Recommend a beginner a DSLR

someguy5 · Apr 21, 2008

Hey all,

I love doing landscape photography, but my old point and shoot digicam wasn't cutting it (terrible night shots, low zoom, etc). My main interest is landscape shots, and the occasional shots of people at parties and such.

I was looking into the Olympus E510, mainly because of its image stabalization, but for night shots i'd still need a tripod, so I figure maybe there'd be other cameras that might do just as good a job or better. I'm mostly concerned with price and lenses.

Any recommendations appreciated.

Big Mike · Apr 21, 2008

Welcome to the forum.

This has been asked many times, try a search and see if you can find some older threads.

What's your budget?

Really, any DLSR is pretty good. I'd personally recommend sticking with a top brand like Canon or Nikon, but Pentax, Sony & Olympus are OK as well.

For landscape photography, you might want a very wide lens...for most DSLR cameras, that means something in the 10mm range. So keep that in mind when looking.

remyxsi · Apr 21, 2008

Just yesterday I purchased a Canon Rebel Xsi. I'm a noob but and don't know very much about anything yet. I'm very pleased with the camera so far. My sister has played with it and loves it. Depends on your budget even the Xti is nice. In my decision it was either going to be Canon or Nikon. I've always been partial to Canon though.

What I did to help me, is I went to my local Best Buy and played with all the different cameras. They had Nikons, Sony, Pentax and some Olympus, and Canon.

someguy5 · Apr 21, 2008

Sorry about that. I tried searching night landscapes and nothing really answered my question.

People seem to love the D40, would that be a good start for me?

Rogan · Apr 21, 2008

by the sounds of it, the lens is gna be just as important to you, so the D40, or any of the Rebels will most likely be fine with the right lens

crazyjackphoto · Apr 21, 2008

someguy5 said:
Sorry about that. I tried searching night landscapes and nothing really answered my question.

People seem to love the D40, would that be a good start for me?

Big mike's recommendations I agree as well. Truth is there isn't "The one" camera for the best night scenes.

Any mid range SLR wiht a wide angel / fast glass would be a good start. 12-24mm f/2.8 or f4 both would work well or the likes. Most important for night scenes, you'd really need a decent tripod for a sharp picture & maybe a shutter release remote IF you REALLY want it to be sharp. Also, should take in low ISO's so there is less noise, IMO wouldn't go over 400 unless using handheld.

hope this helps, but if you just want to know which body to get, D40 or canon 40D are great for starter

Mav · Apr 21, 2008

Click the "before you ask what camera" link in my sig along with some of the other ones, like the "general DSLR guide". :wink:

I <3 my D40, but its limitations are too much for the people that want to fiddle around with a lot of different lenses. It works great for me, and I hardly even use my D80 anymore. Actually, I'm thinking of selling it once again in advance of the D90 coming out so that I can get maximum value for it.

Olympus is fine, especially for long shooting (has a 2.0x crop factor vs 1.5/1.6x for other systems, see "crop factor" in my sig, lol) but if you ever get really serious about photography you may find the system a bit limiting. Not to poo on Olympus at all because there are nice things and various advantages about every system, but it's the last system I'd recommend ever going with. I can elaborate, but I don't want to start any wars.

RKW3 · Apr 21, 2008

Mav said:
Olympus is fine, especially for long shooting (has a 2.0x crop factor vs 1.5/1.6x for other systems, see "crop factor" in my sig, lol) but if you ever get really serious about photography you may find the system a bit limiting. Not to poo on Olympus at all because there are nice things and various advantages about every system, but it's the last system I'd recommend ever going with. I can elaborate, but I don't want to start any wars.

... What's wrong with Olympus? It seems like they have some very nice & compact DSLR's from the beginner to intermediate range. I could see why you'd be against the E-3 since Nikon and Canon have better cameras & lenses at that price, but the lower end Olympus cameras seem fine, especially for people who don't like the size of normal DSLR's and they want something smaller.

And the war begins? lol

someguy5 · Apr 21, 2008

Mav said:
Click the "before you ask what camera" link in my sig along with some of the other ones, like the "general DSLR guide".

I <3 my D40, but its limitations are too much for the people that want to fiddle around with a lot of different lenses. It works great for me, and I hardly even use my D80 anymore. Actually, I'm thinking of selling it once again in advance of the D90 coming out so that I can get maximum value for it.

Olympus is fine, especially for long shooting (has a 2.0x crop factor vs 1.5/1.6x for other systems, see "crop factor" in my sig, lol) but if you ever get really serious about photography you may find the system a bit limiting. Not to poo on Olympus at all because there are nice things and various advantages about every system, but it's the last system I'd recommend ever going with. I can elaborate, but I don't want to start any wars.

Thanks, great links. I tried out the Nikon D40 at the store today and I think that may very well be my choice... Either that or the Canon 350D.

prodigy2k7 · Apr 22, 2008

Canon Rebel XTi is mine and I am very pleased with it. I love having a SLR its so exciting and fun! Ive had it about a year now and I love to take pictures of everything...

Also known as the 400D or Digital Rebel XTi

lena5538 · Apr 22, 2008

i want to buy a new camera too! it must be something less than 300 euros.. any advices?

Mav · Apr 22, 2008

RKW3 said:
... What's wrong with Olympus?

- smallest sensor of any DSLR system (numerous sub-points here)
- nearly non-existent third-party lens support due to unique sensor design
- higher end lenses are extremely pricey
- limited room for growth in the Olympus system
- more than a few gaps in their lens lineup.

I did say there's some advantages though. The 4:3 aspect ratio is the more natural print format, so you don't have to worry about cropping nearly as much. And if you shoot long a lot, the 2.0x crop factor is actually a benefit and not a drawback. You only need a 200mm lens to get the equivalent of a 400mm view, whereas on a 1.5x/1.6x DSLR you need closer to a 300mm lens. This works in reverse if you like wide angles though.

For most people who just want something better than a crappy p&s Olympus is perfectly fine. But I knew getting into DSLRs that my needs would go well beyond "basic" and wanted to buy into a system with the most options possible. You're not just buying a camera, you're buying into a whole system, since all of the accessories and lenses are proprietary and won't work with each other.

Socrates · Apr 22, 2008

Mav said:
The 4:3 aspect ratio is the more natural print format, so you don't have to worry about cropping nearly as much.

Why would you say that? Where do you get the 4:3 paper? I consider the 4:3 ratio to be the worst ratio for printing.

Mav said:
For most people who just want something better than a crappy p&s Olympus is perfectly fine.

The Olympus SW (shockproof & waterproof) series is certainly not "crappy." Great for the beach where I'd never consider taking an SLR.

Mav · Apr 22, 2008

Most of the common print sizes are closer to 4:3 than they are 3:2. But I'll happily stick with my 3:2 since my "real" passion is landscape and scenic stuff where the extra wideness is greatly appreciated. For most family type photos that I do 90% of the time, 4:3 is more appropriate.

Senor Hound · Apr 23, 2008

Okay, this is the problem you will run into with the cameras that aren't Nikon and Canon.

Say you get your camera and you fall in love with it. They are awesome cameras and most people would! And you find yourself getting into some sort of niche photography, like wildlife. Well then you find out it would be a really neat to have this certain lens that would get those (insert crazy, wild animal here) really well. Well, Olympus doesn't really make a lens that is that size. Or they do, and its in their professional line and can be bought for the incredibly low price of 2grand! You see, to your frustration, that there's an awesome Nikkor lens that's the perfect size, and it only runs $500 bucks! Then you're kicking yourself.

My point is that the lens selection for both Canon and Nikon is insanely better than the others. That doesn't make them better systems, it just makes them more dynamic. You'll have more options shooting Nikon or Canon (and probably the most with Canon, as they don't have the funky autofocusing lens thing that the D40/D60 does).

That being said, if you know for a fact you are only going to be using your camera for fun and you'll be okay having a range of 28-300 (in 35mm terms), then by all means go with the Olympus or Pentax, or Sony, or all others. But if you think there's a possibility you might dive in head first and mortgage your house for that 600mm f/4 lens (for your kids soccer practice, of course), then you MIGHT feel frustrated by Olympus in the end...

Of course, many will disagree, and that is just my opinion. I've only been shooting for a half a year now, but I've asked this question no less than 35 times... Not to mention I always hang out with my friend who is a HARDCORE photographer, and ask him all sorts of questions.

Senor Hound, who is too poor to buy ANY DSLR, Olympus or otherwise