SLR - help needed

[jen0610]

We are getting ready to upgrade to a SLR. None of our family or friends are "camera" people. In our family, I am the one who does all the picture taking at the get togethers. The current kodak point and shoot, isn't cutting the mustard any more. I would love to hear your opitions on what is out on the market today. I have read so many reports, my eyes can't take it any more. Have played with several different camera at the stores and talked to the sales people.

Here is what we are looking for and the uses:

10+ pixels
fast shutter speed
auto focus
image stabilization

Will be used for family photos at holidays and vacations. Kids activites that we will use at - marching band, track, base/softball, basketball, dance recitals/competions, and cheerleading.

Your personal likes and dislikes are all wanted. DH knows that this isn't going to be a cheap purchase, but to start out would like to stay under $2000. He knows I could, and if I had an open budget, would get the best out there.

Thanks!

Jen

 

[velvetelvis]

i would recommend the canon 40D kit with the 28-135 IS lens. the kit comes in around 1500 bucks at most retail stores. i upgraded from the XT and i couldnt be happier with the 40D.

only down side is its pretty large and kinda heavy but the pros far out way those cons.

 

[MICKEY88]

10+ pixels--all major brands have models that meet this criteria

fast shutter speed - again all models meet this criteria, although shutter speed is affected by lighting conditions, so lens speed becomes a factor in lower light..


auto focus--al brands should meet this as well..


image stabilization..this is the biggy.... Sony and Pentax have image stabilization built into the camera body, so any lens will work,,


Canon and Nikon, do not have in body IS, so to get it, you must by IS lenses which are more costly...


Sony just announced 2 new DSLRs yesterday...http://www.popphoto.com/photonews/5081/sony-unveils-alpha-a300-and-a350-dslrs.html

Sony actually bought out Minolta and kept the Minolta A lens mount, so older Minolta Auto focus lenses will work on the Sony cameras..

I've used Minolta for 30+ years so I'm a Sony fan.

I'm sure, the pentax/canon/nikon users will be along shortly to give more info on those models.

 

[gruZ]

Jen,

Before jumping into the fray and picking brand, model, lens, etc. etc. etc. - enough to make your head spin, I'll ask a question.

Are you set for sure on a DSLR? What is it about the current Kodak P&S that isn't "cutting the mustard?" Your intended use list sure looks like a DSLR may be the right option, but there are some newer P&S models out there that might work as well.

The reason I ask is people often think a DSLR will automatically make better pictures, and they are in fact disappointed with the IQ when using a DSLR right out of the box. After some learning, tweaking, setting adjustment, and post processing (which you will do a fair amount of), the IQ is outstanding - but it takes a bit to get there.

If you already know all this, and want to move forward - great! Regardless of the brand / model you will get great images when putting in the time and effort. If you've already been through these thoughts and come to the conclusion that you have, just tell me to shut up and I will!

 

[MICKEY88]

Jen,


After some learning, tweaking, setting adjustment, and post processing (which you will do a fair amount of), !the IQ is outstanding - but it takes a bit to get there.

I respectfully disagree with this comment, if a person gets a good exposure, and learns to frame the shot the way they would want the final print to look, very little if any post processing is neccessary..

 

[jen0610]

Jen,

Are you set for sure on a DSLR? What is it about the current Kodak P&S that isn't "cutting the mustard?" Your intended use list sure looks like a DSLR may be the right option, but there are some newer P&S models out there that might work as well.

Right now with the one I have, you can not take good action pictures, even with the action/sport setting. With the amount of dancing my DD does, I have to have a camera that will take multipule, quick series of shots when they are doing turns, grapevines or jumps. Also need one that will be albe to zoom from up in the stand at band competitions.


Like I said, we don't have any family or friends who are into camera's. Every thing is being based on the reading I have done and the taking with sales people, SLR will take care of those two wants.

 

[DueyDooDah]

Well, Jen. I have to say that your list contains the wrong criteria. Here is the proper list when looking for a good dSLR:

1) C
2) a
3) n
4) o
5) n

Notice the crucial number 5 item. This item is essential to getting the proper fit to your needs and the respect you deserve in a cynical community. (You will notice shortly the cynicism from those messages that follow this one that tout other lists than the one presented above.)

 

[MICKEY88]

we shall ignore the canon propaganda for now...

true photographers will give you respect no matter what brand you are shooting with, since in reality it's not the violin, it's the violinist, that creates the shot...



your best bet for dance stuff is going to be a fast lens..

I personally would get a dslr a 28-70 2.8 lens and a 70-200 2.8 lens....for dance stuff.. a good 100-300 or something in that ballpark should be good for band stuff

others will surely disagree, you ask 20 photographers and you will possibly get 30 different answers..

a good burst mode will help with dance stuff, but to be quite honest, knowing dance and being able to anticipate will yield just as good results

 

[velvetelvis]

you have to realize that when it comes to SLR's there is no all purpose lens. for each of those things you listed ideally you would a different lens for each. much like mickey88 said.

have you thought about a hybrid camera??? like the s3 or s5? nikon makes one too but the name of it escapes me. they come with a nice glass lens, a 12 x OPTICAL zoom (optical is important it looks much better than a digital zoom which isnt really a zoom at all), as well as a full manual setting much like an slr has.

 

[handicap18]

we shall ignore the canon propaganda for now...

true photographers will give you respect no matter what brand you are shooting with, since in reality it's not the violin, it's the violinist, that creates the shot...



your best bet for dance stuff is going to be a fast lens..

I personally would get a dslr a 28-70 2.8 lens and a 70-200 2.8 lens....for dance stuff.. a good 100-300 or something in that ballpark should be good for band stuff

others will surely disagree, you ask 20 photographers and you will possibly get 30 different answers..

a good burst mode will help with dance stuff, but to be quite honest, knowing dance and being able to anticipate will yield just as good results

I would agree with this. While the 28-70 isn't the widest of lenses, it is excellent for low light stuff with the f/2.8 aperture all the way through. Canon and Nikon have one (or in a similar focal range) but they are expensive. Tamron and Sigma also make one for all the major brands (Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc...) and is a lot less money.

The 70-200 f/2.8 is also a good recommendation, however it is a VERY pricey one. With IS or VR this lens is $1700. Sigma makes one that is very good without IS/VR for around $900 (avaliable for all camera makes). Nikon also has a non VR version (80-200 f/2.8) for around $1100.

When ultimately deciding on which one to go with you have to account on more than just your initial purchase. Your putting your money into a system (body, lenses, flash, accessories, etc...)

For what your describing you want a new camera for, you'll definately need a few lenses. Maybe 3, maybe 2. Maybe more. Think of everything as tools. Everyone has a hammer and some screwdrivers, but for other jobs you need a circular saw, or jig saw, or table saw, or a jackhammer or sledgehammer or a compound miter saw. The more specific the tool needed for the job, the more expensive the tool becomes. No matter what brand of tool you go with, knowing how, when and why to use the tool is the most important.

 

[ukcatfan]

Reporting in for Pentax

There is the existing K10D which is a 10MP and has a decent buffer for continuous shooting. The K100D and the announced K200D do not have large enough buffers for your needs. Then there is the newly announced K20D for $1,299. It is going to be very nice and 14MP with a little faster continuous mode than the new Sony 14MP. The Pentax kit lens is pretty nice and covers 18-55mm. Add the new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 and you would be set. I do not know the price on the lens yet.

Kevin

 

[MarkBarbieri]

After some learning, tweaking, setting adjustment, and post processing (which you will do a fair amount of), the IQ is outstanding - but it takes a bit to get there.

You can use just about any DSLR like a point and shoot and get better results than a point and shoot. You can do more with a DSLR by post processing, but it isn't necessary.

fast shutter speed - again all models meet this criteria, although shutter speed is affected by lighting conditions, so lens speed becomes a factor in lower light..

I suspect that the OP means shutter lag. Shutter lag is the time between when you push the button and the picture is actually taken. Shutter speed is how long the shutter is open during the taking of the picture. In either case, essentially all DSLRs are better than essentially all P&S. At the entry level for DSLRs, I don't think is too much difference between shutter lag or shutter speed.

a good burst mode will help with dance stuff, but to be quite honest, knowing dance and being able to anticipate will yield just as good results

I'd be more concerned with buffer size and write speed than fps. If my subject is doing a 5 minute dance segment, my concern isn't how many pictures can I get in 1 second. It's how many pictures can I take in 5 minutes.

 

[fan1080]

true photographers will give you respect no matter what brand you are shooting with, since in reality it's not the violin, it's the violinist, that creates the shot...

Dang gammit, no wonder my photography sux, I haven't a clue how to play violin!!!

I do play other instruments though, will that help my photography?

I need to figure this stuff out fast, we leave for WDW in 9 days!!!

 

[Groucho]

Based on the OP's requirements, I suspect that they're not familiar with SLRs at all. This is not a bad thing (we were all there once), but some basic facts are probably worthwhile...

1) It's highly unlikely that anyone will recommend a DSLR from a company other than the one they currently own. This means:
1a) We DSLRs owners are both snobs and fiercely defensive about our brand choices, in fact I've often heard of Canon and Pentax users getting together late at night for a knife fight. Olympus users tend to avoid rumbles as their knives are a different shape and slightly smaller than everyone elses. (Nothing like a good 4:3 sensor joke to confuse those not paying attention! )
1b) More seriously, it means that most people are very happy with their DSLR. Even if your camera has an el-cheapo kit lens, no focus motor, small buffer, a smaller sensor, or worse image noise than others using the same sensor, chances are that you will still be very happy.
2) Megapixels really shouldn't be a big part of the decision. I think most reasonably educated Canon users would be happier with an 8mp 30D than a 10mp XTi. Sony's 6mp sensor that is in the Pentax K100D and Nikon D40 is slightly better at controlling noise than the Sony 10mp sensor that's in a few cameras from Pentax, Nikon, and Sony, and 6mp is still plenty for lots of detail in a decent-sized print.
3) All the cameras can auto focus, but you can also put manual focus lenses on. The Nikon D40/D40x/D60 cannot focus some lenses that don't have built-in motors, but that's the only real "gotcha" out there.
4) Image stabilization can be done in the body or the lens. Pentax, Sony, and Olympus all offer it in the body (only the entry-level Olympus doesn't have it), while Canon and Nikon force you to buy it in each lens. The newest Canon and Nikon cameras (as-yet-unreleased but very soon) will come with IS "kit" lenses, so any DSLR from the "big five" (again, except the lowest-tier Olympus) give you IS with the body/lens kit combination.
5) A DSLR is most definitely not a magic bullet to give you great photos.
6) If you want a lot of zoom, expect to spend more. If you want low-light ability, expect to spend more. If you want a lot of zoom and low-light ability, expect to spend a lot more. And lug around heavy gear.

 

[YEKCIM]

Very well said, Groucho. A fair and balanced assessment.

~ YEKCIM

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

When ultimately deciding on which one to go with you have to account on more than just your initial purchase. Your putting your money into a system (body, lenses, flash, accessories, etc...)

For what your describing you want a new camera for, you'll definately need a few lenses. Maybe 3, maybe 2. Maybe more. Think of everything as tools. Everyone has a hammer and some screwdrivers, but for other jobs you need a circular saw, or jig saw, or table saw, or a jackhammer or sledgehammer or a compound miter saw. The more specific the tool needed for the job, the more expensive the tool becomes. No matter what brand of tool you go with, knowing how, when and why to use the tool is the most important.

I agree w/ Handicap. I just bought a D80 last year w/ kit lens and 70-300VR lens. Next thing you know, I got the SB800 flash. Before you know it, I bought the Sigma 10-20mm. Now I'm looking at the type of 2.8 lens he described in his post. I should have just got the 2.8 in the first place, but being a total noob, I thought I should just get the kit lenses to start with until I figured out what I needed.
DSLRs have a pretty big learning curve if you've never used them before. I have a film SLR, but it's different than the DSLR. I never had to figure out things like ISO settings, etc. If I knew I was taking lower light photos I would buy 400 speed film, or 800 speed film. I didn't really know what I was doing, but it was more WYSIWYG. If it looked blurry, I would refocus until it looked good. My experience w/ my DSLR is that it's different than the older SLRs in this regard. Many times in my DSLR viewfinder the shot looks fine. Then you snap the picture and it's blurry or worse. (Well that's how it was in the begining. It's getting better now.) DSLRS tend to blow out highlights way more than SLRs. So now I'm thinking of picking up a couple of filters to help with that, especially because I love taking pictures of the sky and sunsets, etc. Sometimes, it's impossible to get it so everything is even and nothing is blown out when you are shooting a bright sunset over dark water for example. (For me anyway, maybe it's becase I'm still learning? ) The point is, I now suffer from Nikon Aquistion Syndrome, LOL! I thought my initial purchase would only be the cost of the camera, kit lens and zoom, couple of extra SD cards, extra battery, bigger camera bag, maybe an external flash for a total of less than $2000. HA! That's what I got for thinking! I have a son who is in marching band (long distance nightime shots w/ fast movements), symphonic band (low light, indoors, no flash allowed), I take a lot of show and concert/dance photos (low light/ no flash), so I needed a fast lens for that. (Got the 50mm f1.8 best/cheapest investment to date! $100!)
So, Handicap is right, it adds up quickly, and you will need a wide variety of lenses to get everything you want because the DSLR is not as intutive as the P&S. Either that or you will have to bump up your ISO for extremely low light photos, in which case you may as well use your P&S. (Unless you already know how to use Photoshop, Lightroom and/or Nikon Capture NX.) If you get the kit lens, you will probably need a tripod to stabilize the camera for any low light shots w/ no flash situations, because the lens isn't fast enough for indoor dancing/recital type photos, especially if you are at a distance. You can't bump up the ISO enough w/out sacrificing quality. (Oh yeah that's right, I also bought a couple of CF tripods, one for home use and a lighter one for lugging around the parks.) Okay, some will tell you to use Noise reduction software, but if you are just starting out in the digital world, for me anyway, I would rather learn to use the camera correctly first and try to learn to get the shot right. Then I can worry about the photo enhancement stuff later. When I can afford it... After I get my f2.8 lenses -- LOL!
In many ways, the P&S is so much easier to use, especially if it has built in IS. But if you're willing to invest the time into learning how to use the camera, and take a ton of photos and analyze them to try to figure out what you're doing wrong, you can start to take better photos. If I could afford it I would take the NYIP class, just because I am really loving my new hobby, and I am impatient to get better at it. (BTW, my husband loves the pictures, but hates the hobby due to the time and $$$.)
But with all that said, I love my Nikon D80, I love the creative experience of figuring out how to get the picture 'right'. Of course, I hate it when it doesn't come out, especially if it's a once in a lifetime shot. But that's my fault, and that's part of the learning experience. One great thing with Digital is you can take as many as you want with no cost until you develop.
The people on these boards are so helpful, I've learned so much from many of them! Thanks to all of your pros out there!
Good luck whatever you decide!

 

[ukcatfan]

So, Handicap is right, it adds up quickly, and you will need a wide variety of lenses to get everything you want because the DSLR is not as intutive as the P&S. Either that or you will have to bump up your ISO for extremely low light photos, in which case you may as well use your P&S. (Unless you already know how to use Photoshop, Lightroom and/or Nikon Capture NX.)

I agree with most but this statement. In low light high ISO shots, a DSLR will always blow away a p&s. That is one of the main reasons many people get a DSLR. It will also do a better job at low light AF than a p&s. For example, I have almost never been able to lock focus in HM with a p&s, but got pretty decent shots with my K100D at 1600 ISO and my 50mm f/1.4.

Kevin

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

I agree with most but this statement. In low light high ISO shots, a DSLR will always blow away a p&s. That is one of the main reasons many people get a DSLR. It will also do a better job at low light AF than a p&s. For example, I have almost never been able to lock focus in HM with a p&s, but got pretty decent shots with my K100D at 1600 ISO and my 50mm f/1.4.

Kevin

Right, but my point was that the OP would have to invest in better lenses than the kit lens or have to bump up the ISO to ridiculous levels; and even then if she's using the kit lens, she/he may still not have enough light to get a decent shot and will probably need more stabilization because you can't shoot off decent really low light pics with the kit lenses and hand hold the camera. Rarely have I been able to hold my dslr in low light situations, w/ kit lens attached, and have the pictures come out flawless, especially if I am zoomed in to something far away. (Like a dancer on a stage.) I always have to bump ISO and that introduces noise and even then the pics may still come out blurry with the kit lens zoomed in and handheld.
In that regard, imo, the intuitive IS wins in a good P&S imo, because at least you have a chance of having *something* come out that's not blurry. You can leave the flash off, or set it for backlighting, and all those little things you can do with a decent P&S. E.G., auto backlighting compensation on/off isn't available on my D80 to my knowledge. (I could be wrong, since I'm still learning how to use it.) Thus far if I have a backlighting issue, I have had to either move the subject or use a flash. Sometimes for performances, you are not allowed to use flash, and the performers could be heavily backlighted, and you certainly can't move them... I guess it also depends on the P&S camera... I love my D80, but the bottom line is until I have all the knowledge on how to take 'correctly exposed photos', there are instances where my P&S has outperformed my d80 w/ Kit lens in low light situations. Now with the 50mm1.8 attached, that's a different story....So my point was the OP is going to have to invest in lenses to be able to achieve all the things she/he is saying she/he wants to be able to do. If I have time I'll post some pictures I took from a concert w/ P&S and D80 kit lens, both handheld...Then you'll be able to see what I mean...In every other aspect, and in flexibility my d80 w/ kit lens blows away any previous point and shoots I've ever had.

 

[pjacobi]

He knows I could, and if I had an open budget, would get the best out there.

Buying the absolute best camera equipment is no guarantee of a good photograph.

The most important camera accessory is...you brain!

Be prepared to commit the time and effort to learn how to use the equipment, lighting, and compostition.

A dSLR is not a magic box the produces good photograghs at the touch of a button.

A good photograph reflects the experience of years of training.

When upgrading equipment, don't forget to upgrade your brain.


-Paul

 

[ukcatfan]

Right, but my point was that the OP would have to invest in better lenses than the kit lens or have to bump up the ISO to ridiculous levels; and even then if she's using the kit lens, she/he may still not have enough light to get a decent shot and will probably need more stabilization because you can't shoot off decent really low light pics with the kit lenses and hand hold the camera. Rarely have I been able to hold my dslr in low light situations, w/ kit lens attached, and have the pictures come out flawless, especially if I am zoomed in to something far away. (Like a dancer on a stage.) I always have to bump ISO and that introduces noise and even then the pics may still come out blurry with the kit lens zoomed in and handheld.
In that regard, imo, the intuitive IS wins in a good P&S imo, because at least you have a chance of having *something* come out that's not blurry. You can leave the flash off, or set it for backlighting, and all those little things you can do with a decent P&S. E.G., auto backlighting compensation on/off isn't available on my D80 to my knowledge. (I could be wrong, since I'm still learning how to use it.) Thus far if I have a backlighting issue, I have had to either move the subject or use a flash. Sometimes for performances, you are not allowed to use flash, and the performers could be heavily backlighted, and you certainly can't move them... I guess it also depends on the P&S camera... I love my D80, but the bottom line is until I have all the knowledge on how to take 'correctly exposed photos', there are instances where my P&S has outperformed my d80 w/ Kit lens in low light situations. Now with the 50mm1.8 attached, that's a different story....So my point was the OP is going to have to invest in lenses to be able to achieve all the things she/he is saying she/he wants to be able to do. If I have time I'll post some pictures I took from a concert w/ P&S and D80 kit lens, both handheld...Then you'll be able to see what I mean...In every other aspect, and in flexibility my d80 w/ kit lens blows away any previous point and shoots I've ever had.

Here is my experience. My S2 IS has about the same noise at ISO 200 as my K100D at 1600. That gives you better performance with a DSLR and kit lens than any p&s. So, you do not have to invest in better lenses to get better low light performance out of a DSLR. Yes, you get the best results with a better lens, but even a kit is better than p&s. As for stabilization, it is useful, but certainly not a holy grail. To relate this back to the Disboards, most low light shots at WDW require a fast enough shutter to prevent subject blur. At those shutter speeds, IS no longer matters. Given that, a dancer on stage would require a fast enough shutter that would take IS out of the equation.

Kevin