File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Out of the following SLR's what would you guys recommend to a amateur for a first cam, Sony A100/A200/A300/A350 - Canon XTI/XT/40D
>> Anonymous
40D.
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
whatever feels comfortable in your hands
>> Anonymous
Any of the Canons - 20D or 30D over the 40D though.
>> Anonymous
>>147133
The main downfall of it is that it weighs alittle over a ton and is huge. but other than that it would be something id go for
>>147136
Then that'd go around the a100-200 range for me, but I want something that I can get into and take good pics off the bat.
>> Anonymous
Nikon D40, epic value for moneys
/Thread
>> Anonymous
>>147192
Well.. 40D doesnt autobracket.. Naturally the first he would want to do is shoot a bunch of HDR and show them to his friends to get "aw, youre such a natural!"-responses.. Therefor, 400D.
>> Anonymous
>>147136
>>147136
>>147136
>>147136
Don't overlook this!!!
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>147195
lulwut?

my 30D does it, and your saying they took it away?

its like 4th on the menu btw.
>> Anonymous
>>147141
All DSLRs will do that if you can, except the Sony A700, which smears the files on purpose. The A100 will do fine. Buy that, a 28, 30, or 35mm lens to taste, whatever Sony's cheap 50mm is, a wide angle to taste, and you'll be pretty set.
>> Anonymous
>>147197
D40*
>> heman
d40
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>147198
Way to try and troll unrelated!

Sony has the best performance in that price bracket and the most comfortable grips. Canon has a larger collection of specalist lenses and bodies, neither of which is important to you.
>> Anonymous
k200 aint bad, sealed, etc
k20d, if you want to splash out, but not "d300" splash out

pick up a nikon D200 or 30D 2nd hand could be anohter good idea?

would not go near a sony
id rather take a photo by stabbing a hole in my penis, and putting some film behind it, then rolling back my foreskin for 1/60th sec

Olymus with the little e-420 looks ok
>> Anonymous
>>147299


unless you're ever going to need $5kUSD extream telephoto lenses, the sony will do fine. Even if you do need extream telephoto, there's TONS of old minolta af stuff that is some of the best glass made.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>147299
Careful there. The D40 is Nikon's bottom-of-the-barrel entry-level SLR that can be had for $500. The 40D is Canon's mid-level SLR that costs $1200.
>> Anonymous
>>147314
ok how would the D40 compare with sony?

sorry for all the questions but i just want to get the right one, that is all.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>147319
I'd actually say the Sony's better than the D40. Nikon's "OVER 9000 LENSES!" argument doesn't really work when OVER 8985 of them don't work with the particular camera model.

The good news is that you don't really have to worry that much about "the right one". All digital SLRs currently on the market will let you take great pictures, of pretty much equal quality. Even systems like Olympus', which I've personally ranted and raved against in countless threads, will give image quality barely distinguishable from Canon and Nikon's high-end cameras.
>> Anonymous
>>147321
ok thanks alot, sony 200/300 it is then.

Appreciate all the info
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>147324
(Though I'd recommend the Canon XTi or 40D over both of 'em)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>147321
Actually :P the A100 was almost as good as a D80 and cost a lot less.

Sony is very much pricing themselves competitivly into the bottom end of the market. If i knew the new canon bodies specs I would say how it stands against that, but from feeling an XTi it is a lot worse than the sonys.