Thread: Assistance/advice on SLR selection.

Perhaps I should get the eos 1000d?? It comes with twim lens kit for $900 at a large shop at the moment? Still seems fairly much the same as the 400d, but with lenses

The Canon EOS 450D is the latest version of the one you are referring to. There is a lower quality build and cheaper priced EOS 1000 but for the difference in price the 450D is the better buy. Nikon has the D60 in that price range. There is also Sony, Olympus and Pentax to consider.

The Nikon would be my pick as I hate the ergonomics of the Canon. That's an individual thing so all I'm really saying s go with what feels the most comfortable. The Canon also must use the flash for all low light focusing and metering (even if it doesn't fire it pulses).

You're best off putting money in to good lenses to start with though some of the kit lenses now are starting to be reasonable and less in to the camera body.

Have you looked at Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ for information?

Ill go make a coffee and look at that link.

Thanks for some starting info! Its a bit daunting really.

Ill go and have a feel and play with cameras once all the Chritmas/new years madness has gone.

I dont need a full blown pro style camera, as Im not that interested! I just want a really good camera for recreational use.

Ill have a look at the Nikon too.

Cheers!

you should still get a good A3 out of a 10.1.......

mega pixels aren't everything, its what you do with them that counts......and how often do you think your going to be making A3 prints for it to really matter that much.

I would be inclinding to go to a camera shop and have feel of the others before making your decision on just likeing your mates..
DSLR's are exxy so you want to make the first decision the right one.

and as derek said save up money for a decent lense....I went around the houses before I brought a decent one and really wish I hadn't then I wouldn't of wausted any money

Originally Posted by dullbird

how often do you think your going to be making A3 prints for it to really matter that much.

I would be inclinding to go to a camera shop and have feel of the others before making your decision on just likeing your mates..

Its not that I will be making lots of A3 prints. It would be nice to have the choice to do so if I wish.

The reason I said I liked my mates was, it has about all the things in a camera I am looking for. Its in the right price range, and was comfortable to use.

It is only a template, so I can say "this is what I like. What else is there like it for about the same money?"


Anyway, I went and has a look at a few cameras today, whilst my gf is at work. I Found the Nikon D80 was a bit less arkward to hold, but seemed almost too big for my hand over the Canon.

The other cameras I looked at were the Sony Alpha a350, and the Canon 450d.

The Sony has a really cool adjustable lcd screen, which, I imagine, could become quite popular. It pops out, and can be tilted up or down, for low or high shots. The screen itself seemed not bright enough, and I had trouble seeing it in the stores lights. And 2.5 fps seems a bit slow.

The only downfall of the Nikon d80 that I saw was there is no 'live view'. If it had live view, I would be more inclined to consider it.

The 450d's problem, is no Macro setting. You have to get a seperate lense to do that. Its 3.5 fps is pretty sweet too. I love motor racing, mountain biking, and anything that goes fast enough to be a danger to your health, so that speed would be quite nice. I know there are faster fps cameras out there, but they cost a fair bit more.

ISO rating on the Canon is up to 1600, but the other 2 are up to 3200.
All have 1/4000 - 30 sec shutter speeds.

Most other stuff is fairly equal. It is early days in camera hunting yet, but at least Im getting a feel for what is out there, and getting to see and feel the differance in cameras.

-Joel-

They say that the Canon 450d and its predecessors were made with a small body to appeal to 50% of the potential market, women. I use mine with a battery case (looks like and old motor drive) that goes under the camera, it gives me a bit bigger surface area to grip onto plus I have yet to run the batteries flat.

I suspect that you maybe better off looking at some of the high end single lense cameras with a good amount of optical zoom. The SLR provides the advantage of been able to offer you the choice of using the best lense for the shot that you are taking and unless you are going to buy a few lenses I think that it is a waste to buy one. The same as I think it is a waste to buy the lenses for the reduced size detector arrays.

ikon D80 is now supersede by the D90 so will be old stock. Good camera basically equivalent to somewhere between the EOS 400D & 30D Canons.

The build quality of the D80/D90 is much heavier than the 450D the only comparible Nikon is the D60 in that range.

The reason for no "Live View" on the D80 is its age. The D90 has this but expect to pay $1700+ with a lens kit.

No DSLR is going to have a Macro setting. It's just not an option unless you get a "macro" capable lens, as its a function of the ability of the lens. If you want that kind of functionality stick with something like Canon's G10.

As for megapixels. anything above 10mp is fine the key thing you are actually looking for is sensor size for picture quality. Consider the size of a P&S compact's sensor is often smaller than most people's little finger nail and a DSLR is at least 22 x 15 mm. There are some good articles about this on the web. Have a look at the spec's of the Nikon D2H and then consider there are still top end pro's shooting with this camera and its only 4mp. Megapixels are over rated.

For the money you want to spend the Cannon DSLR is the best option, if you want something better go a Nikon. As some of the others have said you may be better off with a single lens camera which also take excellent photo's.

More megapixels are better but are wasted if you have a crappy lens. I have a 4 megapixel Cannon point and shoot camera with a Carl Zeus lens that takes photo's as good as some 10 meg camera's.

The thing to remember is that digital camera's don't hold there value and the main reason for that is that they are still evolving so your getting new features and more megapixels with each new model which forces the value down on the older models. My 4 meg Cannon cost me $1500 4 or 5 years ago, I would be lucky to get $100 for it now.

So unless you are going to do a lot of phopoghaphy work go the single lens camera with all the features. Another thing to remember is that 95 percent of you photo's will never be printed and less than 1 percent will ever be enlarged.

Good luck
Jeff