New Camera for a beginner: Canon 550D, 60D or Nikon 3100?

[Marrokina]

Hi everyone,

I've been interested in photography for quite some time, but only now I'm able to buy a SLR.

I've been doing some research and I'm not completely sure what to pick.

My budget is about 1000€, for body and lens, to begin with. In time I'll buy another lenses, but for now, I can only buy one.
I would like also to know what kind of accessories, filters and any other important "little things" I should consider buying for a starter.

I've been looking into the cameras I mentioned above, because they are the only ones that fit in my budget. I looked in the used market, but unless anyone can give me a hand, there's not a big used market for DSLR's in Portugal.

I'll be using this for macro photography and landscape, and also for those family ocasions and maybe trips. Come to think of it, I'll use it for pretty much everything.

So, can someone help me?

Thank you,

Marrokina

 

[John Mc]

Im not sure how much the 60D would set you back, but its a rather good camera,so's the 550D, i've never used a Nikon,so i cant tell you what it would be like to use one.

I would maybe suggest the 550D,and see if you can get a decent tripod and macro/telephoto lens and then a polarizing filter,and i would probably say a bag too?

 

[Marrokina]

Thanks for your advice. I've seen photos taken with and without the polarizer filter (isn't it also called Neutral density?) and I'm definitely going for one of those too. The bag comes with the kit, and so does the tripod ;-).

I've browsed through several threads in the forum, and many people claim that Nikon is "better" than Canon, while others say it's a matter of personal taste. I don't know anything about either, as I only used a SLR some years ago, it was a fully manual 35mm, and I was in a workshop .

I'd like very much to know about Nikon as well. I was pretty sure about getting the Canon 550D with the 18-55 IS and the 55-250 IS (it's a kit worth 1029€), but I'm having second thoughts... 60D seems a little better, but I'm not sure if it's worth the extra price, and I have absolutely no idea whatsoever about the Nikon 3100.

 

[Vinny]

I can't speak specifically about the Canon models but Canon or Nikon - it's what you like. Getting a lens that you need/want is important but at this point macro may be out due to price but for the other functions the 2 lenses you mentioned should be fine. A good or great lens will set you back a lot of money and getting a somewhat lesser lens/camera to learn photography may be the way to go. A great photo comes from a photographer who knows how to take great photos.

I chose the Nikon D90 because it had the features I wanted (actually too many) but it kind of functioned like a film camera where I can control shutter speed and aperture without going into menus. The lower end Nikons didn't and I couldn't afford the higher end ones. But I was able to afford 2 lenses and have the focal range I wanted.

The 18-55 is possibly good for getting a family around a table to taking a candid shot. The 55 - 200 is good for anything that you need to get in a little closer or for on a sports field or wildlife. Just a caution though is that 200mm is sometimes not enough if you are taking photos at a soccer (football) game and the action is at the other end of the field.

I would stay away from kits that give tripods and such - they are usually junk but a bag may be useful. Although most people start adding to their collection of equipment and will run out of room in the bag. If buying the camera and lens is cheaper than the kit that includes the tripod and bag, I would go that way.

A circular polarizing filter will take glare or reflections off of surfaces and you typically dial in the amount and see it change in the viewfinder and it can be used to cut down on the amount of light getting to the camera. A neutral density (ND) filter just cuts down on the amount of light getting to the camera and there are various amounts of light cutting that they do (the whole filter cuts light by 1 stop, 2 stops, ...). There are also graduated ND filters that have various amount of light cutting on a single panel (goes from 2 stops to 0, ...).

 

[matt_att]

I can't speak specifically about the Canon models but Canon or Nikon - it's what you like. Getting a lens that you need/want is important but at this point macro may be out due to price but for the other functions the 2 lenses you mentioned should be fine. A good or great lens will set you back a lot of money and getting a somewhat lesser lens/camera to learn photography may be the way to go. A great photo comes from a photographer who knows how to take great photos.

I chose the Nikon D90 because it had the features I wanted (actually too many) but it kind of functioned like a film camera where I can control shutter speed and aperture without going into menus. The lower end Nikons didn't and I couldn't afford the higher end ones. But I was able to afford 2 lenses and have the focal range I wanted.

The 18-55 is possibly good for getting a family around a table to taking a candid shot. The 55 - 200 is good for anything that you need to get in a little closer or for on a sports field or wildlife. Just a caution though is that 200mm is sometimes not enough if you are taking photos at a soccer (football) game and the action is at the other end of the field.

I would stay away from kits that give tripods and such - they are usually junk but a bag may be useful. Although most people start adding to their collection of equipment and will run out of room in the bag. If buying the camera and lens is cheaper than the kit that includes the tripod and bag, I would go that way.

A circular polarizing filter will take glare or reflections off of surfaces and you typically dial in the amount and see it change in the viewfinder and it can be used to cut down on the amount of light getting to the camera. A neutral density (ND) filter just cuts down on the amount of light getting to the camera and there are various amounts of light cutting that they do (the whole filter cuts light by 1 stop, 2 stops, ...). There are also graduated ND filters that have various amount of light cutting on a single panel (goes from 2 stops to 0, ...).

i am in the mid of making decision to get 1 dSLR, i like zooming, with the same budget i can get 18-200 kit lens from 60D, but I can get only 18-105 kit lens.
Please advice the quality build from NIkon (review say so) worth that different or i should go with my preference, 18-200 , 60D (budget been max)

thanks

 

[Vinny]

Well, I have the Nikon and I'll say it's great and worth it and a Canon person will say the same thing. Read this website and there are numerous threads about which is better and the truth is - it's what YOU like and that holds true with other brands as well. The biggest problem with zooms is you give up something because its a zoom and the bigger the difference in the zoom range, 18-200 vs 18-105 vs 11-20, the more you give up. This is true for Canon, Nikon or whomever. Fixed focal length lenses (prime lenses) are the way to go for specific reasons but zooms can be very good.

I would say read reviews about the lens you're interested in and see if it is a good lens for what you want. As far as a D90 vs 60D - I have no clue what the difference is.

I like having the 18-105. It's on my camera all the time, it's my family snapshot lens and it takes sharp photos. I have a 70-300 that I bought at the same time and it is useful but doesn't see much action; it too is sharp.

 

[Marrokina]

Hi everyone, thanks for your help. I think that, since I'm starting from scratch, I'll go with the zoom lenses. It should give me more versatility, and a lot of experience to start with. I already know that fixed focal lens are sharper and cheaper, but for now, I want to experiment with a variety of subjects, lights and scenes, so I can later on buy some primes adequate to what I want to specialize in.

I'll probably buy the Canon 550D. It has a very nice price, less than 1000€ for body + 2 lenses, and I'll buy a polarizer filter, a bag a hood and a tripod as a "side kit".