Buying my first DSLR - need advice!

L

Lankisher

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8
Edit My Images
No
Firstly, I apologise if there's already a thread relevant enough for me to post this in, I just didn't fancy sifting through pages of topics. ;)

Right...I'm currently looking for an entry-level DSLR so I can start up my own portfolio and hopefully make a bit of a career out of this hobby. I've narrowed it down to three cameras, but as an amateur, I'm not completely sure what to look for, hence my being here. I'm looking to spend around £500 maximum and I'd like a twin lens kit if possible. Here's a little run-down of info I've gathered thus far on the cameras I've shortlisted. Please feel free to correct me, suggest alternatives or anything else you want to add. :)

Canon EOS 1000D with twin lens kit(£479.89 from Argos, but knock 10% off that due to the discount I can receive).

PROS:

Good value
Quality pictures
Live view feature
Relatively cheap to buy add-ons

CONS:

The long range zoom lens (75mm-300mm) has terrible reviews
It looks so much more basic than the 450D
Generally it looks a bit boring (I know this isn't hugely important, but you wanna be getting a nice-looking product when you spend over £400).

Sony Alpha A200 with twin lens kit (£429.99 from Argos. Again, I'd be able to get 10% off that).

PROS:

Looks lovely
Some nice features
The lenses have MUCH better reviews than the Canon do
It's surprisingly cheap

CONS:

No live view feature
It's a Sony (to me that screams "we know very little about cameras and more about televisions and stereos", although I could be very wrong)
Add-ons are a lot more expensive than Canon


Olympus E420 with twin lens kit Most places online have this priced at around £350-£400.

PROS:

It's Olympus - haven't they always made good cameras? :|
It looks nice
Apparently it's the worlds smallest/lightest DSLR
It has live view

CONS:

Expensive to buy add-ons, as with the Sony
To be honest, the price puts me off - there's something not quite right about that
LCD display looks a little more complicated and less-pretty than the above two cameras

So...am I even on the right page? Have I totally missed the point? Any suggestions would be very much appreciated - thank you. :)
 
what do you plan to shoot?

do you really need a twin lens kit? I done this route and dont use the long range as its a bit pants tbh.

If I had a choice again I would go for body only and pay more for a decent lens.

The thing is you will probably get hooked like a lot of us, and I know people who regret the 'budget' choice as it costs them more because they have upgraded bits within months.

I would look second hand tbh, get much more for you money, with you budget possibly the 450D and a nice lens for your money. That keeps it open to cheap/more accessories over the sony and also a bump up over your original canon choice.
 
Go to the shops and try them. different bodies feel different due to layout camera size and your hand size.

Buy the one that fells most intuitive to hold and fits your budget.

Do not use live view as a reaon for buying unless you are going to take macro photography.

SLRs are meant to be used primarily through the viewfinder, not like a compact.

Not quite sure what you mean by the lcd being less pretty on one model. it's a black rectangle.


Oh and welcome to TP:)
 
This'll sound a bit vague, but I like to shoot anything that interests me. I've done some event photography in Jamaica and enjoyed it, so photographing people is probably my main focus, but I like to picture outdoor stuff too...wildlife, landscapes, etc. I guess the main reason I want a twin lens kit is to capture the more long-range stuff if I'm unable to reach it physically with the basic lens.

So you'd say the 450D is FAR superior to the 1000D? Oh yeah, and why do they name stuff in that way? Surely the 1000D is 550 better than the 450, no? ;) :lol:

The main reason I'd prefer to buy new is because with second-hand stuff you're limited in who you can go to, and I'd prefer a 12 month guarantee to a 6 month one. Ebay and places like that are a bit dodgy, in my opinion. If I had a problem with the camera I wouldn't be able to contact the seller and ask questions. Then again, I guess it's the same if I bought it from Argos, since they know f-all about cameras.
 
PsiFox said:
Go to the shops and try them. different bosies feel different due to layout camera size and your hand size.

Buy the one that fells most intuitive to hold and fits your budget.

Do not use live view as a reaon for buying unless you are going to take macro photography.

SLRs are meant to be used primarily through the viewfinder, not like a compact.

Not quite sure what you mean by the lcd being less pretty on one model. it's a black rectangle.


Oh and welcome to TP:)
Click to expand...

Yup live view is pretty usless other than for macro using a tripod basically, which it is very handy for.
 
PsiFox said:
Go to the shops and try them. different bosies feel different due to layout camera size and your hand size.

Buy the one that fells most intuitive to hold and fits your budget.

Do not use live view as a reaon for buying unless you are going to take macro photography.

SLRs are meant to be used primarily through the viewfinder, not like a compact.

Not quite sure what you mean by the lcd being less pretty on one model. it's a black rectangle.


Oh and welcome to TP:)
Click to expand...

Okay, firstly I don't even know what "macro photography" is, so you can see I'm very much the amateur. I just thought 'live view' would be standard on any camera, to be honest. And what I meant by the display was what it looked like when it was switched on, not how it looks switched off. The Olympus has a weird-looking display to me, whereas the Sony has hints and tips and other 'beginner' stuff on the display settings - I liked that.

And thanks. :) I hope I can learn something here. :)
 
Lankisher said:
This'll sound a bit vague, but I like to shoot anything that interests me. I've done some event photography in Jamaica and enjoyed it, so photographing people is probably my main focus, but I like to picture outdoor stuff too...wildlife, landscapes, etc. I guess the main reason I want a twin lens kit is to capture the more long-range stuff if I'm unable to reach it physically with the basic lens.

So you'd say the 450D is FAR superior to the 1000D? Oh yeah, and why do they name stuff in that way? Surely the 1000D is 550 better than the 450, no? ;) :lol:

The main reason I'd prefer to buy new is because with second-hand stuff you're limited in who you can go to, and I'd prefer a 12 month guarantee to a 6 month one. Ebay and places like that are a bit dodgy, in my opinion. If I had a problem with the camera I wouldn't be able to contact the seller and ask questions. Then again, I guess it's the same if I bought it from Argos, since they know f-all about cameras.
Click to expand...

you get some good deals on here in the classified section, some really good ones!

you can get a tamron 70-300mm for the canon around 150 new and 50-80 second hand, its an ok lens, but it has its moments when it doesnt shoot well etc depending on conditions. But its cheap enough for you to get your pictures without wasting much if you didnt like it.
 
Lankisher said:
Okay, firstly I don't even know what "macro photography" is, so you can see I'm very much the amateur. I just thought 'live view' would be standard on any camera, to be honest. And what I meant by the display was what it looked like when it was switched on, not how it looks switched off. The Olympus has a weird-looking display to me, whereas the Sony has hints and tips and other 'beginner' stuff on the display settings - I liked that.

And thanks. :) I hope I can learn something here. :)
Click to expand...

I wouldnt base your choice on the camera coming with beginner stuff on the display, you will soon outgrow that, especially with all the advice you would receive on here :thumbs:

and macro is basically pictures shot reallllyyy close up!
 
Was the info I gathered about parts/add-ons for Nikon/Olympus/Sony correct, though? Am I better off with a Canon if I'm just starting out?

Based on reviews, I'm more inclined to go with the Sony, but I feel like I'd be making a mistake doing that...somehow. Not sure why. :|
 
Lankisher said:
Was the info I gathered about parts/add-ons for Nikon/Olympus/Sony correct, though? Am I better off with a Canon if I'm just starting out?

Based on reviews, I'm more inclined to go with the Sony, but I feel like I'd be making a mistake doing that...somehow. Not sure why. :|
Click to expand...

Im not up with the sony stuff....BUT some of my mates have sony and find it alot harder to find accessories etc for their cameras.

A flash my mate needed he had to buy an extra bit just to get the right adapter to fit etc.

There are also less lens choice for sony. as far as I am aware anyway.

I would go with Canon over the names in your list.

I am sure a Nikon (evil :naughty:) user can pop some info on the models available in the range given.
 
One missing from the list: Nikon D5000...very good entry-level camera...
Bundles available with a standard zoom and short-telephoto zoom...
 
Lankisher said:
Hmmm...it's a minefield, this is. :S
Click to expand...

You gotta think how much this might develop, you say to make a bit of a career out of a hobby?

If so, I would definitely go with a Canon or Nikon, as the lenses and accessories etc just go on and on and are fairly reasonable priced.

what size sensor are in the sony and olympus you mentioned?
 
I would add to the 'pros' of the E-420 is that the kit lenses are really good (IQ and build quality) - you won't be wanting something better immediately. The build quality of the camera itself (my daugther/wife have the E-410) is really good, especially given it is the base model.

Accessories... Never had a problem. There are plenty of cheap batteries and cable releases on ebay. Flashes - there are a number of TTL third-party options - from about £65 upwards. I can't think of any other accessories you would want that are olympus-specific.

I'd also consider the E-600 - Curry's are doing these quite cheaply. You get the newer (12MP) sensor, in-body IS and a better AF system.

Andy
 
Ok the info I think you are referring to is simply info on settings the camera used when a picture was taken.

you do not have to display this and can simply review the image after shooting.

All the pertinent data on camera settings is visible through the viewfinder as you frame the image.

Look at all the models Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc all cameras can take good images, you make them great.

Macro photography is close up images. Very close.
 
Robbo said:
Im not up with the sony stuff....BUT some of my mates have sony and find it alot harder to find accessories etc for their cameras.

A flash my mate needed he had to buy an extra bit just to get the right adapter to fit etc.

There are also less lens choice for sony. as far as I am aware anyway.

I would go with Canon over the names in your list.

I am sure a Nikon (evil :naughty:) user can pop some info on the models available in the range given.
Click to expand...

its not hard to get sony accessories, its just some third party ones are compatible unless adapters are bought.

also you claim a mate couldnt get a flash unless he got an adapter? did he look at sony compatible ones, theres just as many as there are nikon and canon.

lens choice doesnt matter as most of the lenses out of the 60+ that are canon arent going to be all in you camera bag. most people only need 3 or 4 lenses.

i use sony and instead i got an a300, i dont know why your buying from argos considering your wasting alot of money, as the camera's you mention can be had for less than £350 with twin lens, especially the a200 with can be had twin lens for £300.
 
Robbo said:
You gotta think how much this might develop, you say to make a bit of a career out of a hobby?

If so, I would definitely go with a Canon or Nikon, as the lenses and accessories etc just go on and on and are fairly reasonable priced.

what size sensor are in the sony and olympus you mentioned?
Click to expand...


18.00 x 13.50 mm for the Olympus and 23.6 x 15.8mm on the Sony.
 
mastertrinity said:
i dont know why your buying from argos considering your wasting alot of money, as the camera's you mention can be had for less than £350 with twin lens, especially the a200 with can be had twin lens for £300.
Click to expand...

Purely because I work there and can get 10% off, and also when I've compared prices online they've come out as one of the cheapest, so it just made sense.
 
mastertrinity said:
its not hard to get sony accessories, its just some third party ones are compatible unless adapters are bought.

also you claim a mate couldnt get a flash unless he got an adapter? did he look at sony compatible ones, theres just as many as there are nikon and canon.

lens choice doesnt matter as most of the lenses out of the 60+ that are canon arent going to be all in you camera bag. most people only need 3 or 4 lenses.

i use sony and instead i got an a300, i dont know why your buying from argos considering your wasting alot of money, as the camera's you mention can be had for less than £350 with twin lens, especially the a200 with can be had twin lens for £300.
Click to expand...

:thumbs:

Exactly - there is a lot of Canon and Nikon options because they have been around with their mounts longer with a bigger market share. As long as you have options, I wouldn't worry that you don't have lots! There is a degree of duplication in the Canon/Nikon lineup because of their legacy designs (they've been around longer).

Olympus, having a ground-up approach with their DSLRs, have a very comprehensive lineup, complemented and duplicated (a bit) by Sigma. Personally I would stick with the Olympus glass. Their 'standard' (i.e. basic) glass isn't expensive and the IQ is very good. I don't see the point of having less good options from Tamron, Tokina as well... The pro and top-pro grade glass is the equal or better than the Canon/Nikon professional glass, so I wouldn't worry there either!

If you plan of going full-frame for portrait or landscape work, there are better options than the Oly. For the build quality, lens quality, built-in IS and compactness, I think they are hard to beat. The differences in the sensor size and noise characteristics are actually not that great - and not really visible until ISO 800 and above, and then only on heavy crops or enlargements. Check out my picasa gallery if you are unfamiliar with the output of Oly!

Andy
 
Robbo said:
Yup live view is pretty usless other than for macro using a tripod basically, which it is very handy for.
Click to expand...

Re-read what you wrote. :lol:

"Live view is useless other than macro using a tripod basically, which is it very hand for.
 
Carlm90 said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbo
Yup live view is pretty usless other than for macro using a tripod basically, which it is very handy for.

Re-read what you wrote.

"Live view is useless other than macro using a tripod basically, which is it very hand for.
Click to expand...

are you on about my poor grammer? lol

or contradicting my self? if this one that it still only has one use and thats only if you do macro work on a tripod, normally over 1:1 .... If you dont have a macro set up then its useless
 
Lankisher said:
It's a Sony (to me that screams "we know very little about cameras and more about televisions and stereos", although I could be very wrong)
Click to expand...

You are very wrong ;)

Sony bought the camera business from Minolta. Plenty of expertise there and no shortage of quality glass either if you decide to go beyond kit lenses. Not only do Sony make their own "G" range but Carl Zeiss do a range of autofocus lenses in A-mount (Zeiss also make lenses for Canikon, but manual only). Contrary to what some say, there is no shortage of second hand glass either since Minolta were making AF lenses that will fit since 1985, when they introduced the first autofocus SLR, before Canon or Nikon.

If you want to use a generic on camera flash you'll need a hotshoe adapter (£10 on ebay, also available from FITP who advertises here) which will also provide a sync port for off camera flash (the A200 doesn't have one). However there are plenty of Sony fit flashes from Sony and third parties.
 
Liveview is very much more useful on a camera with an articulating screen (e.g. Olympus E-3, E-30, E-600, E-620). Great for ground-level shots without lying in the mud and 'over the crowd' shots. It's also very useful for prefocus checking on fast lenses (e.g. where there might be a tangle of branches and you want to ensure you've locked on the right bit!)
 
onomatopoeia said:
You are very wrong ;)

Sony bought the camera business from Minolta. Plenty of expertise there and no shortage of quality glass either if you decide to go beyond kit lenses. Not only do Sony make their own "G" range but Carl Zeiss do a range of autofocus lenses in A-mount (Zeiss also make lenses for Canikon, but manual only). Contrary to what some say, there is no shortage of second hand glass either since Minolta were making AF lenses that will fit since 1985, when they introduced the first autofocus SLR, before Canon or Nikon.

If you want to use a generic on camera flash you'll need a hotshoe adapter (£10 on ebay, also available from FITP who advertises here) which will also provide a sync port for off camera flash (the A200 doesn't have one). However there are plenty of Sony fit flashes from Sony and third parties.
Click to expand...

Whereas there might be a lot of old Minolta A-mount glass, much of it is not that hot on DSLRs (either the resolution of the lens isn't up to it or the coatings are not ideal for digital). Some does work, don't get me wrong, a lot doesn't work so well and you are better off getting the newer designs.

Andy
 
AndyElliott said:
Liveview is very much more useful on a camera with an articulating screen (e.g. Olympus E-3, E-30, E-600, E-620). Great for ground-level shots without lying in the mud and 'over the crowd' shots. It's also very useful for prefocus checking on fast lenses (e.g. where there might be a tangle of branches and you want to ensure you've locked on the right bit!)
Click to expand...

Yes I found that on a Nikon P90 I had before my dslr....very handy.
 
I would personally go 2nd hand off this forum. Most of the members here treat their cameras with TLC so at least you know if it goes wrong its due to luck rather than abuse. For that price range you can get decent lenses too.

If you want to go with new, can I suggest just purchasing a camera with just the kit lens? If further down the line you feel limited by that lens then maybe purchase another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top