First DSLR

[Village Idiot]

You're going to spend more money on lenses than on camera bodies. And if you choose to be a wise guy and not invest in quality lenses, then you're going wonder why you can't get teh beautiful bokeh in your photos. So buy a dSLR body that is comfortable and does not have any unnecessary features and spend the rest on good glass.

And perhaps buy a video camera to shoot video. I'm guessing the quality will be better.

Didn't even pay any attention to this reply the first time through.

Bokeh should be one of the OP's last cares with what they're interested in shooting.

And DSLRs have the ability to switch to some great glass and have quality that you can only touch in dedicated video cameras that cost a lot more.

There's some limitation, but if you were to look, you'd see that SNL, indie movie producers, feature film producers, and others that are in the film industry have used the 5D MKII over traditional cameras in eaither part of the movies/skits/videos or over the whole entire thing.

Recommending a person buy a completely different product without having any idea that what they're looking at in the first place is more than capable of doing in the first place (And with better quality) is basically telling them to waste their money.

 

[benlonghair]

in the film industry have used the 5D MKII over traditional cameras in eaither part of the movies/skits/videos or over the whole entire thing.

As I was saying, the entire final episode of House (where they were trapped under a collapsed building) was shot on a 5D Mk2. I was amazed by how good it looked.

Of course, as with still photography, user skill has an awful lot to do with how it comes out.

 

[mcopan]

D5000 all the way. Just got one and love it. Check out some of the UK photo mags like Digital SLR Magazine. They have great articles and product reviews especially online.

Food for thought. A couple Christmas' ago I was walking around the local electronic stores and many of them were selling Nikon as fast as they ordered them, and many of the Canons were being returned. I started to pay attention more when I saw this happen repeatedly. I asked the teck guys and they said there is nothing wrong with Canon but people were bringing them back because there were not as easy to use as other brands.

Another note, I have a couple friends who are pro writers and photographers for a couple mass publications and all they use is Nikon. They have shot with numerous different camera's and always buy Nikon. Normally these guys are buying higher end Nikon bodies and buying nice non-kit lenses.

Hope this helps you. Just pass on the help when you can help someone else.

 

[tsaraleksi]

D5000 all the way. Just got one and love it. Check out some of the UK photo mags like Digital SLR Magazine. They have great articles and product reviews especially online.

Food for thought. A couple Christmas' ago I was walking around the local electronic stores and many of them were selling Nikon as fast as they ordered them, and many of the Canons were being returned. I started to pay attention more when I saw this happen repeatedly. I asked the teck guys and they said there is nothing wrong with Canon but people were bringing them back because there were not as easy to use as other brands.

Another note, I have a couple friends who are pro writers and photographers for a couple mass publications and all they use is Nikon. They have shot with numerous different camera's and always buy Nikon. Normally these guys are buying higher end Nikon bodies and buying nice non-kit lenses.

Hope this helps you. Just pass on the help when you can help someone else.

See, here's the funny thing. Of the pro shooters I know and work with, 4/5 shoot Canon.

(the point here is that THIS ONE TIME type comments are not helpful at all. You should buy a camera based on what you need and want, not what someone else says other people do. )

 

[Village Idiot]

D5000 all the way. Just got one and love it. Check out some of the UK photo mags like Digital SLR Magazine. They have great articles and product reviews especially online.

Food for thought. A couple Christmas' ago I was walking around the local electronic stores and many of them were selling Nikon as fast as they ordered them, and many of the Canons were being returned. I started to pay attention more when I saw this happen repeatedly. I asked the teck guys and they said there is nothing wrong with Canon but people were bringing them back because there were not as easy to use as other brands.

Another note, I have a couple friends who are pro writers and photographers for a couple mass publications and all they use is Nikon. They have shot with numerous different camera's and always buy Nikon. Normally these guys are buying higher end Nikon bodies and buying nice non-kit lenses.

Hope this helps you. Just pass on the help when you can help someone else.

Most of the pros I know shoot Canon. What's your point?

I also find that they're easier to use.

 

[bazooka]

I also concur that the Tamron 17-50 is a sweet lens. It was also my first lens for the 40d (which I bought used).

 

[robertwsimpson]

I shoot canon and I also stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night!

 

[DerekSalem]

You're going to spend more money on lenses than on camera bodies. And if you choose to be a wise guy and not invest in quality lenses, then you're going wonder why you can't get teh beautiful bokeh in your photos. So buy a dSLR body that is comfortable and does not have any unnecessary features and spend the rest on good glass.

And perhaps buy a video camera to shoot video. I'm guessing the quality will be better.

I agree with all of this except the quality of video. The only difference you run into using one of the newer DSLRs as opposed to an actual video camera is that they haven't fixed the "panning shift" problem. If you do a lot of panning (quick panning) the view kind of shifts while panning. It's noticeable only if you're following a fast car or something but otherwise the quality is on par or even better than most video cameras. Most of this is because of the glass difference.

Definitely invest in a good body but a vast majority of your funds should go toward the glass you use with it.

 

[AlexL]

I personally went with the T2i, but that is probably because I do not have as much of a tight budget. I believe the D5000 takes beautiful photos too and I don't think you can go wrong with either Nikon / Canon. If you can't afford the T2i in your budget, i think I would get a D5000 based on the reviews i have read in dpreview and kenrockwell.com's recommendation.

 

[mumureo]

I recommend buying the body only and getting a better quality non-kit lens. I followed this advice from others and am very glad I did. So far I haven't had any noticeable problems with sharpness, color abberation, or distortion like I see in shots taken with some of the kit lenses. Sometimes I wish I had an IS lens, but to me, the optical quality, faster lens, and static aperture through the focal lengths is worth it.

Also, as was mentioned above, consider buying used to get more "bang".

Ahh good idea! :thumbup:

Thanks for all of the advice!! :sillysmi:
Oh also, if I do manage to get the T2i, would the 18-55mm kit lens be sufficient enough for my trip? - I'll mainly take pictures of building's, landscape, a little bit of video, and indoor types of pictures. And if I get the T2i, I'm pretty sure I won't be able to afford the Tamron 17-50 lenses.. ): I'm not too sure about my budget yet, but if I can't afford the T2i.. I think I might get the Nikon D5000, it seems to have everything I need and it's a bit cheaper than the T1i. I also found out that the D5000 has a time-lapse feature which I think is super cool too! Anyway's I'm not super sure on my decision yet, I'll see how the camera's feel this weekend - and see if I can find another job to pay for it

 

[white]

Bokeh should be one of the OP's last cares with what they're interested in shooting.

Bokeh is the only thing that matters, obviously.

Recommending a person buy a completely different product without having any idea that what they're looking at in the first place is more than capable of doing in the first place (And with better quality) is basically telling them to waste their money.

I know. Isn't it great?

 

[robertwsimpson]

The kit lens would be great to learn on!

I also think it has IS, which will be important for video needs.

 

[Village Idiot]

Bokeh should be one of the OP's last cares with what they're interested in shooting.

Bokeh is the only thing that matters, obviously.

Recommending a person buy a completely different product without having any idea that what they're looking at in the first place is more than capable of doing in the first place (And with better quality) is basically telling them to waste their money.

I know. Isn't it great?

Obviously, because you have no stake in what this person is doing, so you can do whatever you feel like and not care about it.

 

[dimocks04]

I have the D5000 and love it! It's all about personal preference! Good luck!

 

[johnnycanuck]

If you have a point and shoot camera with video than there is not really any need in buying a dslr with video. If you really need video then spend the extra money. (dont opt out the pentax kx) But remember ITS NOT THE BODY ITS THE LENSES I wouldn't buy a kit lens with the camera I would spend at least 400$ on a solid lens. A perfect lens for you would be the sigma 18-50 f2.8 macro. Great portrait, macro, and f2.8. Thinking of getting one myself. If you don't need the macro capabilities then I would suggest the tamron 17-50mm f2.8. I have done some research and it has proven to be a little better than the sigma. You can buy both of these lenses for 400$ (canadian) each on craigslist. and a canon xsi (which has amazing image quality) is also 400$ (Canadian) on craigslist. Thats 800$ with room to spend.
JUST REMEMBER ITS NOT THE BODY ITS THE LENSES and the photographer.
Visit photozone.com to view reviews on lenses.