troyb

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.

YYZCanada300

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.

tkmeister

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.

number_6

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

User Name

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.

wiredboy10003

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.

gfunkdave

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.

Global_Hi_Flyer

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.

troyb

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.

Thalassa

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.

rkkwan

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.

Internaut

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.

skywalkerbeth

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.

manneca

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.

tkmeister

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.