To SLR or not to SLR

[Woza]

Hi all,

I have started a couple of threads on here, all of which have been very informative and a lot of help.

I am still undecided as to whether or not i should bother with an SLR. Im not looking to become a professional photographer, i merely would like to be able to take some better quality pictures. I attend Le Mans each year and try to get to some other motorsport events.

I dont want to start spending £££ on lenses etc which from my research can cost the same if not more than the camera itself.

So my real question is whether i should bother just buying a dslr (looking at a nikon d40/60) will the lens that comes with it be sufficient for me.

Or should i just upgrade my digital camera for something with a few more toys and megapixels!? (currently have an ixus 60 - which i love!)

Thanks again all,

Woza.

[GetCarter]

Do you want to put the camera in your pocket?

If so, avoid DSLR

Do you want to get close ups of the cars at Le Mans?

If so, avoid compacts.

IF 'B'

Are you happy spending more than £350? (including a lens to get close ups)

If so, buy a DSLR

Is that too much money?

If so, buy a compact.

HTH

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 28th July 13:46

[Simpo Two]

More toys and megapixels won't help you shoot motorsport...



What level of expenditure do you feel comfortable with?

[Joe911]

Nearly all compact cameras that I've seen have a delay between pressing the shutter and the picture being taken. DSLR's don't (at least the good ones don't). So using a compact for anything moving is problematic.

[Pints]

GetCarter said:

Do you want to put the camera in your pocket?

If so, avoid DSLR
Do you want to get close ups of the cars at Le Mans?

If so, avoid compacts.

IF 'B'

Are you happy spending more than £350? (including a lens to get close ups)
If so, buy a DSLR

Is that too much money?
If so, buy a compact.

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 28th July 13:46

You're ignoring the option of "bridge" cameras such as the Canon SX1 IS or Canon SX10 IS.

[GetCarter]

Yep... would never recommend.

[Woza]

Update: Just went to Jessops and had a play with some cameras - the guy in there was very informative and showed me the Canon Powershot SX10 is.

This seems to do everything i want it to do and said for me it should be the perfect camera, wont need to spend hundereds of pounds on lenses etc as the one it comes with has a 20x zoom, it does video etc, has the digital viewfinder and an lcd screen.

In Jesspos it is £339 but just typing the name in to google i have found it for less than £300 already.

Would this be the ideal camera for me?

Woza.

[dgb00]

Doesn't seem that great - all the downsides of an SLR (bulky etc) with none of the upsides. And for not a lot more you can get a Nikon D60 with an 18-55 lens thrown in, which will be a lot better than the Canon.

[satans worm]

Must admit that looks an impresive spec, 20Xoptical with IS for 300quid!
What is its 20x optical equiv for 35MM??
Can you buy any kind of macro lense add on for this?
How about filters, can you buy polarising filters etc for this camera?

[Simpo Two]

Woza said:

said for me it should be the perfect camera, wont need to spend hundereds of pounds on lenses etc as the one it comes with has a 20x zoom, it does video etc, has the digital viewfinder and an lcd screen.

Bugger, I wish I'd heard of this model before I went out and spent thousands on lenses...

LCD screen too!

[GetCarter]

argh.................

Sony SX10 IS = 0.28 cm2 sensor size

Nikon D60 = 3.72 cm2 sensor size

DON'T BUY THE CANON!!! (IMHO of course!)

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 28th July 15:59

[Woza]

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?new...

this is the best site i can find with details of the canon.

Getcarter - do you mean dont get the Canon as its not a Sony?

Woza.

[GetCarter]

Apologies I was looking at both Sony and Canon,

... the Canon, has a TINY sensor - forget mega pixels, size is (in this instance) everything. Not only is the Canon NOT a 'shove in your pocket' size camera, it can't fit the myriad of attachments that DSLRs do, and probably wont get you the results you are after.

This is why I'd always recommend either a P&S or a DSLR... the ones in the middle are just lukewarm water.

[vteclimey]

There will always be a compromise of some sort.

GetCarter is righ in that you really need dSLR for quality, but if you finances really don't stack up to SLR territory then that camera should do you.

I have a Nikon CoolPix 5700 for about 4 years before getting a dSLR, no question the SLR is way better in every way measurable. The 5700 still managed to produce for me many great photos and while its not a shove in youtr pocket P&S it really wasn't that bad to carry about and I really wanted the longer zoom, which a P&S could not have delivered.

So if you like it and it fits your budget, get it, you will probably enjoy it.

[Pints]

Bear in mind that not everyone can afford to throw lots of money at DSLRs and the additional lenses, etc. that you need with them. Something like the Canon SX10 offers a good zoom, takes rather reasonable pics and has a host of other nifty features you usually don't find on a DSLR. All this and you're only paying £300-odd for it.

[GetCarter]

Pints said:

Bear in mind that not everyone can afford to throw lots of money at DSLRs and the additional lenses, etc. that you need with them. Something like the Canon SX10 offers a good zoom, takes rather reasonable pics and has a host of other nifty features you usually don't find on a DSLR. All this and you're only paying £300-odd for it.

er... OK... there are not many left, but a Nikon D40 can still be had for £292 http://www.google.co.uk/products/catalog?hl=en&amp...

...so why buy something that is worse, for more?

(Nifty features... video? - Yep... if you want video, don't buy a D40)

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 28th July 16:30

[Woza]

GetCarter said:

Apologies I was looking at both Sony and Canon,

... the Canon, has a TINY sensor - forget mega pixels, size is (in this instance) everything. Not only is the Canon NOT a 'shove in your pocket' size camera, it can't fit the myriad of attachments that DSLRs do, and probably wont get you the results you are after.

This is why I'd always recommend either a P&S or a DSLR... the ones in the middle are just lukewarm water.

So technically the Canon is a glorified Digital Camera with SLR looks - would i be barking up the right tree here?

[dgb00]

Nikon D60 kit including 18-55mm lens for £329: http://www.google.co.uk/products?hl=en&q=Nikon...

[Woza]

GetCarter said:

Pints said:

Bear in mind that not everyone can afford to throw lots of money at DSLRs and the additional lenses, etc. that you need with them. Something like the Canon SX10 offers a good zoom, takes rather reasonable pics and has a host of other nifty features you usually don't find on a DSLR. All this and you're only paying £300-odd for it.

er... OK... there are not many left, but a Nikon D40 can still be had for £292 http://www.google.co.uk/products/catalog?hl=en&amp...

...so why buy something that is worse, for more?

(Nifty features... video? - Yep... if you want video, don't buy a D40)

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 28th July 16:30

the problem for me is all the add on's.

As i said to the chap in the shop - i dont want to have to spend hundreds on lenses to be able to take a good photo and that is why he recommended the Canon.

In his words the Canon would suit me for many years fresh out of the box whereas the D40 would need a lens which would cost around £150 extra!

Woza.

[dgb00]

Woza said:

GetCarter said:

Apologies I was looking at both Sony and Canon,

... the Canon, has a TINY sensor - forget mega pixels, size is (in this instance) everything. Not only is the Canon NOT a 'shove in your pocket' size camera, it can't fit the myriad of attachments that DSLRs do, and probably wont get you the results you are after.

This is why I'd always recommend either a P&S or a DSLR... the ones in the middle are just lukewarm water.

So technically the Canon is a glorified Digital Camera with SLR looks - would i be barking up the right tree here?

Pretty much. The CCD size gives much more "quality" than just the megapixel sizes. Some professional digital SLR bodies costing thousands don't actually have that high a megapixel size, but the CCD is full size. Plus, the advantage of an SLR (manual control, interchangeable lenses, accessories etc) is not matched by the in betweeners like the SX10. With the Canon SX10 you still have the problems of it weighing a fair old bit, not as portable etc but with none of the benefits. Lens quality will probably be a bit crap too.