Budget DSLR for a beginner?

[Calerid]

No one listens to your advice because you can learn and experiment with digital and not have it cost money. Film is much better and more rewarding to shoot when you know what you are doing.

Well i learned with film and a 70-300mm lens shooting people and cars and random stuff and i always thought it looked good. Not really that expensive either. Buy a camera for $100 and you just saved $1500 you would have spent on a dslr. Now you have lots of extra money for a good lens or some film... This day and age everyone wants some instant gratification with digital, well i actually enjoy getting my photos back from the lab and seeing the results. To me it is more exciting to wait. But i also always got excellent exposures back it gave me the confidence in my equipment. With digital people have an impulse to look at every photo right after they take it and i think it disrupts the work flow when trying to learn the art of photography. Most newer film cameras have pretty food light meters so you can trust you will get a decent exposure.

Dont get me wrong. This is not a completely biased opinion. I did shoot with a DSLR ( nikon d 7000) for a year while i was in iraq. It was impossible for me to get the film developed there so it was convenient. But i sold it because it just wasnt as exciting as using real film. Film has a nice look to it. Digital looks too clean and perfect for my style of photography. I like it to be natural and organic.

I think i might try a poloroid back on the contax 645 though. That would be fun to mess with.

When I have some money, maybe.... I cannot afford to go out and buy film when I want to take pictures. I am 18 & married, My funds are lacking and I cannot spare anything else because there are actual necesities that come first and all. I would Love to be able to shoot film for fun one day, I would Love to have a freakin dark room with it. Thanks for the advice though.

 

[enzodm]

So I stand by my statement. I was asking a question about what cameras are available in my price range, I would truly appreciate it if the focus was kept on the question at hand instead of making points out of my responce to a comment. I do appreciate your looking at this though!

It is indeed in focus, because if you start with a faith statement, you reduce your possibilities, in particular with a small budget and high expectations in terms of continuous shooting, that make almost necessary to go towards used. The already suggested semi-pro 30D and 40D will give you respectively 5 - 6.5 fps, 11 - 17 RAW buffer (and you can find prices in the link I kindly provided you among the first posts - with one lens, fit your budget).

 

[3bayjunkie]

When I have some money, maybe.... I cannot afford to go out and buy film when I want to take pictures. I am 18 & married, My funds are lacking and I cannot spare anything else because there are actual necesities that come first and all. I would Love to be able to shoot film for fun one day, I would Love to have a freakin dark room with it. Thanks for the advice though.

I am 30 and married with kids so i totally understand. My point was, with all of these "on a budget" questions that seem to pop up, i suggest film. I am too on a budget. A pro film camera can be had for $200 where as a pro digital camera, $2000 and up. That money you save can be spent on film and a good lens.

An amateur camera $50, an amateur digital camera $200 or more. So you can see where the savings is. I cant settle for. Crop sensor bc i hate them so i couldnt consider an amateur DSLR.