New DSLR advice

[nick heppinstall]

I've started to put a bit to one side to purchase my first DSLR. I've been using various Compacts and a Fuji S7000 Bridge since 2004 which has been an excellent little camera.

Trouble is three fold :

1) The 6x zoom on the Fuji ( even with converter ) is just not enough

2) It's finally got to the point where after taking 6 pictures at max resolution the 20 second wait is driving me nuts. I can shoot in RAW but only single frame.

3) My best mate has purchased a pretty cheap Pentax DSLR with a kit lens. He has also purchased a Tamron 300mm lens which I think cost him around £115. The detail makes my Fuji look a bit sick

I will probably have around £7-900 to play with.

Main use will be Family and Aviation.

I'm going to start some pretty intensive research now but any advice or pointers will be appreciated :-)

Cash is a bit tight so I will not be buying in the next week or so.

[RobDickinson]

Well. They (dSLR's) are all damned fine photo taking machines. There are differences but they tend to be minor in the same price range.

Canon & Nikon still IMO have the edge on IQ and high ISO noise, AF and perfomance, with the best range of lenses. But that doesnt mean the others (sony, oly etc) are far behind.

£900 can get you a good used 40D, 18-55IS kit lens and 70-300IS which is an ideal starter kit for family and avaition.

(300mm is a bit short but honestly with the budget your not going longer whicher body you get)

[Simpo Two]

I find a 70-300mm lens to be very good for telephoto work as long as you don't need a fast aperture. I have a Nikkor 70-300mm VR as my 'airshow lens'.

However, it's far from ideal as a general purpose lens because there's no midrange or wideangle - so you'll need to plan for a body and two lenses, say 18-70mm and 70-300mm. I'll leave the make up to you

[GetCarter]

I agree with what they said /\

[nick heppinstall]

Thanks all. Anyone have experience of Sony DSLR's ?

Would it be better to go for a cheaper body and spend the extra on a falf decent 300mm lens ?

What should I be looking for lens wise ?

[jimmy306]

No experience of sony DSLR, but i think they are pretty good, and IS in the body which is a plus. I think most photographers will tell you that the lens is more important then the body, so unless you need a function on a more expensive body, spend as much as you can on the lens.

[JustinP1]

I was in a similar situation just over a year ago, with a 'bridge' camera and wanting to get the kind of photos that the guys on here posted.

I managed to get an end of line Canon 400D from PC World for under £200 with the 'kit' 17-50 lens, and I also inherited a Canon 70-300mm lens from my Dad who passed away a few months before.

So in a way I ended up with Canon through chance really, but I am more than happy with it. Despite the relatively similar cost of the 'budget' DSLR and the bridge camera, the DSLR knocks spots off the bridge.

Practicing a big doing wildlife photography I got to know the pertinent controls and using the Canon 70-300mm I found that not only was I always using it at 300mm, the image quality was much better than the 'bridge' camera but I wanted more. I got a Sigma 50-500mm for £400 from ebay, and it is superb for what I want, and is actually usable all the way from 50mm where I have even taken portraits with it, to the full 500mm. The second issue is that the image quality and sharpness is way better than the £180? Canon lens.

I would recommend any of that kit if you have a decent budget of £700-£900. I would also say that Canon has a much larger second hand market out there so it is easier to both buy what you want and sell your kit when you want to upgrade.

Don't blow all of your cash on the body - thats a false economy. Tech moves on so quickly anyway it will be outmoded in 2-3 years. However, a good lens will not only make more difference to the final outcome of the photo but will be able to work with other bodies in the future. That's my theory anyway...!

[Stuart]

My only comment about the 70-300, particularly at the hobby end, is that they can be VERY slow. The barrel is long so light has trouble travelling all the way down it, and they'll only open to 4.5 at full zoom. The upside of a zoom like this on the xxD and xxxD Canon bodies, of course, is that you have 1.6x magnification due to the lack of a full frame chip. That makes it a 112mm-480mm in real terms.

As for the advice on bodies, well your budget gets you firmly into prosumer DSLR territory, particularly used. I like Canon simply because I've always had them, but I'd get yourself down to Jessops for a play and then buy from them as a reward for their great advice find it cheaper online afterwards.

[condor]

Jessops aren't always expensive, I bought a Nikkor 70-300mm lens from them last year and was the same price as the Amazon one. I think when your spending a few hundred pounds then it's a good idea to trust the seller.

[Skodaku]

jimmy306 said:

No experience of sony DSLR, but i think they are pretty good, and IS in the body which is a plus. I think most photographers will tell you that the lens is more important then the body, so unless you need a function on a more expensive body, spend as much as you can on the lens.

I have a Sony Alpha A300, (which I had to search for as I specifically wanted that body), with Sony's own 18-55 and 18-250 lenses. Very happy with it as are other Sony DSLR owners I've met. See if you can get an A350. Cracking body and feels "right" in the hand...............but not all cameras suit all people so handling is a must. A bonus with Sony DSLR's is that the anti-shake is built into the body so you don't need special lenses. Lots of the old Minolta lenses fit as well, (Sony took over Minolta), so you have a wide choice of glass. Sounds like an A350 or A380 would suit, (but they feel very different to each other), and spend money on lenses. The 18-250 is a good lens rather than a great lens.

Good luck.

[nick heppinstall]

OK then here's an update. So far I'm leaning towards this Pentax with 55mm kit and Pentax's own 300mm :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pentax-K-x-Digital-Camera-...

Not planning on buying from Amazon just for info.

Review here :

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/

Anyone used or own the above cam or lens ?

[Stuart]

nick heppinstall said:

OK then here's an update. So far I'm leaning towards this Pentax with 55mm kit and Pentax's own 300mm :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pentax-K-x-Digital-Camera-...

Not planning on buying from Amazon just for info.

Review here :

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/

Anyone used or own the above cam or lens ?

I don't have any experience of the Pentax but, at your budget, I think you could do better. Particularly if you'll consider used. Camera gear tends to be well looked after and it is hard to disguise when it hasn't been.

The thing about Canon and Nikon (I have the former) is that they dominate the market and so have far better support in terms of lenses and accessories. If you get into it you will, I promise, regret not going for one of these in the first place and you'll more than likely end up replacing the Pentax.

A kit Canon or Nikon entry level body and lense will be as good (or better) and offer far more opportunities to change lenses later.

Just my two penneth.

[tinman0]

I'd choose Canon or Nikon depending on what your friends have. If none of your friends have Canon or Nikon, then its down to Jessops to see what best fits.

If you don't go Canon, you should be able to get onto a 500D body with kit lens + cheap 70-300 + bag.

And I would shop at Jessops. You may pay a few quid more (but not much), but it's worth to keep hobbyist shops in business.

[jimmy306]

tinman0 said:

but it's worth to keep hobbyist shops in business.

O/T , would you really call jessops a hobbyist shop? I would call it a large chain that happens to sell camera's whose staff know very little about what they sell (might be a bit of a generalizations there, sorry if anyone works at jessops). I went in there and said i was considering a d90 or a 50d, and if they could advise me either way. The girl in the shop went on about how the d90 was "way better in everyway, much nicer looking and just better because her boyfriend had just bought her one and it was great." She coulnd't tell me anything about either camera, despite apparently owning one! I then went to London Camera Exchange (a great shop btw, very friendly, helpfully, knowledgeable staff) and bought the 50d!

Edited by jimmy306 on Monday 22 March 19:38

[Felters]

Definitely go second hand - and if you're near London give Grays a try. A D80 with a 70-300mm and a 18-55 would set you back about £650 and have a full twelve months warranty. I've bought from them several times and have no regrets. Bit of a customer experience too if you can get to them... about as far from dealing with a pimply yoof in Dixons as it's possible to get.

http://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/secon...

[tinman0]

jimmy306 said:

tinman0 said:

but it's worth to keep hobbyist shops in business.

O/T , would you really call jessops a hobbyist shop? I would call it a large chain that happens to sell camera's whose staff know very little about what they sell (might be a bit of a generalizations there, sorry if anyone works at jessops). I went in there and said i was considering a d90 or a 50d, and if they could advise me either way. The girl in the shop went on about how the d90 was "way better in everyway, much nicer looking and just better because her boyfriend had just bought her one and it was great." She coulnd't tell me anything about either camera, despite apparently owning one! I then went to London Camera Exchange (a great shop btw, very friendly, helpfully, knowledgeable staff) and bought the 50d!

Most of the local independent camera shops are gone. Killer rents, killer rates, and too many people wandering in, wasting their time and then going online. And then those same people complain that their locally owned shops have all gone out of business.

Jessops may be a chain, but there are so few choices now, there sometime isn't really an option. And I'd still rather give my business to Jessops than Curry's.

Ok in London with some of the big independent camera shops, but their just aren't that many outside London.

[Simpo Two]

Funny to think that in the 1980s 'Jessops of Leicester' was a massive mail-order company that out-competed camera shops. Then I guess they went and bought shops...

[Stuart]

I would have no problems whatsoever going into Jessops (who are a chain like Dixons in my book) trying what I wanted, giving them a chance to price match online and, if they weren't able to, buying elsewhere.

I wouldn't do this to a local independent (and there are a couple near me) because I wouldn't consider it fair on the business owner. Slightly twisted morals I realise, but there are plenty of small-ish companies operating online only who are able to offer a good deal because they choose not to incur the overheads associated with a shop front. They're no less deserving of my business than a high street operator, and there's no reason why a large chain like Jessops shouldn't match their prices if they want my business.

[tinman0]

Stuart said:

They're no less deserving of my business than a high street operator, and there's no reason why a large chain like Jessops shouldn't match their prices if they want my business.

Erm, apart from shop front rents, business rates that make your eyes water, front line staff to serve customers, fitting the shop out, and then buying in stock, and people going in wasting their time looking but not buying because they can buy online from a business which spends £100pa on a website, has a WorldPay account, and buys in kit directly from the distributor when its ordered from the website.

Totally agree. No reason at all why a shop shouldn't be able to compete with a business with next to no overheads.

[Stuart]

tinman0 said:

Stuart said:

They're no less deserving of my business than a high street operator, and there's no reason why a large chain like Jessops shouldn't match their prices if they want my business.

Erm, apart from shop front rents, business rates that make your eyes water, front line staff to serve customers, fitting the shop out, and then buying in stock, and people going in wasting their time looking but not buying because they can buy online from a business which spends £100pa on a website, has a WorldPay account, and buys in kit directly from the distributor when its ordered from the website.

Totally agree. No reason at all why a shop shouldn't be able to compete with a business with next to no overheads.

I don't disagree with any of that, but the point is that they don't have to have these overheads. They have a choice. This doesn't mean that they're owed my cash...