's more than I want to pay. So now I don't know what to do.

At least I know I'm on the right track since these seem the be the models to consider. Perhaps I will look for more D80 vs D200 comparisons...

At the time I bought my Nikon D70, almost three years ago, it was the clear choice. Apparently the other manufacturers have long since caught up. Whichever one you get, you will find that it makes digital photography fun again. By that I mean that, if you grew up taking photos with an SLR film camera, and became accustomed to the quickness and control those cameras offer, you missed all that with digital cameras because of the slowness and cycle times and compromises. Well, with a good digital SLR, you press the button and it takes the picture right then at that moment, and is ready to take the next pic right away.

If you have any investment in lenses and other accessories with one particular system, stay with that. I have a bunch of Nikon cameras, so I really appreciated the D70's ability to use all the stuff I have lying around.

"...... you missed all that with digital cameras because of the slowness and cycle times and compromises......"

That's not just the cam, but the card as well. I have a 9mp fuji that came with a cheap card. Spent some good money on a good memory card, and the camera is twice as fast.

depends on what you wnat to do with it i guess..
ive got a Canon5d, 580ex, battery grip, 24-105L IS USM and a100-400L IS lense.. it ate up the budget for a HDV camera... so it was a big decision to make.
I also use a 50mm 1.8L and Ridata 100x CF cards.
cant fault the unti save for dust and crap gettin caught into the foocal screen, but that the nature of SLR's

One of the reasons i opted for the 5d was due to the full frame Sensor. low noise, incredible ISO options, customisability, colour, and the build. Also the features within the camera itself were outstanding and pretty much poo'd on everything else i had seen.

With a 12mp machine liek this, one would expect it to write very slowly, however it takes about 1 second to write a straight RAW file, where as jpg is even faster.
Put it this way, by the time u move teh viewfinder away from your face to view your image, the red light is already off and writing has completed.
For both formts (jpg and raw), its about 1.2s to write both files to the card. In fact, its slower transfering the card to PC than it is the camera actually writing to the card itself.
2gb takes about 15minutes using a CF USB adapter. Im hoping USB expresscard adapters are released cheaper soon as these offer SATA speeds but im yet to see these in action...

With CCD size, you should be aware that cheaper models may not offer full frame, so your lenses wont behave the way they were designed. Some have a crop factor such as 1.4x.. what this means is that a 100mm lens would actualy end up being 140mm
In addition to the canons, if u go for a XH2 or XLh1, u can mount EF lenses on the bodies without any adapters (m2 type)

I like Nikons "easy" sharpness, but the nikons are noiser with regard to colour gradations, and dont have the punchiness of the canons straight out of the camera. I cannot fault the Dynamic range of the 5d, but then, u get what u pay for.. I like the nikons, but they just didnt cut it for me..

As backup, im lookin at the 400d.. i liek the auto sensor cleaner.. basicaly the camera reverses the charge to the sensor pretty mcuh electrifying the dust off the panel..

That's a pretty good speed... nothing to complain about! You MAY want to try a smaller card though... they seem to work faster. I bought two 512's instead of one 1g. They're not that big.. they fit into your pocket and they change out pretty fast.

Agreed. smaller is faster, however i bought 4 cards at 2gb each coz i do all day shoots and sometimes i dont have the luxury to whip out the laptop.. Also, 2gb only houses about 132 shots at 12mp raw.. so anythign smaller might be a nuisance.
i wouldnt go above 2gb though... (potential data loss)
I dont have an issue with tee speeds though... in fact im happy with them compared to other models ive seen

Understand... shooting RAW with small cards is not AT ALL efficient!

Sort of depends on what your needs are. The Olympus E-500 is a great deal with a "kit" lens that is reportedly visibly better than the Canon or Nikon kit lenses. Plus the Oly has the best anti-dust system on the market at this time (Canon has introduced one, but it apparently does not work as well).

That being said, if you need to shoot a lot of high-ISO images, the Nikons and Canons have better high ISO performance than the Oly.

However, you should wait to see what comes out of the woodwork at PMA next month....

You've find extensive reviews of just about every camera out there and very active user forums where camera owners post example photos, complaints, speculation about new models, etc. on this site:

www.dpreview.com

I use a Canon 20D with a bunch of lenses and it's a great camera (but not a current model). The Canon 30D is very similar, the Canon 400D/ Rebel XTi is cheaper, newer, probably better in at least some ways.

current Canon DSLR models

current Nikon DSLRs

The Canon XTi (400D) is optimized for amateur use, so the pictures look snappy straight out of the camera, while Canon's next step up, the 30D has a softer image that is optimized for more Photoshop work so the photographer can pull a wider range of looks out of the (JPEG) picture.

I did a shoot with a Nikon D80 recently and was not impressed with the autofocus. It was far from what Canon offers, and this has been seconded by many.

The D200 seems to do a bit better on this, and the D200 is also the only one that is environmentally sealed among these "lower cost" cameras. It has a nice, solid feel, #1 in the medium price range.

Canon 5D is weatherized of course, but it is a bit pricey, although I have seen recent very brief deals bringing the body down below $2,000.

If you have large hands, you may want to stay away from the Canon XTi/400D, as it is quite small and this can actually create problems for the large-pawed, or when using large lenses.

The Canon 18-55mm kit lens isn't even good enough to use as a door stop, it is an embarrassment for the company.

If you need to shoot a lot at 1600 ASA, get a Canon 30D (or a 5D if you can afford it), you'll get less noise than with a Nikon D200, although with enough tweaking of sharpness settings the difference is not fatal.

Another thing to think about when buying an SLR is accessibility of features you use often. D200 has button access to stuff you need to dive into menus for on the D80, and that's a definite killjoy for pro users. Ditto with Canons.

I have the Oly E-300 and at 8 mp it's done well for my needs.

I bought a Canon Digital Rebel a few years back and use it almost every day, now looking to move up to one of the new SLRs.
Any of the Canon or Nikon SLRs would be a safe bet, althought Pentex and others are now making good SLRs to. Pixels are like money can never have enough of eather, and the more pixels you
wont the more money you have to have.

Terry

Here's my vote for the Canon rebel xti. I have a canon 30d and love it. I'd buy the less expensive Rebel Xti (10 mp) and take the extra money and put it into a lens or lenses.

if you have $400 or so to spend on a lens, get the 28-135 is.

If you have $1000+, get the 24-70L. Need a telephoto? 70-200 2.8 IS is amazing (not to mention big and heavy)

As mentioned above, the reviews on www.dpreview.com are excellent. You can't go wrong with canon or nikon in my mind.

Sean
------------------------------
broadcast voiceovers

I personally favor the Canon side. I personally use a 20D and have been very pleased with its performance. Now that it is going on three years old, technology is now offering new features in the next gen lineup.

Canon recently announced there new MarkII...obviously out of the price range (great camera though). This led me to search for a possible 40D... rumor has it that one is coming out this year.

That being said... Canon Rebel XTi is a good camera to start with, put any additional money into developing your selection of lenses. Take the time and inquire about the 20D still in retailers inventories, there may be some good deals just to move them out.

Chad

with the 5d, i cannot fault its autofocus accuracy and speed. ISO at 3200 is perfectly usable for video and 5x7 prints and the body actaully feels more robust than any 1/3rd ccd video camera i have held (and ive pretty much owned each one at one time or another.. )
Reason i went for teh 5d is due to the fact that of all teh dslrs i found, none came close to the latitude that this offered.. fair enough its a very pricey camera, but i can set up compositions in almost any environemtns and get teh shots i wnat without messing about too much.

The time i save in photoshop makes up for the cost..

I recently did a model shoot in a nice deserted location and in the cave (she was dressed in kakhi safari suit and camaflauge bikini underneath) the colour in these low light settings were friggin incredible.If i could upload a pic i'd show u.

one thing i dont like abot the 5d is the relatively small autofocal points compared the actual frame size.. .

if u want to chekc out real life user reviews of gear, check out www.fredmiranda.com
Its where i go if i need to read up on anything DSLR

This is another excellent still camera review site:

Imaging Resource

I always check dpreview and then this site. Between the two, you will know more about the camera than the people that designed it.

I certainly see a lot of good advice from qualified people on this forum and appreciate it. Thanks.

Traditional SLR was my life from childhood through college. I made a good living for a while from it and won some national awards. I was a Pentax and Olympus man because Nikon was beyond my price range. But then circumstances, I had to find a real job. I sold my lenses and dark room about 12 years ago. Kind of graduated to DV 5 or 6 years ago, then HDV, even do some corporate video work on the side for my IT company.

But now I miss the SLR life for travels and nature photography. Point and shoot digital cameras give me no gratification! So the use is for travel, nature, and photographs of the prettiest little girl who ever lived (my daughter). I am really impressed with 10 megapixel quality. I feel like digital is finally good enough to use for framed 11x14 and larger prints, which is what I like.

Just based on advice about the recent history of surprise discontinued models and parts, I will probably go with Nikon and Canon DSLR's. The Olympus looks comparable, but its pricing is not any better. I am starting from scratch for lenses and parts.This weekend I will wonder through some Tokyo camera shops, try out a few models, see what feels best, then make my decision...

BTW - if anyone ever wants free footage or stills of simple Tokyo or Japan scenes, I'd be happy to donate some content. Just for the fun of having an assignment.

If you don't care which system you go with (no old lenses, etc.), I think I'd go with Canon, even though everything I own is Nikon. This is based strictly on reading other people's experience, however, and not on my own use. That said, I absolutely LOVE my Nikon D70. Like my Nikon fTn I got in June 1970, and my Nikon 8080 that I got twenty years later, it seems almost too good to be true.

I've yet to feel that way about any video camera I've owned or used.

For the Canon, anybody have experience with the Tamron 18-200mm lens?

A Japanese link http://esearch.rakuten.co.jp/rms/sd/esearch/vc?sv=2&f=A&g=0&v=2&p=3&e=0&s=2&oid=000&k=0&sf=0&sitem=EOS+Kiss+Digital+X+%A5%EC%A5%F3%A5%BA&x=0

I've got a 10D with a Tamron 28-300mm lens. Nice set up. Would love the 5D, but I am not a pro photographer.