DSLR camera's. Advice???

[GOLFBALLS]

I'm looking at getting a DSLR as a part bday gift. I have around $800 - $1100 max in mind. From what i can see, it's mainly a price difference dictated by megapixels??
eg: a 21 megapixel camera with HD movie mode will go for around $3000 in a Nikon.

Any suggestions from photo savvy dubbers???

[rayray086]

Megapixels dictates the resolution you can shoot in. Basically the higher the MP, the larger you can blow up your pictures. This is really only useful if you intend to take pics and print out massive poster-size prints.

Price difference is based on their features, and from my recent shopping around, there's about three tiers - consumer (<$900), prosumer and professional. I'm a Canon user so I can only comment on Canons, but look into getting a 600D with a single kit lens. If you're tight on money, the 1100D single kit lens is also good for the beginner, but might feel a little small for most guys. Best is to go out to a camera shop and spend some time handling the cameras. When I was first looking into DSLRs, I had my heart set on a Pentax based on specs, reviews and price, but as soon as I got out there, the Canon easily felt the best in my hands. To be honest, for a new DSLR user, I'd recommend going for the camera that feels best. All DSLRs in the market nowadays are top notch and hard to fault. Going with Nikon or Canon ensures you'll have plenty of lenses to upgrade to when you feel that you've outgrown the kit lens.

[Wolfgang]

Great advice Ray.

Another option for you is the Canon 550D twin lens kit. The only difference between the 550D and 600D Ray mentioned is the 600D has a swivel screen.

[eltonking]

if you plan on going anywhere with your photography - don't waste your time with a xxxD body - the 100's series, (while now can produce a very good image) feel like they have come out of a mcdonalds happy meal box. Go second hand, and also remember, the lens makes a massive difference - spend your saved money from getting a second hand body (i picked up a 40D - absolutely amazing although higher ISO performance leaves much to be desired compared to newer bodies) on your lens (don't get stuck with the shoddy kit 18-55mm kit lens - even the 50mm f/1.8 (should cost no more than $100) is a great lens to play around with - also has a very shallow DOF)
the ergonomics of the semi pro/pro series cameras allow for you to actually take photos (having wheels for both shutter speed and aperture) as opposed to the lower end consumer bodies - if you want something to run around with thats nice and light - you can get the 600D, 550D etc but then you might as well just get a point and shoot - i recently also picked up a canon G12. i love it. it takes a great shot (very comparable to my 7D) has a hot shoe (i can attach an external flash) and is just a great little camera.
hope that helps

[Agolf 5hitstir]

^^ As above ^^ our studio uses canon all day every day and we have never had troubles even though they don't get treated the best at weddings etc.

[Drift]

More pixels doesn't necessarily mean a better image. The more pixels crammed onto a sensor, the more noise the image will present. This is as a result of the size of the photosites decreasing as resolution/pixel count increases. As the size of the photosites decreases so to does the number of photons able to be captured by each photosite per shutter opening for a given time. In order to compensate for this, sensor gain is increased which introduces noise. Most cameras overcome this noise by way of noise reduction algorithms however this is always at the expense of detail. All of a sudden, the extra pixels don't look so flash.

Exposure problems can also result. Think of a photosite as a bucket, and an image sensor die as a pallet with buckets arranged close together. If these buckets are small, you can only fill them with a small amount of water before they overflow into the next bucket with some dribbling down the side. In image sensor terms, this translates to blown highlights or blooming as the electrical charge from one photosite spills out into those surrounding it. On the other side of the coin, there's less ability to capture detailed images in low light conditions.

Dynamic and tonal range is also impacted. This is essentially the ability of the sensor to accurately reproduce all aspects of a scene including light and shaded areas and subtle variation in skin tones etc. With higher pixel density sensors, their ability to accurately reproduce such scenes is reduced. Think of a scene with someone sitting on a bench under a tree by a river with a couple of boats. In full sun, one of two things will happen. 1) the person on the bench will be correctly exposed with the river and boats blown out 2) the river and boats correctly exposed with the person nothing but a silhouette. An image sensor with large photosites is more likely to reproduce an image closer to what we see with our eyes such that detail can be extracted from all elements of a scene.

Having said all that, until youve decided on what type of photography really captures you, you're unlikely to experience too many problems. Canon are known for producing much cleaner images at given ISO settings than the competition. Both their APS-C and full frame CMOS (others use CCD but thats another discussion altogether)sensors are excellent and coupled with their Digic series processors, produce fantastic images.

As for lenses, Canon and Nikon have the best selection. However you'll have to choose a system and stick to it as lenses are not interchangeable between camera manufacturers without expensive adaptors which often limit certain functionality. With Canon, if you're going with a consumer/prosumer camera you'll have a choice of EF-S and EF series lenses. The smart buy is to put your money into EF lenses where possible as if you ever decide to upgrade to a full frame (5D, 1D, 1Ds etc) you'll be unable to use the EF-S lenses. The other thing is to stretch to the best lenses your budget will allow. You don't need to go straight to L series but avoid the kit lenses where possible. Lenses have a resolution limit too and the kit lenses are often not up to par with the resolution of current cameras. It's not to say you can't take nice photos with a kit lense but side by side with a better lense of the same focal length/aperture etc, the difference is chalk and cheese. Better contrast, colours, tonal range, exposure etc and less distortion, uneven focus, chromatic aberration.

Anyway, I've dribbled on enough for now. Canons a winner in my book. Fantastic IQ, range of lenses from both Canon and third party manufacturers such as Sigma, huge range of flashes and other accessories.


PS: Nikon fanbois DIAF.

[AdamD]

I used to shoot with a Canon 450D, now use a 7D.

Personally, I'd suggest that, if you're after something new, you go with a 600D body, but forego the awful kit lenses altogether. You can get the Canon 50mm f1.8 fixed prime lens for around $100, and while it's a very cheap and flimsy lens built to a (very low) price, the quality will outperform any cheap kit lens you'd care to mention. (If you're happy with near-new, a secondhand 40D off eBay, as suggested above, is a fantastic option, and should be seriously considered.)

If this camera is going to become the start of a serious, lifelong hobby in photography, then camera bodies come and go - the technology and sensor quality will change rapidly with time. What doesn't change so quickly is the quality of the optics within the lenses. Choose a camera manufacturer (Canon or Nikon primarily) based on the lenses in the range, and put your dollars into quality lenses over extra megapixels. It's the lenses that you'll want to hold on to for many years, and it's those that really hold their value in the secondhand marketplace too.

[GOLFBALLS]

Great advice guys, thanks.
I understand most of that!!!

I deffo want to have control over aperture and shutter speed, and am thinking a max of 18 MP??

I'll go to some camera shops today and pick some brains.

I've been using an old Canon A1 for years, and have learnt good composition skills thru only ever shooting with my little olympus snappy or phone!!! I can get some interesting shots but now my imagination has outgrown those, and film is too slow, too expensive, and i cant upload a paper print!!

The other main thing for me is good HD filming capabilities for upcoming car blogging

Cheers

---------- Post added at 05:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 PM ----------

if you want something to run around with thats nice and light - you can get the 600D, 550D etc but then you might as well just get a point and shoot - i recently also picked up a canon G12. i love it. it takes a great shot (very comparable to my 7D) has a hot shoe (i can attach an external flash) and is just a great little camera.
hope that helps

Just wanna clarify... You say getting a 550D/600D is comparable to a point and shoot??? Both those cameras have fully manual capabilities though. They do have wheels for manual aperture and shutter speed settings... Right???

---------- Post added at 06:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:46 PM ----------

One more question.
What is this ISO stuff all about?

---------- Post added at 06:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:02 PM ----------

Ah just figured out the ISO thing: A digital equivalent of film 'speed' and noise is basically the same as grain.

[AdamD]

Just wanna clarify... You say getting a 550D/600D is comparable to a point and shoot???

A good high-quality point and shoot (like the Canon G series) will perform at close to the level of the consumer-range dSLRs under certain conditions (bright daylight, scenes that don't require a great deal of the lens in terms of sharpness, etc etc). However, it's certainly been the case in the past that you can't go past a dSLR (even a basic one) for low-light performance at high ISOs - where noise is most prevalent but you can at least "get the shot" - due to their physically larger sensors. Having said that, the latest entry-level dSLRs do have very small sensors. What can't be debated is that you can always throw an outstanding (and very expensive) lens on even an entry a dSLR, and you can't do that with even a super-premium compact. The G series do give you full manual control, and of course they are a whole lot easier to take with you than an SLR.

I suggest you have a read of these reviews:

Canon EOS 550D / Rebel T2i Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review
Canon EOS 600D Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review
Canon PowerShot G1 X Preview: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review
Canon Powershot G12 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

And if you're after a comprehensive review site for all of Canon's dSLR gear (fantastic for lens reviews), see The Digital Picture.

[GOLFBALLS]

Thanks Adam. Good advice.
The 600D is looking good just because of a few of its extra functions than the 550. The G1 looks like a great little camera for casual snapping and controlability, but ultimately the fixed lens and no HD movie function puts it out of the picture. Maybe one day when i want an extra camera to take around...

I'll have a look around for 2nd hand 5D's & 7D's too.

I need something with a good scope for creativity in all types of light conditions, but it doesn't need to be a $6000 fully pro thing. I'm not looking at making money out of this... yet

For a new camera, the 600D looks like a good combination of the above.

Thanks guys!

[HillbillyBob]

there are always great buys for second hand gear if you are patient, cameras tend to depriciate quickly, good lenses less so but good glass can easily go 20+ years considering how often most brands change their mounts

[Transporter]

I've bought Canon 1000 the entry level DSLR twin kit some 3 years ago and was quite disappointed with the low light image quality (w/o flash). My old Ricoh GRD performs much better for normal printouts.

Also look at Samsung NX11 or better still NX100 (21mp), which is latest from Samsung, the same sensor size as in the entry level DSLR. It produces very nice pictures (my daughter bought it for her boyfriend as Christmas present) it is a very creative camera, that is much easier to carry around. See also Olympus PEN cameras, I'm happy with PEN EPL3, plenty of accessories and lenses for Olympus.

Look also at Nikon 1 cameras. As others say, you don't need the DSLR to get good shot in good light and unless you buy good lens to go with these DSLR entry level cameras, you can be quite disappointed with the results.

Digital Photography Review

[parso_rex]

I just bought one of those NX11's a fortnight ago myself just as a point and shoot replacement for one of my cameras basically and its very impressive with full APS-C size sensor. I do have to find one of their 30mm pancake lenses though to make it my ideal camera by being a bit more compact and these aren't cheap but they're well worth it . Sony has one similar and no doubt all the brands will have these middle ground options available soon.
Drifts post above is spot on re sensor size and noise too.

[GOLFBALLS]

Yea. Noise isn't something i need to be pissy about just yet, and as i've already stated, a good point and shoot still wont cover my intentions for use, and i'm not blowing the shots up real big.

A lot of my low light stuff i'm going for will be tripod based anyway, so i wont necessarily be always cranking ISO up for a quick exposure etc.

I dont think you can stick an EF type lens on any point & shoot style camera's either can you??

Anyhoo, i've decided what i'll go for so thanks for the advice, but feel free to talk camera's amongst yourselves

[eltonking]

I dont think you can stick an EF type lens on any point & shoot style camera's either can you??

Anyhoo, i've decided what i'll go for so thanks for the advice, but feel free to talk camera's amongst yourselves

no you can't, but all canon lenses are interchangeable (although EF-S lenses cannot go on full frame bodies)

what camera are you looking at?