Which Camera???

[Miss Sony]

I second that, a friend of mine got scammed by a website that was selling a Nikon for way less than it was priced anywhere else.

Good point, I should have added that. I just use Best Buy to test products, I always buy online from a reputable shop.

If you find a website selling a camera well below sites like Amazon, B&H or Adorama, it's likely a scam site. Buy from reputable vendors. If you don't know if a site is a scam or not, ask us before you buy.

 

[anubis404]

I would look at a slightly used d70 or d70s on craiglist, amazon, or b&h. It'll be something that you can grow into and it will be better than the d40/60 it also has a built in af motor which the d40/60 doesnt have.

I agree. It is way more durable, and the shutter life is twice as long (its rated for 100,000 actuations while the D40 is only rated for 50,000). It also boasts Nikons CLS system, a much better flash sync, and an in-body AF motor for the same price. You'll also gain access to Nikon's whole AF and AF-D line of lenses, which sometimes are very valuable for a budget photographer.

 

[Enough Already]

Unsurprisingly I'd add Pentax to the mix. Without looking I am not sure which is closer in price but both the K200D and K20D are VERY solid well performing models that can be had at a price lower than the competition.

On top of that their lens range is superb with a massive range of manual focus lenses fitting straight on and working without a problem. All the autofocus lenses work ( apart from two ULTRA rare ones ) fine and their build quality is superb.

Some people here will argue that they don't do pro kit.. well no this is true but the kit they do produce is very solid dependably kit that easily matches higher priced Nikon and Canon kit.

Don't get me wrong, Canon and Nikon are very very good, but don't leave Pentax out of the equation.

I agree here. Add the 16-50 ($670) and or 50-135 ($730) both @ F2.8, both SDM, both cracking lenses. Look at the price of L glass in comparison. Some will say there is no comparison, they might be half right, but at $3000 for similar lenses, these are half the price. Hell, you could buy a body for each lens and still have cash in your wallet. It comes down to your budget too. But if you want sharp images, you have to invest in good lenses regardless of which system you go with.

 

[ANDS!]

Nikon CLS is available on all Nikon digital cameras. However, the advantage of the D80 ove rthe D40/D60 is that it acn act as a wireless commander should you venture into studio lighting photography (and it sounds like you might). I'm not too familiar with Canons Speedlite system, but I know Nikon's is much more integrated than Canon's (assuming you do not go third-party for your off camera lighting needs).

I would say - price versus feature - the D80 is the best bang for the buck that won't put you into the 1000 dollar territory for a camera and maybe a so-so lens. A refurbished D80 can be had for around 450-500 bucks on Adorama, and a 50MM F/1.8 you can pick up for about 100 bucks. So all told about 600-700 bucks to get you up and running with a good system.

 

[Katier]

I agree here. Add the 16-50 ($670) and or 50-135 ($730) both @ F2.8, both SDM, both cracking lenses. Look at the price of L glass in comparison. Some will say there is no comparison, they might be half right, but at $3000 for similar lenses, these are half the price. Hell, you could buy a body for each lens and still have cash in your wallet. It comes down to your budget too. But if you want sharp images, you have to invest in good lenses regardless of which system you go with.

And on top of those two pentax also have their 'limited range' of 'prime' lenses that I havn't seen the like of which in any other camera. In focal lengths from 21mm to 77mm plus other non-limited primes such as the 14mm wide angle and two macro's (50mm and 100mm).

Personally I want, at some point, to get the 77mm, 43mm and either the 14mm or 21mm.

 

[Village Idiot]

Nikon CLS is available on all Nikon digital cameras. However, the advantage of the D80 ove rthe D40/D60 is that it acn act as a wireless commander should you venture into studio lighting photography (and it sounds like you might). I'm not too familiar with Canons Speedlite system, but I know Nikon's is much more integrated than Canon's (assuming you do not go third-party for your off camera lighting needs).

I would say - price versus feature - the D80 is the best bang for the buck that won't put you into the 1000 dollar territory for a camera and maybe a so-so lens. A refurbished D80 can be had for around 450-500 bucks on Adorama, and a 50MM F/1.8 you can pick up for about 100 bucks. So all told about 600-700 bucks to get you up and running with a good system.

The down side to the CLS system is that it only works with Nikon speed lites. If one were to venture into studio lighting, then they'd most likely be using larger lights to get the effects they want.

It is fairly effective for general off camera lighting though.

 

[Seefutlung]

Of the cameras you mentioned the primary difference is CMOS vs. CCD sensors.

In low light situations and at elevated ISO's (400 - 800 -1600) the CCD sensors will produce much more noise (looks like grain) than CMOS sensors. The higher the ISO the greater and more pronounced the noise.

Many photogs with CCD sensors don't even use ISO 800 "... what's the point?" was a remark I heard.

Generally, indoor high school sports or night high school sports require an ISO of 1600 (minimum).

All Nikon cameras under the D90 use CCD sensors.

All Canon dSLR cameras use CMOS sensors.

CMOS sensors will allow you to shoot without tripod or flash in a greater range of lighting situation with significantly better Image Quality (IQ) than a CCD sensor.

Gary

 

[ANDS!]

The down side to the CLS system is that it only works with Nikon speed lites. If one were to venture into studio lighting, then they'd most likely be using larger lights to get the effects they want.

It is fairly effective for general off camera lighting though.

No way. Speedlights are PERFECT for small studio lighting or even large studio lighting. Power output is not a problem.

 

[Village Idiot]

No way. Speedlights are PERFECT for small studio lighting or even large studio lighting. Power output is not a problem.

So it's not going to be a problem getting enough light out of a Nikon SB800 for a 53" octabox?

 

[Katier]

Of the cameras you mentioned the primary difference is CMOS vs. CCD sensors.

In low light situations and at elevated ISO's (400 - 800 -1600) the CCD sensors will produce much more noise (looks like grain) than CMOS sensors. The higher the ISO the greater and more pronounced the noise.

Many photogs with CCD sensors don't even use ISO 800 "... what's the point?" was a remark I heard.

Generally, indoor high school sports or night high school sports require an ISO of 1600 (minimum).

All Nikon cameras under the D90 use CCD sensors.

All Canon dSLR cameras use CMOS sensors.

CMOS sensors will allow you to shoot without tripod or flash in a greater range of lighting situation with significantly better Image Quality (IQ) than a CCD sensor.

Gary

For the record Pentax use CMOS ( in the K200D/K20D and k-m, but CCD I believe in the 10D, 110D, 100D etc. )

 

[MrNewMan]

With all that said... I'm leaning towards the Rebel... Getting one that is refurbished would save some money to invest in some good lighting and lenses... How do you guys feel about refurbished cameras? Good idea?

And what lighting would be a good cheap route to go for studio shots (this is for photography of musicians for press kits etc)??? Which lenses would be good to purchase for this cause?

I'm going to have a photography student assisting me, but I'd love to gain some knowledge on here from actual photographers. Thanks again

NewMan

 

[ANDS!]

So it's not going to be a problem getting enough light out of a Nikon SB800 for a 53" octabox?

No - just shoot more than one through it. In any case if someone felt they NEEDED to go with a 4 foot and higher softbox, then at that point I would say they've graduated to a level of use where it's not just about "hobbyist" shooting and money may be swapping hands. With anything, if a person can't get good results out of the basics, they aren't going to get good results out of the advanced.

 

[Katier]

No - just shoot more than one through it. In any case if someone felt they NEEDED to go with a 4 foot and higher softbox, then at that point I would say they've graduated to a level of use where it's not just about "hobbyist" shooting and money may be swapping hands. With anything, if a person can't get good results out of the basics, they aren't going to get good results out of the advanced.

+1

strobist proves you can get pro quality shots from standard flashes without much trouble. There are of course situations where something like an octobox would enhance a photo.. BUT the photographer would need to be knowledgable about what they are doing AND the benefits of such a device. i.e. probably a professional or serious studio enthusiast. It's like reccomending a pro body (or even a £1000) and lens to a complete novice. No point they won't suddently take great pictures and need half the features.