Looking to buy first DSLR

Turnerea · Aug 28, 2008

I'm in the market for my first DSLR, and was hoping to get some thoughts on how I should proceed.

I mainly shoot landscapes- I enjoy traveling to national parks and hiking- so I figure I'll need a decent wide angle end (18mm?) but I'd also enjoy getting into the wildlife while I'm out there, so I'd like to get tight on things- 200mm? Am I doomed to need to carry two lenses with me? Or would a 28-135 be enough??

I've also been going back and forth between Canon's Rebel Series (XSi probably) and Nikon's D80. The Nikon is about $100 more, but that's ok if I'm getting more out of it. I haven't use it before, but the depth of field preview seems great, especially while I'm still learning. The Nikon says it has it, but only with the "CPU lens attached" What does that mean?

I'd appreciate any input from people with experience with either of these cameras. Is the Nikon worth the extra $$? Should I just go seriously into debt and get the D90?

Hobbes · Aug 28, 2008

Turnerea said:
I'm in the market for my first DSLR, and was hoping to get some thoughts on how I should proceed.

I mainly shoot landscapes- I enjoy traveling to national parks and hiking- so I figure I'll need a decent wide angle end (18mm?) but I'd also enjoy getting into the wildlife while I'm out there, so I'd like to get tight on things- 200mm? Am I doomed to need to carry two lenses with me? Or would a 28-135 be enough??

I've also been going back and forth between Canon's Rebel Series (XSi probably) and Nikon's D80. The Nikon is about $100 more, but that's ok if I'm getting more out of it. I haven't use it before, but the depth of field preview seems great, especially while I'm still learning. The Nikon says it has it, but only with the "CPU lens attached" What does that mean?

I'd appreciate any input from people with experience with either of these cameras. Is the Nikon worth the extra $$? Should I just go seriously into debt and get the D90?

I was kinda in the same position as you are a lil bit over a month ago and I created this thread: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=130132
XSI is an excellent camera but 40D and 50D are so much better both when it comes to build quality, speed and user friendliness. I for one really like the top LCD and the dedicated ISO button of 40D. and of course a much better kit lens.
well for me my choice was between two Canon cameras since I have used a Canon DSLR that belonged to a friend of mine in the past and really liked it. I believe if you are really serious about photography you shouldn't be scared of spending money on a good camera ^^ as for landscape photography well I believe the ideal camera for that would be one with full frame sensor like Nikon D700

Turnerea · Aug 28, 2008

Hobbes-Thanks I've read through that thread and got some good info.

I think that I'm going to stick with the XSi for now- being a student, it is easier to swing price wise. However I was planning on purchasing this lens for it

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=workaround.jsp&A=details&Q=&sku=149629&is=GREY

Hoping that the wide end would allow for some landscapes, and the telephoto end will allow for some tight shots of wildlife. All Canon compatible lenses work with all Canon SLRs right? So if I get the XSi, and keep throwing money at lenses over the years, when I can afford the 40D, I'll already have a full set of lenses I can use with that one too right??

Thanks,
Erik

Coldow91 · Aug 28, 2008

Not all Canon lenses work on Canon DSLR, FD mount lenses won't work but EF and EF-S lenses will work on DX/crop bodies

Nikon on the other hand has been using the same mount since like 1959 or something and to take advantage of those 40+ years of lenses I would get a D60 or a D40 which are great cameras and use the extra money on lenses. (the D40/60 can use old sharp cheap MF lenses that no other Nikon DSLR can). The only gripe people have with the D40/x/60 is that it can only autofocus with AF-S or HSM lenses but Nikon and Sigma and Tamron have been coming out with these lenses for a while and are coming out with lots more

or save up and go for the D90 which looks to be an awesome camera that should last you a long time.

Turnerea · Aug 28, 2008

Coldow- thanks for your thoughts. Still a little confused- would an EF lens, like this one, work on both a Rebel XSi and a 40D?

Also, I just learned more about the crop factor- does that mean that the above lens, which is 28-135, would translate to 1.6x those figures, so 45-216? I'm learning on a film SLR now with 18-55, and didn't want to loose too much of the wide end, but I haven't seen any lenses that would match this wide end-- I think i'd have to find a lens that is around 11mm (18/1.6) haven't seen anything like that??

Or is the 1.6x already factored into the figures when you're looking at lenses because they figure everyone is using them on digital bodies now with the smaller sensor??

Coldow91 · Aug 28, 2008

The lens poster would work on both, yes.

the numbers posted is the range of focal lengths. This doesn't change. With the crop factor the sensor is only taking the picture from the center of the image that is projected on it buy the lens. Making the "effective" focal length 45-216. With EF-S lenses the 1.6 crop factor is already "factored" into the focal lengths listed but with EF lenses you would have to do the math if using on a crop body.

I understand your need for wide lenses. I would recommend getting an EF-S lens that starts at 18mm. The kit lens that comes with the Rebel Xsi is 18mm-55mm and should fill your need very well.

Hope that made sense

JustAnEngineer · Aug 28, 2008

Canon switched to the all-electronic EF mount in 1987, making a clean break from their previous FD mount. All EF mount lenses should work with an EOS SLR or DSLR camera, even the entry-level Rebel XS. EF-S lenses are designed specifically for the smaller sensor size of the EOS DSLRs with APS-C size sensors (e.g.: EOS Rebel XT, XS, XTi, and XSi, or EOS 20D, 30D, 40D and 50D). EF-S lenses will not work with EOS film cameras or on EOS DSLRs with full-frame sensors (e.g.: EOS 5D and 1Ds Mk. III).

Nikon didn't switch to electronic lenses until 1996, but they expanded their old F mount rather than creating a whole new mount. The newer electronic AF-S (and AF-I) lenses will work with the low-end Nikon D40 or D60 cameras, but these cameras lack the old-style mechanical drive. Older Nikkor F mount lenses won't autofocus and may not support the camera's other automatic functions, either. Stepping up to the D80, D90 or D300 gives you more compatibility with the older F mount lenses.

The 1.6x field of view crop factor for the Canon DSLRs with APS-C size sensors (or the 1.5x factor for the similar Nikon models) is not included in the lens designation. The lens is still doing the same thing. The cameras with smaller sensors are just catching the center of the image that comes through the lens. This has more subtle implications for depth of field besides the obvious difference in field of view. My EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens gives me the same field of view as a 27-88mm lens would on a full-frame camera. My EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens would work with an EOS film SLR or full-frame DSLR, but my EOS 40D catches only the center of the image, so it has the field of view that a 112-480mm lens would have with a full-frame sensor.

The Rebel XSi comes with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens. This covers a very useful range of focal lengths. This lens has cheap construction, but the optical quality is better than previous kit lenses. If you want to go to ultra-wide angle, the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 gets good reviews. If you want to take portraits with a shallow depth of field or low-light photographs that need a wide aperture, the $90 EF 50mm f/1.8 is very cheap, but it's pretty good optically. For wildlife, I'd like to have the $1400 EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens, but that's pretty expensive. The $1700 EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM with teleconverters would be even more expensive, and it'd be heavy, too.

Hobbes · Aug 29, 2008

Coldow91 said:
With EF-S lenses the 1.6 crop factor is already "factored" into the focal lengths listed but with EF lenses you would have to do the math if using on a crop body.

no the focal length range listed is for cameras with 35mm sensor even if it is made for aps-c cameras.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon_18-200_3p5-5p6_is/

Turnerea · Aug 29, 2008

Hobbes said:
no the focal length range listed is for cameras with 35mm sensor even if it is made for aps-c cameras.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon_18-200_3p5-5p6_is/

Thanks for all the info- so I gather that for any lens, EF or EF-S, if I want to compare to the performance I'm getting out of my 35mm film camera, then I need to multiply by 1.6.

But now I'm seriously bummed, because I generally like the 18-55 that I have for my film camera, but something like this lens seems to be the only way I can get the same types of shots. That is a bit too much $$ for me, considering I'm spending about the same for the camera body, and I'm already turning over couch cushions for that!

How do most people here get such wide shots with crop body cameras?

Hobbes · Aug 29, 2008

Turnerea said:
Thanks for all the info- so I gather that for any lens, EF or EF-S, if I want to compare to the performance I'm getting out of my 35mm film camera, then I need to multiply by 1.6.

But now I'm seriously bummed, because I generally like the 18-55 that I have for my film camera, but something like this lens seems to be the only way I can get the same types of shots. That is a bit too much $$ for me, considering I'm spending about the same for the camera body, and I'm already turning over couch cushions for that!

How do most people here get such wide shots with crop body cameras?

well if i were you I would look for a lens for full frame cameras course sooner or later you will upgrade and probably get a more expensive 35mm camera and EF-S lenses dont fit them. those canon L lenses are expensive but unlike a DSLR you can keep using a lens until it breaks ^^

JustAnEngineer · Aug 29, 2008

If you decide that you want to go to an ultra-wide angle lens, consider the $570 Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX. I'd probably try the 18-55mm kit lens for a while, first.

epp_b · Aug 29, 2008

18mm is a pretty good wide-angle for APS-C and Canon 1.6x. Try it first, see how you like it.

Of course, the only way you can get insanely wide angle shots is with a full-frame sensor, but that's also insanely expensive.

mdsoares · Aug 29, 2008

Since you're looking at consumer level DSLRs I'd also take a look at Sony's A200 and A300. When it comes to consumer DSLRs, the Sony's are just as good as the Nikon D40, or D60 and the Canon Rebels, and in some areas, better. They have In body IS, which while not quite as efficient at long focal lengths as in lens, it will save you a consider amount on lenses as any lens you attach to the Sony benefits from IS. Used lens availability is also very good as Sony uses the old Minolta Maxxum mount, which provides 20+ years of SLR lenses.

I may get bashed for saying it, but for a consumer entry level DSLR, Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Olympus are all very good options. Quality is going to be just as good on all of them, so I'd reccommend you give them all a fair shake and choose based on features that match what you want, and not just on the brand name. I'd wholeheartedly suggest a Canon or Nikon if you're buying a prosumer or pro body, but for entry level consumer bodies, they are really all on a pretty level playingfield. Canon and Nikon marketing have done a great job convincing American that anything with their name on it is vastly superior to any other brand. While that often holds true with the pro equipment, it is not at all true with the entry level stuff.

Turnerea · Aug 29, 2008

Thanks- I've been looking at the Sonys today online, and the reason I hadn't considered them strongly before is that, while I haven't used it yet, I thought the depth of field preview feature sounded really cool. The Sonys don't have that (200,300,350 at least).

Is this feature something that people use alot?

mdsoares · Aug 29, 2008

Turnerea said:
Thanks- I've been looking at the Sonys today online, and the reason I hadn't considered them strongly before is that, while I haven't used it yet, I thought the depth of field preview feature sounded really cool. The Sonys don't have that (200,300,350 at least).

Is this feature something that people use alot?

DOF preview is very cool, and is probably the only feature I miss on my A200. However not having it isn't a backbreaker like it is with a 35mm, becuase with the digital you can view the photo right away to determine how you did.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, when dealing with entry level DSLRs, don't get caught up in the name. All of the DSLR companies, Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, produce great entry level DSLRs. Find a camera that has a feature set that you like. For example, if the DOF preview is a big deal for you, then definately go for a camera that has it. If you want to have Image Stabilization but don't want to spend the premium required to buy IS lenses, then get an Olympus or Sony that has IS in body so ALL lenses benefit from IS, thus saving you some $$. It all comes down to what features you want.

Some fanboys will go as far as saying that anything not a Canon or not a Nikon sucks. This is a load of crap. While it has SOME truth with pro level DSLRs, it is absolutely false with the consumer products.