ClaytonC01

iTrader: (4)

I'm looking into buying an SLR... just curious as to what everyone here is using and thoughts or reviews on your SLR's. any input would be appreciated.. thanks

BriA5

iTrader: (3)

A rough budget would def. help out. They range in proce dramatically.

Remember, the camera body is the cheaper part... put more money into the lenses.

ClaytonC01

iTrader: (4)

im looking to start out somewhat cheap... less than $1k..

98BirdLS1

I posted most of this in another thread. Nikon D40/D40x/D50 and Canon Rebel XT/XTi are all great starter DSLR's. All of them come with a decent 18-55mm starter lens that is great to learn with. All are under $1000 including the lenses.

Go to a few places and play with all the Cameras you can, feel which one you like the best, feels the best. Resolution isn't everything. The D40 only has 6.1mp but thats plenty for anything up to 10x13 prints with great clarity.

Stick with Nikon or Canon as the other brands don't have the upgrade support you might need if you get serious. Don't forget to add in extra costs like memory cards, bags, filters (definately need a UV filter), tripods (a MUST for low light shots and car photoshoots).

Another thing to remember is not to get discouraged when your shots don't look like all the ones you see on the internet. Most of them go through hours of photo processing.

Good luck SLR photograpy gets expensive but its sure is fun.

Luke

DVFlyer

iTrader: (18)

Have you considered used? There are many camera forums (dpreview, fredmiranda) where people sell their used gear because they are upgrading.

FWIW- My wife uses Fuji S2's for her wedding photograhy. They are Nikon based bodies so they take the Nikon lenses. They have served us well for quite a while now. The only drawback is that they use a two battery setup. One set of double AA's and a set of CR123's.

plumpzz

iTrader: (10)

I just bought a canon Rebel XT last night with a 2 gig memory card, tripod, case, UV filter, kit lense and an extra battery for about 750 shipped. I chose the canon because of my familiarity with canon.

arvin

iTrader: (2)

I'd say a used Canon 20d and a 17-85 IS lens. Both can be had for about $1000 and normally pops up on craigslist on a regular basis.

gqong

iTrader: (13)

id recommend a canon rebel xt + a good lens. that will fit the budget < 1000$ also grab a tripod, extra batteries....id suggest the grip as well fits 2 batteries and feels great while holding it.

Vlad

Wrong question. If you really into quality photography you should be asking who's lenses are the best. Aside some exotic choises, Canon lenses rule modern world. The camera body really isn't that important, and all canon SLRs will do. Take 1/4 of your budget and get whatever body fits that range. Newer Rebels are better then older Rebels, and Ds are better than the same period Rebels. So new or used D body is slightly better than same time period Rebels. You can pick up 10D body from ebay really cheap, around 300 bucks I believe.

Take the rest 3/4 of your budget and invest into good fast lenses. L series or good non-L. Avoid kit lenses. The quality of picture mostly depends on the quality of the glass, not body. Kit lenses are made to be cheap, not to be good. And yet most people will spend $1500 on a body, and then use it with $150 lens wondering why pictures don't look even close to pro...

If you have to pick only one lens - get 24-70 f2.8 L.

Also if you into portraits - get 50mm f1.8 (mk I, if you can find it on ebay). For under 100 bucks it's probably wolrds first exception to the rule you-get-what-you-paid-for

kevburgler

agreed, and i've heard nothing but good things of the 50mm f1.8, still have yet to try it out though.

gr?

It's not overly special. People love it because they usually upgrade from the kit lens to a prime lens and are amazed how sharp their images now look. For the price it's hard to beat, though. People tend to forget to mention how loud the autofocus mechanism is and how slow it is when indoors.

MagicPie

Since your asking advice on a car forum, I take your a noob, save your money in just get a nice point and shoot. People think dSLR offer some kind of magic, and pictures will look professional.
I assure you a pro can make a cheap point and shoot look as good as a dSLR. All dSLR do is make things easier to do, most features on a dSLR amateurs will never use, most keep it on automatic in the first place which defeats the purpose of a nice dSLR.
If you do decide to get a dSLR dont spend too much, for no reason.

I meet this guy a few times and he a badass with a camera and he wrote a nice article about the BS behind high end cameras. $150 vs $5K camera
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

When I was doing cinematography work, I knew when I was competing with a poser for a job when I see they have a $30K camera and I bring a out a $4K camera. I never lost a job to another person, it the person behind the camera that matters

gr?

The way I read that comment, it's pretty much a slap in the face to any amateur or semi pro photographer on this forum. Since this is a car forum, no one here has an idea how to use a camera?

MagicPie

I never said that, nor was I intending to be negative with that statement, I was trying to save him from a $1K camera that can do nothing more then a nice $300 PnS

Granted I assume he was a amateur but I know not any professional or even semi-pro would asks question about camera in a non camera forum. Considering there hundred of forums where professionals hang out, it doesnt make sense, also any pro would already have a list to of camera to consider and would only need suggestion as to which one suit there needs best from people that have owned them.

Look at all the "what camera to buy?" threads and most responses are people looking up the most expensive camera and assuming there the best and then go on to mention buying filters and lenses that no really needs.

All I intended to say that a expensive camera will not preform miracles and make up for lack of talent

Vlad

I have an Mk I version with metal mount, bought it off ebay for $160. It's one of the best portrait lens. quite close to expensive 85mm 1.8 and 1.2 L. I just have a thing about metal mounts, so I had to find Mk I.

Amazing bokeh when wide open. Good for dark situations too.

Lots of pics on my www.trusevich.com made with it.

TheOtherRob

iTrader: (14)

D50 FTW! Good camera for beginners and its capable of some very nice pictures. I purchased mine from ebay for around 560. That came with the body, tripod, lens, bag, memory card, and usb card. All brandnew. If you want a good camera to learn on and also have one thats not as difficult to use, then I suggest the d50. If you want sample images let me know.

Vlad

What are you talking about? When used on a body with crop censor it's on par with 85mm 1.8 and 1.2L. I've tried them all.

Yes it's loud... First time I've hear it I thought it's broken. But what it has to do with quality of pictures?

Vlad

So you think on a car forum you can only find people who know one and only one thing - how to drive?

As for SLR vs. P&S... It's loughfable to suggest there is no difference...

SLR is about full and total control. Yes, in some situations, like travel daytime photography, you can take a comparable shot with P&S, but you'll spend 10 times more time and 10 times more tries, until one shot is miraculosly matches what you looking for. With SLR you can get that shot from the first time, every time. And in most situations, like sports, night, indoors, portrait... you simply can't take comparable shot with P&S.

Accidentally, that website you mentioned only show you bright daylight static situation - the only situation where (after number of tries) you can eventually get a shot that looks comparable on a computer display.

So, yes, expensive camera with good lens can perform miracles. But you have to know what you doing of course.

MagicPie

how exactly does a expensive camera and lens preform miracles, its capture nothing more that a PnS can.
A good PnS has the common manual setting that a dSLR can offer, offer the common lenses ranges, adjustable ISO, shutter speeds, and have lens with low f-stop.

The only real disadvantage a PnS is not being able to produce shallow DOF, something most people dont need to use, but nothing a quick blur from photo shop cant overcome.

ctwentytwo

iTrader: (9)

I also feel P&S doesn't offer the flexibility of an SLR... the super-wide and super telephoto options that's available with the change of lenses... also, generally, the SLR's are less noisy with higher ISO's... without the need or photoshop or noise reduction software. For the price of a good P&S, you can actually get the Nikon D40, or with some change, a Canon XT. Personally, I'd skip the bottom of the basement, and just go to D40x or XTi... and look upward from there.