Need help buying a dSLR

DSLR noob · Sep 19, 2007

shivaswrath said:
WOW, that second link you attached was an amazing point to illustrate the finer points of photography. . .I'm developing an eye, and have always been a hapless aesthete - but I still do believe a good SLR will help carry me to that next level in capturing those moments. . .

I'm a car guy and the best analogy I could think of is that it depends on the driver more so than the car; a lot of guys recommend spending a couple of days at Bob Bondurant's race school or something similar ($2k or so), rather than spending $80k on a BMW or Lotus =) A nice car never hurts though, right?

Yes photography is very much like racing (and very different) but a great analogy none-the-less.

My pictures would be the same as they are on my XT even if someone gave me a 1D MKIII (maybe the lens actually WOULD change a few things we'll relate these to tries which make a HUGE difference in a car's performance).

Same with my car. If I got a Corvete Z06 on the same 225 rubber as my Rx-7, everything but my straight line performance would be the same, as I am currently too chicken to fully push my car at the track, however some R-comp racing tires would quickly leave me feeling bold, as would a fast zoom lens to a camera.

This analogy further illustrates the irrelevance o f a camera body and the importance of good lenses (they really are close to , if not, the most important part of capturing photographs(when going for portfolio quality photos, not just snapshots).

dangergoinoff · Sep 19, 2007

I got the k100d super 2 weeks ago and am having a lot of fun with it. I only realised how much i have to elarn about it once i got it out of the box and starting emssing around with it.
All part of the journey

93rdcurrent · Sep 20, 2007

That's awesome. I got my D40x about a little over a month ago and I'm having a blast. It even convinced me to go through a mid-life crisis and go back to school for a BFA...

I missed photography and I missed school. Question is do you think it would be more fun the 2nd time?

DSLR noob... btw I have a Mazda RX-8 and I'm a moderator on www.rx8web.com gotta love the Rotaries!

Hill202 · Sep 20, 2007

shivaswrath said:
WOW, that second link you attached was an amazing point to illustrate the finer points of photography. . .I'm developing an eye, and have always been a hapless aesthete - but I still do believe a good SLR will help carry me to that next level in capturing those moments. . .

I'm a car guy and the best analogy I could think of is that it depends on the driver more so than the car; a lot of guys recommend spending a couple of days at Bob Bondurant's race school or something similar ($2k or so), rather than spending $80k on a BMW or Lotus =) A nice car never hurts though, right?

It's inspiring isn't it? It helps get you past the technical aspect and begin focusing on the creative aspects of photography.

I think everytime a beginner comes here and asks "which camera is the best?" They should be shown that article. I wish I had read it 2 weeks ago

shivaswrath · Sep 21, 2007

I'm getting more and more frustrated with the abundant choices I have!

Sounds like we have some car guys on these boards too, it's nice to have some commonality (I have a 2005 Evo VIII, so driving hard is a passion of mine for sure!)

this morning I was driving into work and I was DYING to pull over, fall in New England is just a picture perfect time - I saw some leaves falling graciously to the ground and I wanted to capture the picture of the leaves (focus on the leaves) falling and have the trees in the background against the rising sun. . .would've been perfect. . .I think I'm going to lean towards the Pentax with the 11 A/F spots, so I can focus in on certain objects with more acumen than the D40. . .thanks for the advice and comments guys!

Neuner · Sep 21, 2007

[shudder]Ken Rockwell[/shudder] Dude needs to take his own advice.

93rdcurrent · Sep 21, 2007

shivaswrath said:
Sounds like we have some car guys on these boards too, it's nice to have some commonality (I have a 2005 Evo VIII, so driving hard is a passion of mine for sure!)

That's awesome. I had a '95 E36 M3 with Dinan upgrades before I bought the RX-8 and my car before that was a 575hp MR2. Turbonetics and UPRD helped me develop it. Talking about driving a car hard... I was pumping 24psi or 1.3 bar out of my MR2's turbo. It was loud to say the least. My RX-8's going to be getting a supercharger most likely next summer. [/hijack]

shivaswrath · Sep 21, 2007

93rdcurrent said:
That's awesome. I had a '95 E36 M3 with Dinan upgrades before I bought the RX-8 and my car before that was a 575hp MR2. Turbonetics and UPRD helped me develop it. Talking about driving a car hard... I was pumping 24psi or 1.3 bar out of my MR2's turbo. It was loud to say the least. My RX-8's going to be getting a supercharger most likely next summer. [/hijack]

Nice, what supercharger kit are you getting? I'm falling in love with my Evo again, just recently got some aggressive cams and a larger intercooler installed - pushing 23psi through the stock turbo and exhaust with 320 lbs tq!

So hijack aside, you have a combination of camera features that I'm interested in:
Nikon D40x with the VR 55-200mm lens - I priced it out to be about $880, do you think the features are in line with a noob like myself?

I tried the D40 out (little cheaper, probably get that over the D40x, but still get the VR lens) and loved how light it was. I'm trying the Pentax out tonight (k10d and k100d). . .

93rdcurrent · Sep 21, 2007

shivaswrath said:
Nice, what supercharger kit are you getting? I'm falling in love with my Evo again, just recently got some aggressive cams and a larger intercooler installed - pushing 23psi through the stock turbo and exhaust with 320 lbs tq!

I was supposed to have tested out an engine management system from a local company out here for Pettit Racing but they had some issues with recent changes in their racing division on their main cars (it was a political thing). Needless to say my twin screw sc kit didn't come through and that was too bad. I will go with that one if I go with a supercharger. Otherwise I'll talk to Turbonetics and Tony Woest over here for the EMS for a custom turbo kit. Tony can do all the Dyno tuning for me which is great and they are like 15 min. away.

shivaswrath said:
So hijack aside, you have a combination of camera features that I'm interested in:
Nikon D40x with the VR 55-200mm lens - I priced it out to be about $880, do you think the features are in line with a noob like myself?

I tried the D40 out (little cheaper, probably get that over the D40x, but still get the VR lens) and loved how light it was. I'm trying the Pentax out tonight (k10d and k100d). . .

I originally bought the D40 at Shutterbug and I had 30 days to play around with it and decide if I wanted it or to go with the D40x. I stepped up. I'm really just a beginner too so I would say that I've been happy with what I got so far but I'm probably going to get a Sigma 70-300 lens with a Macro setting. As far is I've been able to tell the Macro lens is the only thing I'm lacking (for a beginner). I just bought a book published by Magic Lantern Guides and written by Simon Stafford, Nikon D40x. It has just about all the information you would need to learn the operations of the camera and it is pretty well written so far. It was only $19.95. A bargain imho. I've been happy with the camera so far and that's a little over a month with the camera.

usayit · Sep 21, 2007

ANDS! said:
The Pentax is a pretty cheap camera (in price), but you're going to run up against lense selection for it. I dont know how many lenses Sigma and Tamron (the two big third party len manufacturers) make for the Pentax, but they DEFINITELY make a crap load for Canon and Nikon.

Sigma and Tamron make lenses with Pentax mounts.
Tokina as far as I know does not.

My vote is for the Pentax.

shivaswrath · Sep 21, 2007

Well I decided to take sometime and abuse my local camera store, who coincidentally has very competitive pricing (close to B&H, which is good for a local joint!)

I learned an IMMENSE amount between all the different cameras I've been thinking about.

I tried the Pentax K10d - it was too heavy and the menu's were not very amateur friendly.

I tried the Pentax K100d, and it was significantly better, but still too large for me (I feel like this is developing into a "this soup was too hot, this was too cold" fairy tale of some sort). . .I even tried the fixed 40mm lens, the new Pentax limited lens, and I had to say, not having zoom and walking around taking pictures got a bit annoying. . .and not having rechargeable batteries was a bit annoying too (I'd have to spend $20 for that)

And then I tried the Nikon D40X. . .even though I'd probably get the D40. . .so I was really happy and in love . . .the menu system was very intuitive, I loved the in-camera editing as well. . .and I also use the VR 50-200mm lens, and it was fantastic at high zoom levels, everything I want!! And the camera was still remarkably light. . .

I'm now debating on waiting for the holiday season to see if prices will fall and whether I should go with the D40 or D40X (6 vs 10 mp, I'm afraid I"ll kick myself in the ass if I don't go higher, but then again, it depends on the printer that's printing the pictures as well). . .

Any thoughts or ideas??

PS, I REALLY went in hoping the best for the Pentax since I used to use my Dad's old Pentax 35mm. . .so I"m not hating, just found something that fits my hands a little better!

93rdcurrent · Sep 21, 2007

Printing anything up to 8x10 will be the same pretty much for the 6-10 mp range. In the long run it may be more convenient to get your own pro-quality printer and there are several good ones. I have my eyes set on one but it is around $500-600. What do you do? Kinko's can do a good job with JPEGs up to 5x7 on the Sony equipment they got for around $2.49/pp or if you want 4x6 I think it's $.39. Of course you'll get better quality at a print shop. All up to you.

jon_k · Sep 21, 2007

DSLR noob said:
If you HAVE to have it, get an Olympus E-510.

You can't say things like that without starting a debate! I tell my friends who consider buying cameras "If you HAVE to, get a Canon."

Can you explain why Olympus is a last resort only?

1) I've got an E-1, E-500 and E-300 and they all take stunning images in comparison to the competitors offerings at the time.
2) I know several professionals who take amazing photographs who in no way appear hindered by the brand.
3) People often argue that the 4/3 image format is small and so it is bad. For one, the small sensor = small lenses. The primary argument from Canon users (Nikon users don't bring this up usually) is that of image quality.
3a.) However, I've noticed most of Canikons offerings are mostly APS-C sensors. These sensors are small too, and only 3mm taller in size then the 4/3 sensor format. In actuality they produce worse image quality because the Canon/Nikon lenses that fit the APS-C bodies are designed for full-frame sensors and so putting a full frame lens on a APS-C sensor = bad image quality. In comparison the 4/3 Zuiko lenses are designed specifically for the 4/3 format, resulting in great image quality. So really your options are 1) Nikon/Canon full frame (which is most of the pro bodies out there, $$$) or 2) Olympus with a 4/3 format designed for best optical quality on the 4/3 sensor format.

The Olympus E-410 and E-510 have all the features the original poster wants except for "-Takes AA batteries". It performs extremely well and I'm curious why you think this system is for a LAST RESORT.

Olympus seems to suffer from the same problem that Leica presents: the cost of the equipment makes people nervous. In Leica's case, of course, the price tag is quite high. In Olympus' case, the price tags are generally low, and as a result everyone is paranoid Olympus might be low quality, so they spend $4000 on a Canon EOS system instead.

I have yet to see one reasonable, considered opinion that the equipment is substandard or deficient. Indeed, most people rave over it, especially for its compactness and compatibility. I use it extensively and am happy with the images it delivers, including enlargements. They look just like images shot with much pricier gear.

six-five-two · Sep 22, 2007

Wow, I'm surprised this thread is still around. Anyways, I have a Pentax K100D now. I have the kit 18-55mm lens and a Pentax 75-300mm lens. I don't really like the 75-300mm lens due to not being that sharp, but I could have just messed up my focus or aperture settings. I know how to use the camera decently well now.

The only reason why I chose the K100D over the Nikon D40 was because the K100D had Auto Exposure Bracketing (aka AEB) for HDR pictures. I don't use it all the time, but it is very helpful in some places.

The menu on the K100D is also quite terrible. The D40 has a way more user-friendly menu.

So for anyone here deciding on a Pentax K100D or a Nikon D40... if AEB doesn't count, then get the D40.

I hate Ken Rockwell. His $150 vs. $5000 article is stupid, I can easily tell the difference and on the zoom up photos, you can obviously tell which one is which. Is this guy half blind or what? That's why some cameras are more than others.

Question: Can you take good macro photos with the kit lens?

leopardforest · Sep 23, 2007

It seems to me that you are asking for people suggestions but you dont like the suggestions people are giving you. As far as the Ken Rockwell article goes, I think that it is very true. I just recently got a DSLR only because my P&S did not have a manual option and I wanted to be able to have control over my DOF, SS etc. Plus I felt that it was an investment that I woudn't regret.

Looking at people's photos on sites such as Flickr you can see thousands of great pictures where people have used cheap cameras to take great pictures. They are not depending on technology to provide them with a great shot. They are looking at a scene and trying to capture it the way they see the scene.