Advice on SLR camera for noobie please?

[L33]

Hi Guys - can anyone help me please?

I've decided I want a decent(ish) SLR camera. I'm a little wet between the ears and a complete novice so I suppose I'm still a little unsure what exactly I'm after...

I have a budget of upto £500, but £400ish is where I'd rather be unless a bargain is to be had out there somewhere!

For my budget, I think I'm probably looking 2nd hand (on fleabay and alike).

I do like the idea of purchasing a bundle comprising of camera, memory card(s), and most importantly a spare lens or 2 - basically, I want a complete package. I also like the idea of a zoom lens.

As for makes / brands, I'm looking at either the Canon (probably 400d), Nikon (probably D80) or some of the Sony Alpha range - What I do like about the Sony range is that the cameras have the image stalilizer built into the camera, but I'm not too sure if image quality is up there with the Nikon and Canon? Is the image stabilizer necessary?

A friend is selling a 400D with a whole heap of stuff imcluding a Tamron 28-300mm which is NOT image stabliized. Is this an issue when using maxium zoom without a tripod?

Has anyone got any links to any 2nd hand packages for sale that look reasonable too please?

Many thanks in advance,
L33

[Simpo Two]

Don't stress too much about 'image-stabilised'. Somehow, by a process now lost in the mists of time, people managed to take perfectly good photos from 1835 until as recently as 2004 without it!!

[RobDickinson]

I still take pics without IS!


"I've decided I want a decent(ish) SLR camera."

EVERY new dSLR is decent(ish). There realy isnt a bad one, thre are differences but usualy not as large as how they feel and operate in your hands. Nikon and Canon match each other very well but work quite opposite in operation.

"For my budget, I think I'm probably looking 2nd hand (on fleabay and alike)."

2nd hand is good so long as the camera hasnt been abused. I'd honestly avoid the xxD series for a similalry priced xxD used if you go canon.


"I do like the idea of purchasing a bundle comprising of camera, memory card(s), and most importantly a spare lens or 2 - basically, I want a complete package. I also like the idea of a zoom lens."


Memory cards are cheap, probably if buying used they will be thrown in 'free' or hideously over charged... memory cards are dirt cheap realy now.

As for lenses, most are 'zooms' , i.e. variable focal length, very few at the consumer end are primes (ie.. fixed focal length) but there are some excelent bargains, say the 50mm f1.8 prime, pin sharp[, small, light, very very fast (good in low light) and lots of control over Depth of field.

Be ware of bundled lenses that are basicaly just tat. Checkout them on their own see what there worth, theres some good old lenses and some bad ones, good ones tend to hold their value very well.

'Kit' lenses (18-55mm) tend to be of average quality and OK to get you going, canons old non IS one isnt great , the new IS one is pretty decent.


"Is the image stabilizer necessary?"

IS is a tool, usefull at times when you dont have a tripod handy, it gives you a (limited) option rather than bumping ISO etc. Sony cameras tend to produce good images in decent light but not measure up (on IQ) overall to canon/nikon in poorer light. They dotn seem to offer as many focus points or as fast fps etc either.

"A friend is selling a 400D with a whole heap of stuff imcluding a Tamron 28-300mm which is NOT image stabliized. Is this an issue when using maxium zoom without a tripod?"

It can be, I dont know that lens but it will be f5.6 at 300mm at best and you will need 1/500th shutter speed handheld, that means plenty of light. Also lenses arnt at their best 'wide open' especialy consumer mega zooms like that, so you would be better 'stopping down' to f8 or f9 reducing the amount of light the sensor gets again.

High 'zoom' lenses ( long end in mm / wide end ) tend to be jack of all trades/master of none lenses. Your often better off buying 2 or 3 lenses that will do the job. Dont feel the need to 'cover' every mm. often you can walk instead of zoom, and IMO most people use long lenses pinned at either end of the zoom anyhow.

[beano500]

L33 said:

A friend is selling a 400D with a whole heap of stuff imcluding a Tamron 28-300mm which is NOT image stabliized. Is this an issue when using maxium zoom without a tripod?

At typical shutter speeds of 1/500th and above, you won't (probably) notice any difference.


For shtter speeds in the range of about 1/60 to 1/250 you'll probably have to work harder on your technique.

But you'll learn a lot.

[Rubbish Analogy Mode]

Would you prefer to learn in a basic car - safely work out how a car skids et cetera, before you move on to a Ferrari - or don't you care and just want ABS and ESP and XYZ?

[/Rubbish Analogy Mode]

[GetCarter]

I use image stabilistion all the time... it's called standing still. None of my equipment has it.

[PPPPPP]

GetCarter said:

I use image stabilistion all the time... it's called standing still. None of my equipment has it.

I recall there was a saying about using a shutter speed that's more than the lens focal length as a guide.

[onomatopoeia]

L33 said:

As for makes / brands, I'm looking at either the Canon (probably 400d), Nikon (probably D80) or some of the Sony Alpha range - What I do like about the Sony range is that the cameras have the image stalilizer built into the camera, but I'm not too sure if image quality is up there with the Nikon and Canon? Is the image stabilizer necessary?

I use a Sony A700. IS (SSS in Sony speak) is not necessary but can help, depending on situation. Even with a short lens I can't hold the camera still enough to take a picture at 1/10th second without but most of the time I turn it off, I don't want it to stabilise when I'm trying to pan and I think it slightly softens the image where it's not needed (tripod using a remote release, for example). That's subjective though, I've not tested extensively.

Regarding image quality, Sonys fall down on in camera jpg quality at higher ISO settings - shoot raw and convert on the computer and it's rather better. The current firmware update for the A700 (v4) improves the in camera high ISO jpg conversion quite a bit over the original, but not all the other models have had new firmware and converting on the computer is still a better bet.

Canon or Nikon will increase the size of the s/h market for lenses and accessories, although with 25 years of Minolta then Sony AF lenses on the A-mount as well as the 3rd party suppliers the s/h choice is not small if you get a Sony.

[Simpo Two]

PPPPPP said:

I recall there was a saying about using a shutter speed that's more than the lens focal length as a guide.

Generally yes, although wide angle is much more forgiving than telephoto. And these days, if the aperture is already at max, there's always the option of increasing ISO.

Propped against a pew or column in a church I can use, with care, 1/30th at 200mm - any slower than that and you get subject movement which IS/VR isn't going to solve anyway. In fact, gloomy interiors aside, almost all of my photos are taken at 1/60th regardless of focal length because that's the way fill-flash seems to work best.

Edited by Simpo Two on Wednesday 27th January 13:35

[nick30]

if you can stretch slightly further to 500d its an amazing piece of kit. £529 with the current £50 cash back offer

[L33]

Many thanks for the replies so far guys - very useful indeed.

I've decided to chuck a little more cash into the pot and go for new.

After looking at cheepest new prices on Fleabay, my options are:
Canon 1000D with IS kit lens ~ £300
Nikon D3000 with VR kit lens ~ £350
Canon 450D with IS kit lens ~ £400
Nikon D5000 with VR kit lens ~ £430

In addition, I'd go for one of bundle kits jessops have:
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/Acc...

OK, so spending a little more, but I'm thinking better to spend £500 - £630 on brand new kit rather than £400 on a used 400D I don't know the history of?

I like the price of the 1000D, the on-camera idiots guide that comes with the D3000, the live view with the 450D and the HD video the D5000 offers. From the many comparison photos I've been looking at, in my humble opinion, the Nikons appear to produce pictures with richer colours - I like that a lot, although I guess with the right software, the colour of the canon pics could be the same?

Whats your thoughts please guys?

Many thanks

[Barry Ashcroft]

Hi Lee, how you doin mate it's been a while.
I have a perfect set-up for you in the classifieds on here and in the TVRCC classifeds have a look if any good give me a shout.

Got a replacement car yet?

Barry

[L33]

Barry Ashcroft said:

Hi Lee, how you doin mate it's been a while.
I have a perfect set-up for you in the classifieds on here and in the TVRCC classifeds have a look if any good give me a shout.

Got a replacement car yet?

Barry

Hi Barry - I'm very well thanks - you?
I did see your advert earlier today - looks a very nice kit but well and truly blows my budget, unless your willing to talk on price?

As for the car, I've still got the Sagaris - I did have it up for sale but after driving the Ferrari 360 Spider that I was going to replace the Sag with, I wasn't over impressed. I'm not saying the 360 is a bad car - far from it, but it lacks the sparkle that the Sagaris has.

Hows your Tam running?

[RobDickinson]

L33 said:

I like that a lot, although I guess with the right software, the colour of the canon pics could be the same?

Whats your thoughts please guys?

Many thanks

Yep canons in camera defaults for JPG ( colour, sharpening, contrast etc) are usualy very conservative and you can tweak these (and picture styles) to what you want.

Usualy SLR's are geared up for processing on a PC later making these tweaks, which is often better ad doing it than in camera, and can be undone. Once say sharpening is done in camera(jpg) its done for good (which is a bad thing).

Most people shoot RAW anyhow - and the in camera processing isnt applied.

Theres not a lot between the entry level ones realy get which one is the best deal/feels the best.

[Simpo Two]

Most people make, or should make, the Nikon/Canon choice on ergonomics - ie how it feels in their hand and where the controls are. Idiot's guide, live view, HD video and extra fruitbats are merely strap-on toys to help sell cameras, nothing to do with how well they take photographs. 'Richer colours' can be changed in a menu if you shoot JPG (I think Nikon call it 'vivid'), or in processing if you shoot RAW ('saturation').

It's a jungle ain't it!

[Barry Ashcroft]

L33 said:

Barry Ashcroft said:

Hi Lee, how you doin mate it's been a while.
I have a perfect set-up for you in the classifieds on here and in the TVRCC classifeds have a look if any good give me a shout.

Got a replacement car yet?

Barry

Hi Barry - I'm very well thanks - you?
I did see your advert earlier today - looks a very nice kit but well and truly blows my budget, unless your willing to talk on price?

As for the car, I've still got the Sagaris - I did have it up for sale but after driving the Ferrari 360 Spider that I was going to replace the Sag with, I wasn't over impressed. I'm not saying the 360 is a bad car - far from it, but it lacks the sparkle that the Sagaris has.

Hows your Tam running?

Yep very well thanks mate.
Good decision on the Sag it is too nice to sell.
Tam is great but I'm thinking of selling as I want to go play on a track.

Ref Camera kit I'm always willing to talk about price but only by a small amount. Remenber I work in Nunny every couple of weeks so could meetup with you so you can see/check it all out but it is top quality kit for a bargain price.
I do have a mate interested in the big lens and flash gun so could sell you the rest. Have a think a drop me an email if interested or give me a call.

Barry