Dslr camera - is there an obvious choice?

[steveatesh]

Having in the past had an SLR (30 years ago) then slipped into the dark side of a digital compact for convenience I now have the bug to upgrade to a DSLR. I intend to ask Santa for one but to be honest am totally out of touch now with photography and especially what a DSLR can offer an enthusiast.

I have looked at the Nikon D5100 which seems to get good reviews (and would be at the top end of santas budget) and touched on the Canon 600D which also seem to get good reviews.

They each have long lists of features but I am unsure of the benefits these represent in everyday use.

So, what features should I be looking for in a DSLR camera in this budget. - is there one that has more end user benefits than another?
Is the lack of a zoom motor in the Nikon body a real handicap - does it seriously limit lense choice or make them more expensive having to consider Nikons motorised lenses? Would the Canon be better in this regard?
I am interested in exploring HDR - is there one of these or another DSLR camera that is likely to offer more than others for taking HDR ?
I am interested in taking low light photos, such as late evening, without flash. Will one of these cameras be better than the other?
Any other comments will be appreciated before I put my Santa request on the amazon wish list!

Thanks in anticipation.

[Dogsey]

At any level there is very little between either Canon and Nikon, I'd say the best way to decide is to go and handle all the options and see which one feels best in your hands as this will make the biggest difference to you.











(PS. Men buy Canon, girls buy Nikon! )

[flat-planedCrank]

Dogsey said:

(PS. Men buy Canon, girls buy Nikon! )

And so it begins again

[Dogsey]

flat-planedCrank said:

Dogsey said:

(PS. Men buy Canon, girls buy Nikon! )

And so it begins again

Says the girl!

[flat-planedCrank]

Dogsey said:

flat-planedCrank said:

Dogsey said:

(PS. Men buy Canon, girls buy Nikon! )

And so it begins again

Says the girl!

I'll have you know I use a Canon 5D!

[steveatesh]

Dogsey said:

At any level there is very little between either Canon and Nikon, I'd say the best way to decide is to go and handle all the options and see which one feels best in your hands as this will make the biggest difference to you.


(PS. Men buy Canon, girls buy Nikon! )

Thanks for that, I'll pop into Jessops then.

Re the Canon Nikon thing - does that mean you have to be powerfully built to handle a Canon?

[RobDickinson]

Nikon body motor thing is much less of a problem thesedays but you will likely end up paying mor for af-s primes and having to dodge a few older used lenses.

You talk about low light photography without flash. This means tripods or fast lenses.

Nikon have the 35af-s and the new 50f1.8 af-s both of which are good.

Canons 50 1.8 is cheaper (and just as good) as the new nikon, but they dont have a lens quite as cheap as the 35. Canons 35/2.0 is though a better lens all round, and full frame to boot.

If your keen then a sigma 30mmf1.4 would be the ideal choice, its HSM so works on anything.

[GetCarter]

flat-planedCrank said:

Dogsey said:

(PS. Men buy Canon, girls buy Nikon! )

And so it begins again

As I use both Canon & Nikon, that must mean I'm bisexual.

[vtecstu]

RobDickinson said:

Nikon body motor thing is much less of a problem thesedays but you will likely end up paying mor for af-s primes and having to dodge a few older used lenses.

In case this needs further explanation, because it did to me a year ago, the NIKON D5100 doesn't have a focus motor in body - you need AF-S lenses that contain lenses themselves. As Rob says, there is good availability of these now, but they are more expensive than the equivalent regular NIKON lens, and I assume equivalent Canon one too.

For example, both my AF-S Sigma 70-300 and NIKON 35 f1.8 cost approx £170 - the non AF-S versions would each have been approx £100.

Am very happy with my camera, a NIKON D60, but the very good deal I got when I bought it has been slightly offset by extra spend on additional lenses.

[Simpo Two]

vtecstu said:

In case this needs further explanation, because it did to me a year ago, the NIKON D5100 doesn't have a focus motor in body - you need AF-S lenses that contain lenses themselves. As Rob says, there is good availability of these now, but they are more expensive than the equivalent regular NIKON lens

But AF-S is infinitely nicer to use than old-fashioned screwdrive, being much faster and quieter. Most lenses the beginner is likely to meet will be AF-S anyway; they don't have (current) screwdrive equivalents. So unless you want to use archaic/specialist lenses (in which case you probably don't mind manual focus) it's really a non-issue IMHO.

[RobDickinson]

Simpo Two said:

So unless you want to use archaic/specialist lenses (in which case you probably don't mind manual focus) it's really a non-issue IMHO.

"I am interested in taking low light photos, such as late evening, without flash."

Lower end budget + the above screams cheaper/used primes, most of which are screw drive I believe?

Yes it can be a non issue, especially if you want to buy new high priced shiny af-s lenses.

[Simpo Two]

1) If he is going to go out in dusk then AF may not work, so he will be manual focusing anyway, so the problem does not arise.

2) If he is buying a new DSLR it will most probably be with a kit lens, and AFAIK they are all AF-S, so the problem does not arise.

AF-S lenses are not 'high priced shiny' lenses, they are the norm. If budget is such that he cannot afford more than the kit lens, he can use the slower aperture and use a tripod. Or manual focus as above. Don't let the old 'lack of a motor' cry be a major buying factor; of far more importantce IMHO when choosing brands is ergonomics. Money can be saved up, ergonomics can't

[dibbly dobbler]

sorted

[cornet]

Unless you really want to do lots of Video then I'd get the D90 over the D5100 which has in-body AF motor.

[Simpo Two]

As another idea, I was going to suggest that if the motor really bugs you but money is tight, then a s/h D80 would be an option too.

[Harrysdad]

Just bought the Canon D7 which was quite a jump from my trusty Canon 350D, But the thing is lovely. I dont pretend to be an expert but, just playing around with this thing had produced some terrific shots. You get huge ISO with modern DSLRs so low light shooting is easy and will give you a grainy atmosphereic texture.

I am with you, flash units kill a moment. Nikon Canon doesnt matter DSLRs are loads of fun.

[vtecstu]

Simpo Two said:

But AF-S is infinitely nicer to use than old-fashioned screwdrive, being much faster and quieter. Most lenses the beginner is likely to meet will be AF-S anyway; they don't have (current) screwdrive equivalents. So unless you want to use archaic/specialist lenses (in which case you probably don't mind manual focus) it's really a non-issue IMHO.

Did not know that! Cheers - feel better about paying more for lenses now!

[steveatesh]

Thanks for all of these suggestions and thoughts, I,m going to take the advice and go and "play" with some DSLR cameras to get a feel for the ergonomics and controls and see what feels best.

The lenses was interesting - I didn't know what af-s was until now, so cheers. I will be getting a camera and kit lenses at the outset, so plenty time to learn about add ons next year.

Cheers everybody.

[Simpo Two]

steveatesh said:

I didn't know what af-s was until now

Lens designations can be confusing; if you get stuck post a link here. Nikon call it AF-S (not to be confused with the 'AFS' setting on the camera body which is a different thing), Sigma call it HSM; not sure about the other makes. I think getting the kit lens is a good start while you work out everything else.

As your camera will be what they call 'crop sensor' (DX in Nikon speak) you can also use lenses designed for full frame (FX if Nikon) cameras too, which is one less thing to worry about.

[Gad-Westy]

steveatesh said:

Having in the past had an SLR (30 years ago) then slipped into the dark side of a digital compact for convenience I now have the bug to upgrade to a DSLR. I intend to ask Santa for one but to be honest am totally out of touch now with photography and especially what a DSLR can offer an enthusiast.

I have looked at the Nikon D5100 which seems to get good reviews (and would be at the top end of santas budget) and touched on the Canon 600D which also seem to get good reviews.

They each have long lists of features but I am unsure of the benefits these represent in everyday use.

So, what features should I be looking for in a DSLR camera in this budget. - is there one that has more end user benefits than another?
Is the lack of a zoom motor in the Nikon body a real handicap - does it seriously limit lense choice or make them more expensive having to consider Nikons motorised lenses? Would the Canon be better in this regard?
I am interested in exploring HDR - is there one of these or another DSLR camera that is likely to offer more than others for taking HDR ?
I am interested in taking low light photos, such as late evening, without flash. Will one of these cameras be better than the other?
Any other comments will be appreciated before I put my Santa request on the amazon wish list!

Thanks in anticipation.

I don't think there is actually much to choose between any of the DSLR offerings. Most manufacturers seem to cover most market sectors quite neatly.

I don't know much about the Canon you mention but the Nikon D5100 is a great camera. It has built in HDR if that is something you're interested. No idea how well it actually works in practice. You could just bracket three or more shots with just about any DSLR though and merge the photos into HDR later. The nikon is exceptional at high ISO. Biggest downside with it is that most controls are menu driven. I had the older model and it eventually frustrated me. Doesn't stop it being a great camera but just depends how hands on you want to be as to whether it'll suit you.

And, like above, the best advice is to go and try some for yourself.