Reply With QuoteCanon 1000D is what I have and it is great value for money
Looking to move into basic DSLR set-up, primarily for use on here and eBay.
What are currently the best camera/lens options and what should I expect to pay - either new or used?
Also, I'm not looking to get involved in post production software so something with strong Jpeg ability would be preferred.
Any suggestions?
Canon 1000D is what I have and it is great value for money
Yes.Originally Posted by bonzo697
A wee trip into the Scottish Highlands and a visit to Ffordes where you can discuss your needs with knowledgeable folk and play with the options before you decide.
Mike.
PS; Perhaps something now best left to the Spring unless you have a vehicle with 2-track-drive.
Mike.
+1 I have a 1000d too, great camera.
Not sure if you are buying new or not, but if its new if you check the photography forum, somebody got a great deal on a Sony.
If you are buying secondhand and depending on budget I would recommend a nikon d90
+1 For any of the Nikons thats what I started with and have never looked back
RIAC
Possibly the best used buy at the moment is a Canon 40D. £340ish if bought privately from somewhere like Talkphotography SC, a little more from a dealer with a warranty. Can be used on fully auto granny mode up to whatever level you attain. Also a vast selection of lenses available.
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/used-e ... as/?page=3
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/
F.T.F.A.
A second hand Nikon D40/50/60/90 depending on budget.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Thanks for the responses so far, it looks like Canon and Nikon are the preferred brands. I don't really have budget but would probably opt for used initially. There are a couple of options in SC currently - 450D and D80. They appear to be quite old models, but would they worth considering?
How about a Sony R1 if you can find one, not a DSLR but fitted with amazing Zeiss optics and APS class sensor
Now has a cult following as only available for a short time due to the cost of production to Sony
Pentax Kx or Kr; compact, especially with the limited primes, and excellent IQ. The Kr is newer, which means you coulg probably get a very good deal on a Kx (just as good) somewhere. The 18-55 WR (water resistant) kit lens is very good indeed.
Any opinions on Nikon d3000? Argos have them for £329. I'm assuming this is an outgoing model, but is it a good price?
I have a Canon 60D. Not sure if it counts as 'entry level' but it's pretty awesome and I don't think the price is too spiteful - should be able to pick one up with lens for around £1k. I had a Nikon D3100 before and the Canon absolutely spanks it and my friend who has a Canon 7D (the model up) actually prefers mine and is downgrading' to the 60D. All the camera you will need for the next few years
Get <whatever it is that I use>!
Best wishes,
Bob
Personally, I'd ask the question "why do I need a DSLR rather than a decent compact / Bridge" camera before taking the plunge into the murky and potentially expensive world of DSLR's!
What do you need to do that a smaller cheaper camera can not manage?
I already have a Fuji HS10 which I believe is considered a reasonable if not decent Bridge camera, but it's still only really a point and shoot that's limited to/by its auto capabilities. It does has full manual control but it's far too complicated to operate manually and the instructions are PDF only, so not very practical.
How does this compare with the d3000? They're similar prices for a used D90 and new D3000?
I started off with a D40 then progressed to a D90. Not a lot wrong with a D40.
My first DSLR was a Canon 400D. It's a great piece of kit has it's limitations so I'm looking to upgrade now so a really useful thread. My advice would be to get the best camera you can afford but make sure you also get a decent lens as well. The bundled lenses with the entry level cameras often aren't the best.
Fuji is a good camera. It's easier to manipulate that than a DSLR. I beieve the H10 will do limited manual functions and that's all you need. Running a DSLR properly isn't a simple task and from what you said you don't need one.I already have a Fuji HS10 which I believe is considered a reasonable if not decent Bridge camera, but it's still only really a point and shoot that's limited to/by its auto capabilities. It does has full manual control but it's far too complicated to operate manually and the instructions are PDF only, so not very practical.
As a wake up call to all that think Fuji is some second rate camera company. Most of the enlarger lenses are Fuji and a fair portion of the printing machines for film are also made by Fuji. My point is that a Fuji lens had the last word in the production of most of the worlds printed photographs. Scary ain't it!
Upgrade to an L lens and your 400D will quite literally blow you away. I ran with a 30D until last year and that's an 8 megapixel camera. My main lenses were the 70-200 IS F4 L, the 24-70 2.8 L, and the EFS 10-22. I now shoot a 7 D along with the 30 D and that camera has a lot of life left. Using the lenses I have I can manage larger than 11x14 prints with no visible imperfections.
My next lens will be the canon 100mm F2.8 macro. That lens will double as a portrait lens as it has pretty impressive Bokeh (bokeh is the character of the out of focus blur)
My two 150mm lenses (normal lenses) for shooting 4x5 inch are Fujinon, a compact f6.3 lens (for use with a Linhof Technika), and a not-so-compact f5.6 (for use with a Linhof Kardan). Much of the film I use is by Fuji. I have in my fridge Fujichrome T64 RTP, Fujichrome Velvia 50, Fujichrome Provia 100F (my favourite film), Fujicolor Pro 160S, Fujicolor Pro 400H and Fuji Neopan 400[1]. I still use a Fuji F10, one of the first compacts with decent high ISO performance (recommended by Ming Thein, who accompanied me when I purchased it). I have a lot of time for Fuji. :)
[1] The Sherwood shots were taken using Fuji Neopan 400 120 roll film (Bronica ETRSi camera).
Best wishes,
Bob
After a fair bit of trawling on-line I've narrowed down to either Nikon D3100 or Canon 1100D. Any opinions on either, and also what I should pay used would be appreciated.
It's hard to recommend something from a position of knowledge if you haven't used one, though :wink:
OP - my wife was in your position a year ago. She went around loads of shops and handled as many DSLR bodies as she could. Reading reviews, our impression was that the major manufacturers have sensors of similar qualities, and so she went for the body which felt most natural in her hand [ultimately going for Nikon]. She went for the D5000 over the D3000, mainly to get the turning view screen.
I was going to upgrade to a 5D mkii but would I be better spending some decent money on good quality lenses instead? If so, what would be a good all round lens?
Upgrade to an L lens and your 400D will quite literally blow you away. I ran with a 30D until last year and that's an 8 megapixel camera. My main lenses were the 70-200 IS F4 L, the 24-70 2.8 L, and the EFS 10-22. I now shoot a 7 D along with the 30 D and that camera has a lot of life left. Using the lenses I have I can manage larger than 11x14 prints with no visible imperfections.
My next lens will be the canon 100mm F2.8 macro. That lens will double as a portrait lens as it has pretty impressive Bokeh (bokeh is the character of the out of focus blur)
Depends what lenses you were going to pair the 5D mkii with... :wink:
...I'd certainly look at picking up a 70-200 L (IS & F dependant on budget), it's one of the best lenses (in terms of bang for buck) you can get, then re-evaluate where you want to go from there.
HTH
I was going to upgrade to a 5D mkii but would I be better spending some decent money on good quality lenses instead? If so, what would be a good all round lens?
Upgrade to an L lens and your 400D will quite literally blow you away. I ran with a 30D until last year and that's an 8 megapixel camera. My main lenses were the 70-200 IS F4 L, the 24-70 2.8 L, and the EFS 10-22. I now shoot a 7 D along with the 30 D and that camera has a lot of life left. Using the lenses I have I can manage larger than 11x14 prints with no visible imperfections.
My next lens will be the canon 100mm F2.8 macro. That lens will double as a portrait lens as it has pretty impressive Bokeh (bokeh is the character of the out of focus blur)
I agree! I seldom use IS and the F4 is every bit as sharp as the F2.8 and half the weight and price. I use the 70-200 with a 1.4 teleconverter for soccer and get excellent results. The F2.8 would be too heavy to swing around for any length of time
I fell in love with the 24-70. It's masive but not a lens that you'd use for action anyway. Great colour and contrast and nice bokeh for a zoom.
I can't say it enough, stay with OEM lenses, it's worth the money (except for Zeiss of course) I'm retired now and when I built this system I deliberately went with all OEM . The only boat anchor I own is the 17-85mm.
Thanks for the tips, I can see an extra Christmas present being added to the list!
In the dSLR market I'd suggest sticking with Canon or Nikon. Once your join a system you're more or less locked in. These guys have the best support from the other lens manufacturers.
The best is usually whoever released the last camera.
I chose Canon when I bought my first 35mm and have stuck with them ever since. There has never been a reason for me to swap and I'm delighted with my cameras (1, 3, 30, 300, 7d, 30d). I'm sure I'd be saying the same if I'd bought Nikon.
Have you looked at the Panasonic G range?
They don't have the bulk of full DSLR, take damn fine photos way above the best digital compacts and all while maintaining their ease of use - highly recommended.
I'd agree with the earlier post, choose your make carefully as once you've chosen and invested in extra lenses etc you are pretty much locked in, you can get new cameras easily enough but changing all your extras to a new manufacturer will cost. Nikon and canon are the way forward, not much to choose between them, get yourself to the shops and get hold of a few and choose which one fits and feels best. I got a Nikon D3100 last xmas and think it's great, you'll be looking at about £400 for a new one with kit lens. Most will come with a basic kit zooms lens, Nikons is the 18-55 which is actually quite well regarded, but you will probably want/need some more, i only have experience of Nikon lenses. A 35mm prime(non zooming) is a great lens to have, as you can take pictures indoors in low light without a flash and as the aperture is so large the shutter time is quick which gives blur free pics without the need for a flash, great for portraits pics of the kids etc, the Nikon 35 f1.8 is fantastic and will cost about £140 new. You may also want a tele-zoom for outdoor wildlife or sports pics, something like the 55-200, 55-300 or the higher spec 70-300 which i picked up for about £200 used. That's the 3 main lenses you will need covered, basic short zoom, 35mm prime and tele-zoom, but none of those will be any good for watch/ebay pics, you'll need a macro lens for that, one that can focus at short distances, something i don't have but could do with, but can't justify the spend at the minute. You will also need to budget for a spare battery, SD cards (multiple smaller ones rather than 1 big one in case it goes wrong), a case, maybe an external flash too.
Brighty
This.
Go and play with a few first and see what suits. I tried a few entry level models (Canon, Nikon etc) and ended up with Sony as it felt the most natural to hold.
Also, beware going too far up the specs until you're sure that's what you want. The more expensive cameras may be higher spec, but they are often bigger and much heavier.
If you are just starting out secondhand seems a better option than new, the never ending search for ever more pixels crammed onto a sensor isn't as important as the marketing people
would have you believe, so buying behind the bleeding edge makes a lot of sense.
As for some software .... "The Gimp" http://www.gimp.org/
is completely free and runs on both Windows and Linux and is very full featured
and extensible.
I suspect that of the things that can be quantified, pixel density traded off against size is a more interesting measurement than megapixels. E.g., for a given size of sensor, I would, within reason, rather have larger pixels/photodiodes (less density), even if fewer megapixels.
Best wishes,
Bob
Thanks. Some helpful pointers here. I think it's now a case of handling a D3100 and 1100D and seeing what deals will be around in the sales. If anyone has comparative experience that would be helpful.
Grab a clean memory card and make the rounds of the photo shops. Take a few frames s you try the cameras out. Then go home and look at them.
The gentleman that talked about sensor size vs density was right on. I ran an 8 megapixel up to this summer (30D) with fantastic results. Mind you i had Canon L lenses on the camera.
One other important feature is support from friends. If all your buddies have canon you'll get more canon support and vice versa.
Don't skimp on cracked(stolen) or second rate software. if you can't afford photoshop CS5 then buy Adobe Elements for 1/6 the price you get 80% of the features of the full blown version. There's not a lot you can't do with elements and in Canada it's under $80 in the UK around 60 GBP
Photoshop is the gold standard and elements is the natural starting place. nikon and canon are about equal regardless of whatever some may say.
I recently bought a Wacom tablet and elements was bundles with it so look around, deals abound :shock:
I think I'll be going for a Canon 1100D. At this point will I save much by looking for used, or should I just get a new one which are around £390 - unless anyone knows of any better deals?
There's absolutely nothing wrong with used, much like buying a used watch.
I started with a used Nikon D40 and then moved to a D90, which is still my current camera. I prefer the D90 because (in addition to it being a fantastic camera) it's just the right size and weight to take steady pics, while not being too bulky to carry with my 16-85mm lens. I do a lot of HDR and long exposure work and the D90 offers the manual controls for me to do this. I also prefer the ergonomics of Nikon to the other brands.
I'd suggest you first think about what type of photos you'll be taking, in which conditions, how often you'll be using the camera, how much portability you'll need, etc etc. Maybe start with what lens you want to use or require to take the type of photos you are after, and then choose the body. You can always upgrade the body so consider the lens first. Personally, I found that Nikon had the type of lenses that would help me more, plus I also picked up some really old Nikkor lenses quite cheap that were compatible with the D40/D90.
Although Nikon and Canon are the main players, I'd also recommend you take a look at Sony and Pentax. You really need to hold the camera, see if you can make sense of the menu system....be comfortable using it, before you make a decision. Nikon and Canon have a great selection of lenses. I haven't forgotten about Olympus, which I've always had a soft spot for, and which I really wanted to buy, but I just didn't like the bodies at the time.
There's some good advice there and I think I've narrowed my search to what I'm looking for which is the 1100D. I only require a camera to take photos for here and eBay, and I think the 1100D shouldn't go beyond the limits of my ability/interest and funds for lens upgrades, which is more likely if I went for a higher spec used model.
I finally decided on the Canon 1100d. I've not used it yet as the battery is charging, but initial impression is very plastic and not as well built as my Fuji HS10. I also picked up a used Canon 80-200mm lens, and for the same money I could have also had a used Nikon D80 with various lens options, which had much better build quality, but was over 5 years old. It also has no live-view and I'm not a big fan of the viewfinder.
Looks like I'm a few hours late, but was going to suggest looking at the Lumix G3 - a micro four thirds camera - which I reckon would out perform some of the low end DSLR range.
Posting Permissions