dSLR suggestions

[priya91]

Hey, So recently I received a Canon SLR, but I have been looking into buying a Digital SLR. My budget is anything under $1000. I absolutely have no idea what to buy as I am a photography novice. I would love some suggestions. Most people have recommended Nikon or Cannon. Suggestions on particular models would be awesome. Thank you

 

[fokker]

Canon 550d should be around your budget, or maybe a 50d. Both great cameras. 550d is only 'entry level' but trumps the 50d on most most counts, incl HD video. I'm a canon junkie BTW - I have nothing against nikon and you should look into their stuff too (D90), but I only know about canon gear. Canon have an awesome lineup of lenses and accessories.

 

[reznap]

You can get a Nikon D90 new with kit lens for $1,000.

If you care about video recording capabilities, you may favor a Canon. The 550D that fokker speaks of might be called a Rebel T2i in Canada, at least that's what it's marketed as south of your Canadian border. They sell for $900 with the kit lens.

If you don't care about video so much I'd recommend you get the Nikon. The D90 also has an internal focusing motor (correct me if I'm wrong, Nikon owners) so you'll be able to auto focus the cheap Nikon 50mm 1.8 and other motorless lenses.

 

[FattyMcJ]

The D90 also has an internal focusing motor (correct me if I'm wrong, Nikon owners) so you'll be able to auto focus the cheap Nikon 50mm 1.8 and other motorless lenses.

You're right.

But might I also suggest the Pentax K-x or K-7 for two reasons.

1) I'm plugging Pentax because they're the "underdog" and yet they produce top quality products that are hard to beat for the features vs. price comparison.

2) The Pentax K-x has the same sensor as the D90 (killer high ISO quality at 1/2 the price of the D90) AND both Pentax models (the K-x & K-7) have an internal focus motor AND internal shake reduction (K-x & K-7), which will ultimately save you money on lenses in the long run.


Speaking of which, if you already have a collection of Canon lenses from the film SLR...disregard the above and get yourself a Rebel T2i (550D), and enjoy! :mrgreen:

 

[reznap]

The old Canon lenses... well. If they're halfway decent ones I'd say let that help you choose what brand to buy. I'm curious to know what you have for lenses, but if it's trouble don't bother.

 

[priyamartin91]

The forum is not accepting my password even after I get a new passoword. weird. Anyway, I have canon zoom lens EF 28-80mm.

 

[D-B-J]

^^ same thing happened to me. i downloaded google chrome and logged in with that, then deleted the cookies on my internet explorer and it worked fine. Thats what they told me to do, and it worked. haha.

I got a nikon d200 and an 18-135mm for 600 dollars. and the camera is AWESOME. So, i would have no fear in getting a used product, just make sure you know how many actuations are on the shutter. I was looking into a d5000, which is an OK entry level, and ended up with a pretty awesome camera for less money. So used is not always a bad thing.

 

[fokker]

The forum is not accepting my password even after I get a new passoword. weird. Anyway, I have canon zoom lens EF 28-80mm.

That lens is close to worthless (and not a very suitable focal range for a crop body/digital SLR), so don't worry about sticking with canon for the sake of the lens.

I agree with the above comment about buying second hand, not only is a good way to save money but you can end up buying much higher quality gear than you anticipated.


FattyMCJ:Interesting points about the pentax models,I have never really taken a second look at them. Mostly because it is hard to find good second hand lenses and accesories. Are you saying that both the pentax models and the D90 have in-camera image stabilization? (or shake reduction or VR or wahtever it's called) Because that is completely news to me.

 

[priyamartin91]

It makes sense to buy second hand. I would get a better quality camera for less rather than buying a new model which isn't as good. Can you guys suggest any good ones? Under $1000 of course.

 

[KmH]

AND internal shake reduction, which will ultimately save you money on lenses in the long run.

Are you aware of the technical limitations from having shake reduction in the camera body rather than in the lens?

 

[DerekSalem]

Canon 550d should be around your budget, or maybe a 50d. Both great cameras. 550d is only 'entry level' but trumps the 50d on most most counts, incl HD video. I'm a canon junkie BTW - I have nothing against nikon and you should look into their stuff too (D90), but I only know about canon gear. Canon have an awesome lineup of lenses and accessories.

I'm with you. The 50D is a nice prosumer camera but I'm absolutely loving my 550D (T2i). My dad has the 50D and I wouldn't even think twice about going with the 550D over it. Lighter, smaller, and better in certain aspects.

But I'd definitely say look at the D90 too (Nikon). I'm a Canon guy, but Nikon makes some good stuff.

 

[stephenk]

I'm looking to see what I can pick up used for around 1000 dollars as well. I have the same camera as the OP, interestingly enough! I think going used'll give me the chance to have something a bit more than I would have if I bought new. What do you guys think? What are some suggestions for good used dSLRs around 1k?

 

[FattyMcJ]

FattyMCJ:Interesting points about the pentax models,I have never really taken a second look at them. Mostly because it is hard to find good second hand lenses and accesories. Are you saying that both the pentax models and the D90 have in-camera image stabilization? (or shake reduction or VR or wahtever it's called) Because that is completely news to me.

No, I was saying that both Pentax models have internal SR (not the D90) while all three (Kx, K7, D90) all have an internal focusing motor. Hopefully that clarifies my statement.

As far as second hand lenses being hard to find, I don't agree. PentaxForums.com is an EXCELLENT resource for good quality second hand lenses, sold by other "Pentaxians", not to mention eBay and Craigs list. Adorama and B&H both carry the full gambit of new lenses and accessories also.

There is also a full Lens Review database complied by actual USERS of each lens, both Pentax and 3rd party HERE that you can check out.

A selection of 30+ years worth of K mount lenses AND M42 mount lenses (Super Takumar comes to mind) is hard to argue against IMO.

Are you aware of the technical limitations from having shake reduction in the camera body rather than in the lens?

Actually, no. Please elaborate!

It works by using a floating lens element that is moved orthogonally to the optical axis of the lens using electromagnets.[3] Vibration is detected using two piezoelectric angular velocity sensors (often called gyroscopic sensors), one to detect horizontal movement and the other to detect vertical movement.[4] As a result, this kind of image stabilizer only corrects for pitch and yaw axis rotations,[5] and cannot correct for rotation around the optical axis. Some lenses have a secondary mode that counteracts vertical camera shake only. This mode is useful when using a panning technique, and switching into this mode depends on the lens; sometimes it is done by using a switch on the lens, or it can be automatic.

The system also draws power from the battery, so de-activating it when it is not needed will extend the time before a recharge is required.

One of the main disadvantages about lens-based image stabilization is the higher price tag that comes with it; not all lenses that Nikon and Canon manufacture are image stabilized. Also, because light passing through the lens is shifted from its true optical path when it projects out the rear element onto the sensor, poor 'Bokeh' can result.[9] This is the subjective quality, but highly valued by professional photographers, of the out-of-focus area around an image. In-body image stabilization does not have this problem because the light is not altered, only the sensor's position.

vs.

The advantage with moving the image sensor, instead of the lens, is that the image will be stabilized regardless of what lens is being used. This allows the stabilization to work with any lens the photographer chooses and reduces the weight and complexity of the lenses. The price value is often seen in the ability to buy lower cost lenses from makers like Tamron and Sigma and still have stabilized images. There are popular lens types that have no in lens stabilization option where sensor based stabilization can be very useful. This also allows one to use old manual lenses with this stabilization feature.

One of the primary disadvantages of moving the image sensor itself is that the image projected to the viewfinder is not stabilized. However, this is not an issue on cameras that use an electronic viewfinder (EVF), since the image projected on that viewfinder is taken from the image sensor itself.

Another disadvantage of moving the sensor instead of the lens is that only the main imaging sensor is moved, but the autofocus sensor is not moved. This means that camera shake can lower the performance of the autofocus system in bad light. This is an issue only with DSLRs which have a dedicated phase-detection autofocus sensor, not an issue with smaller cameras which use the main sensor for contrast-detection autofocus.

The above quotes from Wikipedia, but others can be found with a simple Google search.

As to the In-Body quote, any lens made for Pentax cameras will work, and will have SR. That's a big bonus IMO. Those OLD fully manual lenses from the 60's & 70's work beautifully (I have a few)!

As to the disadvantages in the in-body SR: Not having SR in the viewfinder is irrelevant IMO, what you see through the view finder is not what you ultimately care about, it's the photograph. Besides, if you're hand holding the camera, your eye will be moving just as much as the camera will and SR would be of no benefit.

As far as the AF sensor not moving with the image sensor, while this is unfortunate, it's not really noticed or an issue that I've read about. Thus, irrelevant IMO.

I know this will enrage several Canikon lovers, and I'm NOT suggesting Pentax is better than Canon or Nikon, just simply putting out information that is often overlooked due to the higher advertising budget of Canikon. :mrgreen:

KmH... No sarcasm at all. I love to learn, so please post either links or quotes suggesting the opposite. I'm still a novice, so if the above is incorrect or incomplete, PLEASE educate me and may it be of value to the other members of this board!

 

[fokker]

Interesting points, and thanks for clarifying.

 

[D-B-J]

Well, you could go hardcore and get a nikon d2x for about 1000 dollars. Or, you could "settle" for a nikon d200. Those sell for about 600 or less. Then grab a nice lens of your choice.