Recommendation for a DSLR Camera

[boBQuincy]

If Canon's Xs fits your hands it is a great choice for a beginning dSLR. If the Xsi is on sale for almost the same price it is a great choice, period! These cameras are capable of great photographs, image quality is right up there with many higher priced cameras. And yes, I use a Xsi (after years of using Canon xxD models). All of the images from my February 2009 trip were taken with the Xsi!

The old 18-55 kit lens is non-IS and not a very good lens either. The newer 18-55 has IS and is really a pretty good lens. I was not aware of the older lens being sold with any kits these days but if it is I would hold out for the lens with IS.

 

[bob100]

I have the Canon XSi and love the feature that the LCD turns off when you put your eye to it! That alone is worth the price difference to me.
OP~ go to the store and hold them. I found that the XSi was the best for me (and that was before it's price drop, and I still don't regret it). I'll eventually move up to the 40 or 50D but that will take some time. I went in ready to buy the Nikon D40 but I was quickly won over by the XSi, even with the higher price tag. It was also rated the best of the entry level dSLR's at the time in Consumer Reports (things have probably changed since I bought it a year+ ago, but then again, they always do ).

I also got the Canon XSi (450D) because of the good reviews. The only feature I miss is video - I didn't use it all that often with the S5 but sometimes on vacation or at a wedding a video clip is better than a photo.

 

[ukcatfan]

The newest Pentax entry level model is the K-x. It will be out in a couple weeks. It looks like it is going to be pretty impressive for entry level. It is going to come in three different kits, two with two lenses.

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=4004

 

[Raecheal]

I see you're in Ontario. Staples right now has the Rebel XS kit for $499. I (think it's with the non-IS kit lens though). BUT here's what you can do (speaking for personal experience). Go to Future Shop or Best Buy and ask them to do a price match. I did this and got the IS kit, plus they beat the Staples price by 10%. You'll end up with the Rebel XS IS kit for $494 plus tax. If the difference in kit lenses happens to come up (which I doubt it will), hey you're a beginner, you didn't know, right?

Heyy... Thanks!!!



Thanks for your comments everyone.. I feel a little bit more confused now with all the different options/features.. but I"m gonna go and handle a couple this weekend with the Dbf.

I clearly know nothing about Camera's, If I were to puchase the Rebel XS, etc, Do I have to change lenses every time i want to take a photo? I'd like to start with one lens... and then as my knowledge grows.. expand to more lenses.. is it possible to take day to day photos' without changing lenses? One more questions, do i have to put the photo in focus or can that be an automatic feature? (sorry if this is a stupid question I"m a beginner in every sense!!)

 

[annnewjerz]

I clearly know nothing about Camera's, If I were to puchase the Rebel XS, etc, Do I have to change lenses every time i want to take a photo? I'd like to start with one lens... and then as my knowledge grows.. expand to more lenses.. is it possible to take day to day photos' without changing lenses? One more questions, do i have to put the photo in focus or can that be an automatic feature? (sorry if this is a stupid question I"m a beginner in every sense!!)

No question is a stupid question!

In short, no you don't always have to change lenses and yes most lenses will autofocus for you---you don't need to do it yourself.

For a long answer---a lot of people buy their first dSLR with the "kit" lens that comes with it. That can range from the standard 18-55mm lens, to a nicer 18-200mm lens. Buying it with one lens allows you to shoot and then decide what you would like any additional lenses for.

Just for the sake of explanation, let's say your p&s has a good zoom on it and you can get a close up of your Dbf's face from 15 feet away---that might be the equivalent of 350mm (making these numbers up). If you get the 18-55mm lens that comes with the camera, you can still get the same picture of your Dbf, you just have to walk closer to him to get it. You can change or not change lenses as much as you'd like depending on what you are shooting. You can have three different lenses, or one, it all depends on your shooting style!

As far as whether the camera will automatically focus for you, the answer is pretty much yes. If you go with a Nikon D40, D40x, D60 and maybe the D5000 and D3000, they will not autofocus with all lenses, only with specific ones. If you go with any other brand (for the most part) you don't have to worry about that. You can always switch into manual focus if you'd like, but for the most part if you switch the camera to autofocus, all you have to do is select a focus point.

I'm sure someone can come along and offer up a better explanation, but for now---good luck with the cameras and shopping and hopefully you come out with something you really love.

 

[creativeamanda]

The thing about the Nikons is this--the body does not do the autofocus in the entry level DSLRs. The lens has the autofocus mechanism in it. For this reason, older lenses may work with the Nikon cameras, but you may have to use manual focus for those.

Personally, I would recommend my camera--a Nikon D60. Unlike the D40, it offers the Vibration Reduction/Imiage Stabilization. It is a very small, very lightweight camera. It also offers greater resolution in the form of 10.2 MP. The price is good--for the camera, an additional lens, a camera bag, a 8GB Sd card, an additional lens cap, and a UV filter, I paid around $950 US.

Most Nikon users will tell you they do not like Canons. I like my Canon P&S fine--but I found it rather less user friendly than the Nikon SLR and Nikon Digital P&S I owned before it.

But I think the telling thing for any camera is the images. These are mine from our June 2009 trip.

I used the wrong lens for this one, but like all real amatuers, I have a big problem with fireworks. Still the best ones I've ever taken. . .

And my favorite. . .

Good luck in your choice.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I'll stick to the wider recommendations of the rest of the group so far - I don't think you'll go wrong with any DSLR brand you decide on. And I personally wouldn't worry in your case about the lens selections and such, because the limitations one might encounter for buying future lenses wouldn't impact 99% of all amateur photographers...really the only areas in which Canon and Nikon's larger lens selection might pay dividends are when getting into very rare or serious pro glass, and few amateur shooters will ever be looking for that type of lens. And Olympus, Pentax, and Sony/Minolta still have hundreds of lenses available both from their own collection and third-party manufacturers. And all have their own high end lenses as well - Sony with Minolta/Sony G glass and Carl Zeiss glass, Olympus with the higher end Zuiko offerings, etc. Not to mention some very close alliances between some third-party lens manufacturers with camera companies (Tokina and Pentax, Sony and Tamron).

Also, as a side-point on the price of lenses...in some cases the other manufacturers actually have LESS expensive lenses than Canon and Nikon, due to the fact that with Sony, Olympus, and Pentax, the stabilization is in-body and saves having to spend extra for stabilization in lens. This lets you have the advantage of IS/VR/SS with all lenses, including even primes that are not available stabilized with Nikon or Canon. And there are always used lens options with all manufacturers - Pentax, Olympus, and Sony all use the same lens mount systems that hark back to the film SLR days, meaning older lenses will work just fine and even be stabilized.

That said, I think you'd be in fine shape looking at Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Pentax, or Panasonic. Of utmost importance is the feel and handling of the camera in your hands - do you like the grip, button layout, weight, and feel? It would be a shame to pick out a camera that others recommended only to find you aren't comfortable shooting with it and end up leaving it behind instead of bringing it along.

And don't overlook some of the new classes of interchangeable lens cameras that might be a good solution for someone new - Olympus and Panasonic's Micro-4/3 cameras for example, that function very similarly to P&S cameras, with no mirror assemblies and electronic viewfinders/live view, yet still with interchangeable lens options like DSLRs. They have much larger sensors than P&S cameras, and the same high-ISO abilities and speeds as DSLRs in a smaller and lighter package.

Why limit yourself? Look at ALL options, and make the best choice based on the widest possible selection of cameras...you never know where the perfect camera for you may be lurking out there, or what brand-name badge it might be wearing.

 

[Docsknotinn]

WOW, that's rather harsh implying that unless you use canon or nikon you only take snapshots.

I never said or implied that if you buy other brands you can only take snapshots. Quite obvioulsy you either over looked or chose to ignore the fact that I was talking about lens selection not IQ. It may help to re-read my post with out the brand angst. Like it or not Nikon and Canon stand out by a significant margin in that regard. I talk to people on a regular basis that buy other brands with the intent of just taking snapshots with a kit lens only to get hooked on photography. A few months down the road they realize their factory brand of lens choice is limited, availability even for third party glass may be limited and prices are frequently higher.

 

[MICKEY88]

I never said or implied that if you buy other brands you can only take snapshots. Quite obvioulsy you either over looked or chose to ignore the fact that I was talking about lens selection not IQ. It may help to re-read my post with out the brand angst. Like it or not Nikon and Canon stand out by a significant margin in that regard. I talk to people on a regular basis that buy other brands with the intent of just taking snapshots with a kit lens only to get hooked on photography. A few months down the road they realize their factory brand of lens choice is limited, availability even for third party glass may be limited and prices are frequently higher.

I didn't choose to overlook anything, it appeared to me that you were impying such, my mistake..., and thee is no brand angst coming from me..I clearly stated that they all do a good job..

and as has been stated on these boards many times, the edge in lenses is not nearly as great as some would want people to believe, Sony's zeiss lenses among the best, minoltas lenses among the best, the issue is, too many ,people buy into the hype of sales people pushing Canon and Nikon, not knowing that a large number of camera salespeople are limited knowledge wise and are really only pushing that which gets them higher commissions or entered into more contests, back in the 90's when I worked for ritz camera Canon and Nikon were very good at pushing their products with extra incentives to salespeople..
the average person is NEVER going to need hard to find lenses, nor are they going to buy lenses that cost in the thousands of dollars..eliminatings those categories narrows the spread , then you have canons multiple lenses of certain focal lengths,, is redundancy neccessary

 

[Docsknotinn]

I personally wouldn't worry in your case about the lens selections and such, because the limitations one might encounter for buying future lenses wouldn't impact 99% of all amateur photographers. And Olympus, Pentax, and Sony/Minolta still have hundreds of lenses available both from their own collection and third-party manufacturers.

Boy do I ever disagree with that. I have no idea where that 99% figure from but it certainly does not apply to 99% of the people I know. A prime case is the 70-200. A very popular FL. Now take a noob that just bought a Sony and decides he/she wants factory glass and a 70-200. How many choices do they have?
What?
One?
You're joking right?
Lets remember there is a recession. Not every one wants to drop 2 grand on a 70-200 not to mention our noob wants a travel lens and not a 3 pound chunk of glass to lug around. The same scenario with Canon. How many choices are there in the 70-200? FOUR, that includes both f2.8, f4 and IS variants with prices on L glass in this FL starting at $650. So saying that lens availability won't impact 99% of buyers is simply deceptive if not just plain incorrect. Toss in the 70-300 variants and Canon still has 2x as many options with the Sony equivalent being $200 more!
It's absolutely meaningless to say any brand has hundreds of lenses if they do not make the glass you want. Every one should consider not only the glass they want now but what glass they might want in the future before they commit to any brand.
As far as third party mounts go just pick up any photography magazine and scan the B+H ads for Tamron or Tokina glass. Look at prices and availability for Nikon or Canon Vs other mounts.

 

[Docsknotinn]

I didn't choose to overlook anything, it appeared to me that you were impying such, my mistake...
the average person is NEVER going to need hard to find lenses, nor are they going to buy lenses that cost in the thousands of dollars..eliminatings those categories narrows the spread , then you have canons multiple lenses of certain focal lengths,

Fair enough I just want to be clear that's not what I was implying at all. I think if you re-read my post I mentioned all brands make quality equipment.
The bit about "hard to find lenses" might be subject to interpretation. Try finding a Sony OEM 70-200 f4. If as you say no one is going to spend thousands that means there is no Sony factory glass to even consider in that focal length.That's a real draw back IMO. Offering a 70-200 f4 / f4IS and a 70-200 f2.8 /f2.8 IS is not "redundancy". There is very little in common between a 70-200 f4 and a f2.8 other than the FL. One is of very little use to the wedding or candid photographer the other is cost prohibitive and excessively heavy for the average travel kit. I might swing along with your take if you want to talk about DO lenses and tilt shifts but that $$$$$ Zeiss glass is in that category as well.
Now what I meant by "snapshots" is the noob who buys a body with a kit lens intending only to shoot in the auto modes. A few months down the road and they are shutterbugs wanting more glass. No matter what brand you choose it's still wise to think about the glass you may want in the future before you commit to any brand.

 

[MICKEY88]

Boy do I ever disagree with that. I have no idea where that 99% figure from but it certainly does not apply to 99% of the people I know. A prime case is the 70-200. A very popular FL. Now take a noob that just bought a Sony and decides he/she wants factory glass and a 70-200. How many choices do they have?
What?
One?
You're joking right?
Lets remember there is a recession. Not every one wants to drop 2 grand on a 70-200 not to mention our noob wants a travel lens and not a 3 pound chunk of glass to lug around. The same scenario with Canon. How many choices are there in the 70-200? FOUR, that includes both f2.8, f4 and IS variants with prices on L glass in this FL starting at $650. So saying that lens availability won't impact 99% of buyers is simply deceptive if not just plain incorrect. Toss in the 70-300 variants and Canon still has 2x as many options with the Sony equivalent being $200 more!
It's absolutely meaningless to say any brand has hundreds of lenses if they do not make the glass you want. Every one should consider not only the glass they want now but what glass they might want in the future before they commit to any brand.
As far as third party mounts go just pick up any photography magazine and scan the B+H ads for Tamron or Tokina glass. Look at prices and availability for Nikon or Canon Vs other mounts.

sony has a 55-200 and there are many minolta 80-200s and 75-300s available, minor difference in focal length, not deal breakers for me..

to me the bottom line is, there is no such thing as the best camera brand, only the best for each individual person...,, a more important factor than lens selection is, how the camera feels in the persons hands, and how the controls etc are layed out,, if a person buys a new dslr and then hates the way it feels and struggles with the control layout, odds are the cmera sits in the bag in a closet, while the person goes back to using their P&S,, at that point the number of available lenses is a moot point

 

[MICKEY88]

Fair enough I just want to be clear that's not what I was implying at all. I think if you re-read my post I mentioned all brands make quality equipment.
The bit about "hard to find lenses" might be subject to interpretation. Try finding a Sony OEM 70-200 f4. If as you say no one is going to spend thousands that means there is no Sony factory glass to even consider in that focal length.That's a real draw back IMO. Offering a 70-200 f4 / f4IS and a 70-200 f2.8 /f2.8 IS is not "redundancy". There is very little in common between a 70-200 f4 and a f2.8 other than the FL. One is of very little use to the wedding or candid photographer the other is cost prohibitive and excessively heavy for the average travel kit. I might swing along with your take if you want to talk about DO lenses and tilt shifts but that $$$$$ Zeiss glass is in that category as well.
Now what I meant by "snapshots" is the noob who buys a body with a kit lens intending only to shoot in the auto modes. A few months down the road and they are shutterbugs wanting more glass. No matter what brand you choose it's still wise to think about the glass you may want in the future before you commit to any brand.

no need to find a sony 70-200 f4 lens, one simply needs to find the legendary minolta beercan.. Minolta AF 70-210mm f4 Lens they can be found fairly easily


the thing is, yes Sony is new to the DSLR race, having joined late when they bought out Minolta, they've grown faster than many doubters expected..

there lens line is growing,but from what I've seen they are being careful with with choosing which lenses to produce first, not neccessarily producing lenses that are abundant with the minolta name on them..

they know that before they can capture a chunk of the pro market they need to capture amateurs etc, moving up from p&S cameras..while at the same time, making top end dslrs for the minolta faithfuls..

 

[zackiedawg]

Boy do I ever disagree with that. I have no idea where that 99% figure from but it certainly does not apply to 99% of the people I know. A prime case is the 70-200. A very popular FL. Now take a noob that just bought a Sony and decides he/she wants factory glass and a 70-200. How many choices do they have?

Mickey88 has already basically replied the way I intended to...but I just wanted to expand on that point. Right off the bat, you're coming at it more as a serious enthusiast...your average amateur wouldn't feel the need to hew strictly to the 70-200 limitation...they would be more than willing to entertain lenses with similar focal ranges such as the 55-200 (of which there are Minolta, Sigma, Sony, and Tamron variants ranging from $150 to $229), the 70-200 F2.8 (of which there are Minolta, Sony, Sigma, and Tamron variants ranging from $699 to $1,800), at least 20 variants of 70-210 lenses from Minolta, Cosina, Tamron, Sigma, and Magnicon all over the used market and ranging from $150 and up), the 70-300, arguably a MORE useful range than 70-200 for the average user (of which there are Minolta, Sigma, Tamron, and Sony variants ranging from $130 to $800+), and that's not even getting into the even more useful focal variants such as the Tamron, Sigma, and Sony 18-250mm lenses, which can cover the usable range of two lenses for under $800.

So just within that one category you name, and only looking into Sony/Minolta's catalog, there are quite literally dozens of variants, new and used. And one other neat little point - they're all stabilized, no matter how old, used, or new.

The noob with the travel requirements will likely find the excellent 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 to be a wonderful lens that can cover from wide to tele, with very good color and sharpness/detail, all in one light, small package.

As far as third party mounts go just pick up any photography magazine and scan the B+H ads for Tamron or Tokina glass. Look at prices and availability for Nikon or Canon Vs other mounts.

Actually, I have 2 Tamron lenses for my Sony. And one Sigma. And a Minolta. And one Sony (actually made by Tamron). No problem finding them - including an 18-250 all-around lens, a 50m F1.7, a 30mm F1.4 prime, a 10-24 ultrawide, and a 200-500mm superzoom. $2,200 total for all of them. I didn't feel too limited by the selection...and very happy to have them all stabilized. I am an amateur (semi-pro as I do sell some photos and publish...but it isn't my career).

Canon has the most lenses. Nikon second, Minolta not far behind (A-mount is rumored to have 16 million lenses out there for it). Honestly, you have highly demanding amateur friends if they cannot be satisfied with the selection from any of the major manufacturers. My point mainly is that even someone just starting out in Auto mode as a casual snapshooter, and deciding they are having fun and want to expand, have hundreds of lenses to choose from with any of the big 5 manufacturers...and that includes a fair selection of third-party kit from Tokina, Tamron, Sigma, etc. If one is getting so serious about their photography that they want to shoot weddings professionally, or require the difference in IQ and speed moving from an F2.8 lens to an F2.0 lens, I'd argue that they've moved well beyong either snapshooter or even enthusiastic amateur. Which is what my statement was about - "amateurs" from auto-mode P&Sers to seriously skilled hobbyists, but not those looking for a career path in photography. I'd argue that 99% figure represents the mass majority of DSLR buyers, with pros representing a relatively small subset. Those pros should definitely be careful what they choose to shoot with, and make sure to pick the right line of lenses...but the amateurs, even the skilled ones, would rarely if ever be hampered by lack of lens selection. Sure...it could happen..."hey, my buddy picked up a Canon xx-xx Fxx lens, and I can't find the exact same lens in my Olympus mount". But likely they could find something pretty close that would satisfy their needs. And maybe not - with the sheer number of lenses available for Canon, I'm quite sure you can comfortably name some lenses that aren't available in any other mount. The question is, exactly how into photography are you if you are needing that whole 30+ million lens selection to be satisfied? Maybe it's time to consider yourself one of the 1% that is SERIOUSLY into photography and beyond the amateur stage!

 

[Docsknotinn]

While I agree with the vast majority of what is being said I think there are a few notable exceptions.
Not every one wants to use after market or used glass. I'm not saying that's either good or bad. It's just individual choice.
As far as the 70-200 being restrictive in FL I just can't agree. Not by a long shot. It's a very popular FL. A lot of buyers will be focusing on IQ, AF speed and build quality VS a little more range. Many of the third party lenses that have been mentioned are variable aperature lenses and some are far, far from stellar glass. Amateur or not many want to upgrade with out spending two grand per lens. As I noted earlier if we focus on this one FL there are few SONY OEM options. I don't think super zooms factor into this and IMO they are generally not the best choice.
Go to B+H and try finding a Tokina 11-16 or 12-24 in a Sony or Pentax mount.
I'm not going to get into the on board Vs in lens stabilization issue simply because no one will ever agree on that between the party lines. You say you have on board OS. I say in lens IS is a LOT more effective at longer FL's.
All brands have some great points so it's just a matter of deciding what is important to the buyer. I'm just suggesting that is some thing that should be factored in to the buyers choice.


"a more important factor than lens selection is, how the camera feels in the persons hands "

I can't agree with that for several reasons. First most of us adapt pretty quickly. A new body might seem awkward at first but you get used to it. Yes you want it to be comfortable and feel good but no way would I ever place that over lens selection. It's not like many are hand holding for hours on end. Bodies come and go as quickly as technology changes. Most want to stay with in a line of glass they they have committed to even if they upgrade their body in the future. Two very good reason to put lens selection over feel.

 

[MICKEY88]

1.While I agree with the vast majority of what is being said I think there are a few notable exceptions.
Not every one wants to use after market or used glass. I'm not saying that's either good or bad. It's just individual choice.
2.As far as the 70-200 being restrictive in FL I just can't agree. Not by a long shot. It's a very popular FL. A lot of buyers will be focusing on IQ, AF speed and build quality VS a little more range. Many of the third party lenses that have been mentioned are variable aperature lenses and some are far, far from stellar glass. Amateur or not many want to upgrade with out spending two grand per lens. As I noted earlier if we focus on this one FL there are few SONY OEM options. I don't think super zooms factor into this and IMO they are generally not the best choice.
Go to B+H and try finding a Tokina 11-16 or 12-24 in a Sony or Pentax mount.
I'm not going to get into the on board Vs in lens stabilization issue simply because no one will ever agree on that between the party lines. You say you have on board OS. I say in lens IS is a LOT more effective at longer FL's.
All brands have some great points so it's just a matter of deciding what is important to the buyer. I'm just suggesting that is some thing that should be factored in to the buyers choice.


3."a more important factor than lens selection is, how the camera feels in the persons hands "

I can't agree with that for several reasons. First most of us adapt pretty quickly. A new body might seem awkward at first but you get used to it. Yes you want it to be comfortable and feel good but no way would I ever place that over lens selection. It's not like many are hand holding for hours on end. Bodies come and go as quickly as technology changes. Most want to stay with in a line of glass they they have committed to even if they upgrade their body in the future. Two very good reason to put lens selection over feel.

1. aftermarket or not, isn't really the issue being discussed, we were debating availability of lenses

2. although partly true, some aftermarket lenses are rated better in build and IQ, than canon,nikon, or sony in the same focal length and aperture...

70-200 is rather specific, just because that's canons Fl, doesn't make it the only good lens,,in that general range. my tokina 80-200 2.8 is an excellent lens, tokina made 2 variations, one was OK, I got the ATX pro, which is the better lens, and made like a tank..

I carry 2 bodies one with my minolta 28-75 2.8, the othjer with the tokina 80-200 2.8

I don't think I'm missing any shots because of the 5mm gap..

3.

to you It's obvious lens selection is more important,I also said because of control layout,,

I sold cameras for 5 years and between personal experience and talking to my manager, sales associates and district manager, we saw a lot of cases where people bought an slr, then ended up not using it because of the comfort factor or not so user friendly layout of controls, and I'm not saying one brand is better, for everyone,, it varies from person to person,, lens selection is moot for a camera sitting in a closet.

people make decisions based on different criteria,

I'm basing my thoughts on what I observed, not just my personal preference,

the day I find myself limited by lens selection for my sony's I'll consider jumping ship, or just buying another brand just for those rare times when i can't get my shot with my sony's

 

[zackiedawg]

While I agree with the vast majority of what is being said I think there are a few notable exceptions.

Me too...it's a good civil debate, because though we are discussing the issue from different viewpoints, we're all closer than it might appear and generally agree with some of the points being raised on all sides.

Not every one wants to use after market or used glass. I'm not saying that's either good or bad. It's just individual choice...Go to B+H and try finding a Tokina 11-16 or 12-24 in a Sony or Pentax mount.

Just wanted to point on that one - you were mentioning name-brand in one segment, then shifted to third-party in another. True...Tokina doesn't currently make Sony mount for their UWA lens. However, Sigma makes the 10-20 F4-5.6 and 10-20 F3.5, Tamron makes the 11-18 (as well as a Sony branded version) and the 10-24 F3.5-4.5. So quite a few third-party UWA lenses available for quite reasonable prices. I have been very happy with the performance from the Tamron 10-24 having just shot with it at Disney last week, day and night, all handheld...the F3.5 was not all that much slower than the Tokina's F2.8, giving me good usability at the wide end even in low light. While it might be nice to have the Tokina as an option as well, that goes to my point that there are very good alternatives available for most photographers to be happy. And if you go Pentax, you can have all the Tokina 12-24 F4 if you're willing to pay a little more for a Pentax label on it. In Olympus, you've got the Zuiko 9-18 F4-5.6 as well as the Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 available.

I'm not going to get into the on board Vs in lens stabilization issue simply because no one will ever agree on that between the party lines. You say you have on board OS. I say in lens IS is a LOT more effective at longer FL's.

No doubt - I agree BTW. Lens-based stabilization does seem to have a bit of an edge overall...but the slight advantage in favor of in-body for me is that I have stabilized used lenses, stabilized $50 lenses, and stabilized primes that aren't available in Canon or Nikon mount at any cost. Plus, I can still buy a stabilized lens for Sony mount, and turn off in-body stabilization.

All brands have some great points so it's just a matter of deciding what is important to the buyer. I'm just suggesting that is some thing that should be factored in to the buyers choice.

To that we certainly all agree! Consider all factors, including lens selection and future plans. I think most of us are just saying not to automatically rule out all but two manufacturers based on lens selection alone, as it is only one of many factors to consider when purchasing, and often the lens selection isn't as limited as some may be led to believe.

I can't agree with that for several reasons. First most of us adapt pretty quickly. A new body might seem awkward at first but you get used to it. Yes you want it to be comfortable and feel good but no way would I ever place that over lens selection. It's not like many are hand holding for hours on end. Bodies come and go as quickly as technology changes. Most want to stay with in a line of glass they they have committed to even if they upgrade their body in the future. Two very good reason to put lens selection over feel.

I'm going based on personal experience. I have Pentax and Canon film SLRs, and Sony DSLRs. I had some lens legacy, though not enough to be the deciding factor. My Pentax lenses are all older manual focus, while my Canon's are EOS AF lenses. When looking at DSLRs, I tried different bodies out, as well as comparing features I was looking for. I do often carry my camera bodies around for many hours by the grip, either hanging in my hand at my side, or up to my face shooting. I do a lot of bird photography, and walk many miles with my camera in hand with a huge zoom lens mounted. When I travel, my camera with travel lens basically never leaves my grip. So grip design was of utmost importance when selecting a camera...as was the location of controls and comfort of buttons and jog wheels for easy use. This happens to be one of those things that is intensely personal - what works for someone else wonderfully could be awful to me, and vice versa. As it was, I had to rule out Canon first and foremost, because I was extremely uncomfortable holding and carrying the cameras I looked at. I found the controls did not fall under finger, which left me looking at finger placement visually before moving to my face, or pulling away to glance at what I was changing. I was OK with Pentax grips, but didn't like menus and controls as much. Nikon was fairly comfortable to me, and controls fairly intuitive. I wasn't really interested at the time in 4:3 so ruled out Olympus. Sony was comfortable to me, plus I found the menus and control layout completely familiar, having had a several advanced P&S Sonys. I was able to shoot with the camera without ever moving my eye from the finder, and got all the features I wanted. Most of all, I can carry the camera with an 8Lb lens, hanging off my fingers my the grip, all day for hours on end, and am comfortable and secure. It happened to mean a lot to me, and has resulted in me bringing my camera with me more often, and shooting more. I had to look back and realize the reason I took no more than a handful of shots with my Canon SLR over 5 years...I never really got used to the controls or adapted to it very well. It never delivered the feel my old Pentax did...and though it was a fine camera, it ended up spending more time in a bag in a closet than traveling with me and shooting.

So while it may not be important to a few people, and some like you may be more than willing to adapt and end up comfortable, I find myself less adaptable and more prone to not use something as much if it isn't comfortable and instinctive...and I suspect many others out there may be in the same boat, as I've known more than a few friends with cameras that never seem to bring them along, and when they do, they are always putting them down or putting them away after a shot or two...just like I used to. And I've seen some of them buy new cameras that they found more comfortable and they're suddenly out shooting all the time (my brother for example with his Nikon D90).

It's just another of the many points to consider, that makes purchasing a camera a complex but ultimately rewarding decision, and best decided by considering the broadest and widest possible selection rather than narrowing one's field before you even start looking.

 

[Docsknotinn]

1. aftermarket or not, isn't really the issue being discussed, we were debating availability of lenses

2. although partly true, some aftermarket lenses are rated better in build and IQ, than canon,nikon, or sony in the same focal length and aperture...

70-200 is rather specific, just because that's canons Fl, doesn't make it the only good lens,,in that general range. my tokina 80-200 2.8 is an excellent lens, tokina made 2 variations, one was OK, I got the ATX pro, which is the better lens, and made like a tank..

I carry 2 bodies one with my minolta 28-75 2.8, the othjer with the tokina 80-200 2.8

I don't think I'm missing any shots because of the 5mm gap..

1) No we are debating the issue of quality OEM glass. To me that means fixed aperature. I'm more than happy to extend that to current generation (not used or out of production glass) Tokina, Tamron and Sigma as they are by far the most popular choices in third party glass. However they should to be fixed aperature lenses for this comparison.
zackiedawg I did shift to third party glass for a moment simply because the Tokina wide angles are very popular lenses at the moment with limited mount availability.

2) I'm not choosing the 70-200 because it's brand specific. A lot of manufacturers make a 70-200 for one reason. It's a very popular focal length. The 80-200 is in the same category, an 18-200 is not.

"aftermarket lenses are rated better in build and IQ, than canon,nikon, or sony"

You are painting with a very broad brush there and I simply do not agree with most statements that broad. Lenses must be compared on an individual basis. The 70-210 Tamron is not comparable in IQ or BQ to the Sony, Canon or Nikon lens in similar FL. The flip side is that there are some high end Sigmas and Tokinas that are incredibly good glass. The question is are THOSE few higher end lenses available in the mount for the brand of camera you buy?
Carrying two bodies is not really the topic now is it? I don't see that helping the noob. That's a bit like saying if you have an unlimited budget you can have great gear. I think we all understand that.

As far as comfort goes I don't disagree that it's a major factor in body choice it's just not what I see should be a major factor in brand choice. All of the majors offer several bodies. A lot of people start with the base DSLR, comfortable or not because that's where their price point is. I do think that all buyers should try to handle a camera before they buy. IMO the view finder plays in to that as well and many noobs seem to over look that.

 

[MICKEY88]

1) No we are debating the issue of quality OEM glass. To me that means fixed aperature. I'm more than happy to extend that to current generation (not used or out of production glass) Tokina, Tamron and Sigma as they are by far the most popular choices in third party glass. However they should to be fixed aperature lenses for this comparison.
zackiedawg I did shift to third party glass for a moment simply because the Tokina wide angles are very popular lenses at the moment with limited mount availability.

2) I'm not choosing the 70-200 because it's brand specific. A lot of manufacturers make a 70-200 for one reason. It's a very popular focal length. The 80-200 is in the same category, an 18-200 is not.

"aftermarket lenses are rated better in build and IQ, than canon,nikon, or sony"

You are painting with a very broad brush there and I simply do not agree with most statements that broad. Lenses must be compared on an individual basis. The 70-210 Tamron is not comparable in IQ or BQ to the Sony, Canon or Nikon lens in similar FL. The flip side is that there are some high end Sigmas and Tokinas that are incredibly good glass. The question is are THOSE few higher end lenses available in the mount for the brand of camera you buy?
Carrying two bodies is not really the topic now is it? I don't see that helping the noob. That's a bit like saying if you have an unlimited budget you can have great gear. I think we all understand that.

3.As far as comfort goes I don't disagree that it's a major factor in body choice it's just not what I see should be a major factor in brand choice. All of the majors offer several bodies. A lot of people start with the base DSLR, comfortable or not because that's where their price point is. I do think that all buyers should try to handle a camera before they buy. IMO the view finder plays in to that as well and many noobs seem to over look that.

OK so now you are changing the parameters of the debate, LOL

1..

While all of the other brands listed here make quality equipment, lens choice can be limited and even if those makers do manufacture a particular lens it can be hard to find and often more expensive than Canon or Nikon. In many cases third party lens choice will also be limited compared to Canon and Nikon mount options. When you chose a body consider the line of glass you are buying in to. You may upgrade your body in the future but you want the glass you but to last a long time.

your original post gave no such limits...just that lens choices are limited...if you are going to change it to fixed aperture and currently made lenses then that should have been stated in your original post..

2. if you are going to quote me and disagree, please include the whole sentence, rather than editing which changes the meaning...

my original stetement clearly says some..aftermarket lenses...

some aftermarket lenses are rated better in build and IQ, than canon,nikon, or sony in the same focal length and aperture

sigma is starting to release their new lenses in sony and pentax mount..

ok forgetting my second camera body, the point is still just as valaid, carrying one body and my 28-75 2.8 and my 80-200 2.8, I'm really not losing anything by not haviing a 70-200 2.8

3. I respectfully disagree, it should be a factor in brand choice based on the info I provided in my prior post, I've seen too many people buy cameras and then not use them because they didn't fit their hand well and control layout was not user friendly to them..there is a big difference in base mdels between brands,, and less of a difference between models within a specific brand, as far as feel and control layout and menu layout goes...

 

[Docsknotinn]

OK so now you are changing the parameters of the debate, LOL

1..

your original post gave no such limits...just that lens choices are limited...if you are going to change it to fixed aperture and currently made lenses.

2. if you are going to quote me and disagree, please include the whole sentence, rather than editing which changes the meaning...

sigma is starting to release their new lenses in sony and pentax mount..

carrying one body and my 28-75 2.8 and my 80-200 2.8, I'm really not losing anything by not haviing a 70-200 2.8

1) Actually I did. I was clearly talking about those wanting to upgrade their gear. Generally that excludes discontinued lenses and variable aperatures. You also tried to stretch that to third part glass and I was very clearly talking about OEM glass.

2) You mean like the way you totally distorted my OP and tried to suggest I was stating some thing that was clearly not the case? I haven't altered the "meaning" of any thing you posted. I don't see how any of that helps your stance much. Clearly every one can read your entire post if they want to wade through all of that.
I don't suggest any one buy any brand based on rumors of future lenses or brand expansion. We have been hearing that from some brands for several years and still no joy.
I never suggested that you are "losing" any thing by using an 80-200. You seem to have great difficulty comprehending my posts. In point of fact I explicitly stated that an 80-200 is in the same category.
Finally I have no idea what ....... means.
In either event I trust that every one can clearly see there is more than one way to approach the choice of a new camera. I say handle the camera, consider the cost of future glass, the availability of future glass as well as the on line support that may be available for each brand.