Dear All

Please let me know which DSLR is a good buy. I am a novice and would like to dive in DSLR's, but before investing I thought it would be good to ask the experts here! I dont want to compromise on picture quality but yes, it should not be awfully heavy and crazily priced.

Thanks a lot!
PS: Is there someone looking to sell theirs / a deal worth interesting?

This question really depends on a number of things like budget and how serious you want to become.

As a guide a good website to get an idea is www.dpreview.com

In terms of brands Nikon and Canon are probably the better to look at. You should expect around 500-700CHF for a reasonable entry kit and if you step up to around 1500-2000CHF a good mid range semi amateur setup is certainly possible.

Without knowing if you have a subject of particular interest, then I'm going to assume you want to play around with a bit of everything.

In which case a an entry level DSLR from either Nikon or Canon with dual kit lens setup (18-55mm & 55-200mm) will cover the majority of bases, and give you a good start. There's nothing wrong with the other manufacturers such as Sony, Pentax and Olympus. In fact I'd go as far to say there's not a bad DSLR on the market these days. It's just that Nikon and Canon have by far the largest selection of lenses and accessories, and when you buy a DSLR you buy into that manufacturers system.

Just a few things to remember:-

Firstly, a DSLR isn't going to automatically turn you into the next Baily or Duffy. A photograph's "quality" is so much more than just the pure technical aspects of sharpness, dynamic range, and lack of noise.

Secondly, if the bug bites then this hobby will end up costing you a fortune. Trust me, I know .

This is a very important point. I went Nikon at the same time a friend went Sony... I lucked into a great system, and she's not so happy. We've both grown in our interest, well beyond what we expected, so definitely take Slaphead's comment into consideration.

I would add one other point: DSLRs are magnificent, even moreso if you take a basic course in how to use them (e.g. something on the dial other than Automatic). IT will be well worth the investment.

I personally like the Canon Eos line. you can get a good starter kit with a nice camera body and a medium lens for about $1000-1500. The cost will tend to float around depending on what options you want.

As the other responses have indicated, the nice thing about Canon and Nikon is that these cameras are so common that there are lots of accessories and attachments available, both from the original manufacturer as well as aftermarket stuff.

To get an idea what you're facing in terms of add on lenses and other accessories, you can look on amazon to get an idea of how far your future disposable income will go.

I'd second (or third / fourth) the point about choosing which system you lock into. Personally I'd always go for Canon / Nikon.

Then it comes down to budget. If you're serious about this - and I mean really serious, not just dabbling to see if it suits you - then I'd suggest getting a decent body but not blowing the whole budget on it, and then putting everything left over into lenses. When I started I made the common beginners' mistake of just getting a fairly cheap kit lens, and then when the bug bit I ended up wishing I'd invested more money up front into better glass. A decent body will help you in terms of things like frames per second, noise performance and so on, but it's the glass that will make the biggest difference to the image quality.

And to echo Slaphead's point, don't get sucked into the trap of thinking that great gear will make you a great photographer. You can spend as much as you want on the latest and greatest, but if you haven't got the ability your images will still be poor.

In a nutshell, get a decent body, spend as much as your budget will allow on good glass, then stick with what you've got until your ability as a photographer outgrows the capability of your gear.

(P.S. It's also worth thinking about what software you'll use for post-processing. If you're shooting RAW, which I'd recommend, probably the biggest player is Adobe's Lightroom. If you're a Mac user, Aperture is also an alternative).

Yup, like other posters here said, think about lenses and not camera body.

Your camera body, even the more expensive ones, will be outdated within 2 years. Good lenses will last a lifetime...

Canon or Nikon will turn out to become some sort of religious question very much like BMW vs. Audi or the like...

We were in a similar situation earlier this year - we know enough about photography that we get to the limits of our higher end compacts (I have a G9 and the wife a G11), so we went for an entry level DSLR as a new toy. Since we use Canons before and like them did the choice fall on a 600D. We are completely happy with it - except that only three months later the 650D came out... which has a touch screen which even Kai from Digital Rev likes - an absolute Nikon guy as you can see from his comments...

I'm interested on sell mine. It was used just a few times, so I would say is quite new.

It's a Canon EOS 550D.

I can give you more details when I back home, but first let me know if you have interest.

That's some old wisdom from film times, which is a bit less true nowadays. Since the OP desn't want to compromise on image quality, a full frame body is the way to go. Non-heavy and reasonably priced: EOS 5D MkII.


If you believe the marketing guys. But if you're happy with the camera that you have, there's no reason to buy a new one. (I'm stilll happy with my 5D mk1)

If they are manual focus, full-metal and don't catch fungus. Otherwise, no. But yes, a lens should last significantly longer than a camera body.

Some very valid points covered above & just add a couple of points from a pro perspective.

Menu structures:
One of the failings of quite a few systems, the menu structure is seemingly an after thought for some manufacturers. It's not obvious at first as you are not familiar with the camera period, but once you have become familiar with it, a poorly designed or illogical menu structure can be frustrating and ultimately, mess up your shots.
Text & colours should be clear & simple - overly graphic or flashy looking menu's are often a sign of poor function & functions should be grouped logically in sections.

Canon and Nikon have the best, & in my personal opinion, Canon has the best. Panasonic are very good too on this front.

I pick a system because it has to work for me & what I do professionally - I'm not brand loyal. I was a Nikon photographer for my whole career on film, but moved to Canon with the arrival of the 5dmk2 because I felt much more comfortable with it and their glass in general & especially the specialist lenes, is just better & from a [pro]workflow point of view, their file quality & colour rendition is the best for what I shoot.

But I know colleagues who are equally happy with Nikon for what they do - horses for courses, etc.

So, basically my advise would be to go with one of the big two, as a dslr starter, the image quality from either will blow you away, but just check out the small details in both as well.

There are other factors to consider with full frame vs. crop - not least price if you're a beginner. Also, what are you shooting? For landscapes / groups etc then a full frame will definitely help. Portraits / headshots and so on, it's not so critical. If you're going to be doing a lot of telephoto work there's also an argument to say a crop frame can help by increasing the perceived focal length. Then again, the OP should also think about where he'll be shooting - a crop frame can work against you in a tight space.

The 5D MkII is a good body and very popular, but if you're going to be spending a lot of time in low light the auto focus can hunt more than other models of a similar price. There are pluses and minuses to every bit of kit - choose your gear according to what you're shooting.

Lots of good information here!

I would like to add another question, what do people think of the new mirrorless cameras?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirrorl...le-lens_camera

I know people who like viewfinders hate them, but aside from that, they promise to be lighter and smaller but with similar sized sensors.

Micro-four-thirds sensors are nowhere near the same size. That said do they overall perform quite well, but not quite as well as an entry level DSLR.

Only mirrorless cameras with APS-C sensors are the Sony Nex (fun to use) and the new Canon EOS-M. The downside of the Sony is the limited range of lenses and the unusual handling. I guess that is a love/hate type of thing - I played around with a NEX7 for some minutes and found it fun but pretty confusing. The EOS-M seems technically pretty much the same as a 650D - which is good.

Just a word of warning -- if you buy into the Nikon system, make sure that you get a body which contains an autofocus motor. With the Nikon system, not all bodies have autofocus motors in them, relying instead on motors contained in the lens. Specifically, the camera bodies to avoid are the D40, D40X, D60, D3000, D3100, D3200, D5000, and D5100.

Buying a body with an autofocus motor means that you can use many of the older, cheaper high-quality lenses. This will make a significant difference as you get more involved in the hobby.

Your two main choices are either going to be Nikon or Canon. Both companies are competing against one another so the models are very evenly matched. In general the Nikon will offer lower noise at higher ISO's than Canon, but Canon will offer better video options and some ergonomic advantages (such as a flip out LCD) and better continuous frame rates over Nikon. On a model per model basis you will see many pros and cons to each one.

My advice would be to set the price point that you want to spend and then flip a coin to decide on Nikon or Canon.

http://reviews.cnet.com/best-prosumer-dslr-cameras/

If you are not set on a DSLR and if weight is an issue you may want to consider a "3rd generation" camera. Olympus has a good micro four thirds camera and Sony is putting an APS-C sensor in their mirror less cameras. Both options would give you the options to learn about photography and are also relatively compact. The Sony with the APS-C has the same size sensor as the Nikon/Canon and currently Sony is making sensors for Nikon...I believe also Canon but I'm not sure.

P.S. The included kit lenses are usually pretty good and I think you would still be very impressed with the image results, but if you are interested in learning more and getting some more satisfaction out of the process you should consider buying a body and a fast prime lens (i.e. 35mm or 50mm) --You can always still zoom with your feet.

I've been Nikon since 1987 with their FA.

To be fair, both Canon & Nikon have great systems, but Nikon have the edge in "Legacy Support" meaning their older F mount lenses will still physically fit on the latest camera bodies even if the AF or metering won't be connected.

Bought a family member the D5100 which has now been kind of replaced by the D3200. I haven't used it much, but it's OK for a beginner's DSLR and if you can live with the kind of slow continuous shooting shutter, then the images are good straight out of the camera. The Nikon D5100 has a pretty good price/features ratio and I'd recommend it. When you want to step up to post production and dabble with curves and other funky stuff, start shooting RAW images and then you enter a whole new world, but that's for another thread.

Beginner comes on forum and asks for advice on DSLR.

I read threads like this and I'm glad I shoot film.

How slow is slow?

We're looking at getting a DSLR because the point and shoots are often too slow.

Also, as a second lens, 55-200 or 55-300?

Thanks,

Tom

but which brand of film camera should you use? slr, tlr, rangefinder, view camera? and then 35, 6x6, 6x7, 645, large format? colour or B&W? slide or neg? tri-x vs HP5 vs Neopan? fast + grain or not? which developer/fixer? agitate more or less? what kind of paper would should you use? which enlarger? etc. etc. etc.

at least with consumer dslr, you're really limited to canon vs nikon (pentax, sony? etc. etc. , please )