Canon Powershot SX220HS to first DSLR

[Weslake-Monza]

Younger daughter may be taking GCSE Photography at school and currently has a Canon Powershot SX220 HS which she's had a couple of years. Either for a summer birthday or Christmas I am considering buying her a brand new DSLR. I'm considering a Pentax K50, Canon EOS 600D, 700D, 1200D and Nikon 5200D or 3200D. All of which I'd intend to buy with the 18-55 lens. At some point I'd buy her a zoom lens that is at least as long as what her existing Powershot zooms to (whatever x14 optical equates to). She tends to take a broad mixture of photos from close-ups of flowers to anything a long way away, such as birds,

Two questions:

Which camera of the above, or something different, will best suit her for the next 3 years and why?

What zoom lense size do I need to get that matches the Powershot (and what's the equivalent in 'old money' 35mm)?

Many thanks

[RobDickinson]

I would suggest any of the canons, she will be a little used to the way canon do their menu systems etc.


Though the Nikons are ok. Honestly stick with one of the big 2.

Canon Powershot SX220HS lens is
5.0 – 70.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 28 – 392 mm)

14* zoom just means the wide end multiplied by 14 gets the long end ( 5 * 15 = 70).

Kit lens is 18-55 , equivelant to 28-90 (1.6 crop factor)

I would add canons 55-250 IS , effective 90-400, this gets you the same range.

Then think about a cheap macro or 'nifty fifty'

[Moonhawk]

The power shot states that its lens is 28 – 392 mm (on a 35mm frame).

If you buy a full frame DSLR - you can use the quoted figures on the lens.

If you buy a 1.3 or 1.6 crop DSLR (which is more likely since the full frames are quite expensive) - you need to multiply these figures by 1.3 or 1.6 to give you the effective focal length of the lens.

For example. The 18-55 kit lens on a 1.6 crop body would actually give you 28-88mm.

To give you the same magnification as the powershot - you'd have to supplement the kit lens with at least a 55-250mm zoom lens. This would give you 400mm at the long end.

Edit: Or....what said

Edited by Moonhawk on Thursday 26th March 21:46

[Simpo Two]

Moonhawk said:

If you buy a 1.3 or 1.6 crop DSLR (which is more likely since the full frames are quite expensive)...

Or a Nikon DX (crop) sensor is 1.5x. But really, try to forget the 'wow zoom' side of things and concentrate on photography. A major benefit to a DSLR system is that can buy and sell bits as you want. It will evolve as your needs evolve.

[ExPat2B]

Ok so, regarding the powershot, people get very hung on "mm" of lenses and the zoom factor.

The fact of the matter is that what really matters is the ability of the sensor and lens to resolve details at a distance.

The powershot has a small sensor and an average lens.

In my experience, a DSLR with a good lens and good sensor will take a picture just as sharp at half or even one thirds of the effective "mm" of zoom of the lens. IE- the if the powershot is at 300mm, the DSLR's picture resolve as much detail at 150mm.

At entry level, currently Nikon is far, far ahead of Canon. Canon are stuck using an outdated chip fab process, and Nikon are using the latest Sony sensors. Nikon's software is also much better - they have a software guided use mode shown here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIqSY56Evpc that will guide your daughter through making the best use of the DLSR without technical jargon. I used it to teach my wife and she loved it.

I would recommend the D3300 rather than the D3200 or D5200. It has no antialiasing filter for sharper pictures, and the Expeed processor offers better focussing speed in liveview over the 3200 or 5300.

I would also recommend the Nikon for one lens in particular for your daughter, the 40mm 2.8 Micro. It has a wide enough field of view to use as a general purpose lens, it lets in 4 times as much light as the 18-55 kit lenses, and it focuses very close for amazing pictures of flowers. It is jaw droppingly sharp, and very compact and light. The wide f2.8 aperture means you can blur the background for good portraits. Canon don't really have an answer to it, the closest thing they do is the 60mm EFS which is too long for a general purpose lens, and its twice as big and twice as expensive.

On the zoom lens, Nikon offer a 55-300 and 55-200 option. I would recommend the 55-200 as it has a better close focus distance, is smaller, sharper and faster to focus. Due to the very close focus distance, you can use it like a big macro lens, it makes a great walk around lens and is light enough to use one handed.

Here are a few walk around shots I took with the 55-200 and D3200.

Funny_Feet by natureiser, on Flickr

GreatTit_Weyside by natureiser, on Flickr

Weyside_Yellow_Duckling by natureiser, on Flickr

Edited by ExPat2B on Friday 27th March 09:37

[rottie102]

ExPat2B said:

I would also recommend the Nikon for one lens in particular for your daughter, the 40mm 2.8 Micro. It has a wide enough field of view to use as a general purpose lens, it lets in 4 times as much light as the 18-55 kit lenses, and it focuses very close for amazing pictures of flowers. It is jaw droppingly sharp, and very compact and light. The wide f2.8 aperture means you can blur the background for good portraits. Canon don't really have an answer to it, the closest thing they do is the 60mm EFS which is too long for a general purpose lens, and its twice as big and twice as expensive.

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_ef_40...

[ExPat2B]

rottie102 said:

ExPat2B said:

I would also recommend the Nikon for one lens in particular for your daughter, the 40mm 2.8 Micro. It has a wide enough field of view to use as a general purpose lens, it lets in 4 times as much light as the 18-55 kit lenses, and it focuses very close for amazing pictures of flowers. It is jaw droppingly sharp, and very compact and light. The wide f2.8 aperture means you can blur the background for good portraits. Canon don't really have an answer to it, the closest thing they do is the 60mm EFS which is too long for a general purpose lens, and its twice as big and twice as expensive.

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_ef_40...

That's not a Macro lens - close focus is 30cm, and reproduction ratio is 0.18x the Nikon's close focus is 3.5cm and 1:1 reproduction ratio. If you want to do flower photography, you want the Nikon.

The closest Nikon comparison is the 35mm 1.8, which has the same close focus distance, but has an aperture twice as wide, at f1.8. Another lens Canon doesn't really have an answer for =-)

[Simpo Two]

ExPat2B said:

Nikon's software is also much better - they have a software guided use mode shown here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIqSY56Evpc that will guide your daughter through making the best use of the DLSR without technical jargon.

I'd just add that as the task is GCSE Photography then some 'jargon' (ie what things are actually called) might be better than fluffy bunny mode. All that does is mask the facts and make understanding what's happening harder to learn. She's a teenage student of photography not a 5 year old and should learn it properly.

[Weslake-Monza]

Thanks for the interesting comments. No-one rates the Pentax with some s/h lenses?

[RobDickinson]

ExPat2B said:

At entry level, currently Nikon is far, far ahead of Canon. Canon are stuck using an outdated chip fab process, and Nikon are using the latest Sony sensors.

If by far far ahead you mean 2 stops of dynamic range at base ISO, which almost no one would really notice then yes.

How is Nikons dual pixel AF doing? oh wait...

Honestly there are advantages to both camps but this is not really one.

[Simpo Two]

Weslake-Monza said:

Thanks for the interesting comments. No-one rates the Pentax with some s/h lenses?

Pentax will do the job equally well, but would have fewer options when it comes to buying extra bits.

[RobDickinson]

Simpo Two said:

Weslake-Monza said:

Thanks for the interesting comments. No-one rates the Pentax with some s/h lenses?

Pentax will do the job equally well, but would have fewer options when it comes to buying extra bits.

Aye their cameras are decent, I have a friend who shoots Pentax. Cant swop , borrow lenses, finds it hard to get used gear, new gear rather than being in stores (this is NZ tho) takes weeks + to turn up.

Go see how many canon 55-250's are on ebay, and how many of the pentax equivalents..

SLR's are all purpose tools that can adapt to what you want to shoot ( macro, landscape, wildlife, people etc) but its harder with the smaller brands to do that

[Weslake-Monza]

Returning to this to ask a few more questions for myself, rather than for daughter this time:

Will the Nikon DX 40mm 2.8 Micro on a D3300 go in as close as my Olympus 35mm with a Zuiko 50mm MACRO lens? If not what would I need instead?

With the Nikon D3300 what lense do I need to match the Zuiko 21mm Super Wide, again uses on my Olympus 35mm.

Thanks

[ExPat2B]

Weslake-Monza said:

Returning to this to ask a few more questions for myself, rather than for daughter this time:

Will the Nikon DX 40mm 2.8 Micro on a D3300 go in as close as my Olympus 35mm with a Zuiko 50mm MACRO lens? If not what would I need instead?

With the Nikon D3300 what lense do I need to match the Zuiko 21mm Super Wide, again uses on my Olympus 35mm.

Thanks

Assuming you are talking about this lens :

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/cla...

Then the Nikon 40mm has twice the magnifying power of the Olympus 50mm - Nikon is 1:1, Oly is 1:2

And the Nikon also benefits from the apparent magnification effect of the APC-C Sensor, so it has a further 1.5 times increase to the apparent image size over the Olympus. So in total the Nikon will get you 3 times closer than the Olympus.

The Nikon 40mm has only 2 weaknesses.

1. In order to get to 1:1 magnification, you will need to be 3.5cm from the front of your lens to the subject. This make insect photography hard as they may spook and fly/crawl off. It also makes lighting the subject with flash very hard as the lens gets in the way.

2. It has no VR.

For this reason the 80mm and 105mm Macro lenses are the preferred choice of nature photographers.

For your wide angle, you will need a 14mm lens for Nikon APS to get the same field of view as 21mm lens on 35mm Olympus. I would recommend the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8