File :-(, x, )
Which camera for first DSLR? Anonymous
Dear /p/,

I don't come here often, so I went through all 11 pages but did not find a thread on this. Therefore:

Question: What should I buy for my first DSLR? Nikon D40? The base Canon DSLR model (don't know the model number)? Or some Sony model? Any extra lenses and additional gear I should buy (tripod, UV filter, etc.)?

Supplemental information:
Experience: No experience with DSLR before. Own HP R607 PaS circa 2005. Starting to look for something more.

Usage: Will use DSLR for a little bit of everything; outdoor day and night, portraits, etc. Strictly amateur/hobby use intended.

Budget: ~$500, although I can wait 2 months and bump that up to ~$600.

Additional thoughts: Need something that is easy to use, although I guess this is not a very important criterion because I will get used to it. Will not regularly print large size prints. Also need it to be as portable (read light and easy to handle) as possible for obvious reasons.

Comment too long. Clickhereto view the full text.
>> Chib
I'm a big fan of my Rebel XT.
stay away from Sony.
>> Anonymous
canon rebel xt, amazon price $423.49 .

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, amazon price 76.94.

SanDisk 2GB ULTRA II CompactFlash, amazon price 34.22.

That's pretty much the cheapest good quality dslr + lens combo you can get for new.

That being said you will have zero flexibility with this set up.

Still, not bad for a beginner to run around with, and it will absolutely kick the ass of any point and shoot in terms of image quality, in dark or bright areas.
>> Anonymous
>>92247

just to clarify, by "zero flexibility" I mean zoom range. It will only shoot at 50mm, which on a crop sensor is more like 80mm.
>> Anonymous
I think the base Sony model is over your price range, though I could be wrong. It's a step above a basic, entry-level DSLR.

Also look at the Pentax and Olympus entry-level offerings. They're all pretty much equally good, each usually having some pretty irrelevent minor advantages and disadvantages one doesn't need to worry about. Go to a camera store, play around with each of them, and buy the one that feels best.
>> Anonymous
>>92247

this setup will also be incredibly light.
>> Anonymous
>>92245

I SUMMON THEE BUTTERFLY!
>> John
Op here... thanks a million for the replies.

1. I am going on an overseas trip. I live in smalltown Idaho and there is no camera store 150 miles from where I am. Therefore, I cannot go to a store to test cameras out. Besides, I'd be totally lost between the multitude of available options and probably biased sales pitches anyway. Therefore, in this case (and in most others), I find that anonymous advice is the best I can get.

2. Can someone also recommend a good book (or two!) for amateur wielders of teh DSLR?

3. I already have a 1GB Kingston SD card from 2005 (from my old camera)... are newer ones faster or something?

4. How important is it for a camera to support shooting in RAW mode?

5. Finally (for now), a somewhat related question: Should I buy Adobe Lightroom?
>> Anonymous
>>92256
1.amazon and google are your friends

2. the internet is best.

3. I *really* doubt your sd card will work in the rebel xt. Probably not any other dslrs either. I could be wrong. the new cards WILL be much faster though.

4. Very important. Once you start shooting in raw you don't go back.

5. If you shoot alot of pictures in raw adobe lightroom is very helpful. You can download the trial version to see how you like it. There's lots of free software that will probably do a fine job for you in any case though.
>> Anonymous
>>92256

You could get a regular magazine. There are some weeklies and monthly ones.
>> Chib
>>92256
-Make sure at least one of your books is camera specific and one of them is for general photography
-you should be good with your 1g card for now
-RAW is good if you want to be able to really edit photos post-shot
-and i suggest against buying any software...if you can get it otherwise go ahead
>> Anonymous
>>92256
the old card will work fine, it probably isnt the fastest speed the camera is capable of though, i bet.
>> Anonymous
>>92244
Try out the base models. That'd be the D40 from Nikon or the 400D from Canon. See which one you like. D40 will be cheaper, the 400D more capable. If you have extra money to spend, compare between the D200 (Nikon) and 40D (Canon). With either of those, you can't really go too wrong. However, as much as I would like a D200, and as good cameras Nikons are, I still prefer my Rebel XT. Point here is not that Canons are better than Nikons (though I think so), but that they can be pretty different and you should choose the one that fits your goals.
>> John
OP here. Thanks for your continuing help.

I froogled for the XT and found what looks like a great price for the XT<b>i</b>. ($401.xx at http://www.yourdigitalelectronics.com/product_info.php?products_id=1881). Has anyone shopped at this site before? I did not find any reseller ratings. Compared to other retailers, the price at this site looks too good to be true.
>> Anonymous
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071109101523AAgNWUp

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071111181848AA36wf0
>> Anonymous
1. I'd advise the Pentax, then. It's the one model with something really stand-out about it: image stabilization built into the sensor. Image stabilization is a way to compensate for the little jitters everyone has holding anything. Some companies (Canon, Nikon, Olympus) do it by moving stuff inside the lens with you, others (Pentax, Sony, Samsung) do it by moving the sensor.

Doing it in the lens gets a little bit better results, but it's much more expensive and only works on lenses it has it built in.

The above person telling you to get a 50mm prime is right, no matter what you intend to use it for. They're extremely cheap and work well in low light. Now, when you say "amateur/hobby" use, do you mean "amateur/hobby" in the sense of "I just like taking pictures for fun and want them to be good," or "amateur/hobby" in the sense of "not for money, but still with serious/artistic/whatever intent?" If it's the former, the lens that comes with it and the 50mm should do you fine. If the latter, you'll also want a prime with a shorter length, and that should start you out well.
>> Anonymous
>>92269
2. Like the other guy said, the Internet. Read the Wikipedia articles on exposure, shutter speed, aperture, depth of field, and film speed. Wander your way at leisure through the other articles at the bottom of the main Photography article. The Luminous Landscape is unmatched for technical issues, but I find it's hit and miss for the less tangible aspects of photography.

3. There are faster ones, but that doesn't have much to do with its age. You will want a larger card (at least 2 GB) though, and your old one will make a nice spare. If you buy Canon or Olympus, you'll have to buy a new type of card, a Compact Flash card. Everyone else, as far as I know, uses SD cards.

4. Vital. Some people will try to tell you otherwise, but it really is. If you want the best quality and control, shoot raw. Unless you go in and do a bunch of stuff on top of converting the file, it'll only take a minute or two.

5. No. Buy Photoshop Elements and download the free Camera Raw software for it. It's cheaper and I'm pretty sure it gives you more control than Lightroom does. Lightroom is designed for professionals dealing with hundreds or thousands of images from a single day's work.
>> Anonymous
>>92267

Meet

>>92268

I'd say avoid them. You could try looking for more if you want, but it isn't promising.
>> John
Yay, OP just learned how to quote posts!

>>92259
Which ones do you read? Any mags specially for the Rebel XT?

>>92268
Thank you very much for the information.

>>92269
Thank you for the reply. I have never shot with much thought given as regards to composition, etc., but I would like to do so now. This is the reason that I have opted to buy a DSLR; a desire for 'better' image quality and an intent to do (start) some 'serious' photography. If it helps to score intelligent (and/or good looking) chicks, why not? :-) Initial interests include mostly regular outdoor/nature photography, HDR experimentation. So, recommend me a good prime lens.
>> Anonymous
>>92276
on top of all the other suggestions id suggest a rebel XT/350D, kit lens and the nifty fifty(50mm f/1.8)
also, canon's use compact flash cards. though theyre cheaper, usually faster and available in bigger sizes, though they are physically bigger.

would be a great starter setup and form here youll learn whether you want wider, longer, sharper, faster, primes or zooms etc.

also, photogs dont get chicks, hell i barely get looks :( though my g/f does like it when i take good pics of her, and its also a good excuse to get some nekked pics of her "im practicing, i swear"

for lenses see:
photozone.de and slrgear.com

for cameras and other photography shit see:
dpreview.com expect a more technical/gear based forum and not much on samples/critique and skills. also expect a lot of old men bitching about whose camera is better, though there are still some good threads often.

well done, photography's a great hobby. ive been doing it for about 3-4 years now and its wicked fun.
>> Anonymous
>>92286

Seconding everything there...except the photographers don't get chicks part. :P
>> Anonymous
well black friday is coming round pretty soon, maybe you can benefit from the dirt cheap sd cards/cameras. Even if you cannot get to a store, there are many online deals. As for recommendations, I recommend what was said above but the best way to learn how to use a DSLAR is to read the camera manual and to experiment... alot.
>> Anonymous
>>92326
also, before I forget, if you are going to shoot in RAW, make sure you have plenty of hd space. Each RAW pic is around 5-10mb per pic.
>> Anonymous
This thread is in serious need of nikon love.
First off, for strict "amateur/hobby use," I don't think you can ever go wrong with either of the kit 18-55mm lenses that come with the D40 or XT/XTi (if you choose to get the kit). I have both the kit lens from my D40 and a f/1.2 55mm Nikkor (which I absolutely love), and I use the kit lens much more often than the prime when I just want to shoot around.
Anyway, to respond to what you said,

1. That's a bummer considering most everyone here would probably agree that the clincher for choosing which entry level dSLR to buy today is ergonomics, and you have no way of testing that out. I personally like Nikons better because the shutter release button is firm while Canon's button moves around a bit.

2. Any Ansel Adams book wouldn't be a waste of your time if you wanna do landscapes. As for the internet, dpreview is great, but my favorite's gotta be kenrockwell.com. His site is full of info, and his technical section is a great read to start out with. Yes, he's biased towards Nikon a bit, but he has a good deal of Canon things in there, too.

3. Your old card should be fine.

4. I'm not a big fan of it and I think it's a waste of time. It gives you more room to work with if you spend the time, but JPG is completely sufficient and much more convenient, especially if you're just starting out. Also, if you only have 1 gig of room, JPG is the way to go. It's a matter of whether you wanna have a chance take more shots or make more out of less shots. Bottom line: If you have to ask; Shoot JPG.

5. I've never used it and never found the need to use it. The other responses in the thread answer it well.
>> Anonymous
Oh, and get a D40 first and a prime if you see the need for it.
>> Anonymous
>>92333

Looking at Ken Rockwell's site for Canon info is like asking the KKK what their opinion on black people is.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>92335
Obviously haven't actually looked at the site. He's spent a good long while fapping over the image quality of his EOS 5D, and he reviews (generally favorably) a lot of Canon gear.
>> Anonymous
Ken "the thumbnail" Rockwell is a douchebag.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>92253
Im here already, the A100 isnt really a base model camera its a D80 competitor.

HAPPY NOW?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>92271
FYI the A100 takes CF and the A700 takes CF AND Duo Pro.
>> Anonymous
>>92425

Yes. I am happy now, thank you.
>> Anonymous
>>92276
Which system are you going with? Different lenses are available to each.
>> John
Op here, ladies and gentlemen. First seasonal snow in my town!

>>92286
Many thanks for your reply. I think I will go with your setup (XT, kit lens and, uh, 'los cincuenta nifty' lens).

>>92326
Can you point me to some good deals for SLR cameras and associated equipment? These SLR prices never seem to come down from their usual levels, be it Labor Day or BF.

>>92333
Thanks for the information about Nikon cameras. Hopefully I will have a chance to check out the D40 when I go on my trip. If I like it WAAAY more than the XT, I will buy it and get rid of the XT. Also, I will check out Ansel Adams' book/s... I'll see if the few libraries that I have access to has it/them.

>>92438
I think I am going to take the advice of Hon. Anon. and go with the Rebel XT. :-)

A general question to all: What does the XTi have for ~$200 more that the XT doesn't (other than the megapixels)? Something I should consider investing in (after borrowing the extra money)? Or should I just stick with the XT and save money for new lenses?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>92527
>Or should I just stick with the XT and save money for new lenses?

WHOLE WORLD OF YES.
>> I||ICIT
>>92286here

>>92527:
"A general question to all: What does the XTi have for ~$200 more that the XT doesn't (other than the megapixels)? Something I should consider investing in (after borrowing the extra money)? Or should I just stick with the XT and save money for new lenses?"

looking here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Ccanon
_eos400d&show=all
not much. a bigger buffer, more MP's (pffffft)and a newer AF system with 9 points over 7.
my opinion, for a learner, an extra 2 points is hardly worth it. and unless you shoot sports or very dark situations then you wont need it. and again, unless you shoot sports you wont need a big buffer.

another consideration:
have you looked at a 20D? i dunno what they go for compared to an XT in the U.S?(is that where you are?) itll have a much more robust body and everything else that comes with a more amateur/semi pro based body. not too forget, as the nikon guy mentioned, itll have better ergonomics, especially if your a guy! i tried an XTi and it was wayyyyyy too small compared to my 30D
>> Anonymous
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>92565
Bigger buffer, faster speed (3fps vs. 2.5fps), extra 2MP. Oh, and the cleaning system, but that's hardly worth mentioning.

However, the thing that really makes the XTi worth it for me is the camera's firmware:
* On the XT, whenever you make a change, you have to confirm it with the set button. On the XTi, you just half-press the shutter and it assumes you're confirmed
* XT only has a luminance histogram view. XTi has an RGB histogram.

(Of course, one could make the argument that I'm just using these as a crutch to justify spending too much on a camera body... and you'd probably be right. ;) )
>> I||ICIT
>>92576
haha, argument? youve got it ;D

the cleaning system is still questionable at least. physical/manual cleaning is still far superior.

2MP is pointless. i didnt care (personally) about the 2MP from 300D to 30D

bigger buffer could be handy, but i barely fill the 30D in raw in most sitautions... unless of course im being a spray tard...
and 1/2fps... now your just being silly...
howd i do? ;)
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>92582
I fill the buffer pretty frequently when shooting RAW. 'Course, when shooting RAW, I'm generally trying to make sure everything in the shot is 100% perfect, so I'll do things like taking 5-6 shots in sequence with slightly different tilts to my camera to make sure one's correctly level.

And that extra half frame per second is really helpful when I'm in a situation where there's a girl taking off her clothes in front of me.

But like I said, it's the better controls that make me feel it was worth the extra duckets.
>> Anonymous
>>92565my opinion, for a learner, an extra 2 points is hardly worth it.

The 400D doesn't only have "an extra 2 point." The AF is sourced from the 30D.

The 300/350D can hunt in low light and is a step below for AF accuracy.