The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Digital SLR camera recommendations?
ToneLoc777
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Does anyone have any camera recommendations? I'm taking a photography class next semester and we need either a 35mm or Digital SLR camera. The Digital SLR is recommended and the only mentioned requirements are "must have manual control of aperture, shutter speed, and focus."
I'm just looking for something "beginner" that meets those requirements. I'm hoping to keep the cost around or under $500.
thanks
I'm just looking for something "beginner" that meets those requirements. I'm hoping to keep the cost around or under $500.
thanks
ToneLoc777 on
0
Posts
Because that sounds like Sony's alpha series, but I'm not certain that the basic model meets those requirements; I remember looking into one and being impressed by the price and a few of their gimmicks, but there was something 'off' that I can't put my finger on right now.
But the biggest thing you want to be absolutely sure of, once you get your basic features in, is that the camera feels comfortable for you to use - you're going to be handling this solid lump of metal and plastic several hours a day for possibly years. If it's too heavy for you to comfortably wave about, or so light that you can't hold it still, you aren't going to have fun using it, so you will get frustrated and probably not learn as much or take as many pictures. And the only way to get better at photography is to take lots of pictures and figure out why this one looks so much better than that one, and what you were doing at the time. Which you won't remember if you're fighting with the thing.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
I really do suggest either Canon or Nikon. They have excellent lens selection to upgrade in the future (which is really the most important part over the body) and great build quality so they will last you a long time. And in the case where you want to upgrade the body, all the lenses will work with the newer models.
I personally have an Canon XTi I love, and three of my friends have the XT model and love them. My brother-in-law has a Nikon which is great too. So among the people I know, we all have positive experiences with those brands.
Also, while you get used to shooting manually, there are different manual modes for each one that allow you to automate some tasks while controlling others, as well as an automatic mode if you wish (which I use a lot for quick candid shots that I haven't had time to set up my manual settings).
Supposedly the Nikon series is more 'user friendly' but I just don't see that. Maybe because I'm just used to Canon's interface.
The nice thing is you really can't go wrong with used for either brand The XTi is a fantastic used buy right now.
First off, some basics of DSLR shopping: Bodies don't mean shit compared to lenses. A shitty lens on a Canon 1DsMkIII (~$8k) will produce significantly worse images relative to a high quality prime on a Canon XT ($300). A digital body will rarely stay with you for more than 5 years or so, while the lenses you buy now will very likely service you damn near forever. Look at the lenses you want now, any lens you may ever want, then get a body.
A scenario to consider: Say you want to shoot really, really badly want to eventually be a birder, because you absolutely love staring at a 20g bag of feathers from 2km away for 5 goddamn hours until it finally turns around so you can capture three frames of it. To do this Seriously, you'll want a high MP count APS-C sensor body with fast AF and really long glass - minimum of 300mm, ideally with 400 and 500mm options and good 1.7x and 2x teleconverter options that let you keep AF. The former body can be found in Canon, Nikon, Sony and Fuji body lineups, but the latter lenses and associated gobbledegook are only found in their entirety and within a reasonable budget under Canon and Nikon. So, as I said, look at lenses first.
You have two tiers of DSLR manufacturers: Canon/Nikon and Everybody Else (Pentax, Sony, Fuji, Other Guys). If you go with Canon or Nikon, it's rather difficult to lose. They have a pretty solid selection of bodies, a clear upgrade path if your future plans will require a high speed sports body or a full frame portrait body or anything in between, and a massive array of lenses. The only place you can miss with them is with their entry-level offerings, which I feel are lacking in certain respects relative to the alternatives available from other manufacturers.
First up, the Nikon D40/D40x/D60. Do not buy. In a fit of poorly planned cost-cutting, Nikon did not include an in-body AF motor in these cameras, rendering them unable to focus with any but a select few, primarily zoom, AF-S lenses. All their AF line, including pretty much all of their prime lenses, will not autofocus on these bodies. Some fans of these bodies will suggest that you can just manually focus the incompatible lenses. They will then go on to tout all MF as superior to "AF or MF at your discretion." This is, of course, hogwash being spouted by folks trying to justify their own purchases of inferior goods. MF is great in some situations, but is extremely inconvenient should your subject be capable of fast movement - something an alarming number of subjects can do. Of course if a D40 falls from the sky you can still take plenty of wonderful photographs with it - I'm just saying that, for the money, it's not ideal. If you want to go Nikon, get an old used D50 or D70 or spring for a new D80/D90 - go as high as your budget allows. Just be sure to leave ample room for lenses, as you'll ideally want to spend roughly equal amounts on the body and a starting set of lenses (kit zoom, 50mm fast prime, something wide or something long depending on what you're into).
Canon has some pretty tasty beginner offerings at the moment. Their XT/XTi/XSi line is a great value for the money and should be seriously considered, especially if your budget only allows a D40 in the competing Nikon lineup. They have a vastly inferior flash system to Nikon, though, so if you're the strobist type give the D80 another look. My only qualm that stands true for both Canon and Nikon is that their beginner bodies feel like tiny toys made of plastic and glue. They're extremely light, made primarily of plastic and offer nothing in regards to weather sealing.
Which brings me to my third brand, Pentax, or more specifically, their beginner offering in the form of the K200D. This camera is a K10D with one finger-wheel missing, and as I've been shooting with a K10D for about a year I feel fairly confident in touting some of its benefits over the competition (which I've also shot with). One word to describe this body: Solid. It's significantly heavier than the XSi and the D40 and fits my larger hands far better than either of the alternatives. It's got a stainless steel chassis and boasts full weather and dust sealing. I feel confident in saying that I could kill several men with this camera before I'd even begin to worry about its well being, and then only due to all the congealed blood on the front element of the mounted lens. It's also got in-body image stabilization and supports every lens Pentax made from the 1970s onward. Canon and Nikon both use in-lens stabilization, which is arguably better (~0.5-1 f-stop gain) but significantly more expensive as every lens you buy needs to have the IS mechanism built into it. Now, if you want to shoot sports you can go ahead and go back to Canon or Nikon, as Pentax lacks affordable long glass and isn't known for particularly fast AF speed or high FPS. If you want to do anything else, give the K200D a try. I do primarily landscapes and controlled portraits, and I couldn't be happier with my purchase. I have a huge selection of cheap, old glass that's wonderfully well built and offers image stabilization despite its age, and lots of high quality new stuff if I can spend a bit more.
Sony has some decent offerings but a poorly fleshed out lens lineup as it stands. I'd keep an eye on them, but would give their lenses a good hard look (for both available focal lengths and their astronomical prices) before buying into their system.
Fuji is great if you want a tiny DSLR like their E-420. The thing can almost fit in your pocket. However, everything costs a lot, they can't make super-wide-angle lenses for 4/3rd sensors like on the Fujis, and the tiny sensors have noise problems. I would never buy a non-E420 Fuji, but some people do, so I suppose they must offer some benefit I'm just not seeing.
Before you buy a body, go to a camera store and try it out. Hold it in your hand, see how it feels. If you buy a body that you don't like the feel of, you'll be less likely to want to shoot with it, and that is Bad. A comfortable body is extremely important and should be one of your primary considerations behind available lenses and cost (assuming cost is an issue).
Whatever you do, DPReview.com is a great resource for camera body reviews and Photozone is a great source for lens reviews.
Canon and Nikon lenses are pretty similarly priced throughout their lineups. By the time you get to focal lengths and speeds where there's any appreciable difference, you're talking "You don't buy these lenses without being a working pro who can write it off" money. You should consider available lenses for borrowing, though. If you've got a buddy who happens to be a pro and shoots Canon, buy a bloody Canon and leech shamelessly.
Situation Specific Advice:
Buy a film camera and process your own film. A photography class must mean there's an available dark room, which you should take advantage of. A good film body can be had for around $100, and a pro level film body can be had for $500. I'd pick up something like a Pentax MX and spend the rest on glass.
If you want to go DSLR because you're too cheap to buy a few rolls of film and some chemicals, buy used and buy local. Do not buy anything that's been beat up or that has a large number of shutter actuations.
for the OP: I'd seriously consider a D70. They were extremely popular and many fine examples with absurdly low shutter actuations reside on Craigslist and the like for very reasonable cost. There is virtually no type of photography that can't be performed with this camera, and the lenses you buy today will fit the higher-end bodies (true for the XTi Canon series as well). A nice example of a D70 with plenty of accessories and a kit lens can be found in nearly any metro area for well under $500 -- $300 if you look hard enough. After you've moved on to a newer, fancier body, you can convert it to infrared, using an outfit like this one: http://www.lifepixel.com/shop/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=4
As for myself, I've moved from the Sony Alpha A100 and chucked it all in favor of a Nikon D300, sort of a sweet spot for pro/consumer cameras until I cross over into absurdly expensive full-frame (FX) gear.
First, I kinda want/need a better all-around lens. Something similar to the kit lens but better. Something that will likely stay on the camera until I need something different. Any suggestions?
Second, I'd love to be able to get closer to some of the objects I photograph. What's a good zoom lens?
Third, Are there any other lens types that would be good to have around for just random shooting? Or should I get some filters or (since I have a Canon) flash modules?
Jesus DM, you're as verbose everywhere as in the photo thread!
The kit lens is an okay lens. You can upgrade tot he new kit lens with IS if you want for about $180. Other than that any upgrade will be atleast $400. You really should get the nifty 50 in any case. It is a 50mm prime lens that only costs ~80 bucks and has a 1.8 f stop, letting you take pics in pretty low light. Eveyrone should have one, it is an amazing lens for the price. After that, try to get 3 zoom lenses. One wide angle, one standard, and one telephoto. I have the sigma 10-20mm for wide angle, the new 18-55mm IS kit lens for the standard, and the 70-300 IS for telephoto. Once you get those lenses you can branch out and get some fast primes or other specialty lenses like macro lenses.
Raptr profile
I will contradict the go film route, though. If the class pushes for digital, you might really want to go digital for that purpose alone, and I've found the immediate feedback nature of digital along with the fact that taking photos don't cost nothin' to help me out while trying to learn about takin' pictures.
You could get a used or clearance Digital Rebel XT and the 50mm f/1.8 for probably around $500 at a local shop. Just be mindful that if you're buying used you should be looking at the shop's warranty and such.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
Digital SLR, Canon. If it's in your budget a 450D and a few good lenses. Obviously Canon lenses are the best for Canon cameras, but lenses by other makes are usually good as long as they're decently well known. For example i've got a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and it's awesome. I of course would like the Canon 24mm f/1.4.. but if you're buying a beginner end slr then you're obviously not going to be buying the absolute best lenses.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
I would say get the new 18-200mm IS if you really just want one lens for a very long time, but that may be out of your price range.
The 18-55mm IS that came with the 450d is very good. Very light (compared to the 17-55mm IS I use now). If you buy it with the 450D, it's $100. If you buy it separately, it's about $200, and you could probably find in-between prices by people who bought it as a package but don't actually want it.
Switch: US 1651-2551-4335 JP 6310-4664-2624
MH3U Monster Cheat Sheet / MH3U Veggie Elder Ticket Guide
You could plop down $300-400 for a good standard zoom (you've already got an OK one) or for that money you could get an excellent normal prime? The 50mm on a 1.6X crop camera is a popular choice, it's a bit long for me for an all around lens (go to the camera store and look through the VF and try to compose shots with 2 or more people, then drop the camera, how's the shooting distance for you?). This also depends on what kind of picture taking you expect to be doing. IMO a prime anywhere from 28-35mm is a good all around lens, for example Canon's 35mm/f2: a fast lens, excellent build quality, quick to focus (a little noisy), that's been almost permanently glued to my 10D. You learn to zoom with your feet. When I took photography in highschool, all we needed was a 35mm film body and a 50mm prime.
I am at an impasse myself though, to send out my Canon 50mm/f1.4 (motor has seized) to be fixed for $165 or pick up a plastic fantastic for perhaps a little more than half that? Is bokeh for realz?
Edit: This was in response to ArcSyn's post.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH