beginners, where to start

[RadioNate]

I'm about to get my 1st paycheck and I think I'm gonna blow it all on a dSLR.

I've been a SAHM for years so the money is just extra to 'play' with.

Money *is* an object as I don't want to go completely crazy.

I currently have an S2IS that I will most likely keep and I'll probablly buy a ultra compact p&s to throw in my purse.

I LOVE the 12x zoom on the S2IS and I don't think I'll be happy with the reach of the 18-55 kit lens. The Nikon 18-200VR sounds really appealing to me but I hate the price, lol.

The S2IS starts at 36mm and I've only once wished for something wider.

I am not happy with my S2IS shots and I'm not sure if upgrading my equipment will help.

I'm not locked into a brand. Nikon is appealing to me because of the view finder lines. I have a real hard time keeping my horizon straight. Truthfully, I don't know if that is something Canon offers. I was sold on the XT but now I don't know.

I'm trying not to get caught up on Mega pixles but I would like the ability to make clean poster size enlargements (20x30).

 

[Jeanne B]

As a beginner, I just received my dream dSLR camera Saturday...Pentax K100D with 18-55 mm lens kit. I'll probably be adding the DA50-200 lens in a few weeks. I might want to upgrade to the K10D down the road but for now the K100 is perfect for me.

I have the S3, thought I would hang on to it but now that I have my dSLR I'm thinking I might sell it and I would still have our A620 as my p&s backup. I'd rather put the extra $$ towards more zoom for my Pentax although I like the video capabilities of my S3 (but I already have a camcorder so it's really not a necessesity, more of a convenience when I don't have the camcorder with me).

 

[JR6ooo4]

Nikon can Canon can be so close in qualities that the choice may come down to which has lines in the viewfinder. I think you can change them in the canon. My horizons are always off as well. Maybe I will look into that.

My package
rebel xt
50mm 1.8
28-135 IS
70-300 IS
3 batts
3 cards totaling 5 gigs


Mikeeee

 

[Master Mason]

I have

Rebel xt
Cannon 50mm f1.8
Cannon 70-300mm
Cannon 18-55 (kit lens)
Sigma 18-125 (my standard walk around lens)
2 gb of memory (which has served my needs but I need to get more)

Mini Tripod
Regular tripod
Monopod
Mini Trekker AW bag to carry it in.

Things I would still really like to get, but don't really need

external flash
Good low f value zoom lens for the kids sports

This does everything I currently need or want. I would lolve to have the 30D but for more than double the cost I just couldn't justify it at this time.... Perhaps when I am ready to upgrade, they will be several models down the line.

In looking at them objectively. I think that Canon, Nikon, and Pentax all make really good cameras. I think the first two have more of a reputation. I know nothing of the other players in the market, so I can't make comments, but have owned and used film versions of all 3 brands.

I choose canon over the others for various reasons, must of them were personal preference rather than features or funtionality.

Figure out what you want and need, then go to a good camera store and play with them.... see which one you like better, and which feels good to you. Holding the thing as much as you will, having one that fits well in your hands will make a big difference.

 

[handicap18]

Although not my "Dream" kit, it is what I have and then what I would like.
Currently have:
Nikon D50, Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 ED IF AF-S DX, Quantaray 70-300mm f/4-5.6 AF, Nikkon 50mm f/1.8D AF, Nikon SB-600 Speedlight flash and also remote shutter release.

I would definatly go with the D50 again. Great camera and great high ISO performance. When I got it I really didn't know much about the ISO performances, it ended up being a bonus. Price wise it fit my budget. For lenses, the 18-70mm is a very good lens, gives a bit more reach than the 18-55mm kit lens. Now, however, the new Nikon D80 has an 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED IF AF-S DX lens as a kit. It will be available shortly for seperate purchase and is about the same price as the 18-70. Thus far, reports on the D80 at the Nikon board I frequent are very positive. The 50mm f/1.8 is almost a must for any Nikon or Canon user. Price wise you can't beat it (about $100 for the Nikon, a little less for the Canon). Its very sharp and performs great in low light situations. On the telephoto side, a 70-300mm is a good lens to have. Some are better than others. I've had my Quantaray for about 8 years. Its led its course and I've gone an pre-ordered the new Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ED IF VR AF-S. For a lens with VR the price is very good at a little more than $500. My dream would be the 70-200mm f/2.8 ED IF VR AF-S, but that is a $1700 lens. My plan is to go with the 70-300 with VR then down the road add the 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF. This will give me 2 lenses (the fast lens and a VR lens) for the same price as the 70-200 with VR.

The SB-600 is a great flash. I love using it. So much more powerful and versitile then the pop-up (which is adaquate).

Other dream lenses are $1000+ or there abouts, 17-55 f/2.8, 80-400 with VR, 105mm f/2.8 Macro, 200-400 f/4 with VR. But then again, these really wouldn't be part of a beginner package. So I digress.

Anyway, I think my dream startup package would be the D50 or D80 (depending on budget), 18-135mm, 70-300mm with VR, 50mm f/1.8 and the SB-600 (if possible to start, if not, would be next to be purchased). With the D50 and the 3 lenses, price would be around $1600 (less if you can get the 18-135 on ebay from someone who didn't want it as part of their D80 package or referbished like I did with my 18-70 I got for $230, over $100 less than retail). Adding the D80 instead of the D50 would be about $400 more. You also don't have to go with the 70-300mm lens right away. The 18-135 (a 7.5x zoom) would be great by itself for quite a while. Good wide angle and good reach.

ok I've ramble enough.

Good luck.

 

[ndelaware]

I think either a Nikon D50 or a Canon Rebel XTi would be what I would recommend. The lens would depend on what type of images you plan to take. You may hate the price of the Nikon 18-200VR but with lenses, you do get what you pay for. Cheaper lenses, especially longer zoom types are typically not very good. Many here like the Sigma 18-125 for either Nikon or Canon.

My "dream" DSLR is a Canon 5D with all "L" glass lenses, but that's not going to happen anytime soon.

 

[fitzperry]

I have a D70, and those grid lines are a nice feature, though I sometimes forget to use them. I started out with the 18-70 kit lens and shortly thereafter added a 55-200. I'd like to have the new 70-300VR, but it's not currently in the budget. I probably will add a 50mm prime in the near future. I'd also like to have an external flash, but I prefer natural light, so it hasn't seemed worth the expense to me. I just avoid situations that require a flash. And I'm hoping the 50mm f/1.8 will assist in that regard.

When I bought my D70 (almost 2 years ago), I got a great deal that made it about the same price as the Rebel that was out then, and the Nikon had a sturdier body, better kit lens, better flash and some features like spot metering that the Canon didn't have.

Nikon also has a cool wireless remote shutter release that costs less than $20. I'm not sure about the Canon.

Good luck with your decision! I think if you find a good deal on the body (whether it's Canon, Nikon, etc.) and get the best lenses you can afford, you won't go wrong.

 

[ndelaware]

Canon has the wireless remote for about the same money. The Rebel can also use a wired remote for extra long exposures or any other time you want to minimize camera shake.

 

[0bli0]

if i were buying a kit for my kids or suggesting to my friends, i'd highly recommend the Canon Rebel XTi (or 400D, depending on where you're from). i'm personally not a big fan of the 'kit lens' (the 18-55 efs). if you can, get the camera with a decent all-around lens, like the Sigma 18-125 (or better yet - Canon 17-85 IS).

i also recommend getting the 50mm 1.8 prime lens. it's one that will let you take great portraits and shots in low light without flash.

lastly, i recommend getting at least one more battery.

if you're interested in going down the Nikon path, i'd recommend the D80 - also with the sigma 18-125 or one of the better Nikkor walk-around ranges

 

[YEKCIM]

FYI, I don't believe the D50 has the VF grid; the D70s does, however. I'm agonizing over dslr purchase, too, and very much like what I read about the D50, but would miss the grid, which my little Fuji S5000 does have.

~YEKCIM

 

[safetymom]

I would look at the Nikon D70s with the VR 18-200 lens. The lens comes on the D200 and it is a wonderful lens.

 

[Groucho]

The Pentax K100D is the only "affordable" one to offer image stabilization in the camera. The Sony has it as well but for a chunk more money. This can be a decisive feature and many people find it very effective and that it can give you 2-3 stops.

I think the focus screen has at least horizontal lines - I can't seem to come up with a quick review that has a picture of it, and my DL isn't handy to check that but I'm pretty sure that it has those at least. You can also change the focus screen if you prefer a different style.

6mp is IMHO plenty for decently-large prints and often image quality suffers as the mp goes up. I wouldn't think of that as being a handicap with any of the 6mp cameras. (Nikon, Pentax, etc.)

Also, next month, Pentax will be releasing the K10D, which will have 10mp and a ton of other features (some unavailable on other DSLRs) but will not be considered a "beginner" DSLR but a bit more advanced.

Obviously I think the K100D is the best choice at the moment, but they're all very nice and I'm sure you'll be very happy no matter which you end up with. You really can't make a bad choice.

 

[ksloane]

I've gone through enough of these threads now to know that I need an education when it comes to digital cameras. I've always been a point and shoot type person.

Here's the problem. My daughter is now involved in sports and dance/twirling. I find that just pointing and shooting doesn't work well in low lighting or when there's movement with my Sony DSC-T33.

Now I readily accept that all of the terminology used on this board is another language to me...I even read my manual and it's too much for me so in addition to wanting a camera recommendation (or if this one should be sufficient some quick how-tos), I'm also asking for some suggested readings for a COMPLETELY ILLITERATE camera person.

Again, my top priorities are softball pics and dance/twirling pics (oh and a trip to Disney in December ).

Thanks ahead of time for all the help you can give this photo newbie.

 

[seashoreCM]

The problem is not your expertise. The problem is that just about any point and shoot camera does not have the capability of taking the pictures you describe.

Not only do you need manual settings for lens openings and shutter speeds but you need big lens openings (like f/1.4) and fast shutter speeds. For digital cameras, this pretty much limits you to the DSLR (digital single lens reflex) cameras.

For sports, 1/250'th second shutter speed is marginal, 1/500'th will cover many situations, and 1/1000'th is needed for some situations. Once you have a shutter speed in mind, there are formulas in just about any photography book to help you set the lens and the ISO. You can often get away with letting the entire picture a just a little darker than it should be to get the shutter speed you want within the lens and ISO limits of the camera.

The closest thing in a point-and-shoot that you can get for your needs is one with a high ISO setting (like 1600). Choose a camera with at least some manual selections notably settings intended for fast motion. There is a disadvantage; the pictures taken when you select high ISO tend to be grainy or coarse (applies to film cameras also). DSLR's tend to give better pictures for a given ISO. That has something to do with the size of the sensor which plays the role of the film and which if larger means the camera itself is larger and its lens is more expensive.

Digital camera hints: http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/digicam.htm

 

[tinksdad]

The fact that you WANT to learn more is admirable!! That alone will take you miles down the road to learning this vast subject we call photography!

Bryan Peterson has written some good books and are highly recommended. Check out this link for several options that might serve your needs.

Another good one is The BetterPhoto Guide to Digital Photography by Jim Miotke

 

[ksloane]

Thanks for the help. I'm glad to know that at least part of the problem is my camera (in addition to my lack of knowledge).

I'm ready to buy another camera (or at least will be ready after I know what to buy). Anyone want to make some recommendations? I'm thinking I want to spend no more than about $600. Please feel free though to let me know if there's a cheaper alternative to suit my needs or if I need to bite the bullet and spend more. I've been looking at Fuji's and I have a friend with a Nikon D40 that he recommends, but doesn't really know much more than I do...just that he likes his camera.

Please anyone...suggestions? Thanks ahead of time.

The problem is not your expertise. The problem is that just about any point and shoot camera does not have the capability of taking the pictures you describe.

Not only do you need manual settings for lens openings and shutter speeds but you need big lens openings (like f/1.4) and fast shutter speeds. For digital cameras, this pretty much limits you to the DSLR (digital single lens reflex) cameras.

For sports, 1/250'th second shutter speed is marginal, 1/500'th will cover many situations, and 1/1000'th is needed for some situations. Once you have a shutter speed in mind, there are formulas in just about any photography book to help you set the lens and the ISO. You can often get away with letting the entire picture a just a little darker than it should be to get the shutter speed you want within the lens and ISO limits of the camera.

The closest thing in a point-and-shoot that you can get for your needs is one with a high ISO setting (like 1600). Choose a camera with at least some manual selections notably settings intended for fast motion. There is a disadvantage; the pictures taken when you select high ISO tend to be grainy or coarse (applies to film cameras also). DSLR's tend to give better pictures for a given ISO. That has something to do with the size of the sensor which plays the role of the film and which if larger means the camera itself is larger and its lens is more expensive.

Digital camera hints: http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/digicam.htm

 

[ksloane]

The fact that you WANT to learn more is admirable!! That alone will take you miles down the road to learning this vast subject we call photography!

Bryan Peterson has written some good books and are highly recommended. Check out this link for several options that might serve your needs.

Another good one is The BetterPhoto Guide to Digital Photography by Jim Miotke

Thanks...I've bookmarked each site and as soon as I buy a camera I'm going to order a few books too....that will be my summer project to buy and learn to use a camera.

 

[YEKCIM]

My daughter's "twirl stick" (baton) recital was this past weekend, so I can speak to your issue with some degree of experience. I used my Nikon D50 dSLR and 50mm lens for pictures of the recital, from about 1/3 of the way back in the auditorium. I had thought briefly about using the 70-300VR, to get close, but in the end, decided on the 50mm to stop action. I was fearful that the 70-300 would deliver only blurred images, due to subject movement. As it was, at ISO 800, I was able to use shutter speeds in the 1/200-1/300 sec range, with the lens pretty much wide open, resulting in pretty decent shots. The downside is that for closeups, I was pretty much out of luck. I did some severe cropping on several, as an alternative and I think 4X6's would be about the limit as far as prints are concerned.

Having said all that, if one of your requirements is to capture baton performances, a dSLR is probably about your only viable option. Ideally, if you had a dSLR and a fast prime (200mm+, f/2.8), you could probably snag some pretty good shots; the downside is that fast prime telephoto lenses cost a wheelbarrow full of cash.

For softball, you would not need a fast lens (fast referring to the ability to work well in low lighting conditions), but a zoom in the telephoto range would be very helpful. In fact, a bridge or superzoom would probably do fine in that environment, but would be virtually useless for the baton shots.

At Disney, there are times that you need a tele zoom *and* good low light capability (indoor stage shows, fireworks, night shots, etc) so again, a dSLR is the only really good option.

As Groucho is sure to point out shortly, Pentax has some very capable dSLR cameras for little, if any, more $$$ than a high end PnS. The downside is that, in order to cover the zoom range, you need either a fairly expensive superzoom or two or three separate lenses to cover the full range. Either way, you're looking at major bucks, compared to a PnS, or even the dSLR body and kit lens.

If a dSLR is completely out of the question, I suggest you consider a Fujifilm "superzoom" like the S6000fd or S9100; Fuji cameras have larger sensors than most PnS digicams and deliver better low light performance, although still not nearly equaling a dSLR.

Hope that has not confused you. It's all a learning process. Hopefully you have the luxury of a little time to evaluate the different options within the context of your budget, and get the best camera for your needs.

~YEKCIM

 

[ukcatfan]

Thanks for the help. I'm glad to know that at least part of the problem is my camera (in addition to my lack of knowledge).

I'm ready to buy another camera (or at least will be ready after I know what to buy). Anyone want to make some recommendations? I'm thinking I want to spend no more than about $600. Please feel free though to let me know if there's a cheaper alternative to suit my needs or if I need to bite the bullet and spend more. I've been looking at Fuji's and I have a friend with a Nikon D40 that he recommends, but doesn't really know much more than I do...just that he likes his camera.

Please anyone...suggestions? Thanks ahead of time.

The D40 is likely not the best camera for your needs due to one main lack of feature. It does not have a focus motor in the body. It then needs to use a lens with a focus motor. Many Nikon lenses have one, but the one lens that you need does not. It is the 50mm f/1.8 prime. You would have to manual focus, which would not be ideal for action. The D50 would work, but they are very hard to come by now as they were discontinued a few months ago. You might find a Rebel XT with kit lens and get the ~$100 50mm f/1.8 and keep it under $600 total, but it might be closer to $700. The Pentax K100D with kit lens and their 50mm will put you closer to $700, but you get a better kit lens and a better 50mm out of it.

Kevin

 

[ksloane]

My daughter's "twirl stick" (baton) recital was this past weekend, so I can speak to your issue with some degree of experience. I used my Nikon D50 dSLR and 50mm lens for pictures of the recital, from about 1/3 of the way back in the auditorium. I had thought briefly about using the 70-300VR, to get close, but in the end, decided on the 50mm to stop action. I was fearful that the 70-300 would deliver only blurred images, due to subject movement. As it was, at ISO 800, I was able to use shutter speeds in the 1/200-1/300 sec range, with the lens pretty much wide open, resulting in pretty decent shots. The downside is that for closeups, I was pretty much out of luck. I did some severe cropping on several, as an alternative and I think 4X6's would be about the limit as far as prints are concerned.

Having said all that, if one of your requirements is to capture baton performances, a dSLR is probably about your only viable option. Ideally, if you had a dSLR and a fast prime (200mm+, f/2.8), you could probably snag some pretty good shots; the downside is that fast prime telephoto lenses cost a wheelbarrow full of cash.

For softball, you would not need a fast lens (fast referring to the ability to work well in low lighting conditions), but a zoom in the telephoto range would be very helpful. In fact, a bridge or superzoom would probably do fine in that environment, but would be virtually useless for the baton shots.

At Disney, there are times that you need a tele zoom *and* good low light capability (indoor stage shows, fireworks, night shots, etc) so again, a dSLR is the only really good option.

As Groucho is sure to point out shortly, Pentax has some very capable dSLR cameras for little, if any, more $$$ than a high end PnS. The downside is that, in order to cover the zoom range, you need either a fairly expensive superzoom or two or three separate lenses to cover the full range. Either way, you're looking at major bucks, compared to a PnS, or even the dSLR body and kit lens.

If a dSLR is completely out of the question, I suggest you consider a Fujifilm "superzoom" like the S6000fd or S9100; Fuji cameras have larger sensors than most PnS digicams and deliver better low light performance, although still not nearly equaling a dSLR.

Hope that has not confused you. It's all a learning process. Hopefully you have the luxury of a little time to evaluate the different options within the context of your budget, and get the best camera for your needs.

~YEKCIM

Thanks so much for the experienced answers....I am somewhat confused but am pulling up these responses as I look at different cameras and then it makes somewhat more sense.

the S6000fd is one of the camera's on my list of possibilities so good to hear that it is worth looking at more. I'm not in a rush at all as I don't NEED the camera. Mine functions...just not as good as I'd like so I have plenty of time to make a decision.