First Camera

Fignewton · Feb 20, 2011

I'm currently looking at getting into photography and am looking for my first camera, I am willing to spend around 5-900.. I want to do primarily black and white photography. I am currently in debate between a canon EOS rebel T3 DSLR Canon EOS Rebel T3 12.2MP Digital SLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit : DSLR Cameras - Best Buy Canada or the Nikon D3100 DSLR camera...Nikon D3100 14.2MP DSLR Camera With AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm VR Lens Kit : DSLR Cameras - Best Buy Canada ... I also have heard good things about the D40.. Any recomendations

kinoflex · Feb 20, 2011

Buy a really excellent film SLR and scan the negs. Nikon F5s on ebay are $250-500 for the body. !

Bram · Feb 21, 2011

Cheap, go with the D40, you can learn all the basics with that body. I have had my D40x for a year and a half and i'm still going strong with it. I plan on selling it and upgrading to the D7k or D90. I think if you want to learn your basics, go with a used DSLR, like the D40 or even D60. Learn the basics, learn everything you need to know. Don't upgrade unless you feel your gear is holding you back.
Good luck with the purchase hope to see pics soon.

vivalaveritas · Feb 21, 2011

Either one of those cameras will be fine for starting out. I was looking around and they cost around the same. I would personally stay away from a used D40 as previously mentioned as you wont be saving much money and it would be used. Also the D40 is 6mp compared to 12-14mp.
If your budget is $5-900 you may still have some cash left over to purchase another lens (50mm 1.8), which you will find helpful in low light situations.
IMO I would not go the film and scanning rout either. I still shoot with film for fun, but digital is here to stay and it is easier to use IMO, especially for a beginner. Again this is just my opinion, but with film you have to have a little understanding of how light works or else you are just shooting with your fingers crossed and hoping for the best. Plus you would have to buy film and a scanner to put them on a computer.

DirtyDFeckers · Feb 21, 2011

I disagree. I would definitely get a used d40 or d60 or something to start out with.. .I mean, how do you know that you are even going to like photography at all? A d60 would probably be the best bet for you. They are going for pretty cheap on ebay now, and you can certainly find one in great condition. Good luck!

Bram · Feb 21, 2011

vivalaveritas said:
Also the D40 is 6mp compared to 12-14mp.
.

Megapixels don't matter unless the Op plans on printing something that is 3ft.x3ft. Then just go for the marketing genius of Canon, since the majority of their users chose Canon due to the high megapixel count. I got a D40x and the megapixels have never held me back. Then again the D40X has 10 Mp sensor not a 6mp.

Ginu · Feb 21, 2011

I would have to agree with the above user, dont get film for a beginner. Don't get me wrong, a film camera is nice, but limiting yourself to 26-32+ shots in a roll and not seeing the results until they are developed is a big waste of time in my opinion and specially when you're just learning.

I would suggest a D60 to start off with and not sure what would be a decent camera with Cannon. I was playing around with a rebel the other day day and I have to say it felt cheap and super slow.

If you're willing to go up to 900, you can start with a kit D60 and perhaps still have some extra cash for a 50mm 1.8 (also make sure that the camera has an internal motor to auto-focus lenses like the 50mm 1.8; D40 or D40x do not have this feature)

Bram · Feb 21, 2011

What Ginu meant to say is for the lower entry level DSLR's for Nikon, you need AF-s or AF-i lenses in order to AF (auto focus) Unlesssssss you opt for the D90 which has a built in auto focus motor. The D90 is an advanced body and will run you $600.00 used (roughly) for body only. Hope that helps.

vivalaveritas · Feb 21, 2011

A higher pixel density will also helps with cropping.
IMO the D3100 would be a better camera then a D60. While it may cost more, it would have a higher resale price then a used D60. Nothing against the D60, I used one for years, but it didn't do so well in low light.
The D3100 also shoots video, while the D60 does not. This may not be an issue for some, but it may be something to think about.

Ginu · Feb 21, 2011

Bram said:
What Ginu meant to say is for the lower entry level DSLR's for Nikon, you need AF-s or AF-i lenses in order to AF (auto focus) Unlesssssss you opt for the D90 which has a built in auto focus motor. The D90 is an advanced body and will run you $600.00 used (roughly) for body only. Hope that helps.

Yep that's pretty much it. Which Nikon bodies have the build in AF motor besides the D90 and higher models? I can't seem to find this info.

Bram · Feb 21, 2011

All hgher ones I assume. I believe the D7K, D300, D300s, D700, D3 series. and then the D90. I would assume if the D90 had it everything above and newer would have it as well.

Ginu · Feb 21, 2011

vivalaveritas said:
A higher pixel density will also helps with cropping.
IMO the D3100 would be a better camera then a D60. While it may cost more, it would have a higher resale price then a used D60. Nothing against the D60, I used one for years, but it didn't do so well in low light.
The D3100 also shoots video, while the D60 does not. This may not be an issue for some, but it may be something to think about.

Having the movie capability is great but with all honesty way to overrated. I record my daughter playing the piano in competitions/rehearsals which works great, but for any moving object my D90 movie mode lacks and I find my iPhone 4 doing a much better job not to mention smaller. Here is a clip shot with the iPhone 3GS at Whistler bike park (keep in mind movie mode on the iPhone 4 is better and HD) and here is a clip shot on my D90 indoors of my cat playing fetch for something to compare.

xjoewhitex · Feb 21, 2011

Bram said:
All hgher ones I assume. I believe the D7K, D300, D300s, D700, D3 series. and then the D90. I would assume if the D90 had it everything above and newer would have it as well.

Add D80,D70 to the list. But I would have to agree with your other posts, the d40x is a very capable camera I love mine I almost didn't upgrade being so fond of it. But I plan to keep it around, ive never had a bit of problem with it always producing amazing photos. If you were to buy any of the lower end cameras we are suggesting I would probably avoid the 50 f1.8, and go for the 35 f1.8 instead, a little more expensive but its also af-s and putting you in the range of 50mm on a cropped body. My 35 is used 90% of the time.

ulrichsd · Feb 21, 2011

I was in a similar money situation (about $1200). Ended up getting a D90 ($650 factory demo from Cameta.com) and the 35mm f/1.8 lens ($200). I love both the camera and the lens and it falls under your limit (though on the high side). The D3100 is probably a great camera also (and would save about $150), but if it was me I'd go for the 35mm instead of the kit lens, the low-light capabilities of the 35mm outweigh the advantages of a small zoom range. I bought a used 70-300mm off of a friend, but sounds like you don't need telephoto right away and can always get it later if needed. Just my opinion.