Question about getting a DSLR

[cdbob]

I have been using my point and shoot a lot and have been very frustrated with the image quality, the focus and the cameras horrible low light performance, I am not talking really low light, just say dinner lighting. Anyways I was wondering which camera you guys would recommend for an amateur like myself. I already have a few Canon and Zeiss lenses, so I think it would probably make more sense to get that, but you guys seem to know the photography stuff very well.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

What Canon and Zeiss lenses do you have already?

[cdbob]

A Canon 50-75 and a Zeiss 80-210, so not too many, also some lens effect stuff.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

http://cgi.ebay.ie/CARL-ZEISS-70-210...742.m153.l1262

I can't track down any mention of a Canon 50-75mm.

Either way, they're probably both MF lenses that are incompatible with any modern DSLR system. You're pretty much working with a clean slate.

[cdbob]

I probably got the canon wrong, is something like that, I am doing this off memory, so its not perfect. These lenses are from my fathers old Canon from the 80s, so I am not sure if that will work with the new Digital stuff. As far as companies go, I know nothing about either Nikon or Canon in terms of which being better. It really does not matter to me, I have no real preference to either company, just the one thats better.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

First: That's probably an FD-mount Canon, which means it won't work on a modern camera body.

Second, Nikon and Canon are about equal. Go down to a real camera store, play with all the cameras in your budget, and then buy the one that makes the most sense to you.

[nomix]

As BCS said, go down to the store, but pick your camera from the grip. That's what really matters. All the brands on offer today are good. I would however avoid the Sony A100, as it's a bit rough in the tooth. The A200, however is quite good. The offerings from Pentax that are worth looking into is the K200D, or the K10D (or the Samsung GX-10, pretty much the same camera) if you can find them.

If you fall for the grip of the Nikon D40/D40x/D60, I would advice getting the D40 or D40x. The D40x really doesn't offer a lot more than the D40 unless the price difference is miniscule. I wouldn't recommend the D60, as it's a D40x with a few updates, for a lot more cash.

The Canon offerings offer good IQ, but the kit lens on all other than the 450D (Rebel XSi) is really not that good.

From Olympus, we have the E-510, the E-420 and the E-520. The E-410 has slightly harsher JPEG processing, so it will blow highlights easier than the E-510; also, it doesn't have image stabilazation. Neither does the E-420, but the impovement in IQ still makes it competent enough.

And, we have Sony. Apart from the a100, which was their first dSLR, Sony has put out some very good cameras recently. The a200 offers good value for money, while on the a350, the kit lens struggles a bit resolving the IQ of the sensor, as it's got higher resolution.

As for the lenses you have, as BCS said, they're probably MF, and won't fit on any dSLR mount. I would however look into the Zeiss lens, as Zeiss has a very good reputation. With an adapter, you might be able to use it. Which isn't all that bad anyhow.

Good luck.

[LeVeL]

Spec-wise Canon and Nikon are really close. I kinda like Canon just because... also found a better deal on it than the Nikon so Im a Canon guy still (p&s was canon)

[otispunkmeyer]

some of the fuji SLR-a-like cameras use larger 1/1.7 inch sensors and they have good low light performance.

downside is the Electronic view finder and no interchangable lenses, but the upside is a compact camera, a versatile zoom lens and plenty of options to get creative.

if u wanna go DSLR, nikon or canon .... you cannot fall off. go down the store handle a few, try some out, see which ones u like and which ones fit your budget best. thats what i did and ended up with a canon, with my budget it was the Canon 400d or the Nikon D40 and i went with the canon (provides AF on all lenses unlike the d40, bigger sensor, CMOS sensor etc). however if id of had a little more dosh i would of walked away with the Nikon D80 because that was a beautiful bit of kit. but i definately dont regret my choice.

theres a stack of second hand stuff floating around for canon and nikon so its relatively easy to build a kit collection on the relatively cheap side.

kit lenses are generally hit n miss, canons more so than nikons (who many would say provide good kit lenses) either way you'd probably be looking to expand beyond the kit lens if you are even a little serious about photography

there are usually meal deals with these things, i see alot of canons going with the 18-55mm and 55-200mm kits. theyre probably not bad for starting out but they are by no means amazing.

still at the right apertures and the right conditions, kit lenses can often suprise. i have some really nice shots from my 18-55mm kit lens. they required F8, but on a summers day that doesnt really matter.

[nomix]

Sharpness is not an issue with the EF-S 18-55 IS. But on the EF-S 18-55 nonIS, it is. The Nikkor 18-55 VR is a also a little better than the nonIS version, but not all that much.

Yes, if you stop down, then you'll get good sharpness, but then what's the point of sharp lenses? The only lens I know that won't produce relatively sharp images at f/8 is some very poor mirror reflex teles ..

Get the dSLR that fit your hand, that is the most important thing. They're all good. I'm not saying don't buy Canon or Nikon. I'm saying buy the one you're comfortable with, if it's a D40, then go for it, if it's a Canon Rebel Xti, then go for it, if it's the Pentax K200D, go for that.

[matt2000]

If you're not really sure you want a D-SLR, then maybe the Fuji Otispunkmeyer (for the benefit of my fingers, we'll call him Dave from now on) mentioned is the way to go. I've been reading a review in Practical Photography (yeah I started buying magazines now ) about the Fuji S100.

It's got a fixed lens like Dave said, and has an electronic viewfinder (with live view LCD), but has a whopping 28-400mm lens and 100-3200 ISO range (compared to the 200-1600 offered by the D40, not including the HI 1 setting). PP does say the focus is a bit temperamental though.

Here's the review to read for yourself:

http://www.photoanswers.co.uk/Gear/S...t-Look-Review/

In the whole Canon vs. Nikon thing, I chose Nikon without really looking at Canon at all, mainly because I'm a beginner. Now though, looking at the 450D, I don't like the Canons anyway. I just don't like the layout of the buttons and the LCD.

[TopGearDog]

When i got my first DSLR almost 3 years ago i knew nothing about them so i talked to my brother who had a Canon 300D and met with his friend who had a Nikon D70. The Canon was alright, but as soon as i saw and held the Nikon, i knew it was the one for me. Thing is though, if the Canon had felt better in my hand, i would have been equally as happy, as Canon also produces great images.

So even if you know nothing about the camera or the system (they all provide great images in the right hands anyway), pick what feels or looks best for you.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally Posted by matt2000

100-3200 ISO range (compared to the 200-1600 offered by the D40, not including the HI 1 setting). PP does say the focus is a bit temperamental though.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fuji...0fs/page14.asp

It has the capability, but I wouldn't call those usable ISOs over 800.

[nomix]

When we're getting into that ballpark of sensors, we're starting to see a hard decrease on IQ at high ISO values, no doubt.

Fuji, however, is regarded as one of the better in this field when it comes to compacts. If I were getting a compact, I'd either get one of their cameras.

Or perhaps a G9, since I like it, and I really don't by a compact for low light no-flash photography anyway.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally Posted by nomix

Fuji, however, is regarded as one of the better in this field when it comes to compacts. If I were getting a compact, I'd either get one of their cameras.

I agree 100%, my digital compact is an F30 and I still consider it to be one of the best compacts ever made. Largeish sensor + low pixel density = awesome ISO performance.

[nomix]

I have an old Olympus mju400. It's one of the worst compacts. :p

And it's a shame, the original mju deserves a better heritage.

[matt2000]

Originally Posted by BerserkerCatSplat

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fuji...0fs/page14.asp

It has the capability, but I wouldn't call those usable ISOs over 800.

I see, They didn't bother to mention that. Still beats the G9 though.

[cdbob]

Thank you all for your input, I decided on a Sony a200, which was oddly enough about half of what I was willing the spend. But I figured if I am still into this in a while, maybe I will upgrade, but it should be well capable of my needs. Thank you for your insight on this. Now enough talk about gear, lets take some pictures!

[nomix]

That's good news! Have fun with your camera, and as you spent less than you had, spend a couple of dollars on a photography book. I am sure there are people who can recommend a good one you can get in Canada.

Now, put your camera on "A" and change the aperture as you shoot to see the differences.

Just go out play with it, photography should be fun!