SLR or Something digital for newb?

Gerald-NC · Dec 2, 2006

I've posted about my future aspirations of getting into sports photography and nature photography. I spoke of my budget only around $300...maybe, MAYBE I could go up some in thinking of starting with a DSLR. Well, looking at Craiglist I've found a number of SLR's with lenses and accessories for around $100. So my question is, should I start with something like that instead of going ahead and starting with a DSLR? I do wonder about the printing costs with the SLR but I'm not set up with a great print system at home for a DSLR either. Besides I'd have to take the "professional looking" shots to a real printer anyway. Or do you have a better idea?

Michael Humle · Dec 2, 2006

Anyway you look at it, if you go digital you are going to be in the
$1000 plus range. The lens you will need for what you want to do will cost in excess of $300. I think your inclination is to start out with an SLR, and I agree given your budget constraints.

Peanuts · Dec 2, 2006

I would vote to defintely look into (film) SLRs. There are plenty on the market now that are of wonderful quality, but at rather low costs due to the introduction and 'boom' of DSLRs. If you are planning on upgrading later, you will probablyw ant to choose your system' early, so that any investment on lenses and the such can be carried from camera to camera.

britonk · Dec 3, 2006

If you are concerned about print costs go with a DSLR - order prints over the web they are really really cheap and free tools like Google Picasa2 help you organize and order your prints.

Film SLRs are cheaper like Peanuts says but that's a one-off cost, moving forward lenses will still cost you weather you go with a film or digital camera and I find it's lenses that is the more costly part of the whole thing.

Gerald-NC · Dec 3, 2006

Any tips on what kind of deals I should be looking for in a SLR? Here's some Craigslist ads for my area:

Canon EOS Rebel 2000 300/300 Date
Canon Camera Bag
SIGMA AF-MF Zoom Lens (Mini zoom/Macro 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 II Aspherical)
Instruction Booklet
(the batteries need to be replaced)

He's asking $95

Canon EOS D30 w/ Canon 35-80mm, 1.4-5.6 lens - $350

pentax k1000 slr w/ lenses - $200

Canon EOS Rebel 2000 Film Camera with 28-80 lens - $100

Olympus om10 manual slr camera with three lenses (28mm, 50mm mini wide, and 80-200mm) 2x teleconverter (doubles every lense) plus old school light meter and soft case. Asking $200

fmw · Dec 3, 2006

I would look for a used, older technology digital camera - even what was a high end point and shoot 5 or 6 years ago. I have a 1 MP Nikon Coolpix that really performs pretty well still. It doesn't work like the new DSLR's but it isn't all that bad. I'm sure you could buy one like it for the kinds of prices you are thinking about. You could certainly buy mine.

There is no point in pursuing a dying technology and the film processing costs will exceed the cost of the film camera in very short order. It's a tough one for many photographers to face but film is really going away.

Nikon, one of the large manufacturers of if 35mm cameras will stop manufacturing them in 2007. They will be digital only. I would take your cue from that.

mysteryscribe · Dec 3, 2006

Like everything else in this time of flux everyone is right.. At the moment you can get the best basic camera system for the money in film. But as was pointed out you will soon eat up the difference in material costs.

Older used digital pns though wouldn't be my choice to learn the principles on. I would want a camera that had manual contols and off camera flash at least.

Im afriad at the moment there just arent any easy answers. If you are in a learning mode you will be shooting a lot of images so film may not be the best for you unless you can do your on processing. Even then at five bucks a roll how long will it take to make up a grand.

Just too mind boggling for me to think about. Some of the more advance pns might be right for you the panasonic with the leica lens comes to mind as a gap camera.

Don Simon · Dec 3, 2006

fmw said:
There is no point in pursuing a dying technology and the film processing costs will exceed the cost of the film camera in very short order. It's a tough one for many photographers to face but film is really going away.

Nikon, one of the large manufacturers of if 35mm cameras will stop manufacturing them in 2007. They will be digital only. I would take your cue from that.

I wouldn't. :lol:

No offence intended. If you look around you can get a film SLR and a couple of good lenses for $100. With good film and good technique you will be able to take shots with that which simply would not be possible with a digital point and shoot - do you know any digital point-&-shoots which have a useable 3200 ISO, full manual control and take an f1.7 lens? Or anything approaching a real wide angle? I don't. An old film SLR is not a bad investment at all. Even if in 12 months' time no-one makes, sells or processes film, you'll still have had 12 months worth of photography out of it.

ironsidephoto · Dec 4, 2006

for what you're doing, i don't think a point-and-shoot of either type would work. i also disagree with fmw in that buying a really old 1mp digital would not be beneficial to you at all. i would buy an older (i am in love with my 1991 Nikon n6006) 35mm slr to learn on, and if you decide you really like it then save up for a DSLR. but that's just me.

Gerald-NC · Dec 4, 2006

What about the Olympus EVOLT E-300 or E-500? These are going on Ebay with lenses for around $400 or less. Still something I have to talk the wife into lol, but it is an option...and right now we have some extra money as long as she lets me use it

...as my Christmas gift lol

CMan · Dec 4, 2006

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e300-review/index.shtml

Looks like it gets a fair review. But may I point out that 300D's (first Digital Rebel) are also selling in that price range with lens and accessories. That would be something you could consider.

Gerald-NC · Dec 4, 2006

You're right, there are some 300D's out there and looks to be a better deal/camera.

Digital Matt · Dec 4, 2006

Better start saving for that 500mm lens if you want to shoot sports

Gerald-NC · Dec 4, 2006

lol yeah that was gonna be a future question...what kind of lenses should I invest in for what I wanna shoot? Starting with landscapes, buildings, cars, people, then sports

Digital Matt · Dec 4, 2006

What I would suggest is that you start with a 50mm and get a handle on composition, and you'll start to realize whether you want something wider, or more telephoto. Either way, good lenses are very important, and they are not cheap.