What Digital Camera Should I GET?

[John.D]

You knew it was coming, the famous 'What Digital Camera Should I GET?' thread!

The old thread over at CA dates back to 2004, so it's probably best to start afresh :)

So, everyone wanting to buy a new camera post here, and the experts can guide you, and post their views on that piece of kit. Reviews of a camera you own are also welcome.

So, let's begin!

[klips]

A 40D.

That is the answer :P

[ukanfoff]

A a disposable with a paper towel tube and a magnifying glass on the end.

:D:D:D

for noobs check out www.dpreview.com first
still dunno what to look for
look up ken rockwell on info bout lenses and stuff. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm

[JonS]

Get the camera that Firstly) fits in your hand the best and Secondly) has the lens selection in its mount that best matches what you do.

/thread

[a/z]

Well, as I continue my particular long journey into the magically wonderful digital world, I´ve now also discarded the Canon EOS 400d.

So now, there are only two contenders left out from the playoffs to start this parody of a Superbowl :D ...

And those are the Canon EOS 40d (with the 28-135mm lens) or the Nikon d80 (with lens still to be determinated).

As I said in the old post, I´ll use it mainly to photograph cities, landscapes, sports (MTB, Snowboard,..), and some more "artsy" takes, and obviusly, the camera will travel a lot. And now thanks to some extra effort my budget has grown to around 1500$.

I know Klips opinion on the matter ;) , but would like to know other´s as well...

Thank you all for helping me out with this :p

[klips]

28mm on 40D is tooooooo narrow, especially for landscapes. Get the 17-85 instead.

[Grumbledook]

get the 17-55 f2.8 IS instead ;]

the 40d will be pretty much the same as the 400d that you had previously (though have you considered a 30d?)

I am guessing you already sold the 400d? Your money would be best spent just buying some nicer lenses than a new body. Especially for landscapes.

if you are going to want to be using it for sports as you said then the 40d would be better than the d80 due to the FPS available to it, iirc

[a/z]

This "looking all day in the internet for a camera" thing is gona kill me...:D

I´ve been looking in Adorama.com and I wanted to ask if anybody has bought there, because I´ve read they ship to Spain via UPS worldwide, and it´s much (A LOT) cheaper than buying here. I even could start considering (considering?I think I would buy that camera right away... :D) a Nikon d300 since it would fit my budget.

Thank you again for your help, and, again, sorry for this back and forth thing, but a lot of effort will go into the selected camera, and I don´t want to mess it up :( .

[a/z]

get the 17-55 f2.8 IS instead ;]

the 40d will be pretty much the same as the 400d that you had previously (though have you considered a 30d?)

I am guessing you already sold the 400d? Your money would be best spent just buying some nicer lenses than a new body. Especially for landscapes.

if you are going to want to be using it for sports as you said then the 40d would be better than the d80 due to the FPS available to it, iirc

No, no, when I said I discarded the 400d, I meant that I discarded it from the models I was looking. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

In fact, my actual camera is an old Pentax P30, which has been with me for some years now, so I decided to make the leap and get a good digital camera and start anew.

Anyway, thanks for your advice ;) .

[John.D]

Yeah, I was also wondering why you would get rid of such a good camera :)

[Morbid]

No, no, when I said I discarded the 400d, I meant that I discarded it from the models I was looking. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

In fact, my actual camera is an old Pentax P30, which has been with me for some years now, so I decided to make the leap and get a good digital camera and start anew.

Anyway, thanks for your advice ;) .

Have you considered Pentax? Might be worth doing if you have old lenses.

[Grumbledook]

Well the d300 is a very nice cam. You need to remeber though that a nice body isn't really much better than a cheaper one if you have a cheap lens on it.

Lenses will last a lot longer than the body will, so factor that into the equation too.

As for shipping from america to spain you got to remember 2 things:

1) you might get a nice big customs charge
2) check about the warrenty

now for canon the body warrenty isn't international, though the lenses are, just 12 months

don't know about the other brands though, you will have to look it up, some of the off brand lenses have longer warrentys (3 years or whatever)

There is a lot of info out there on the www if you look for it. I know I spent ages looking through stuff before I got my 40D and lenses last year.

[a/z]

Have you considered Pentax? Might be worth doing if you have old lenses.

Yeah, but then lenses aren´t in the best of the shapes exactly... :D . That´s another of the reasons that made me decide to start anew.

I really feel kinda bad for abandoning Pentax :p , but right now, and having to rebuy all the gear, I prefer Canon or Nikon...

[a/z]

Well the d300 is a very nice cam. You need to remeber though that a nice body isn't really much better than a cheaper one if you have a cheap lens on it.

Lenses will last a lot longer than the body will, so factor that into the equation too.

As for shipping from america to spain you got to remember 2 things:

1) you might get a nice big customs charge
2) check about the warrenty

now for canon the body warrenty isn't international, though the lenses are, just 12 months

don't know about the other brands though, you will have to look it up, some of the off brand lenses have longer warrentys (3 years or whatever)

There is a lot of info out there on the www if you look for it. I know I spent ages looking through stuff before I got my 40D and lenses last year.

The shipping fees are totally affordable, as long as they stay as they appear on the website.

The warranty is the thing that bothers me (along with the camera getting damaged during the shipment). If something goes wrong, would I have to send the camera back to USA?

But having in mind all that, I think it´s still worth the risk, as I´m speaking of saving around 500€ (with shipments costs and all)...

As for the lenses, my plan is to buy it with (probably) the 18-200, lens, and in the course of two years or so, buy another two or so lenses, with other gear I might need.

[JonS]

I´ll use it mainly to photograph cities, landscapes, sports (MTB, Snowboard,..), and some more "artsy" takes,

Based on that, I'd recommend that a full-frame sensor be on your "must-have" list. Your wides will be truly wide, and you won't have to get down to a 10 or 15mm and have to deal with the distortion issues trying to get that wide into a crop sensor.

So you'd be pretty much looking at the D3 on the Nikon side or a 1-series on the Canon side. Yes, the 5D is full-frame also, but you'll hate it for sports.

Again, what will you shoot the most?


Here is an illustration by Joe Lorenzini (http://www.joelorenzini.com) of the difference between 1.5 crop and full frame on a Nikon D3 (the D3 is auto-switching between DX and FX modes, and can be forced to DX mode if one chooses).

http://www.joelorenzini.com/dp/fxdx.jpg

[a/z]

Based on that, I'd recommend that a full-frame sensor be on your "must-have" list. Your wides will be truly wide, and you won't have to get down to a 10 or 15mm and have to deal with the distortion issues trying to get that wide into a crop sensor.

So you'd be pretty much looking at the D3 on the Nikon side or a 1-series on the Canon side. Yes, the 5D is full-frame also, but you'll hate it for sports.

Again, what will you shoot the most?


Here is an illustration by Joe Lorenzini (http://www.joelorenzini.com) of the difference between 1.5 crop and full frame on a Nikon D3 (the D3 is auto-switching between DX and FX modes, and can be forced to DX mode if one chooses).

http://www.joelorenzini.com/dp/fxdx.jpg

But, sadly, those cameras are way to far (I mean, waaaaaaaaaay to far :( ) from my budget.

The most I can go for would be the Nikon d300, and that only if I order it from the USA as I said (saving me a little more than 500€ I think) and making a little extra effort on the monetary part. Right now this is the option I´m more inclined towards to.

As for what will I be shooting the most, well all of them are quite at the same level, but I guess cities and landscapes would be the ones, as sports are more a winter/summer thing. But all of them are important to me.

Thank you for the advice anyway ;) .

[JonS]

I know the thread is about which DIGITAL one should get, but for your landscapes, have you considered a medium format panoramic that you could have dedicated to that purpose? That could save you a few duckets in the long run...And you wouldn't burn up your pano camera on sports.

[Grumbledook]

az its not the shipping charges that you need to worry about from america; it is the import tax charges

in the UK its not worth my importing from america due to this, customs not only charge me for import tax but there is usually a stupid £25 admin fee to pay as well

I don't know if its the same situation where you are but I would certainly check before you buy

[a/z]

I know the thread is about which DIGITAL one should get, but for your landscapes, have you considered a medium format panoramic that you could have dedicated to that purpose? That could save you a few duckets in the long run...And you wouldn't burn up your pano camera on sports.

Nope, I´d not thought about that possibility, but the truth is that the idea doesn´t seduce me much... I prefer one good digital camera :p .


az its not the shipping charges that you need to worry about from america; it is the import tax charges

in the UK its not worth my importing from america due to this, customs not only charge me for import tax but there is usually a stupid £25 admin fee to pay as well

I don't know if its the same situation where you are but I would certainly check before you buy

Yeah, I´ve been looking about that and yes, here´s pretty much the same. In fact, right now I´m having some problems with a pair of NFL jerseys I ordered from the official NFL shop just a few days ago for the same reason :mad: , so the "importing from america" thing is dismissed...

Well, tomorrow I´ll go to see the Nikon d300 to an FNAC, where, although it´s a bit more expensive than buying from the internet, they let me pay for it in instalments without adding any commissions. If everything goes alright and I don´t change my mind, maybe I can be the owner of a new camera in a pair of weeks... :D

[JonS]

Another issue to think about when buying, is that Nikon is *very* picky about service work on a unit from another market.

For example, I bought a Nikon in Canada a few years ago, needed service within the warrantee period, and Nikon USA wouldn't touch it.

I had to send it to a friend in Canada, who then sent it to Nikon Canada, who then, interestingly enough, sent it to the main service center in the states. Grr. Then back through the pipeline in reverse.

Canon apparently doesn't have that stickiness.

That said, I have no idea how it works to purchase a US market Nikon and try to have it serviced elsewhere. :shrug:

[a/z]

Another issue to think about when buying, is that Nikon is *very* picky about service work on a unit from another market.

For example, I bought a Nikon in Canada a few years ago, needed service within the warrantee period, and Nikon USA wouldn't touch it.

I had to send it to a friend in Canada, who then sent it to Nikon Canada, who then, interestingly enough, sent it to the main service center in the states. Grr. Then back through the pipeline in reverse.

Canon apparently doesn't have that stickiness.

That said, I have no idea how it works to purchase a US market Nikon and try to have it serviced elsewhere. :shrug:

No no, finally I´ll buy the camera here. As I said, the different taxes make the price rise too much.

[DanielJH75]

Like others have mentioned, the lenses are the most important thing, as they'll outlast the camera. This is where brand choice is important: for the most part lenses are not interchangable between brands, so when you buy an SLR you are really choosing the brand your next two or three cameras, assuming you'll want to transfer your expensive lens collection to the next camera.

Considering that I recommend looking for a used SLR with a nice collection of lenses on ebay. The best bang for your buck is a nikon d70 bundled with a good wide-zoom lens like the tamron 28-300 (the perfect all purpose lens IMO). I bought that exact package on ebay a while back for $450, the lens alone cost $300, so that's a steal. Just make sure the camera doesn't have too many exposures, less then 4k.

If the D70 isn't quite up to your standards look for a used D200 or D80.

In addition to the 28-300 lens, I'd recommend a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 lens for those indoor/low light pics.

Good luck!

[a/z]

Like others have mentioned, the lenses are the most important thing, as they'll outlast the camera. This is where brand choice is important: for the most part lenses are not interchangable between brands, so when you buy an SLR you are really choosing the brand your next two or three cameras, assuming you'll want to transfer your expensive lens collection to the next camera.

Considering that I recommend looking for a used SLR with a nice collection of lenses on ebay. The best bang for your buck is a nikon d70 bundled with a good wide-zoom lens like the tamron 28-300 (the perfect all purpose lens IMO). I bought that exact package on ebay a while back for $450, the lens alone cost $300, so that's a steal. Just make sure the camera doesn't have too many exposures, less then 4k.

If the D70 isn't quite up to your standards look for a used D200 or D80.

In addition to the 28-300 lens, I'd recommend a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 lens for those indoor/low light pics.

Good luck!

Right now I´ve got these three lenses: Tamron SP 70-210 f/3.5 19AH (i love it!), a 49mm f/1.7 and a Tamron 28mm f/2.5, and to my surprise (and what a good surprise!), I´ve discovered that they will fit on a modern Nikon DSLR. I was thinking of retiring them, but if this is true, I think I can keep going with these lenses for some time. I know they´re manual, but that´s not a problem to me (and I even think that it's possible to meter with d200 and d300 models).

So that´s why I´ve thought of getting a better camera body, as I´d not need to buy any lenses along with it, and I´d just renovate my gear with time.

Do you guys think it´s a good idea?

[JonS]

This may prove to be a challenge. Just because "they'll fit" doesn't necessarily mean that "they'll work."

My mindset is, ok, you've got some glass to get going off the start, that's a good thing.

- BUT -

You're not going to be able to realize all the nifty features of your camera without semi-equivalently modern glass to go with it.

Am I saying "if it's not new, it's no good?" NOT AT ALL.

But I think you'll be disappointed with that SP lens (what I assume is your main sports lens) on a D-anything if you're trying to get any meaningful volume of work done.

If you're not (trying to get a meaningful volume of work done), then why bother going digital?

Just my 2cc's...

[a/z]

Well, it´s done. I´m now the proud owner of a Nikon D300 (along with a Nikkor 18-200 VR lens).

Right now I´m struggling with the 400 page instructions booklet (it´s kind of weird seeing how before I used to fight with my Pentax P30 to take the pictures I wanted, and now I´m fighting trying to not let the camera take the pictures she wants (I suppose that´s what comes with the digital and automatic age... And yes, the camera has earned a "she" denomination :D. It´s just her personality hahaha), but I can say that this camera is amazing. I just want to learn how it works, go outside and start shooting.

Just wanted to thank everyone here for their help. Thank you very much.

I´ll post some pics as soon as I get something decent to show :D.

a/z

[JonS]

Excellent! :grin:

[ArtIsZen]

I went in to the camera store looking to buy a A SLR camera, I wanted a high iso and a fast lens, for low light shooting the best I came up with, that was a semi reasonable price was the canon 40d, then I figured I would get the canon efs 17 to 55mm f2.8 lens, then I found out it was going to cost over $2500 plus taxes etc.
So I purchased the new fujifilm SF100fs camera, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Fujifilm/fujifilm_S100FS.asp at a third of the price. I have shot about 800 pics over the last few days,a very busy weekend with numerous family events. I am mostly happy with the camera.The picture quality is very good. There are compromises over spending three times more. With a little more time getting used to the camera I am sure I will be happy with it. It is about my 7th digital camera going back 1o years or so.
It is important to remember buying a better camera will not make you a better photographer. It will not teach you how to compose better, it will not teach you how to light a scene better. Spend less money on the hardware and spend the difference going to lessons and seminars.
A link to a site that I have learned from.
http://www.kenrockwell.com

[Brashen]

Need some advice. I'm a total noob when it comes to photography but I need one for my digital paintings. I'm a concept artist and I use a lot of references. So I need something that will get me by but I don't want something crappy that will break down quickly. Also I'm prepared to invest some time into reading about this stuff so any beginner guides would be most appreciated. Thanks!!

[KayleL]

I am just going to get my first DSLR, and I am going cheap. I planning to get the Nikon D40, and have consider getting higher end models such as the D60. From my research, I like Nikon's philosophy much more. Nikon have proved that they know Megapixels don't matter as much, especially when you look at the full-frame cameras. It's maybe only 12.1 Megapixels (You can get compacts with higher MP) and Canon's have 21 megapixels, but it's amazing in lowlight.

[Grumbledook]

the lenses are more important the body anyway tbh

[Jabo]

Is it only me or doesn't page 2 of this thread display even it it should be there?

Well, anyway… I posted a question about videocameras in this forum before but figured it's a field I don't wanna break into right now and really not if there's a lot of money involved. So, the money that was supposed to go into a camcorder, I decided it's time to get a new DSLR instead.

I bought a Nikon D70 back in early 2004 and used to photograph a lot. It was, after all, the first DSLR besides Canon's Digital Rebel to hit the "prosumer"/consumer market. The camera was with me in some really cold nights in winter landscapes, as well as in sweating heat on holiday trips.

Now I'm studying and I really feel the old thing has had it's share. Things that bug me, compared to newer models:

- tiny 1,8" low-resolution LCD
- very rough white balance choices (no Kelvin)
- bad ISO-conditions
- small and rather dark viewfinder
- only 5 focus fields
- and last but not least, a 6 MP sensor

So at first I was gonna carry over my dad's Fujifilm S5 Pro, which is a very nice camera indeed, but very specific concerning it's field of application. It's based on the Nikon D200 and has extra sensor subpixels used for Hight Dynamic Range. This is useful in portrait photography (wedding photography, especially), both of which I don't really do. My problem with this camera is that all pictures are washed out and really, really soft. No matter how much I focus and postprocess, I can't get the thing to achieve acceptable sharpness.

So, the second choice was to go for the new Nikon D90. It's probably the grand-grand-daughter of my D70 (which was followed by D70s and later D80). It's nicely priced and has obviously got a lot of improvements over the years. The problem here is that there are too many features added that actually position it LOWER than it's predecessors. Plastic body, SD-card storage, HD MOVIES (wtf?). I feel if I bought this camera, I would spend a lot of money on not moving forward.

Alright, so the next choice, and actually a little higher than my budget (and conscience) provides: Nikon D300. It costs about one and a half times what the D90 costs, but it sure is the best camera I could get for my money. It removes useless features that were only added to sell units and talks very straight. From all choices, this camera addresses my complaints with the old D70 most. And having used the S5 Pro for some days now, I know that it will fit my hands perfectly (the S5 Pro is essentially a D200).

I have some Nikon lenses in my bag already, so the best price/performance choice, the Canon 40D/50D will not be in the run. I would have loved to have a camera like this in Nikon's lineup, as a lot of my folks at the uni use it and I love it's image quality. But as it seems, the D90 is a little too low and the D300 is a little above the 40D. A lot of reviews compare the 40D with either the D90 or the D300, no one could decide which one would be a competitor to Canon's 40D.

My lenses:

AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm 1:3.5-4.5G ED DX (came with my D70, a pretty good lens actually)
AF Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 D (my favourite lens, I love this little guy)
Micro-Nikkor 105mm 1:2.8 (sharpest lens I own, really old metal, superb images)
SIGMA DC 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3 D (well, the only tele I have, not so good, really dark, but I rarely use tele anyway)
Lensbaby 2.0 (Well… fun times)

What I do:
Lots of architecture and landscapes, lots of still life, some portrait (really rare), little to no action or street photography, but I want to do more street.

Anyone with either of the desired cameras here who could give me some input to make my decision easier? I'm all for useful investments, this thing will keep me awake a lot of nights, that's for sure.

Greets,
Jannis

EDIT: Sorry for the long read. Have to learn to make it short.