Jump to content

New Camera Time - SLR??

AudiPartner

By AudiPartner
in Technology Corner

 Share

Recommended Posts

AudiPartner Newbie

AudiPartner

Posted
Posted

My good old faithfull Pentax Optio 550 packed up at the weekend, so I'm looking to replace it.

Since mobiles have camera's on them these days, I don't need a compact type, so I'm thinking of getting a "proper" camera.

I am a novice, and despite not knowing how to use a proper camera, I do appreciate good photography. So I'm thinking I should opt for an SLR. But then I have noticed a few SLR style cameras around which look pretty good.

I don't want to be spending lots of dosh (around £200?), so I'm wondering whether to go for something like a second hand Canon 20D or a Nikon D40 etc, or just one of those SLR style cameras like the Fujis with 16x optical zoom etc.

Hmm....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AudiPartner Newbie

AudiPartner

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I just went through the same process. The Fuji S9600 is the one I got. Available for sub £200 and great for everything I want to do with it. I did want an SLR but for the money and the use I couldn't justify it.

Probably my conclusion too! However the Canon EOS 350D seem good value - is that cos they're crap??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turrican Newbie

Turrican

Posted
Posted
I'd have thought the 400D is affordable too given the 450D has been released.

I used a 350D a year or so ago and it is a nice bit of kit. 400D is similar with a bigger screen and more pixels I think.

I did read somewhere that Sainsburys were selling the 400d with 18-55 lens kit for £199. Bargain!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AudiPartner Newbie

AudiPartner

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Sorry - OT. Hows the turbo going?

Sweet as mate! Loving it, naturally.

Its silly fast, and now I have my Tubi exhaust fitted it sounds like it goes! Not driven a 997 TT - they're faster, but how fast do you need?? If £55k buys a 997, I think it would be difficult to justify it, when a 996 costs £20k less! I don't doubt they're good value, but they're all good value - think I'd sooner see £20k in the bank.

IF I was spending £55k, I think it would be a on a GT3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jediknight83 Newbie

jediknight83

Posted
Posted

the canon 350 or 400 is a great bit of kit.

the cheaper nikons are also very good but they dont have a built in autofocus motor so it means if you ever want to buy other lenses you need to buy the more expensive ones with their own AF motor built in.

I have the Nikon D200 and as that has a built in AF motor i have been able to buy the tamron lenses which i feel give just a good on the image quality front but dont have a built in AF motor

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GCab Newbie

GCab

Posted
Posted (edited)

I bought a series of compact cameras and found I got bored and made the leap to DSLR. I'm still learning the ropes but it's hugely rewarding.

Be aware it's a step in a different direction, i.e. not just about getting the best possible snapshot. DSLRs mean you can (though you don't *have* to) experiment with manual control, fool about with interchangeable lenses, etc. etc. It doesn't mean you have to do all that now of course - you can get the Canon DSLRs mentioned above, use them on Auto with the kit lens, and just be happy knowing you have the flexibility to play around later, incrementally (start playing more with the settings, maybe get another lens when you're ready, and only have to trade up camera body when you really want to, etc.).

If on the other hand you know already that you're only ever going to want "a good snapshot" and that the extent of your tinkering will be to switch from landscape to indoor portrait pre-set modes because you won't have the patience for anything else, then stick with compacts which can give very good results.

A compromise is either the "bridge" cameras which are compacts but have superzooms etc., but no interchangeable lenses or optical viewfinder (this is the key difference with the models which your question was about); or the 'serious amateur' compacts which allow a lot of tinkering (manual exposure, filters, lens changeability in some cases, etc.) but in compact form. These are probably outside your price range (more £300-400).

Personally I'd find it frustrating getting a superzoom like the Fuji and knowing you'll never be able to experiment with different lenses or filters etc.

Edited by GCab
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
_Tone_ Newbie

_Tone_

Posted
Posted

I guess you have to decide on which lenses you would like - these are what I would purchase:

Sigma 10-20mm - f4-5.6 EX DC HSM (Basically a Nikon AF)

This will allow you to take some magnificent wide angle pics - especialy of the Guards Red Back end!

Alternatively - you could get the standard lens for the camera - 18-55 VR Lens or if your going to shoot outdoors more consider a 55-200 which are about £130.

That would get you started - guess you need some fast Sandisk Extreme 4 cards as well and a book on using that camera to its best.

Then Photoshop.

Can you take RAW images on a D60? If so you could learn how to post produce all the shots - thats fun!

Cheers

Tone

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarMad Explorer

CarMad

Posted
Posted

What type of shots do you want to take?

I'd get a basic book and take the camera for a walk with what ever lens you currently have first. It will help you see what you enjoy taking shots of and give you an idea of where you want to spend you money.

Things can and will get very expensive very quickly if you really want to get into it. +++

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AudiPartner Newbie

AudiPartner

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Not really sure what I'll be taking pictures of yet, haven't got that far. I just needed a new camera and am well aware how good a shots an SLR can take. I have just bought a beginners book so will trawl through that.

I currently have no lenses as the camera was bought body only. Perhaps I'll just pick up a standard 18-55mm lens and take it from there. Or better still, borrow a lens from my mates date who is a crime scene photographer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarMad Explorer

CarMad

Posted
Posted

If you want to learn I'd get a 50mm or 30mm prime if the Nikon you got is a crop. Shooting with a low F stop less than 2 teaches you a lot as does having a fixed lens with no zoom about the depth of field and what happens when you play with the settings.

Taking a good shot is all about what you are trying to say with the picture. With a zoom early on its easy just to take a shot of any old thing. I'd not get anything expensive though. The 30mm f1.4 sigma is a good lens on Canon or Nikon if your on a crop sensor. +++

All of the above is if you want to do it as a hobbie not just to take good random shots otherwise a standard zoom is an ok way to go. :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GCab Newbie

GCab

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm going to disagree with the vastly more experienced Carmad (but then, I'm closer in time to having been in your position, Audipartner :) ) I think if you don't yet know what you want to take pics of, go for a zoom, preferably starting at the 18- mark as you suggest. Not so that you can just stand still and snap the first thing that comes along, but so you can get an early idea of the range of things you can do with an SLR, from landscapes to portraits.

Otherwise you'll find a fixed (prime) lens too frustrating as it never seems to be right for what you feel like trying, and you don't want to get bored before you get fully into "using your feet to get the right perspective". I'd argue for being able to "photo any old thing", actually - it's what you need when you're doing your photographic equivalent of a duckling learning to walk without getting its feet tangled up. In fact my first lens was an 18-200mm zoom, which was great until I dropped the camera and broke it (the lens) - D'oh.

Once you know what you want to focus on (no pun intended :grin:) you can start diversifying or specialising, get a wide-angle zoom or a 'standard lens' (28-30 as Carmad suggests) for landscape, 50mm for portraits, or telephotos if you decide that wildlife catches your interest (you really need up to 200mm to get a feel for that as a starter, and over that to be seriousl into flying birds and whatnot). You're a bit like I was, and I really found a "do it all" superzoom helped me get into it all from day 1 and see what was possible on an SLR. The 18-200 isn't exactly a pro lens, but is high enough quality that it will stay with you for as long as you want, butter-fingered drops aside; and would be great for travelling.

It was intuitive enough to be taking these in the first two weeks (below): (admittedly with a D300 which has an amazing 3D tracking system once you figure out how to turn it on). If you don't want to spend this much (though the occasional one is around used for near £200), then I'd second your choice of 18-55, or alternatively there's a new 18-105 "kit" lens out for £200 (released alongside the D90, and reviewed with it in a few mags) which is supposed to be very good. The Vibration Reduction (image stabilisation) works very well.

http://www.tyresmoke.net/forum/lounge-joy/111408-red-arrows-typhoon-others-dawlish-air-show-pic-heavy-post.html

Nikon 18-200MM F3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics & Photo

Nikon - Nikkor 18-105 mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics & Photo

I think Nikon are rapidly on the up as a brand with their new stuff, and have gone from a bit of a "Merc" image (expensive, staid, premium but not cutting-edge) to doing what Audi did a few years back in terms of getting interest with innovation - I was pleased to see the D300 got rated over the Canon 50D last week +++ - and I notice Canon have now come out with their own 18-200mm, several years later :grin:

Bookswise, I'd recommend Scott Kelby's two, and Exposure by Bryan Peterson.

Amazon.co.uk: The Digital Photography Book: Scott Kelby: Books

Edited by GCab
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarMad Explorer

CarMad

Posted
Posted

:grin:+++ You will need a zoom so its never a waste to get one I still use mine plenty.

But you really 'learn' when you start to understand how you need to cope with something like a 30mm lens at f1.4 and how brutal the shallow DOF can be. It helps then even with an f4 lens.

BUT and its a big but when you have had a very fast lens you only want more, the only thing is they are very expensive as a good zoom and pretty darn heavy most of the time as well.

Let us know how you get on and what you get. Just enjoy it at the start you get lots better the more you take and and the review your shots. You try other things the next time and its good to look at other shots to see what they have done to get ideas.

I've got the Exposure book as well, a great book for everyone to read. +++

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GCab Newbie

GCab

Posted
Posted

Mm, don't know this one (and cant' get eBay at work to check link/price)...

Quick google shows this:

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Interchangeable Lens Review

The thing that would concern me about that is that (combined with the D300 at least) the Nikon 18-200 has really quick focussing (as per the air show pics) so anything much slower may not be worth the saving if it's enough to annoy you or stop you playing with the range and trying different action shots etc. - e.g. cars on a track or whatnot.

Depends how much cheaper the Sigma is I guess...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AudiPartner Newbie

AudiPartner

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A friend has just said he may be off to Hong Kong next week. Presumably they are much cheaper out there?

I'm actually thinking of going for two lenses; an 18-55 and a 55-200.

So if I just asked him to get a "Nikon 18-55 VR lens" is that right, or do I need to specify speed? See, I am a true novice!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...