Entry level SLR?

[Woza]

Im sure this has been covered a million times but please bear with me!

As the title says, im toying with the idea of buying an slr, im forever browsing these forums and taking pictures but wish they looked a little better.

Currently i have a nice Canon Ixus digital camera which has been great but i want a nice upgrade!!

I've not got a lot of money so when i say entry i really mean it - what sort of price am i looking at and what are the best cameras to look at and where to buy them from?

All opinions gratefully received!

Thanks all,

Woza.

[Simpo Two]

Woza said:

As the title says, im toying with the idea of buying an slr, im forever browsing these forums and taking pictures but wish they looked a little better.

'Better' can be tricky to define. What is you don't like, or find limiting about, your current compact? Then we can see if a new camera will fix it.

[Woza]

Simpo Two said:

Woza said:

As the title says, im toying with the idea of buying an slr, im forever browsing these forums and taking pictures but wish they looked a little better.

'Better' can be tricky to define. What is you don't like, or find limiting about, your current compact? Then we can see if a new camera will fix it.

I dont really know what i find limiting about it. Im no expert i just want the right tools to be able to take a better uality photo.

I love taking shots and want more flexibility i was under the impression i would benefit from a DSLR?

Woza.

[Cabinet Enforcer]

Woza said:

I dont really know what i find limiting about it. Im no expert i just want the right tools to be able to take a better uality photo.

I love taking shots and want more flexibility i was under the impression i would benefit from a DSLR?

Woza.

If you don't know what you want it for then it's quite likely you will take the same photos, just with a bigger heavier camera, take less photos because of it, then go back to a compact.

Can you define what you mean by a "better quality" photo? Even a 4 year old compact can knock out a good A4 print, most of what people see as a good photo is actually input from the operator, though the glossy camera adverts usually forget to mention this bit

Can you say what you mean by flexibility? If it's just zoom range then get a bridge cam, if you want better lowlight pictures then forget the small budget, or is it depth of field control?

You could specify clearly what sort of budget you are thinking of, then I guess someone will come up with some different options.

[beano500]

Woza said:

I love taking shots and want more flexibility i was under the impression i would benefit from a DSLR?

Intriguing. I can't be sure whether, in general, people think a dSLR would be a good move from a compact because

a) professional photographers don't use compacts very often
b) the marketing hype is working
c) some sort of peer pressure

But thinking back about 30-odd years, I was the same - wanted an SLR. And I have loved using them over the years.

The problems are that you never stop wanting more kit, more lenses, "need" an accessory or seven, realise that you are never as good as the kit... ...the list is endless! but there's always something to learn.

What are you going to take photographs of? Then we can think about the priorities you need to get right when you purchase.

£200-300 gets you a really good "bridge" camera. Or the body for an SLR system - but you'll spend hundreds more, if not thousands on lenses, software, computers and storage, tripod, magazine subscriptions, flash, bags, back operation et cetera if you go the latter route. And you need to learn the basics properly, which might mean you add a course or two?

So what's it to be? Bears in Alaska catching fish? Greater spotted lesser treenuthatches at 3000 paces? Cars on track? Static cars? Street scenes? Holiday and travel shots? People? Weddings and functions?

[GetCarter]

Lots of very sensible stuff above.

If you do go for an SLR - buy Nikon or Canon. The Nikon D40x is really cheap now, but costs more then the equiv Canon if you want more lenses. (For boring techie reasons).

ETA check out reviews on www.dpreview.com

Edited by GetCarter on Sunday 15th March 12:41

[artov60]

I have bought a Canon 450d as an entry level SLR. I bought mine from these people

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-Outlet-EOS-450D-18-55m...

Effectively a new camera with Warranty for under £400 if you get it right. They have several for sale every day.

Speaking as someone coming back to photography after many years away I can safely say that although the camera is good- it is the operator that makes the photo!

[ofcorsa]

If your confident working in manual/Av/Tv modes then you have more creative options, IMO in auto modes bridge cameras and decent compacts turn out better results straight from camera

[Woza]

hey all, trying to rejuvinate this thread.

i took a trip to jessops this afternoon and they told me that for an entry level dslr i would be looking at a Sony Alpha 200/300 or a Canon EOS 1000D are these good cameras for me.

To answer a lot of the questions which people have asked i am looking to develop my photography skills and want to concentrate on photographing cars and all things automotive.

i really am a novice but have been reading up on the web - specifically on dpreview.com.

Thanks again for all the input,

Woza.

[andy-xr]

If those were my only options I'd take the Canon. I think there's a balance to be struck with what someone wants to sell you vs what you're going to be happy with.

You might not like the feel of the Canon and prefer a Nikon for example. I think in any event I'd write the Sony out of the equation early on if you're thinking of putting some cash into this as a hobby over the next few years, you'll kick yourself later on down the line. On the flipside, if thats your camera and you'll only replace it in 5 years when it's broken then the Sony might be the one for you afterall.

Have a go of them, and if you are thinking of shooting motorsport, add on budget for a lens that goes up to 300mm'ish

[AlfaFoxtrot]

andy-xr said:

If those were my only options I'd take the Canon. I think there's a balance to be struck with what someone wants to sell you vs what you're going to be happy with.

You might not like the feel of the Canon and prefer a Nikon for example. I think in any event I'd write the Sony out of the equation early on if you're thinking of putting some cash into this as a hobby over the next few years, you'll kick yourself later on down the line. On the flipside, if thats your camera and you'll only replace it in 5 years when it's broken then the Sony might be the one for you afterall.

Have a go of them, and if you are thinking of shooting motorsport, add on budget for a lens that goes up to 300mm'ish

Why discount the Sony? If he goes further then any of the cheap SLR bodies will become limiting feature wise, but there is now a good range of lenses for Sony, as well as the Minolta back catalogue for some eBay specials.

[valve bounce66]

see if you can pick up a d40,not the d40x,£240 with lens and you can get a 50-200vr lens for £150,job sorted,you wont be disapointed.


one i took with the d40

Edited by valve bounce66 on Wednesday 22 April 21:03

[Jack Blag]

You say you don't want to spend a lot... how little are we talking? I would get whichever Nikon or Canon package you can afford.

Do you have friends or family that would lend you some lenses? If so, that could dictate which brand you go for.

[RobDickinson]

DSLR's just plain dont come cheap.

The body is only the start, lens's, memory cards, bag, tripod, filters , flash etc etc it adds up, think the body will cost you 1/3rd of your outlay over 2 years or so.

Saying that they are in credable pieces of kit. You can take 70-80% of pics (for printing A4 or so) with any modern camera.

DSLR's are for the other 20-30%.

And They work, fast. Take a picture when you press the button, focus in no time, preview it when you want, shoot at 3fps+ all day.

But , mostly, the camera doesnt matter, its having one with you and how you take the picture thats often way more important.

[onomatopoeia]

AlfaFoxtrot said:

andy-xr said:

If those were my only options I'd take the Canon. I think there's a balance to be struck with what someone wants to sell you vs what you're going to be happy with.

You might not like the feel of the Canon and prefer a Nikon for example. I think in any event I'd write the Sony out of the equation early on if you're thinking of putting some cash into this as a hobby over the next few years, you'll kick yourself later on down the line. On the flipside, if thats your camera and you'll only replace it in 5 years when it's broken then the Sony might be the one for you afterall.

Have a go of them, and if you are thinking of shooting motorsport, add on budget for a lens that goes up to 300mm'ish

Why discount the Sony? If he goes further then any of the cheap SLR bodies will become limiting feature wise, but there is now a good range of lenses for Sony, as well as the Minolta back catalogue for some eBay specials.

There is a perception here that there is very little glass for the Sony mount.

[RobDickinson]

Theres certainly less glass but theres a decent range, some of which is expensive some not.

You can also get all the usual 3rd party stuff too, they've realy filled both the lens and the body lineup out somewhat.

[Simpo Two]

andy-xr said:

If those were my only options I'd take the Canon. I think there's a balance to be struck with what someone wants to sell you vs what you're going to be happy with.

I was surprised they only offered him Canon and Sony. Of course, they're not the only options. The problem with asking some spotty herbert in a shop what he thinks is that you will get exactly that - what a spotty herbert thinks, and you also have no idea what commission structure/incentive he's on. For example, 'sell 10 Sony DSLRs and get a travel rug'.

Canon - Sony - Nikon - Olympus - Pentax - Samsung - Fuji. There's plenty of competition at entry-level; the hard part for you is choosing. You can get all the tecchy stuff from www.dpreview.com and make tecchy comparisons, but that's little indication of how it's going to work for you in real life. If you're quite sure that you're not going to turn it into an obsessive hobby, then any will do. If you think you might be tempted to expand, upgrade and develop, then Nikon and Canon have by far the biggest range of bits, both new and s/h. (and buying s/h lenses is a great way to extend your kit for a fair price).

Edited by Simpo Two on Wednesday 22 April 23:58

[Bigdrift]

Simpo Two said:

The problem with asking some spotty herbert in a shop what he thinks is that you will get exactly that - what a spotty herbert thinks

dont go to J*****s then , go to a real camera shop that have staff that are experienced enough to give proper advice

[Kermit power]

onomatopoeia said:

AlfaFoxtrot said:

Why discount the Sony? If he goes further then any of the cheap SLR bodies will become limiting feature wise, but there is now a good range of lenses for Sony, as well as the Minolta back catalogue for some eBay specials.

There is a perception here that there is very little glass for the Sony mount.

I've not really paid that much attention, but I do get the impression when looking through reviews in camera mags and the like that whilst there might now be more of a range of lenses available for non Canon/Nikon cameras, they seem to be more expensive and generally not quite as good from what the reviewers say.

[GetCarter]

Kermit power said:

onomatopoeia said:

AlfaFoxtrot said:

Why discount the Sony? If he goes further then any of the cheap SLR bodies will become limiting feature wise, but there is now a good range of lenses for Sony, as well as the Minolta back catalogue for some eBay specials.

There is a perception here that there is very little glass for the Sony mount.

I've not really paid that much attention, but I do get the impression when looking through reviews in camera mags and the like that whilst there might now be more of a range of lenses available for non Canon/Nikon cameras, they seem to be more expensive and generally not quite as good from what the reviewers say.

...yet most pros use Canon or Nikon