[Progeni]

Right I was all lined up to get a Panasonic but the fool i bought it from have messed me about and now have cancelled the order due to not having stock

so Im now having a rethink. I'll I be better off spending the extra £90 and buying a Canon EOS 350D with the standard 18-55mm lens ?

Does anyone know if there will be a quality improvement from one to the other, or if I will even have a clue how to use it as I'm a complete beginner.

Also toyed with the idea of the OLYMPUS E500 17-45mm 'cos it £100 off at PC World.

..but of other information for you. The reason I have decided to spend a bit of cash on something half way decent is Im going over to NYC and Las Vegas this year and really wanted some good photo while I'm there so this will be the primary (inital) use for the camera. Though I would like to get into Photography as a hobby also.

Any information you lot can provide will be greatly appeciated.

[Astaroth]

To be honest they arent really comparible.

If you want a nice camera that can take good shots then get a point and shoot

If you want to be getting into an expensive hobby then you an SLR may be a better way to go.


The canon camera itself is better than the panasonic but the lens is probably worse and obviously shorter too but if you are buying an SLR then that isnt really much of an issue because you will be intending to buy other lenses anyway

dSLRs have automatic modes just like point and shoot cameras however to get the most out of them you obviously need to switch to one of the more manual modes

[Pirate!!]

Ahoy!

Sorry to hear about your experience (Lord knows I've had my share recently via eBay). In short, had the purchase gone through without issue, you'd be the proud owner of a new FZ50. So what's changed?

I have an Olympus E500 2 lens kit in addition to the much older Panasonic DMC-FZ3. The Oly is a great camera, BUT price aside, it has it's limitations in terms of lens choice. Lens manufacturers just don't seem to support the 4/3 system like other cameras, such as Nikon, Canon, Sony/Minolta etc. So if you go for the E500 + 14-45mm lens (it's an OK-ish lens) you will be buying into the four-thirds (4/3) system.

The FZ50 on the other hand is a prosumer type camera with a fixed lens that offers macro to 12x optical zoom and a host of other great features that a lot of DSLR's don't have. Image stabilisation for a start . . and you don't need to buy a ton of lenses.

If you do go DSLR, bear in mind you'll likely get just the kit lens which (IMHO) are usually useable, but restrictive, and you will need to add to it (telephoto, macro or whatever). A dedicated DSLR will likely give better image quality, but that said, if you are a novice or do not fully understand the corolation between F-Stop's, shutter speed, ISO, depth-of-field and the like, you'll be using whatever you buy in Auto mode until you do.

This is why there are 'bridge' cameras.

I can't speak for the 350d. Frankly, if you feel that you may be getting in over your head, heed whatever advice is forthcoming. Yes it is daunting, but if you educate yourself via the web, ask questions on the forum, there really is a host of help available and it'll become easier for you.

Also have a look at the Panasonic DMC-FZ7 or the newer FZ8. There are other 'prosumer' choices out there including the Canon S3-IS and the Sony Cybershot DSC-H2 and H5.

Good luck with your choice.

[mansell]

Have you checked out the Nikon D40, a great little entry level dslr, worth a look IMO.