Travel Photography - Entry level DSLR

Hi,

I've had Canon point and shoots for years and am finally looking to get into something a little more serious. I'm looking to spend around $500 but if there's a sweet spot in terms of price/quality/features for a little more, I'm willing to stretch it. Really, I'm looking to be able to get those really in focus shots that seem to only come from SLRs. Also, I should say that part of what is prompting me to upgrade is that I'll be attending some Grand Prix races and want to make sure to get some good shots.

I've been doing a little research but have come to realize that I know nothing about the topic. Mainly, I've been looking at the Nikon D3000. How does this compare to others in that price range? Any other suggestions or things to look for / stay away from?

Alternatively, I am also considering the Canon G11, which I understand to be a quality point and shoot with some higher end features, however I don't know if a camera like that will get me the focus and clarity I'm looking for.

Thanks for any help you guys can provide, I appreciate it.

Best advice I can give is to get a Nikon. I love mine, I have a Nikon D60 and I love it more than any appendage on the left side of my body.

I used to have a nikon d80 then a nikon d300. I think the nikon cameras have slightly better ergonomics than the canon cameras. you should go to the camera store and handle them to which you prefer the most. i think the d3000 is a good choice for your price range. The G11 is a nice camera but if you want to shoot a F1 grand prix, probably the D3000 is a better option.

Consider the Fuji HS10 which is exactly in your price range (USD 500) and has an incredible lens 30x manual zoom (equiv. to 24-720mm). I've owned several Fuji S-series cameras over the years and while they have good and bad points, have found them to take better pictures than similarly priced Nikon or Canon models (which are excellent cameras). Fuji was esp. good with colour balance when others were not -- but most makers have caught up in that technology. The HS10 just came out a month ago and appears to have an excellent CMOS sensor, also capable of 10fps which might be useful for F1 :)

Consider the Fuji HS10 which is exactly in your price range (USD 500) and has an incredible lens 30x manual zoom (equiv. to 24-720mm). I've owned several Fuji S-series cameras over the years and while they have good and bad points, have found them to take better pictures than similarly priced Nikon or Canon models (which are excellent cameras). Fuji was esp. good with colour balance when others were not -- but most makers have caught up in that technology. The HS10 just came out a month ago and appears to have an excellent CMOS sensor, also capable of 10fps which might be useful for F1 :)

Depends - if he's looking to get into SLR photography and possibly get a bit more serious with it then I wouldn't go for a camera like that with a non-removable lens. Price of an SLR, inflexibility of a compact - worst of both worlds IMHO.

Lower end DSLRs used to have kind of a problem with shutter lag. Have they worked that out? Just asking because it might hard to shoot car racing with lag.

Canon vs Nikon is like PC vs Mac - both are good machines; you just have to pick the one you like better. Canon makes its own image sensors, while Nikon uses image sensors made by Sony. That was the key differentiator for me in choosing Canon.

Whatever you choose, I'd suggest getting a cheaper body and a more expensive lens. The glass is the main determinant of image quality. In addition, you can usually find big savings in used equipment - friends and I have had great success buying off eBay. For example, you could probably get the same setup I had until recently - a Canon Rebel XTi and the EF-S 17-85mm lens - for about $500 on eBay.

Also, while I"m sure the Fuji camera is a fine device, if you think you might get serious about DSLR photography you should really do Canon or Nikon. They have the biggest array of lenses and compatible equipment. You should also get an actual SLR camera, not one of these hybrids that are really just dressed-up point-n-shoots.

wiredboy - I have a Canon Rebel XTi, which is a lower end model, but I haven't noticed any shutter lag. Sometimes the AF is a little slow, but that's usually due to low light levels.

My recommendation: spend a little more on the lenses.

I have a first-generation Canon Digital Rebel and recently bought a Canon 7D. The difference in the bodies is night and day (the Rebel is 6-7 years old). I originally bought the Rebel because it was the same sensor and electronics (with some features turned off in ROM) as the higher end digital camera. I figured I'd spend up as the bodies improved - it was a good choice.

That said, the glass makes the biggest difference, so if you need to make a choice, spend a bit more on the glass than the body.

ALso, as someone else noted, Canon vs Nikon is like PC or Mac or high-wing airplane vs low-wing airplane. I chose Canon because I also have an EOS-3 film camera and I can share the lenses among the bodies. Saves on the amount I need to spend on lenses and accessories.

Thanks for all the feedback so far.

So, I understand that the lens is arguably more important than then body. Does that mean I should be staying away from kits that include the lens, or are they sometimes packaged with decent lenses?

I will check out the Fuji, Canon XTI and Nikon D60 in addition to what I was looking at previously.

gfunkdave and Global_Hi_Flyer make excellent points. And so does tkmeister.

All current DSLRs are very good indeed. Go to a store and see which one feels good in your hand and which has a menu system that makes sense to you.

There is pretty good price parity among different manufacturers these days, you do usually get what you pay for. You might get a slightly better deal with Olympus, Pentax, or Sony that with Canon or Nikon, but with the two latter you get the widest variety of lenses.

If you intend to shoot F1 racing, pay attention to the frame rate and buffer size of the camera (i.e. how many pictures per second you can shoot and for how long).

Get the least expensive body and best lenses you can afford. As for kit lenses, they are usually OK (provided they are the manufacturers' own; avoid kits with third party lenses) and you do typically get a little better deal.

When selecting lenses, pay attention to what the maximum aperture of the lens is (often called the "speed" of the lens). Many cheaper lenses have a maximum aperture of 5.6 or even 6.3. The lower this number, the better you can shoot in low light and fast action. A zoom lens with a maximum aperture of 2.8 is very good (although they tend to be pricey) and a 50 mm lens with a maximum aperture of 1.8 or 1.4 are very nice.

Cheers,
T.

Most kit lens are cheaply made, but doesn't mean they have poor optics. If you want any close-action shots, you need a telephoto. For Canon, the best value is the 55-250. You need to compare what's available for Nikon.

You'll hear Canon and Nikon mentioned most often here, as their SLR systems have the most lenses and accessories to choose from. You can gradually upgrade to totally professionally stuff. But if think you'll never get any more lens other than the kit lens, then any brand is fine.

Ever the outsider (I shoot Olympus), I'll add the superb Pentax KX to the mix.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/

For mainstream shooting, the latest Rebel has a lot to recommend it:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos550d/

Both go beyond the bear minimum entry level spec and should grow with you as your photography improves.

If you like Canons, consider looking at a used 30D that is in good shape. That will give you a lot of what is useful and the price should be right.

ps. if your budget is ONLY 500 dollars, then sure, consider the G11 or the S90 (I have the S90). They are both fully manual for when you want it.

It will be hard to get a nice SLR and nice lens for only 500 bucks.

I have the Canon G10 as a small camera and love it. The pictures rival my DSLR. For a smaller budget, I'd go with the G11.

I second what everyone has said about lens. IMHO, kit lenses are a waste of money. Buy the body and then whatever lens you want.

BTW, I've found photography a money pit. I want a bigger sensor, better lenses, etc.

The problem with a G10/G11 is that the viewfinder is pretty much useless. I love the fast lenses(F1.4) you can put on a DSLR, framing through a viewfinder, better low light performance, faster auto-focus, shutter speed, etc. The problem with a DSLR is its relative size. It can get pretty heavy/bulky to carry around once you add a few lenses. So it's something you might want to think about.

Photography can be an expensive hobby as manneca pointed out but it can also be very rewarding sharing your experience through some great photos.

Ever the outsider (I shoot Olympus).Fellow contrarian!

I asked a repairman who sees lots of cameras from the inside. Nikon vs Canon? He says Canon, esp the 5D.

So if I switched, I'd go to Canon. but lenses like this (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/590390-REG/Olympus_261060_14_54mm_f_2_8_3_5_II_Zuiko.html) keep me dear to Olympus. Do Nikon or Canon have any comparable at this price?

As mentioned above, a decent used body + great glass is a winner.

Fellow contrarian!

I asked a repairman who sees lots of cameras from the inside. Nikon vs Canon? He says Canon, esp the 5D.

So if I switched, I'd go to Canon. but lenses like this (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/590390-REG/Olympus_261060_14_54mm_f_2_8_3_5_II_Zuiko.html) keep me dear to Olympus. Do Nikon or Canon have any comparable at this price?

As mentioned above, a decent used body + great glass is a winner.

This is a great, approximately equivalent, lens for the Canon:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

I would also recommend Canon or Nikon. The body is not as important, and using Canon or Nikon gives you the biggest range of lenses (from third-party budget to super high end) that let's you upgrade over time.

But the OP wanted to spend USD 500 total, not $500 for the lense! Sure if money is no object than the choices become wider and plentiful; but any "better" system will be in the >$2000 range. Also, sensor quality is as important as the lense for digital systems (in fact more so for some light situations). Fuji claims to have a breakthrough with its new reversed sensor; certainly interesting technology with great potential, we'll see if the results are delivered. Presumably Nikon, Canon and Olympus will quickly match it if there is potential.

But the OP wanted to spend USD 500 total, not $500 for the lense! Sure if money is no object than the choices become wider and plentiful; but any "better" system will be in the >$2000 range. Also, sensor quality is as important as the lense for digital systems (in fact more so for some light situations). Fuji claims to have a breakthrough with its new reversed sensor; certainly interesting technology with great potential, we'll see if the results are delivered. Presumably Nikon, Canon and Olympus will quickly match it if there is potential.

A good DSLR system does not have to be $2000, not even nearly that much. A perfectly workable basic DLSR + kit lens setup can be had for about $500, one with two lenses for about $600-700. More expensive lenses can be bought later, if appetite grows.

While the Fuji (and many other super zooms) has many things going for it, it simply cannot match a DSLR. While a back-illuminated sensor is a good thing, it is still a very small sensor. A small sensor simply does not gather as much light as a large sensor. (Sony has had back-illuminated sensors since 2008 so this is not really anything brand new.)

The great plus factors of a super zoom are handiness (a huge zoom in a small package) and affordability. These, however, become limiting factors at some point. It is simply not possible to produce a 24-720 equivalent lens that performs as well as lenses optimized for smaller focal lenght ranges. Affordability also means compromises. While a P&S camera can have a ton of features in the software (probably much more than a DSLR, in fact), the hardware simply cannot be on par. This means (apart from the optics and the sensor) slower response times, slower frame rate, shorter battery life, inferior viewfinder (there still is not a good alternative to a proper glass viewfinder), etc.

While a Swiss Army knife is a competent package, it simply does not compare with a set of optimized special purpose tools. Nor does a P&S compare with a DSLR.

Which one is right for a specific photographer, that I cannot really say. I have both, in fact. However, if I had to stick with one, a DSLR would win, hands down.

Cheers,
T.

But the OP wanted to spend USD 500 total, not $500 for the lense! Sure if money is no object than the choices become wider and plentiful; but any "better" system will be in the >$2000 range. Also, sensor quality is as important as the lense for digital systems (in fact more so for some light situations). Fuji claims to have a breakthrough with its new reversed sensor; certainly interesting technology with great potential, we'll see if the results are delivered. Presumably Nikon, Canon and Olympus will quickly match it if there is potential.

I was only replying to the gentlemen who talked about the Olympus lens.

For the OP's budget, I would recommend a beginner body + one good prime + cheap kit zoom lens. I am only familiar with Canon, so I would specifically suggest the following:

You can save some money buy buying second hand and buying an older model. For a beginner, the higher pixel counts and advanced features don't really add much. You can buy a Rebel XT on ebay for much less (probably <$300)

As for lenses, I would highly recommend the 50mm f/1.8 prime (~$80 used). Getting this (relatively) high quality prime will give you a taste of what is possible with the SLR and is great to learn the system with and great with general portraits and close-ups, and gives you a taste of the types of high quality pictures you can take.

I would couple the prime lens with a very cheap zoom lens with a wide range. These are usually the zooms that come with the beginners kits or you can buy a third party lens (Sigma/Tamron etc - if you can buy them in Asia, they are usually much cheaper there). They give you a lot of flexibility on the cheap, while sacrificing somewhat on quality. But it will do for most general purpose outdoors shooting. You can always upgrade later.

Gusss I was a little oblique. The Olympus 14-54 lens is an example of the brand's value and quality. I know of no equivalent Canon or Nikon lens at the same price. With Oly you get better value, but as stated above, less choices. Important considerations when making a LTC to a camera line.

deleted

Ever the outsider (I shoot Olympus), I'll add the superb Pentax KX to the mix.


WOOT had the Pentax K20D kit (w/lens) up on their Woot-off yesterday as a kit. Around $600, I think. It's gone now, but I'm betting there are other places on the vast web to pick up a bit older, but very good, camera at a discount.

I've been researching entry level DSLRs too. I think I've settled on the Canon xsi, over the comparable Sony and Nikon models. Only downside is that it does not have image stabilization on board; so that could be an issue with respec to acquiring lenses in the future. (You need an IS lens.) Body only can be found around mid $400s; with entry level lens around $550.

I've been researching entry level DSLRs too. I think I've settled on the Canon xsi, over the comparable Sony and Nikon models. Only downside is that it does not have image stabilization on board; so that could be an issue with respecto acquiring lenses in the future. (You need an IS lens.) Body only can be found around mid $400s; with entry level lens around $550.

Good choice, congrats!

Cheers,
T.

Good choice, congrats!

Cheers,
T.

Thanks. Anyone who wants to suggest a good all purpose first lens that can be acquired used or refurbished in a reputable way, I'm all ears!

Thanks. Anyone who wants to suggest a good all purpose first lens that can be acquired used or refurbished in a reputable way, I'm all ears!

The L Series 24-70 mm f/2.8 is a fantastic lens but quite pricey. You might want to look at the Sigma-24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-24-70mm-F-2.8-EX-DG-Lens-Review.aspx), instead. It is not as good a lens, but it is about half the price.

Tokina also has some pretty interesting options: they have a 16-50 mm f/2.8 and 50-135 mm f/2.8 available. I have not tried those lenses but I am extremely happy with my Tokina 10-17 mm fisheye. It is built like a tank and has very nice optics. Some people here have indicated problems with Tokina lenses on a Canon 7D but apart from that I have only heard good things about them.

The only places in the US I have bought used lenses from are Adorama and B&H. In Europe, the German ebay (www.ebay.de) is a treasure trove of used optics but probably not very convenient to buy from from the US (many sellers won't ship to US to begin with). I am hoping some of the more knowledgeable Canonistas here can come up with some suggestions as to where to buy from.

Cheers,
T.

The L Series 24-70 mm f/2.8 is a fantastic lens but quite pricey. You might want to look at the Sigma-24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-24-70mm-F-2.8-EX-DG-Lens-Review.aspx), instead. It is not as good a lens, but it is about half the price.

Thanks. This can get expensive in a hurry, I suppose.

Hmmm. The qualify of my point and shoot pictures are bad, but are they that bad . . . . ?

;)

Thanks. Anyone who wants to suggest a good all purpose first lens that can be acquired used or refurbished in a reputable way, I'm all ears!

Well, since you ask, I recommend the EF-S Canon 17-85mm lens. In fact, I'm selling mine on ebay. :)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5-6-USM-Lens-Accessories-/280499651017?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item414f1501c9

How do contemporary Zuiko lenses compare to the legendary OM lenses?

Well, since you ask, I recommend the EF-S Canon 17-85mm lens. In fact, I'm selling mine on ebay. :)

Thanks! I'll check it out.

Thanks! I'll check it out.

Also check out the reviews at http://www.the-digital-picture.com/. I like this guy's writeups. He's very thorough.

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/5.0.0.591 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)

Thanks to everyone who responded. I will check out all the suggestions and figure out what is best for me. I will be sure to let you know how it turns out.

I was in the same position a few months ago and ended up buying a pentax k-x over the nikon d5000. I was able to get the camera with a 18-55mm lens and a 55-300mm lens for around $600 from Amazon.

i went to ebay and bought non working Canon EOS 650 and then used Canon Loyalty Program to trade it for Canon XSi kit for $359. is this a good deal? any accessories i need to buy?

i went to ebay and bought non working Canon EOS 650 and then used Canon Loyalty Program to trade it for Canon XSi kit for $359. is this a good deal? any accessories i need to buy?

A used XSi (body only) goes for just above $400 and a brand new one a little below $500. So depending on what you paid for the EOS 650, you might come up a little ahead.

Accessory-wise, lenses and a speedlight come first to mind.

Cheers,
T.

Hi,

A bit far from what I was originally proposing, but I was hoping you guys might have a little guidance on the following:

I recently discovered the Canon Loyalty program and happen to have 3 old Canons that I am willing to part with (S400, S410, and S50). The upgrade options for all of those are the same: SX10 for $199, G11 for $249, Rebel XS for $359. The G11 pops out as a good deal, what about the Rebel XS? It seems quite old.

Any thoughts are appreciated!

I Have Canon unveils PowerShot G11 high-end compact
The premium quality Canon lens delivers picture-perfect performance, offering a 5x wide angle (28mm) zoom with optical Image Stabilizer (IS). This allows handheld shots to be taken at much slower shutter speeds (4-stops) than conventional non-IS models - allowing perfect shooting in darker conditions or at a lower ISO. Greatly reducing blur caused by camera shake, photographers can shoot at longer focal lengths and in lower light conditions without the need for a tripod.
just for • $499 only..Sensor

• 1/1.7" Type CCD
• 10 million effective pixels
Image sizes • 3648 x 2736
• 3648 x 2048
• 2816 x 2112
• 2272 x 1704
• 1600 x 1200
• 640 x 480
• 320 x 240
Movie clips • 640 x 480 @ 30fps
• 320 x 240 @ 30fps
Maximum clip length Up to 4GB or 1 hour
File formats • Still: JPEG (Exif v2.2), RAW
• Movie: MOV [H.264 + Linear PCM (monaural)]
Lens • 28-140mm (35mm equiv)
• f = 6.1 - 30.5 mm
• 5x optical zoom
• F2.8-4.5
• Construction: 11 elements in 9 groups (1 double-sided aspherical element)
Image stabilization Yes (Lens-Shift)
Conversion lenses Yes
Digital zoom up to 4x
Focus • Auto focus :TTL
- Face Detection / 9-point AiAF
- 1-point AF (center or Face Select and Track)
- Fixed centre or Face Select and Track
• Manual focus
AF modes

• Single
• Continuous
• Servo AF/AE
AF lock Yes (on/off selectable)
AF assist lamp Yes
Focus distance Closest focus distance 1 cm
Metering • Evaluative (linked to Face Detection AF frame)
• Center-weighted average
• Spot (center or linked to Face Detection)
ISO sensitivity • Auto
• ISO 80
• ISO 100
• ISO 200
• ISO 400
• ISO 800
• ISO 1600
• ISO 3200
AE lock Yes
Exposure compensation +/- 2EV in 1/3 stop increments
Shutter speed • Auto (1 - 1/4000 sec)
• 15-1/4000 sec
Modes

• Auto
• Program AE
• Shutter Priority AE
• Aperture Priority AE
• Manual
• Custom (2 modes)
• Special Scene
• Stitch Assist
• Low Light
• Quick Shot
• Movie
Scene modes

• Portrait
• Landscape
• Night Scene
• Sports
• Night Snapshot
• Kids & Pets
• Indoor
• Sunset
• Foliage
• Snow
• Beach
• Fireworks
• Aquarium
• Underwater
• Color Accent
• Color Swap
• Stitch Assist
White balance

• Auto (including Face Detection WB)
• Daylight
• Cloudy
• Tungsten
• Fluorescent
• Fluorescent H
• Flash
• Custom1
• Custom2
• Underwater
• White Balance Correction
Self timer • 2 or 10 sec
• Custom or FaceSelf Timer
Continuous shooting • Approx. 1.1 shots/sec.
• AF: Approx. 0.7 shots/sec.
• LV: Approx. 0.8 shots/sec. (until memory card becomes full)
Image parameters My Colors (My Colors Off, Vivid, Neutral, Sepia, Black & White, Positive Film, Lighter Skin Tone, Darker Skin Tone, Vivid Blue, Vivid Green, Vivid Red, Custom Color)
Flash • Auto, Flash On, Flash Off, Slow Sync, Red-eye reduction
• Slow Sync Speed : Fastest speed 1/2000 sec
• +/- 2EV in 1/3 stop increments
• Face Detection FE compensation
• Safety FE
• Flash exposure lock
• Manual Power Adjustment
• Second Curtain Sync
• Range (Auto ISO):50cm - 7.0m (wide) / 4.0m (tele)
External Flash E-TTL with EX series Speedlites, Macro Twin Lite MT-24EX, Macro Ring Lite MR-14EX, Canon High Power Flash HF-DC1
Viewfinder Real-image zoom, Optical Viewfinder
LCD monitor • 2.8 inch Vari-angle PureColor II VA (TFT)
• 461,000 pixels
• 100% coverage
• Adjustable
Connectivity • USB 2.0 Hi-Speed
• HDMI mini connector
• AV out (PAL / NTSC switchable)
Print compliance PictBridge
Storage SD, SDHC, MMC, MMCplus, HC MMCplus
Power Rechargeable Li-ion Battery NB-7L
Weight (no batt) 355 g
Dimensions 112 x 76 x 48 mm
Additional images
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0908/Canon/G11/PowerShot-G11-BCK-LCD.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0908/Canon/G11/PowerShot-G11-FRT.jpg

Hi,

A bit far from what I was originally proposing, but I was hoping you guys might have a little guidance on the following:

I recently discovered the Canon Loyalty program and happen to have 3 old Canons that I am willing to part with (S400, S410, and S50). The upgrade options for all of those are the same: SX10 for $199, G11 for $249, Rebel XS for $359. The G11 pops out as a good deal, what about the Rebel XS? It seems quite old.

Any thoughts are appreciated!

The G11 is a pretty good deal as it usually retails for $469 or so. The Rebel XS with the EF-S 18-55 mm lens goes for $499, so the deal (assuming it is body only) is not stellar.

The XS is a very capable camera but given the rapid development of the Canon entry-level and prosumer DSLR lines, it is getting a bit long in the teeth.

Cheers,
T.

Hi,

Nice image of the Plaza de Espana ( Seville) in the monitor of the G11 above!^


Regards

TBS

I greatly appreciate all of the advice given here. I ended up going with the G11 refurbished via the Canon Loyalty Program. Since I am so used to small P&S cameras, I am going to try this out and see how it goes. If I like it, I will probably end up selling it and moving on to one of the DSLR's recommended above.

I greatly appreciate all of the advice given here. I ended up going with the G11 refurbished via the Canon Loyalty Program. Since I am so used to small P&S cameras, I am going to try this out and see how it goes. If I like it, I will probably end up selling it and moving on to one of the DSLR's recommended above.

i went ahead and got both G11 and XS kit from Canon Loyalty. I'm still learning how to use the XS since there's a lot of set up to do to take proper picture. i like the G11 better because I don't have to do anything

are there any free online dslr learning classes you can recommend?

are there any free online dslr learning classes you can recommend?

I am also interested if theres one.

I'll vouch for Olympus. Have an E-510 w/ 2 lens kit and Metz 58 flash. I'm actually looking to upgrade if anyone is interested.

Please also keep in mind the olympus E-pl1, or other similar micro 4/3rds cameras...I traded my Rebel XT for one, and am extremely impressed by both the image quality, flexibility of using alternate glass, and very small size!

you should go to the camera store and handle them to which you prefer the most.

I think thats the best idea. I've done a lot of research over the last two weeks. I decided I wanted the Nikon D5000. I went to Best Buy yesterday to play with the cameras. I tried Sony, Nikon & Canon. Now i want a Canon becaue it felt a lot better in my hands than the others. Of course now i have to decide which Canon model I want. I'm stuck between XSi and T1i


BTW, I've found photography a money pit. I want a bigger sensor, better lenses, etc.

Kind of like Elite status for some of us :p

Having a DSLR can be a bit of a hassle, they are quite big and sure the images are good but if you can get away with getting a G9 or something then I think i'd go that way. Depends on what you are looking for, someone mentioned they need really fast lenses f1.4, then yep you need a dslr but for general travellers then a DSLR can be a bit annoying to lug around.

Get the Canon SX20 (has a 20x optical zoom: 28-560). No need to lug around a DSLR/lenses ^

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09081904canonsx20is.asp

Get the Canon SX20 (has a 20x optical zoom: 28-560). No need to lug around a DSLR/lenses ^

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09081904canonsx20is.asp

And the complete lack of ability to take advantage of different lenses.

For a photo enthusiast, a little small bag for your DSLR w/ kit lens or with similar size is nothing compared to the quality of picture you can get. You can always get a point and shoot that you can put in your pocket so you can leave your DSLR in your hotel room in some occasions.

I wanted to migrate from film to digital. Bought the wife a compact digital some time back (Casio Exilim) which was super, but lens range was so-so. I'll admit that I am biased. I've got a pair of mid 60's Nikons (F) - completely manual and built to last. I was slightly dismayed to find that whilst Nikon have retained the F mount, the old lenses (pre AI) are not always usable on new digital cameras. I was rather hoping to use the current stock.

Cut to the chase. I picked up a D80 on eBay for £250 for the body and sourced a couple of nice second hand lenses (28-85mm f3.5-4.5 and 80-200mm f4.5-5.6). Total outlay was £370 for the lot. Why Nikon ? Well, provided the body has the AF drive, you can use any Nikon AF lens produced. This gives you access to some really nice bits of glass at good prices. For instance, the 28-85mm zoom set me back £50. Focusses down to a couple of feet and then has a macro facility that takes you to 11" from the film plane. Given that the camera body and lens account for about 8", that's plenty close ! OK so it's about 15 years old, but it works fine. Optically, unless you are going to produce 40" wide prints, you'll have a job finding a better lens.

Alternatives considered . Canon digital cameras are not as forgiving in allowing old lenses to be used and I wasn't smitten with the feel of the Canon. Fuji do a nice SLR that also uses the Nikon F mount, but then why not just go for a Nikon. Pentax and Sony felt small and cramped. That said, I didn't like the smaller Nikon bodies (D3000, D40, D5000, D60) It was going to be a D80, D90 or D200 (D300 was nice but would have caused marital rift). Of the three, the D90 was newest and most expensive, but had 12Mp plus latest CMOS chip, Live view and also video capture. Didn't need video but est looked OK. D200 could use some older lenses, 10Mp CCD chip but requires XD cards. Oh and the contacts are pins and can get bent. D80 uses same chip as D200, uses SD cards. Not as complex as the D200 and also newer design (about 4-5 years old now though). The DSLR market is accelerating at a scary rate with new cameras popping up all the time. Lot of used cameras around with low(ish) usage - Nikon reckon their shutters will run for about 100,000 shots. You can pick up used pro models for less than the current enthusiast ones. This filters down and means that a starter DSLR that is about 3-4 years old can be found for a song.

Canon digital cameras are not as forgiving in allowing old lenses to be used and I wasn't smitten with the feel of the Canon.

Canon made a clean break with the AF transition (FD mount to EOS); I've never hit any problem using some old (mid-90s) EOS lenses on current DSLRs - one friend of mine is using a 1st-gen 50mm f/1.8 he bought with a then-current EOS 630 - sometime around 1990.

This filters down and means that a starter DSLR that is about 3-4 years old can be found for a song.

Or a 7-year old one for free; I gave away my first generation D-rebel, as it just wasn't worth the hassle of selling.

Hi All,
I am looking into buying my first DSLR (I am 20 Years old so I am trying to keep it under $450-500) what would you recommend for a starter DSLR?

Hi All,
I am looking into buying my first DSLR (I am 20 Years old so I am trying to keep it under $450-500) what would you recommend for a starter DSLR?

My normal advice has been to pick the lenses you want to eventually get, and use that to base it on the system, but these days starter models have gotten so cheap (ie in your budget, new, with a kit lens) that you might well just get a starter camera and then sell it and move up if you need a broader array of lenses than that system can provide.

If you're planning to get serious, the other good option is to go used.

All of the new starter cameras come with an 18-55 lens.

Purely as a starter camera, the best bang for your buck is the the Pentax K-x ($499 at B&H right now). Of the second-tier lens systems, it has the best lenses to move up to (but not as good a range of choice as Canon or Nikon) and has the best feature set the best choice is which has the advantage over either of the above of having sensor-shift image stabilization (whereas the above have IS only in the kit lense) and a better array of additional lenses than the Sony/Minolta system. It also a better feature set than the Canon XS. I've not used the K-x, but build quality on the other Pentaxes I've used has been about as good as Canon's and maybe a hair behind Nikon.

Canon vs. Nikon is a bit of a religious debate. Right now the Canon starter model (the Rebel XS, $499) is a little less expensive than the Nikon one (the D3000, $549); they're very, very close in features although the Nikon has a slightly larger screen and one-step higher maximum ISO. Both use in-lens image stabilization (which will comes with the 18-55 kit lens in both cases) but because it's in-lens, cheaper additional lenses won't have it. I've not used the D3000, but the build quality on their prior starter model (the D40) was slightly better than the Rebel XS

The last options worth considering is the Sony system (which uses the old Minolta mount) - the lowest cost (about $450 for the A330 with image stabilization, and $350 for the A230 without.) Other than image stabilization on the A330, these are basically comparable to the Nikon D3000. Range of lenses is least of the 4 systems, and I've not been that impressed with the build quality of the Sony I've played with in-store (a generation or two back, however)

Many Thanks for that. Regarding the Sony using the Minolta mount, is that the old Konica Minolta mount? I am asking since I have a Konica Minolta Z5 actually that I use to use to do my serious photography. I will admit I had been looking into the A330 recently.
My normal advice has been to pick the lenses you want to eventually get, and use that to base it on the system, but these days starter models have gotten so cheap (ie in your budget, new, with a kit lens) that you might well just get a starter camera and then sell it and move up if you need a broader array of lenses than that system can provide.

If you're planning to get serious, the other good option is to go used.

All of the new starter cameras come with an 18-55 lens.

Purely as a starter camera, the best bang for your buck is the the Pentax K-x ($499 at B&H right now). Of the second-tier lens systems, it has the best lenses to move up to (but not as good a range of choice as Canon or Nikon) and has the best feature set the best choice is which has the advantage over either of the above of having sensor-shift image stabilization (whereas the above have IS only in the kit lense) and a better array of additional lenses than the Sony/Minolta system. It also a better feature set than the Canon XS. I've not used the K-x, but build quality on the other Pentaxes I've used has been about as good as Canon's and maybe a hair behind Nikon.

Canon vs. Nikon is a bit of a religious debate. Right now the Canon starter model (the Rebel XS, $499) is a little less expensive than the Nikon one (the D3000, $549); they're very, very close in features although the Nikon has a slightly larger screen and one-step higher maximum ISO. Both use in-lens image stabilization (which will comes with the 18-55 kit lens in both cases) but because it's in-lens, cheaper additional lenses won't have it. I've not used the D3000, but the build quality on their prior starter model (the D40) was slightly better than the Rebel XS

The last options worth considering is the Sony system (which uses the old Minolta mount) - the lowest cost (about $450 for the A330 with image stabilization, and $350 for the A230 without.) Other than image stabilization on the A330, these are basically comparable to the Nikon D3000. Range of lenses is least of the 4 systems, and I've not been that impressed with the build quality of the Sony I've played with in-store (a generation or two back, however)

Many Thanks for that. Regarding the Sony using the Minolta mount, is that the old Konica Minolta mount? I am asking since I have a Konica Minolta Z5 actually that I use to use to do my serious photography. I will admit I had been looking into the A330 recently.

It's the same mount as the Minolta DSLRs, and I believe (seems to be confirmed by this site: http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp ) that it's the same one as on the AF Minolta film cameras. Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minolta_AF it looks like Minolta (like Canon, and unlike Nikon and Pentax) went with an entirely new lens mount when they went to autofocus.

The following is only an issue if you are going to consider buying used lenses, but: I don't know if there are any generational compatibility (or only-partial-compatibility) issues with the Minolta mount; one advantage of Canon is that pretty much all EOS lenses (excluding the handful of EF-S digital only ones which work only with APS-C DSLRs, and not with the first couple of generations of those) will work on any EOS-system camera. With Nikon and Pentax, there are (used) F- and K-mount lenses some of which will work, some of which will work but not autofocus, and some of which will not work at all. Also, with Nikon (not sure about Pentax) which lenses will work but not autofocus varies by model; the first generation Nikon AF system had the AF motor in camera. The D90, D70s, and D70 had the motor to support those lenses; the D40/D60/D3000 did/do not. Not sure about any higer-end current models.

Also, with Nikon (not sure about Pentax) which lenses will work but not autofocus varies by model; the first generation Nikon AF system had the AF motor in camera. The D90, D70s, and D70 had the motor to support those lenses; the D40/D60/D3000 did/do not. Not sure about any higer-end current models.


The high end Nikon models (e.g. D300) have the AF motor in the camera. The entry level D40/D60/D3000/D5000 don't. Benefit of not having motor in camera is reduced weight, plus obviously lower build cost. Downside is that you have to buy lenses with inbuilt motor for AF or stick with manual focus only.
Rule of thumb for Nikon is - if you have a D40/D60/D3000/D5000, you can use almost any lens made since the mid 70's. Catch is that unless it has a built in motor, you have to manually focus. Any manual focus lenses (AI or AI-S) will not meter. If you have a midrange D70/D80/D90 you can use any of the old AI or AI-S lenses but they won't meter, you can use any AF lens and the AF will work as will metering. If stump up the cash and get a D200/300/2H etc you can use AI lenses and get the metering to work.

Point to note. I think you can use DX lenses on FX bodies provided you have configure the camera to work with DX (reduced) sensor size. As Nikon FX sized sensors are currently only in the pro models, it isn't an issue for most.

Point to note. I think you can use DX lenses on FX bodies provided you have configure the camera to work with DX (reduced) sensor size. As Nikon FX sized sensors are currently only in the pro models, it isn't an issue for most.

DX = APS-C, FX = full-frame 35mm, right? Can you use DX on a film body with vignetting?

Bit nicer than Canon's EF-S (APS-C-only) lenses, which won't physically fit on full-frame or film bodies.

DX = APS-C, FX = full-frame 35mm, right? Can you use DX on a film body with vignetting?

qualified yes.

dx lenses will work on full frame digital and recent film cameras. depending on the lens, they may fill a full frame sensor or film at some focal lengths. for instance, the 12-24mm from about 18mm to 24mm will not vignette, but at 12-17 it will.

however, in some cases dx lenses may not work at all on older film bodies. lenses that don't have aperture rings (and are controlled electronically) are not going to work well when it's attached to an old mechanical body from the 1970s...

qualified yes.
[...]
not going to work well when it's attached to an old mechanical body from the 1970s...

Got it, thanks!

Agree, DX on film cameras is a bit of a dodgy number. Had a look at what G lenses will work with older Nikons (G lenses have no aperture ring). Looks like the lens will mount, but will underexpose. Now I haven't tried this, but logically, if the max aperture for the lens is say f3.5, then provided you set that as the aperture on the meter, it should work. All you are doing is working on aperture priority with a single value. Not exactly flexible !!

If you are thinking of Nikon, the DX lens that is supposed to be the bee's proverbials is their 18-200mm VR zoom. Covers just about all bases.

Point to note. I think you can use DX lenses on FX bodies provided you have configure the camera to work with DX (reduced) sensor size. As Nikon FX sized sensors are currently only in the pro models, it isn't an issue for most.

Is the reverse also true?

I own a Pentax K1000 with 3 lenses. Haven't used it much the past several years after getting a point and shoot digital (first a basic Olympus, then a much better Nikon).

Now I'm planning to get a DSLR, and wondering if my 3 old lenses from the K1000 would be compatible with any DSLRs...or whether I'd even want to do it, assuming it's possible.

... Now I'm planning to get a DSLR, and wondering if my 3 old lenses from the K1000 would be compatible with any DSLRs...or whether I'd even want to do it, assuming it's possible.
Any lens ever made by Pentax will fit on any Pentax DSLR. That is one of the selling points.

Any lens ever made by Pentax will fit on any Pentax DSLR. That is one of the selling points.

And that is, indeed, a huge selling point for me as I already have 3 lenses. I think I'm sold!

That said, if anyone can make an argument for someone in my situation not buying the Pentax K-X, I'm still curious...

And that is, indeed, a huge selling point for me as I already have 3 lenses. I think I'm sold!

That said, if anyone can make an argument for someone in my situation not buying the Pentax K-X, I'm still curious...

Do your current 3 lenses support autofocus? If they do not, coming from a K1000, digital manual focus may well be worthwhile, but it's definitely something to consider.

Other than that, the K-x looks like a good camera and an excellent value; I'd look at what lenses you might want to get later, if any, and make sure that something along the lines you want will be available for the Pentax. Assuming they are, there's no reason to go that route.

... That said, if anyone can make an argument for someone in my situation not buying the Pentax K-X, I'm still curious...
Kx is currently the best-bang-for-buck entry level DSLR on the market. The 18-55mm "kit lens" that comes with it is rated best-in-class for the breed. There is also a nice suite of high quality add-on lenses available for the "K" mount and Sigma makes a huge line of good third party lenses.

The only thing you might want to consider is the fact that Pentax has leaked plans to introduce 2 new models at the big photo trade show in September. Rumor has it that one will be a slight upgrade of the Kx, tentatively called the "Kr." From what little we (enthusiasts) have seen, the improvements are slight and I wouldn't pay a lot more but it might be a reason to wait a month or so just to see what is coming. Just remember, this is still all rumor. If you want a camera now, the Kx would be a good choice.

Do your current 3 lenses support autofocus? If they do not, coming from a K1000, digital manual focus may well be worthwhile, but it's definitely something to consider.

Other than that, the K-x looks like a good camera and an excellent value; I'd look at what lenses you might want to get later, if any, and make sure that something along the lines you want will be available for the Pentax. Assuming they are, there's no reason to go that route.

Honestly, I have no idea whether the 3 lenses I have support autofocus or not (using them with the K-1000, it was not a required feature, so if I had to guess I'd say probably not). As I said, I haven't used the K-1000 much in the past few years, and am not necessarily looking to replicate that experience entirely in a DSLR - at least, not right now and not with this camera. So I think the K-x is probably a good choice.

Plus, I am under the impression that the K-x can be put into manual mode if I were to want to use it that way...right?

Kx is currently the best-bang-for-buck entry level DSLR on the market. The 18-55mm "kit lens" that comes with it is rated best-in-class for the breed. There is also a nice suite of high quality add-on lenses available for the "K" mount and Sigma makes a huge line of good third party lenses.

The only thing you might want to consider is the fact that Pentax has leaked plans to introduce 2 new models at the big photo trade show in September. Rumor has it that one will be a slight upgrade of the Kx, tentatively called the "Kr." From what little we (enthusiasts) have seen, the improvements are slight and I wouldn't pay a lot more but it might be a reason to wait a month or so just to see what is coming. Just remember, this is still all rumor. If you want a camera now, the Kx would be a good choice.

Interesting news...but I will have a need for the camera before September, and I doubt I would want to pay more to get the "improved" camera. I'd more be curious whether this would result in the price of the Kx going down at all, but I believe I have heard that B&H (where I'm planning on buying it) will give a refund if the price goes down during the return period...so that way, I could have the camera now and still have price protection in case it becomes cheaper after the new model comes out.

Honestly, I have no idea whether the 3 lenses I have support autofocus or not (using them with the K-1000, it was not a required feature, so if I had to guess I'd say probably not). As I said, I haven't used the K-1000 much in the past few years, and am not necessarily looking to replicate that experience entirely in a DSLR - at least, not right now and not with this camera. So I think the K-x is probably a good choice.

Certainly. In terms of figuring out whether they're AF-compatible and if there are any other features (re: metering, etc) which won't work with the lenses, the K-mount (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_K_mount) wikipedia article is probably the pace to start.

Plus, I am under the impression that the K-x can be put into manual mode if I were to want to use it that way...right?

Yup. With a nice physical switch to go between the two, no menus needed.

Great. I'll have to check the lenses when I get back to the place where they reside...now I'm curious.

Big thanks to both nkedel and abmj-jr for the advice.

I've got a low-end Sony Alpha 200 that I'm taking to Europe this winter. My current plan is to ditch the kit zoom and buy a used 24mm f2.8 Minolta lens which equates to a semi-wide angle on the aps-c sensor.

Compared to the kit lens:
-better image quality
-smaller size
-lighter weight
-larger aperture (for blurring backgrounds and for low-light)
-perhaps better construction

Just like buying a $1,500 stereo receiver and hooking it up to $200 speakers (the system will sound no better than the $200 speakers), you want to consider a less expensive body and better glass. Like others have mentioned in a different fashion ;)