@ Marka: If your version can do it than an upgrade may indeed be in order. I just never thought the newer versions had this option, as you never post EXIF info with your images.

Oh, I never use the "optimise" feature, but always set the jpg-compression manualy. I think it's just not in the program. Paintshop does pretty much everything I need - and has done so for me long before I picked up photography again - but I guess EXIF data may be one of the areas where it becomes obvious that it can't be completely compared to something like Photoshop. But the EXIF writer looks promising. Might be just the compromise I need between my old software and my new requirements. Have to give that one a try. Thanks. :) But if anyone else has a suggestion, just keep it coming. So far I am not married to any option yet, and I am still quite curious if anyone has ever tried to hack into a jpeg file.

Wish I had motives like that to shoot right now. :) I saw this too late to make any recommendations, but I think you made a good choice. I'm using the same 28-135mm on my 400D and I like it a lot. As for macro lenses: One suggestion that I think hasn't been made yet is the Tokina ATX AF 100/2.8 I don't have it, but reviews I've read convinced me that it might make a very good addition to my collection at a reasonable price.

What girsempa said above is absolutely right AFAICT. Sounds like he knows what he's talking about. :-D The one advantage JPEG gives you (IMO, AFAICT, etc) is that it allows you a lot of control over the file size. That's important for things you want to put on the internet if you don't want people on a slow connection to wait for the image to load for ages. But as long as you just want to save a copy for your own future use TIF or RAW should be your friends. :-) If you want to look into the details, I think some wikipedia articles are actually pretty good, if you ignore the technical and mathematical stuff (which always make my head spin).

If you want to shoot landscapes and buildings I think the kit lense should be okay. Animals may be an entirely different beast (only a small pun intended). Depending on how shy these creatures are, and how close you manage to sneak up on them, you may need a dedicated macro lense for those shots. But - from my very, very limited experience - there simply isn't a single lense that will do everything for you. If you hope for the "egg-laying wooly pig", as a German expression goes, you may never find it. If you have a chance to rent a lense for a few days I would suggest you check out something in the 28-135mm range, to see if that will serve you well. It's what I use, and the only thing I miss compared to the kit lense of the 400D is the slightly wider wide-angle setting. And if the price is important to you, try ebay or similar sites, once you have decided on a lense. The Canon 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM I now use on my 400D I bought used, but it works perfectly well and I got it for quite a bit less than a new one would have cost. Even if you want to support your local store, check around first, then mention to the local guy that you could get item X for $Y online and see if they don't offer you something better than they offer the average customer.

No idea yet, but I bought a 28-135mm lense on ebay this week. I hope it will arrive Monday or Tuesday, but unless I have given it a good workout I wouldn't dare to make any comments on it. Another problem is that I have looked into a lot of internet sites before I made up my mind about this lense, but all of them are in German, so they may not be of any use to you(?). I guess that you should not look into a lense that fits your camera, but rather one that fits your purpose. There are a lot of lenses available for the 400D (and maybe for the S5 - no idea, really) by Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, and possibly a bunch of other companies (these are only those I looked into). Just use Google to search for a site that gives some reviews of the camera you intend to buy. Some of the comments you may find could offer a lot of details about the lenses people used with the camera you may buy. Sorry that I can't offer better advice, but I am pretty new to this DSLR business myself.

I got my 400D/XTi yesterday. Haven't been able to take as many shots as I wanted, as the best lighting these days is only available when I have to sit at my office desk, but so far I like it very very much. :-) Thanks again to everyone who chimed in about the Canon. So far I really like it, and I don't regret buying the 400D. :-) (And if anyone comes across this post looking for opinions on this camera, feel free to contact me by site mail. I didn't intend this to be a detailed review of my personal opinion, but I am willing to share it.)

Quote - If you are holding the DSLR with a proper technique...your left hand should be nowhere near that dohickey...

LOL. You may well be right that I wasn't holding it properly. I was holding it the way that came natural to me, and learning to work with a DSLR "properly" may take me a while. Once I do,it may not be a problem at all. That said, I have made up my mind, and the Canon 400D/XTi it will be. While I have read only good things about the Nikon 40x, and it felt really god in my hands, the lack of an autofocusing motor in the camera body made the difference. I liked handling the Canon almost as much as holding the Nikon, so I could concentrate on the technical aspects for my decision. I briefly considered the Nikon D80, but it seems it is more expensive here in Germany than it is (for example) in the US, and with the "cash back" deal Canon has going right now the monetary difference will be quite big. The money I save by buying the Canon can go towards a dedicated macro or telephoto lense whenever I feel I need it, but until then I think the Canon should serve me well enough. :) I'll let you fine folks know when I get the camera, and how I like using it. :) Many thanks again to everyone who helped me make up my mind. I love you guys. hugs

Thanks, guys. :-) Looking into the technical details of both cameras - and especially the lense options - is what I was about to do next, but getting some pointers on what to look for will probably serve me quite well. :-)))

I just got back from getting all "touchy-feely" with some cameras, and here is what I found. (Might get a bit longish, but I want to write down my first impressions for my own future reference and inform you guys at the same time.) Cameras I held (in alphabetical order): Canon 400D/XTi, Nikon D40x, Olympus 510, Pentax K100. Before I get into the impressions these cameras left with me, three remarks: (1)For a guy who is 5'10"/178cm tall I think I have small, long hands. My right middle finger is 7.5cm long, my right palm about 9cm wide. (2)From way back I am used to (non-digital) SLRs that are rather boxy, without the grip so common in current DSLRs. I was surprised to find that the grip - and the placement of some buttons that comes with it - makes very little difference to me. Felt quite right with all the cameras, even when I held them like I would hold a "box". (3) I wear glasses, and I must say I am impressed how well the viewfinders of all cameras agreed with that. Not once did I feel my glasses were getting in the way. Nice! :) Now, for the cameras: (I) Pentax: Nice handling, solid viewfinder, but a bit heavy compared to the others - or at least it felt a bit heavy to me. Might be a matter of the mounted lense, but it was the first thing I noticed about this camera. All in all I think it might work for me, but I would call it average, i.e. a good solid camera, but perhaps nothing spectacular from where I sit (at least when it comes to handling it). (II) Olympus: Feels good to hold, but somehow the position of the viewfinder felt somewhat... "wrong" to me. Sorry, can't describe it any better. Might be a matter of the size of this camera, which seems a bit wider than the others. At first I thought that would be a good thing, but the other three just felt better in my hands, as I could really wrap my hands around them. That aside I am still somewhat tempted by the in-build image stabilization and live view on the monitor. (III) Nikon: Nice to hold, the viewfinder really agreed with me (both in terms of size and placement). One thing I am less certain about is the dohickey for the shoulder strap. It didn't really cut into my left fingers, but I am afraid it might make things uncomfortable if I handle this camera a lot. Apart from that the Nikon felt really good in my hands. (IV) Canon: IMO the viewfinder here falls somewhere between the Nikon and Pentax, i.e. good, but not superb. But holding this camera felt really good, at least as comfortable as the Nikon, and I like the placement of the controls on the right side of the back, which really agrees with me. The "button circle" is placed low enough to leave me more room for my thumb than the Pentax, while it is still easy to reach. The 400D/XTi may lack one or the other feature the other cameras provide, but now that I've held it I am more tempted than ever. I'll mull over the decision for another day or so, but right now it seems a close call between the Canon (feels nicest to hold) and Nikon (a viewfinder I really love). I'll probably end up with the Canon, but right now it is just a little too early to tell. :D

Tan, yes, I have seen leeco's gallery and I was mighty impressed. And I will keep your advice about exposure and length of the lense in mind. It's been so long since I used an SLR that I think I will have to re-learn almost every one of the small lessons I taught myself when using an SLR. :D Garlor, while I don't think your reply answers any of my questions :p ;), your photos certainly enlighten me to the capabilities of the 400D, which looks pretty good to me. I'll try to get a good solid look at the 400D tomorrow - together with the Olympus 510, Pentax K10, and Nikon 40x and 80, which look like the most promising options for me right now, even if the Nikon 80 is at the upper end of what I am willing to spend on an "entry-level" DSLR. I'll keep you guys posted on how that turns out. :)

Thanks, Tan. :) I am really stunned by the "handheld" you just posted - but OTOH I know that a bit of luck is usally necessary to capture insects. ;) Than again, if the 400 is anything like your 350 it starts to look more and more like a good option for me. Now, here's something else that's important to me. Maybe some of you Canon users can answer this: How steep is the learning curve with the Canon, or to put it another way, how good are the automatic settings? I know myself, and I know that once I get a DSLR I want to go out and shoot nice pictures immediately and not study the manual for a week before I can take my first shot. ;) :D

For those wondering: I asked Tan about the (Canon) equipment she used in some of her photos, so she posted the above. It may look slightly out of topic, but to me it isn't, even if she uses a 350 and not a 400. Thanks, Tan. :) Awesome pic, and close to what I hope to shoot one day. :)))

Quote - However until you actually get a DSLR you wont really know what you want until you have used it for a bit - so i would recommned just getting the kit lens and work from there, dont go in for buying everything at once, you might not want or need the lens that someone reccomended to you...  ebay is your friend ;)

Well, if there is anything I would buy sooner or later it's a macro lens, which might be a Tokina 100/2.8 given the price range and some reviews I've read. That should work with the whole Canon EOS series and some Nikons too. But not going overboard right from the start is sound advice. :)

Thanks for the comments so far, you two. :) About actually handling the cameras: Yes, that is my plan. In fact it's about the only thing about this new camera busines that has been firmly decided by now. g