DSLR startup costs

[MarkBarbieri]

I notice that we get a lot of posts from people thinking about moving from a p&s to a DSLR to improve their pictures. I wonder if they understand that the total system cost of a DSLR is often much more than the cost of the body and a kit lens. What are the things you think a typical DSLR user is likely to want to buy within the first year and about how much will they pay for them? Feel free to point out where someone suggests something that you think is more of a nice-to-have rather than a must-have.

1) Second lens - In order to get anything like the zoom range on a p&s, most people are going to need to have the kit lens and a longer zoom lens. What's a consumer telephoto zoom run these days? $250?

2) More memory cards - Most people upgrading to a DSLR are likely to also move from shooting JPG to RAW, thereby increasing their memory usage about six to eight times. If you were filling a 512 meg card on your trip, you'll be filling a 4 gig card now. Fortunately, memory prices have dropped a lot. I'd plan on spending an extra $50 bucks.

3) Circular Polarizer. OK, many or most DSLR users won't get one, but they darn well should. A budget one will run about $50.

What else did you get when you made the switch? Tripod? External flash? Better camera strap to handle the weight? Camera bag? Lens hood(s)? RAW processing software? Photo editing software?

 

[Miss Kelly]

I don't think many newbies realize the need for some sort of photo editing program. Those Raw files won't process themselves.

 

[gruZ]

Mark,

Ah, the DSLR slipperly slope. I bought a Canon DRebel a few years ago, body only, and have since...

...added a prosumer Tamron 18-200 telephoto (about $450)
...sold the DRebel and upgraded for a Canon 20D (incremental $450)
...added a Canon 50mm F1.8 ($70)
...added a Sigma 24-70 F2.8 and Sigma 70-200 F2.8 (more more more)
...added a Sigma 2x Teleconverter
...added a 430EX external flash
...went the Strobist route and added light stand, umbrella, etc.
...bought the cheapo eBay remote triggers
...sold the Sigma 2x Teleconverter
...realized I now need better editing software (currently used PSE 2.0)
...realized in order to run the better software, I need a new computer (currently using a 4 year old XP PC w/ 512mb of RAM)
...am now consistently trying to talk myself out of upgrading the 20D to either a 40D or (hushed voice) going to the dark side (Nikon).

Sure, some of the new DSLR's look attractively priced - the manufacturers don't want you to know they are the gateway drug to more expensive toys!

To those considering the purchase - run while you can!

 

[Master Mason]

Must haves.

1. Editing Software
2. Tripod
3. Extra lens(es)
4. Camera Bag

Nice to have
1. More extra lens(es)
2. really good tripod
3. External Flash
4. Extra memory
5. Memory Card Reader
6. Various filters

Here is my biggest piece of advise to give though. Get the camera with kit lens and use the crap out of it, learn what it will do, learn what it will not do, learn what types of pictures you like to take, and what types of pictures you will likely never take. Then and only then start purchasing the extras.

My reasoning on this, is if you just go buy something, you really don't know what you need, so your either guessing, or listening to someone else, most likely a salesman that wants to sell you something. If you haven't learned your camera, you will likely buy a cheap zoom. It may or may not be the zoom you really needed, and if not, then your going to have to buy another zoom. You might go out and get an external flash, and find out you never take flash photos. You will definately buy a bag and wish you had something different.

I probably have $1k in equipment that I never use anymore, because I didn't understand this lesson. If I knew then what I know now, I could have that last lens I need to complete the set I have decided that fits what I need, instead of lenses sitting around collecting dust.

In my case not all is lost, as those extra lenses will be pulled out when I upgrade and my son will begin putting them to use, which is why I haven't sold them yet. It isn't that they are not good, they just didn't fit my shooting style.

 

[webshark3]

Oh you guys exaggerate.. Why since I bought my discounted 300D, all I bought was a ..... few.... lenses.... maybe a flash... some slaves......3 bags....filters.....backdrops, straps, batteries, a card or 2, readers.....

oh @#$!... I'm broke.

 

[MICKEY88]

I
2) More memory cards - Most people upgrading to a DSLR are likely to also move from shooting JPG to RAW, thereby increasing their memory usage about six to eight times. If you were filling a 512 meg card on your trip, you'll be filling a 4 gig card now. Fortunately, memory prices have dropped a lot. I'd plan on spending an extra $50 bucks.

I respectfully disagree with point number 2, I don't think MOST people will switch to raw, the majority of new dslr users are quite happy with the jpeg results and won't want to invest the extra time and work of raw conversion..

 

[webshark3]

I don't think many newbies realize the need for some sort of photo editing program. Those Raw files won't process themselves.

A

I gave my sister a disc full of RAW images from her wedding. She doesn't even know what RAW is...

I was shocked when she came back a few days later with a stack of printed photos from Walgreens. Turns out, the latest RAW Viewer from Windows has a easy converter. She never knew she was dealing with RAW. LOL

I warned her that if she printed anything over 4x6 or for framing, PLEASE, let me post-process.

 

[jann1033]

i agree with all of the above which is why imo a dslr isn't for everyone. I think sometimes people get caught up with the thinking that if it isn't a dslr you can't take a decent shot which of course for the most part isn't true...and then don't want to carry anything heavier than a p&s so leave the dslr home and get a p&s anyway( which is fine if that's what they want to do, just kind of expensive imo)

plus with my old slr i had 2 lenses( crummy ones but that is beside the point) and covered 18-300...not sure if my pickiness has progressed or dslr lenses are just more expensive and enticing but i've added more "stuff" than i ever did with my slr...maybe it's the internet's fault since i didn't know as much stuff was out there till i went on the internet

i do agree with master mason though, get an "all purpose" basic lens till you know how you like to shoot which might be a while after you get the camera. then imo get the best reviewed lens you can afford so you'll want to keep it

 

[MICKEY88]

..maybe it's the internet's fault since i didn't know as much stuff was out there till i went on the internet

it is the evil of the internet and message boards like this one,

the average person would be happy with pics from a p&s or a dlsr with a 50mm lens, which is the way it was years ago with 35mm slrs.


but now people go online and see awesome pictures posted by really good photographers, and realize that their good pictures aren't as good as they could be..

so all of you are to blame for the boom in dslr sales...

shame shame you evil people....

 

[extreme8]

Must haves.

1. Editing Software
2. Tripod
3. Extra lens(es)
4. Camera Bag

Nice to have
1. More extra lens(es)
2. really good tripod
3. External Flash
4. Extra memory
5. Memory Card Reader
6. Various filters

Pretty close to my list but I have made a few edits.

Must Have
1. Editing Software
2. Tripod
3. Extra lens(es)
4. Camera Bag
5. External Flash
6. Cable Release

Nice To Have
1. More extra lens(es)
2. really good tripod
3. Extra memory
4. High Speed Memory Card Reader
5. Various filters
6. Hardware Monitor Calibrator (Huey, Eye One, etc)
7. Extra Batteries

 

[blestmom]

I really appreciate all the help I've gotten here. I was one who was considering starting in dSLR. But several here suggested that I go the Fuji s6000fd route, and I feel that was the right decision for me. I'm not ready for the expense, and the learning curve, of a dSLR. My pictures are turning out very good for what I want them for...so THANK YOU!

 

[Nikel]

Oh man, I have spent a fortune!

My must-haves:
1. extra body (for those paying gigs, just in case of equipment failure)
2. several lenses (for me 85mm 1.8, 70-200mm 2.8, and 28-75mm 2.8)
3. external flash (+ back-up)
4. reflectors
5. editing software
6. good walk around camera bag, plus a monster bag for carrying it all while traveling
7. lots of batteries and memory cards
8. battery grip
9. card reader
10. external hard drive for storing it all
hmmmm, there's probably more I couldn't live without that I'm forgetting...... There's def. plenty I like having but could get by without.

FWIW, I skipped the kit lens and never missed it. My first lens was the 50mm 1.8. I do have a "cheap" zoom lens though - the 28-105mm just for vacations when I don't want to carry around all the expensive and bulky stuff.

I do have a camera bag I hate though. Fortunately it was relatively inexpensive. And it's the only equipment purchase regret I have.

 

[H.E. Pennypacker]

What about a good UV filter for each lens? I always buy one when I buy a lens, so for me it's on the must have list. $60, $70 or more for a good multi-coated UV filter can be a significant additional expense for some and I'll bet a lot of people overlook it. But it's a small price to pay for a little extra lens protection on that $750 18-200mm VR Nikkor you just picked up.

 

[mikamah]

I'm an new dslr owner. Got the Canon xti in june with the kit lens, and a small carrying case. I wanted to get a longer zoom and wanted something I could use all the time, and just got the canon28-135 is lens. I picked up the 50/1.8 along with it since it is such a bargain.

I need a bigger bag, and tripod, and for now that's all I'm planning on getting.
Oh, and photoshop at some point. I now use picture-it for minimal post-processing.

I only bought one compact flash 2gb ( I think) and that holds about 360 pics.

I only shoot in Jpeg, and am still learning how to shoot in more manual modes. I've never had an slr, and initially I took better pics with my p+s, but now I can really see the difference, and am thrilled with my investment. I don't think I will be shooting in RAW for quite some time.

I think I've spent about $1200. But I'm capturing priceless memories.

 

[MICKEY88]

What about a good UV filter for each lens? I always buy one when I buy a lens, so for me it's on the must have list. $60, $70 or more for a good multi-coated UV filter can be a significant additional expense for some and I'll bet a lot of people overlook it. But it's a small price to pay for a little extra lens protection on that $750 18-200mm VR Nikkor you just picked up.

that is one that is highly Debatable , UV filters are pushed highly by salepeople only to up their sales and commission.,

any extra piece of glass in front of your lens, can cause degradation of the image and increase the chances of flare...,, a good lens hood offers the same protection, possibly more so, if you drop the lens with a metal filter their is no softening of the impact, with a plastic lens hood the blow is softened..plus in a situation such as hitting head on against a door or something similar, the filter is very close to front lens element and might offer no protection, again the lens hood sticking out farther prevent anything from hitting the glass..

if you take a poll of professional photographers, most will never use a filter unless it will somehow improve the image, but never just for protection.... that's what good insurance is for...

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I respectfully disagree with point number 2, I don't think MOST people will switch to raw, the majority of new dslr users are quite happy with the jpeg results and won't want to invest the extra time and work of raw conversion..

Perhaps you're right. I have a tendency to overestimate people's computer skills and their interest in photography. Shooting RAW seems like a natural thing for someone interested enough in photography to upgrade to a DSLR, but I bet it's still intimidating to some and seems superfluous to others.

I really appreciate all the help I've gotten here. I was one who was considering starting in dSLR. But several here suggested that I go the Fuji s6000fd route, and I feel that was the right decision for me. I'm not ready for the expense, and the learning curve, of a dSLR. My pictures are turning out very good for what I want them for...so THANK YOU!

I wasn't trying to scare people off from DSLRs with this post. I just worry when people talk about upgrading to a DSLR that they underestimate the total system cost because they don't realize that there are many extra items that they'll almost certainly buy once they upgrade.

As for complexity, you really could buy a DSLR and leave it in full auto mode and still see significant benefits over a P&S.

What about a good UV filter for each lens? I always buy one when I buy a lens, so for me it's on the must have list. $60, $70 or more for a good multi-coated UV filter can be a significant additional expense for some and I'll bet a lot of people overlook it. But it's a small price to pay for a little extra lens protection on that $750 18-200mm VR Nikkor you just picked up.

This is one of those suprisingly divisive subjects. There is no optical need for UV filters with digital cameras. Some people find that the prophylactic benefits outweight the risk of image degredation and others feel the opposite. Oddly, a great many people feel that the conclusion that they reached is the one and only correct decision and that others must be taught the error of their ways.

My thoughts are:
* I always use a lens hood because they help protect the lens and they help significantly in the reduction of stray light entering the lens.
* Using a lens hood, I have never scratched a lens and have heard of few cases where people having meaningfully scratched their lenses.
* I understand how UV filters can degrade image quality (generally by reflecting bright lights in the picture frame) but I've rarely seen it happen.

So the choice is whether to prevent a rare occurrence (scratching your lens) by spending money and adding the risk of another rare occurrence. Neither option sounds like a disaster, but I'm cheap and lazy so I pass on the UV filters. I'd also be concerned that I'd have to take it off to use a polarizer or risk vingetting when zoomed out.

On the subject of polarizers, am I the only one that feels that is a "must have" or very close to a "must have?"

I only shoot in Jpeg, and am still learning how to shoot in more manual modes. I've never had an slr, and initially I took better pics with my p+s, but now I can really see the difference, and am thrilled with my investment. I don't think I will be shooting in RAW for quite some time.

It's really pretty easy to deal with RAW files. You can use the software that came with your camera to convert them to JPGs. Even if you don't do anything special with them now, you'll have them in the future when you learn more about RAW processing. Someone here once posted the analogy that shooting JPG is like keeping your prints and throwing away your negatives. It's OK if you're happy with the prints, but if you ever want to go back and process it differently (correct the white balance, adjust the exposure, etc), you'll be happy that you have the RAW file. To be fair, I practically live on computers and hang out with some hard-core photo geeks, so what seems pretty easy to me might actually be a challenge for more normal people.

 

[mikamah]

It's really pretty easy to deal with RAW files. You can use the software that came with your camera to convert them to JPGs. Even if you don't do anything special with them now, you'll have them in the future when you learn more about RAW processing. Someone here once posted the analogy that shooting JPG is like keeping your prints and throwing away your negatives. It's OK if you're happy with the prints, but if you ever want to go back and process it differently (correct the white balance, adjust the exposure, etc), you'll be happy that you have the RAW file. To be fair, I practically live on computers and hang out with some hard-core photo geeks, so what seems pretty easy to me might actually be a challenge for more normal people.

That does sound challenging and time consuming to me. I'm sure down the road I will probably feel differently. Especially if it means I'll take pictures like you some day!!

 

[MICKEY88]

Shooting RAW seems like a natural thing for someone interested enough in photography to upgrade to a DSLR, but I bet it's still intimidating to some and seems superfluous to others.

.

it seems natural to you, but your skills and interest in photography are way above the average person upgrading to a dslr..

it's kind of like back when i worked for ritz camera, people would decide to buy an slr because a friend or family member took such great pics with one.

then they would insist on buying the cheapest film they could find, and wouldn't believe us when we tried to explain the concept of grain and, the value of spending a little more for good film..

 

[Nikel]

Perhaps you're right. I have a tendency to overestimate people's computer skills and their interest in photography. Shooting RAW seems like a natural thing for someone interested enough in photography to upgrade to a DSLR, but I bet it's still intimidating to some and seems superfluous to others.

Depending on what I'm shooting, it definitely seems superfluous to me. A wedding or other paid gig? Sure, I'm shooting in raw. Snapshots of family events? Jpeg all the way baby. No flipping way am I dealing with processing all those images just so my mil can scrapbook them.

 

[Khokhonutt]

I think the whole RAW debate can come down to how you use the camera. For me, a huge part of the reason I went to a DSLR was to improve my ability to take shots of my kids marching. Most of the games/contests are at night, which meant, with my P&S, that I almost never got decent pictures.

The DSLR gives me greater flexibility, but a RAW image in a decent post processing program (I use Lightroom) can yeild amazing results. Yes, it's more work than the average person is willing to do, but for me, it means I get shots of my kids in action that I never could get before.

Now I realize this is a highly specialized reason for doing what I do. My point, though, is to think about what you want to get out of the DSLR purchase and why you're making that purchase. What you plan to do with the camera will be an important part of the decision making process.

Jeff