Discussion
I have asked a which DSLR question before but I have finally got a bit of spare money and the inclination to actually go for it this time. I have a G9 at the moment but feel I want to move beyond it. I want to be able to use iso 400 and above, have longer than 15 sec exposure times. Ability to fit a flash that can use TTL. I like the bracketing and all the manual options it has in it. I want a propper shutter too so you can see when you pan rather than guess. Fit filters but aftually be able to focus with them on as the filters block the AF beam and the manual focus is poor especially in low light.
My workmate showed me his NEX sony. I thought that was pretty great and was amazing for the size. I found the price a bit off putting though as the NEX or more so the impending Nikon 1 are solid DSLR money but offer less functionality. I understand they are different markets but for me it just means I may as well finally make the jump. Plus it finally offers me the oppertinity to get into lighting a bit more. I love the things you can do with the longer exposure and layering flash shots and would really like to try that. The sony offers bulb time but only a tiny add on flash via some unique connection so I think that would be too limiting.
After reading the reviews the D5100 is kind of my favourite but I am probably being swayed by the likes of other DSLR users at work who have gone nikon and the excellent website of ken rockwell. The chromatic correction and larger sensor is what edges it for me as well over the cannon 600d. The things I don't like are that it gets bad comments about the usability. I find my G9 can be a bit clunky changing the settings so I would hope it is no worse than that. The canon is just a safety thing I guess I feel brand loyal. However things like the AF motor being in the body seems like a good idea. In nikon I would need to go for the d7000 for that. It just seems that could be quite a big limiting factor in lens choices unless you want to go manual everywhere and whilst challenging could be a chore if you are trying to get a shot around people who would b quite happy with an image from a 2mp nokia. Ideally I dont want to spend that kind of mony either.
600 quid seems like a lot for a camera to me so the near grand for the d7000 is really big money to me. That said if it is mony well spent now for high value features I guess I would be tempted. It just means I would have to forgo the flash for now which is a shame. Is the sigma ef 610 dg st any good? I have looked into the second hand market on all of these and they are just too new to realy be available or they dont ofer much of a saving but at an increased risk that somone has dammaged it.
My workmate showed me his NEX sony. I thought that was pretty great and was amazing for the size. I found the price a bit off putting though as the NEX or more so the impending Nikon 1 are solid DSLR money but offer less functionality. I understand they are different markets but for me it just means I may as well finally make the jump. Plus it finally offers me the oppertinity to get into lighting a bit more. I love the things you can do with the longer exposure and layering flash shots and would really like to try that. The sony offers bulb time but only a tiny add on flash via some unique connection so I think that would be too limiting.
After reading the reviews the D5100 is kind of my favourite but I am probably being swayed by the likes of other DSLR users at work who have gone nikon and the excellent website of ken rockwell. The chromatic correction and larger sensor is what edges it for me as well over the cannon 600d. The things I don't like are that it gets bad comments about the usability. I find my G9 can be a bit clunky changing the settings so I would hope it is no worse than that. The canon is just a safety thing I guess I feel brand loyal. However things like the AF motor being in the body seems like a good idea. In nikon I would need to go for the d7000 for that. It just seems that could be quite a big limiting factor in lens choices unless you want to go manual everywhere and whilst challenging could be a chore if you are trying to get a shot around people who would b quite happy with an image from a 2mp nokia. Ideally I dont want to spend that kind of mony either.
600 quid seems like a lot for a camera to me so the near grand for the d7000 is really big money to me. That said if it is mony well spent now for high value features I guess I would be tempted. It just means I would have to forgo the flash for now which is a shame. Is the sigma ef 610 dg st any good? I have looked into the second hand market on all of these and they are just too new to realy be available or they dont ofer much of a saving but at an increased risk that somone has dammaged it.
I'll give the same answer I give whenever anybody displays in interest in picking up an SLR-
Go to a shop and and have a play with all the models they have within your price range, how the bodies feel in your hand and how you like the menu systems. These days they're all fantastic cameras, and most most beginners will struggle to tell the difference in image quality.
Go to a shop and and have a play with all the models they have within your price range, how the bodies feel in your hand and how you like the menu systems. These days they're all fantastic cameras, and most most beginners will struggle to tell the difference in image quality.
No recommendations from me but a few pointers.
You have thought it through which is the main thing. You defo need a DSLR not a 'marketing exercise' the limits of which you will hit inside a week.
The higher up the range the camera body is, the more capability it will have and also more controls on the outside where you can get to them quickly, not buried in menus.
Ken Rockwell's site is good for purely technical information but some of his opinions are generally viewed as misguided. Your opinions are probably more valid to you than his are.
Reviews can be helpful but remember most of them are just lists of specs with opinions and who wrote them anyway? www.dpreview.com is worth a read though.
There is no point buying a body which you can already see shortcomings with.
A DSLR kit evolves with time (and money). Don't expect to buy everything on day one; add things as you find you need/can afford them as your photography advances. I would rather have one good thing and save for the next, than two less-good things.
Once in DSLR-land, the results you get are more down to the user than the camera.
£600 is nothing
You have thought it through which is the main thing. You defo need a DSLR not a 'marketing exercise' the limits of which you will hit inside a week.
The higher up the range the camera body is, the more capability it will have and also more controls on the outside where you can get to them quickly, not buried in menus.
Ken Rockwell's site is good for purely technical information but some of his opinions are generally viewed as misguided. Your opinions are probably more valid to you than his are.
Reviews can be helpful but remember most of them are just lists of specs with opinions and who wrote them anyway? www.dpreview.com is worth a read though.
There is no point buying a body which you can already see shortcomings with.
A DSLR kit evolves with time (and money). Don't expect to buy everything on day one; add things as you find you need/can afford them as your photography advances. I would rather have one good thing and save for the next, than two less-good things.
Once in DSLR-land, the results you get are more down to the user than the camera.
£600 is nothing
I have been down to Jessops and had a good look at both. I liked the Nikon but it's hard to really judge when you have it on some annoying tether and some sales person constantly on you.
I thought about something older but I guess i'm just a sucker for an upgrade. I know MP arent the be all and end all but I would feel like I was going backwards going down in those numbers.
I have been through dpreview. I think they seem unbiased things like the ISO tests zoomed in are conclusive enough as long as they are consistent in their approach. I know I can't afford it all on day 1 I could happily spend thousands on bits I think I want now but probably don't need. I think that has been what has put me off before. I add up all the stuff I want get a scary number and decide to leave it.
I thought about something older but I guess i'm just a sucker for an upgrade. I know MP arent the be all and end all but I would feel like I was going backwards going down in those numbers.
I have been through dpreview. I think they seem unbiased things like the ISO tests zoomed in are conclusive enough as long as they are consistent in their approach. I know I can't afford it all on day 1 I could happily spend thousands on bits I think I want now but probably don't need. I think that has been what has put me off before. I add up all the stuff I want get a scary number and decide to leave it.
I would take a serious look at the Nikon D90 unless you really want to do lots of Video with it (the D90 video is limited to 5min at a time).
Much easier access to functions than the D5100 (button layout is almost identical to the D7000).
Image quality between the D90 and D7000 is negligible especially with the kit lenses. I've shot with both the D90 and D7000 recently, both great cameras. Unless you want to use it for shooting long videos then I'd get the D90 and spend more money on lenses
Much easier access to functions than the D5100 (button layout is almost identical to the D7000).
Image quality between the D90 and D7000 is negligible especially with the kit lenses. I've shot with both the D90 and D7000 recently, both great cameras. Unless you want to use it for shooting long videos then I'd get the D90 and spend more money on lenses
Buzz word said:
I know I can't afford it all on day 1 I could happily spend thousands on bits I think I want now but probably don't need. I think that has been what has put me off before. I add up all the stuff I want get a scary number and decide to leave it.
OK. But you have to jump in somewhere. So I suggest you get the body you like best and which gives you some 'growing room', and start with the kit lens. This will get you up and running and will give you plenty to learn and discover about using the camera. From there you will begin to get an idea where you want to go next, eg wide-angle, or telephoto, or fast lenses, or macro, or flashgun, or tripod and so on. As you say, there's no point buying stuff you *think* you want when in fact they'll just collect dust.DSLR systems change and evolve with the user, so there's nothing wrong with cutting your teeth on an 18-55mm kit lens, then eBaying it and upgrading to 17-55mm f2.8, or adding a 70-300mm, or whatever you want - but at least then your decision is driven by need/interest not want/guesswork.
Well chaps, I just did it. I went for the canon in the end. I liked the Nikon interface much more as it was a lot more intuitive but the canon just seemed to be able to do more. I just cant wait to get some photographs in now. It's just sat on my table charging. I feel like a kid at Christmas who found out he didn't get the batteries.
Buzz word said:
Well chaps, I just did it. I went for the canon in the end. I liked the Nikon interface much more as it was a lot more intuitive but the canon just seemed to be able to do more. I just cant wait to get some photographs in now. It's just sat on my table charging. I feel like a kid at Christmas who found out he didn't get the batteries.
600d ? Lenses ?
Buzz word said:
Well chaps, I just did it. I went for the canon in the end. I liked the Nikon interface much more as it was a lot more intuitive but the canon just seemed to be able to do more. I just cant wait to get some photographs in now. It's just sat on my table charging. I feel like a kid at Christmas who found out he didn't get the batteries.
Congrats! Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff