Agonising Over DSLR Choice!

[allie5]

Ok guys I need some help!

DH is buying me a DSLR (whatta guy ) and Im trying to choose which I should go for. The idea is that MAYBE I can use it to bring a little extra income as several people have asked me to shoot their kids on the basis of shots Ive taken of mine. Ive also had a few people say that some of my photos might interest some local magazines. Now, Im not relying on this, its just an idea, and of course, Im not buying this camera, solely to use to make cash, as chances are I might never sell a picture - BUT I want something that can take pictures which MIGHT be good enough as well as something for fun.

My first thought was the Canon 400D (Rebel XTi in the US) as Im familiar with Canon's, having an old and reliable Canon EOS 200 film camera for years.

However, when we went to our local camera store, although it felt fine in my wimpy girly hands, DH thought the 400D looked "small cheap and plasticky". We had a 30D out to compare and that did seem a more robust option.

Unfortunately, there wasnt a lot else to compare - I know several people here rate the Pentax K10 which has had good reviews but I cant find one to look at!

Im wondering what my best options should be. Start with something like the Canon 400 / Rebel, Pentax K10, Nikon D80 and then upgrade if I need to OR go for something like the Canon 5D / Nikon 200D straight away. The "inbetween" model seemed like the Canon 30D but the sales guy was quite dismissive of this model and seem to think it was due for replacement very soon.

Although Ive been out of serious photography for awhile, I used my old Canon EOS constantly before the kids were born (when it became too cumbersome to lug about with baby bags, strollers etc etc!!) so Id say I was an intermediate user looking to become advanced with some study and and plenty of hands on use. Ive only used compact or bridge cameras for the last 6 years or so, so I know that Ive got some catching up to do!

Any advice from all you knowledgeable lot out there? I suppose Im asking what level of camera I should be buying rather than a specific brand. Id class the 400 / K10 / D80 as more entry level, 30D as intermediate and Canon 5D / Nikon 200D as advanced...as a rough kind of guide!

Thanks!

Allie

 

[YEKCIM]

You might consider a less expensive body, and invest the savings in the best glass you can get. You can always upgrade to a better body later, or simply add a better body to your kit. How you use your camera would also be a valid concern. For example, if you think you will be in rough envirnonments (dusty, wet, prone to being knocked around), you might do well to spend the extra bucks for a more durable body, such as the 30D or D200 offer.

~YEKCIM

 

[jann1033]

just a thought but depending on what your lenses are like from your old camera they might work with any eos, all canon eos lenses work but some 3rd party don't , some can be rechipped to work.

i recently asked a similar question on 2 different sites( for me about upgrading) and every single post agreed with yekim..the body will give you a little faster speed, maybe some weatherproofing but basically the lenses are going to make or break the sharpness so i'd put your money into a few good lenses you don't have. as far as magazines go, i think from what i have read you might need a lot more mp than anything other than a pro camera can give you which is a lot of money to spend on a "maybe, someday i might want to" deal. some one can correct me if i'm wrong but canon just came out with announcements of their new things and the new camera was an update on the mark11 so not sure it that rules out the "rumored" "40 d"
edited
i thought of something else...the way digital cameras improve practically daily, are you going to want to spend that much again in a few yrs? i figure with the cheaper body, at least in 2 yrs or less when you up grade you will be getting probably something comparable to what you would have spent $$ money on before....not that a rebel? will ever = a mark?, i mean comparatively speaking, right now the xti has 10 mp and sensor cleaning..which i think is more than the 30 d(isn't that 8 mp?)..although i agree with bobq, that top lcd is so much better than the dumb rebel back one that i hate. it's just how much did a film slr really change in a yr or 2, imo that seems different for digital. so unless you won't care are you going to want to spend another $3-4000 in 2-3 yrs? only you can decide that

and you really have to go with what feels good in your hands...i hadn't even looked at nikons before i got my rebel and so always wondered but tried one a couple days ago and i could barely fit my hands around it( i have a lot of stiffness in my hands so that is probably more of a factor for me than "normal" people but i hope the next "d" is a shrimpy one )so that would have been awful for me..i think the pentax is smaller but i have yet to see one in real life.

 

[boBQuincy]

The Rebel *is* small, cheap, and plasticky. It also take great pictures. At least you seem to have the presence of mind to look primarily at Canons (ducking and running).

We have a Rebel Xt and a 30D, except for maybe some high ISO noise there is no way to tell the images apart. The difference (to me) is not even in the size and weight, it is in the handling. The Rebel line does not have the rotary dial that I use so much to change parameters, and the Xti does not have the top LCD that I find very useful. When I use DW's Rebel I get very confused when trying to set anything. The 30D seems easy by comparison.

The 30D will be replaced, and probably within the year, but it is still a fine camera at a good price. The 5D is really nice but does not accept -S lenses and has no built-in flash. It also doesn't really need -S lenses either but at $3000 I decided to go with the 30D instead. I would miss the flash for fill-in and casual use.

My choice ($$$ permitting) would be a 30D and mostly L series lenses, with the 10-22 EF-S for wide angle.

 

[Gdad]

I would go with the best you can afford and think you may want in the forseeable future. My history with photography is very similar to yours - enjoyed a film slr for years and went digital P&S when the kids came along. I got a dslr almost a year ago with a few inexpensive lenses. Now less than a year in I have already upgraded several of the lenses and am eyeing a better camera body (If I disapear from the boards one day and my DW has an 'only used once D200' on Ebay please call the police) Point being I wish I had been a little more patient and spent a little more up front to know and get exactly wat I wanted the first time as it would be less in the long run. Just my $.02

 

[ukcatfan]

I agree that you should save on the body and invest that in lenses. Even thought the 400D is out, that does not make the 350D worthless. The same thing goes for Nikon and Pentax. Consider the K100D, D50, and D70. You might want to avoid the D40 as it has limited lens compatibility. At your price range, there is also the Sony, but I know almost nothing about them. If he thought that the Rebel felt that way, then you might want to still consider the lower end Pentax and Nikons as they do not seem that way to me. That is one of the main reasons I ended up with a K100D instead of a Rebel. As to where to find one to try over there, I have no idea.

Kevin

 

[MICKEY88]

the Sony is an excellent camera, it won the camera of the year award for 2006, and has a great line of lenses including Minolta lenses...

the one advantage of the sony is the body integraded antishake, eliminating the need for more antishake lenses..


the best thing to do is find a place to play with your choices before buying....

I have a freind who wanted a rebel xt, her husband bought her a 20D instead because he though the rebel seemed cheeply made....

she doesn't like the 20d because it is to big and bulky for her tiny hands...so she doesn't use it much...

 

[tinksdad]

Another vote for good glass!! And don't forget those plastic bodies are usually lighter if that is a concern.


I did a similar agonizing over my D200 purchase. I had several Olympus Camedia series cameras after a couple of film camera the newest being a Canon EOS series.

I like the way the Nikon fit my hand and felt. Just seemed a better fit for me. If you have lenses for Canon, that may be the deciding factor. I only had one and it wasn't that great anyway.

 

[handicap18]

My recommendation, get the camera that feels most comfortable and fits best in your hands. If the XTi is small to you, then maybe the 30D is better. Of the Canon line (not including the higher end pro models) it does have true spot metering. If price is more of a concern yet your still not comfortable with the XTi then look at the Nikon D50, it has one of the best high ISO performances of the consumer level dSLR's, its inexpensive yet still is a nice size especially compared to the XT or XTi. Pentax's K10D is another that is in the size range of the 30D and is still on the inexpensive side. The Nikon D80 is a very nice camera, along the lines of the 30D, price wise and feature wise. It has a few more bells and whistles than the D50, but is almost twice the price (Don't get yourself cought up in the megapixels!!).

If you can find yourself a camera (like the D50 or K10D) that might save you some money on the body and not really lose anything performance wise and feels comfortable to you, then you can put the money saved to better glass like one of the f/2.8 zooms, some primes and/or zooms with VR/IS. And don't forget a speedlight flash if flash photography is in the works down the road. The pop-up flashes on the dSLR's are a nice feature, but are really only good for fill.

Good luck with your shopping/research. It can be both fun and agonizing.

 

[ukcatfan]

the Sony is an excellent camera, it won the camera of the year award for 2006, and has a great line of lenses including Minolta lenses...

the one advantage of the sony is the body integraded antishake, eliminating the need for more antishake lenses..

The Pentax K100D and K10D both also have the in body stabilization. The K110D and the older models do not have it. On my K100D, the in body type seems to work just as well as the lens based IS on my S2 IS. If long tele is your expected use for IS, then the lens based type is supposed to be about a half stop better than the body based type. At wide angle, body based is supposed to be better. I would assume then that at moderate tele, they would be equal.

If you are wanting to save money on the body, the K100D is very nice and I will likely keep mine for some time. The K10D does have some nice features though.

Kevin

 

[Groucho]

I'd also recommend going for an "entry level" DSLR - K100D, D50, or XTi - to start out with.

My first thought was the Canon 400D (Rebel XTi in the US) as Im familiar with Canon's

I've been saying for a while that I think this sells more Canons than anything else. Sure, the body can take great photos, but no better than the competition, and it's cursed with probably the worst kit lens and what are generally considered the worst ergonomics and build quality/feel. It also sounds like many of the "cheaper" Canon lenses are not up to snuff and you may find yourself yearning for big-buck "L" glass sooner rather than later.

The Nikon D50 and D80 generally get rated higher on ergonomics and build quality/feel.

The Pentax K100D and K10D are very similar to the Nikon models, both in layout and feel, and internally (they use the same sensors as comparable Nikons), however they also add image stabilization. Price a few lenses with IS (or VR as Nikon calls it) and you'll quickly see a big advantage in having it in-body. I think Canon and Nikon will eventually begin putting it in-body as well, but this is just a hunch on my part.

Anyone, each of those can produce stellar photographs, but the lens is a key component - and you'll definitely get better photos with a cheaper body and pricier lens than a pricier body and cheaper lens.

 

[Boss Hogg]

I would go for which ever ones feels better in your hands. We've had the 300D and now the 400D and admittedly the 400 is much smaller, which initially I was concerned about - this is excarcerbated by the fact that the 300 had a battery grip on! However, I have got used to it, and now actually prefer its size and weight - especially at the end of a long day at the Parks.

I would think you'd find that all the entry level DSLR's are much of a muchness, just read a review saying that the Canon is the best, but I have also read some which say the Nikon is better

Friend of mine had the Nikon, and I could never get used to the button set up, they seemed to be in the "wrong" place when trying after the Canon.

I would say that most of the reviews I read say that the Canon takes better pictures than the competition, so maybe it is a toss up between which feels better and which produces the best results - however it is only degrees.

 

[zagafi]

I *love* my 30D! The 5D is a full frame sensor, and I simply don't need that right now. Digital cameras are *always* going to "be replaced" so that's a moot point. Buy what you need to do the type of photography you're interested in and remember to save $$ for good glass.

 

[allie5]

Thanks all.

Very very helpful. I think it unlikely I need something like the 5D right now and will probably go for the 30D or possibly the Nikon 200 with some nice lenses. I still want to check out the Pentax as well.

 

[tinksdad]

Here's an "interesting" review of some of the cameras we've been discussing on Ken Rockwells site. I don't agree with some of what he has to say at times, but worth looking at.

 

[boBQuincy]

Here's an "interesting" review of some of the cameras we've been discussing on Ken Rockwells site. I don't agree with some of what he has to say at times, but worth looking at.

Ah, Ken Rockwell. As you mention, "interesting" but I especially caution newer photographers to take what Ken writes with a grain (or a box) of salt.

 

[Groucho]

Beware: BLOODY NEWBORN PHOTO on linked page! Where's the "vomit" smilie????????

I didn't get any further than that.

 

[tinksdad]

Beware: BLOODY NEWBORN PHOTO on linked page! Where's the "vomit" smilie????????

I didn't get any further than that.

Oh come on Groucho!!! Where's your pioneering spirit???


He was pretty proud, wasn't he????

 

[jann1033]

Beware: BLOODY NEWBORN PHOTO on linked page! Where's the "vomit" smilie????????

I didn't get any further than that.

What? you don't think "freshly" new-borns are cute? i'm just thrilled his wife is "modest" plus at least there aren't any "squishy diaper" pics

 

[Groucho]

I saw something about how proud he was that he shot a few dozen pictures as the kid was popping out and having the cord cut.

NOBODY on the PLANET needs a photo of their child's cord being cut. (The medical professionals can look at pictures of other people's kids!) I take lots of pictures of my son - but we waited until after the doctor cleaned him off for the first one! BLEAH. And who are you going to show such a photo too? If someone invites me over to look at childbirth pictures or video, I'm going to find somewhere else that I have to be that night...

Anyway, I definitely didn't need to see that picture. I'll look at someone else's DSLR comparison, thank you very much. I'm not interested in how well a given camera handles during childbirth.

Side note: My wife dragged me to the usual "new parent" childbirth classes before our boy was born. When the inevitable video of childbirth came up, I naturally looked anywhere BUT at the TV... and the expression on everyone's else face was much more entertaining, anyway! You've never seen such looks of horror as on the soon-to-be-parents... that part alone is almost worth the classes!