File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hello there /p/,
Ive been thinking about buying a nice SLR cam under $2000. Could any of you recommend some for me please?
>> Anonymous
2000 of what dollars? Singapore? US? Canadian? Australian?
>> Anonymous
well the rebel xti is a nice camera, and with the leftover money you could get yourself a very nice lens for it.

Personally I really like canon, although nikon is a good choice too.

Check out dpreview.com for really detailed specs.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
SLR or DSLR?
coz for $2000, you can get a VERY nice SLR
>> Anonymous
for that much you can get a new Canon EOS 40D

go for that

alternatively, buy a nice film SLR or older 20D and spend the rest on decent lenses
>> Anonymous
>>77367

Definately get a good lens though. The most important thing.

Also, a good idea is to buy the body used from a good reseller (b&h photo video for one) and then buy a nice lens new.

LENSES ARE EXPENSIVE. KEEP THIS IN MIND.
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
>>77376

The only exception would be some primes, though. Like a 50mm 1.8
>> Anonymous
up to the 400D range Canon supposedly has the better quality cameras over the Nikons, but past that from what I've heard Nikon has a strong hand. I went with a 400D and think it's great, although Canon has the worst track record as far as dust on the sensor goes.

For $2000 I'd say go for a D80 or possibly a D200 and get some nice lenses, perhaps a 18-300 Sigma or something, along with a few other lenses depending on what you might be shootan.
>> Anonymous
>>77400

And by that I mean a 28-300 Sigma.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>77400
>from what I've heard from Nikon fanboys and Nikon dealers, Nikon has a strong hand.
Fix'd
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>77405
lol your like the most canon fanboy in /p/
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>77409
True, but at least I'm upfront about it. :)

Basically, my point is that both systems are pretty much equal. Anyone who tells you differently is pushing an agenda.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Go look at the A700 Sony, takes all Minolta Dynax lenses.
>> Anonymous
Canon EOS 3

OR

Nikon F100
>> Anonymous
>>77353
ITT: richfags.
>> Anonymous
>>77445
THIS is what a fanboy looks like.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>77664
I think that's what a fangirl looks like. I mean, I don't know for sure, but I've always assumed from the "Butterfly" name.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>77719
But ofcourse ac <3

>>77664
What its not _OUTRIGHT_ fanboyism, for what the anonymous is wanting to spend, it is another viable option. If i was recomending it to just ANYONE then that would be fanboyism.
>> Anonymous
>>77402
first of all, the Sigma 28-300 sucks on so many different levels. just read reviews and user opinions online for it.
Second, for under 2000USD the best digital SLR you can get is the new Nikon D300 and that's a fact.
If you also want special lenses it really depends on what you want. if you are into birds or sports and want a very good tele lens, get a second job and save more money. if you want a general use lens then get the new Canon D40 maybe and put 500$ in good used glas, leaves you money for a bag and a memory card.
If you are new to DSLRS or if you are not sure what aperture priority is, get yourself a Rebel XTi or a Nikon D40x or whatever you find for a good price. Sell it in one year and buy todays top model for half price.
>> Anonymous
>>77749
moar liek fanGAY amirite?
>> Anonymous
cannon xti online its about 800$ through staples it will cost about 1400$
>> Anonymous
28-300mm doesn't seem like a very attractive range on a APS-C camera, that's 42~45mm at 35mm equivalent on the wide end. That's really troublesome for indoors photography or anything like that. An 18-200mm would be a wiser choice then, IF you'd want a superzoom lens in the first place.
>> Anonymous
Pentax k10d($900) + DA* 16-50 2.8($900) = Win