Complete photography virgin seeks advice..

S

snakesandcats

Suspended / Banned
Messages
17
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys.

As you'll notice, this is my first post.

I may enrage a few of you 'cause i havn't done as much research as you'd have liked, but it's a pretty confusing world to me.

I've just graduated, and I've recently come into a wee bit of money, and I've always wanted a decent camera. I'm travelling this summer, and moving to Australia at the start of next year, so I'll need something to capture my experiences.

Now, I'm really just unsure as to what kind to buy. I'd always imagined SLRs as setting the benchmark for photo quality etc, and I always planned on getting one when I could afford it.

I've been made aware of digital superzooms such as the panasonic dmc fz38, and they look pretty sound, and I used to own a cheaper Fuji superzoom that I liked, but just didn't have that edge when compared to shots by SLRs.

Any advice you guys could offer would be greatly appreciated.


Oh also, I'd be up for buying second hand. I was referred to this site by a photographer friend who said he could purchase for me as i have such a tiny post count, but he now lives in Zimbabwe, and is impossible to contact for advice.

So yeah- fire away

Cheers

Dave
 
Hiya Dave - have a quick look through this section and the main talk-photography section - I think there's about three threads running currently with the info you're after - saves me or someone else writing it all again for you...
 
When asking for camera/lens advice with DSLRs its always best to state what photography you want to do.. Different cameras and certainly different lenses for different jobs... A camera body perfect for landscapes might be little use for sports as an example
 
Giving us an idea of your budget would be a good starting point.

As for super-zooms, they are in the same league as compacts when it comes to image quality.

You really have two options for SLR image quality

A Digital SLR, EOS 500D , Nikon D5000 Etc

or
A GF1 type camera, with an SLR (ish) sized sensor, which offers a significant step up from a compact camera in a more compact package than an SLR system. A few users on here use these and are very happy with the results.
GF1 Link
 
Thanks for the advice. I'm in the process of researching this all.

As for the type of photography, basically i want to take nice pictures of landscapes, things and people. Not anything really specific.

my budget is probably going to be 400gbp. which is partly why i'm intimidated by the SLR world, as 400 would only get me an entry level one, although I'm willing to go second hand.

whereas 400 in the superzoom world will go a long way, it seems.
 
snakesandcats said:
whereas 400 in the superzoom world will go a long way, it seems.
Click to expand...

don't be too tempted by these huge super zoom ratios: i had an a canon powershot sx10 - sporting a 20x zoom lens and costing about 400 quid. sounds good on paper. in the real world, to fit a lens of that range into such a small body means there are a few compromises to be made - chromic aberration at the wide end and softness at the long end. even in the middle, the sweet spot wasn't so sweet.

the lens was also pretty slow at it's longest length - f5.6. you will seriously notice the difference between an slr and a superzoom in terms of image quality.

it's even noticeable in small prints - there is a lot more contrast and detail captured by an aps-c sized sensor. if image quality is important to you then i would steer away from superzooms.

i can't comment on cameras like the gf1. from reviews and sample images i've seen the image quality isn't fantastic, but that could have been down to processing or poor exposure.

if you're travelling you probably don't want anything too heavy - maybe a canon 450d, 500d or 550d would be something to look at?

the kit lens which comes with these cameras is pretty rubbish though and not of fantastic build quality - if you could stretch to it, you might want to look at the ef-s 17-55mm f2.8 or maybe the ef 70-200 f4 (might be a bit heavy though) second hand?
 
I see. So you would reccomend holding out for a decent body, and pair it with a decent lens, rather than buying a kit? I'll need to act fast as I fly to moscow on the 18th!

Thanks again
 
cuthbert has hit the nail on the head with regards to superzoom bridge cameras - waste of money imo and only attract people because they are basically a 'faux SLR' in that they look like them and that's it really. I had a Panasonic FZ 20 and the barrel distortion was so bad at the wide end you could easily think it was a fisheye lens - and I'm not kidding either.
 
personally, yes.

some people might say that the kit lens, the 18-55 (which comes with most consumer canon bodies) is ok. i think it's pretty dissapointing and doesn't have enough resolving power to do justice to the high megapixel sensors found in the 500/550d. it's ok to get you started, but it's just a little too soft and slow for me.

it's a difficult call. it comes down to how much money you want/can spend and how important these photographs are to you.

if you just want to capture memories, maybe cheap and cheerful is the way forward. if you have a passion for photography and want to expand and test your own creativity, i would spend that bit extra and get the good lens.

like i said, there are lots of lens options covering what you want to do, no single lens will do it all perfectly and those i listed earler really complement each other rather than be a straight choice - it depends on what you want photograph, how much you are prepared to carry about and how much you want to spend (although those two lenses aren't that much different in price).
 
Ok. I think i've decided on an SLR in that case.

I have a Geology job on the horison in australia, so I figure I'll be able to afford lenses to compare to my salary when the time comes.

My friend suggested the cheapest of the Nikons, the D40. Would it be wise to purchase a D40 body and a slightly better than standard lens..?
 
snakesandcats said:
Ok. I think i've decided on an SLR in that case.

I have a Geology job on the horison in australia, so I figure I'll be able to afford lenses to compare to my salary when the time comes.

My friend suggested the cheapest of the Nikons, the D40. Would it be wise to purchase a D40 body and a slightly better than standard lens..?
Click to expand...

Thing is with the D40, the lens selection will be limited. Basically, Nikon make two types of autofocus lenses: AF and AF-S. The AF lenses are cheaper (generally), but the focus motor needs to be in the body of the camera. The AF-S lenses are more expensive, and the focus motor is found inside the lens. Due to the D40 being so compact, there is no motor in the camera, so the only lenses that will autofocus with it are the AF-S ones. So just a word of warning, before buying any AF lenses, just remember you will have to manual focus! Its a great camera though ;)
 
i don't really know nikon kit that well, i'm sure one of the other members of the forum will step in to help.

but if you're asking, is it better to get a slightly older, cheaper camera body and put the money towards a better lens - yes - absolutely - i wish i had read this forum when i purchased my first slr, i would have saved myself a few quid!
 
Personally, I would say the kit lens which comes with D40/D60/D3000 (I'm a Nikon fan) would be absolutely fine for your needs. It will do wide-angle shots a treat and has a decent level of zoom for subjects in medium range. It has a fast auto-focus built in so you don't need to worry about manual focus.

If you are planning on getting pretty serious about your photography then it's worth looking into lenses in more detail, but there's no need to get too into what can seem like an endless pit of information and choices when all of your needs are covered by the kit lens (it's the kit lens for a reason!).

Also, as an aside for everyone else, a Canon superzoom with CHDK installed offers a lot of very interesting options you won't find so cheaply elsewhere.
 
Canon 18-55mm is isnt so bad, i think for a beginner who's going to take photos of quite a variety, cities, landscapes, objects, people etc it will be fine and you will get some very decent photos with it, build quality isnt great but it's very light for travelling and as long as your careful you shouldn't have any accidents with your camera anyway.

www.camerapricebuster.co.uk is very handy

Canon EOS 450D Body £432.00
Canon EOS 450D + 18-55mm IS Lens £499.00
Canon EOS 500D £508.00
Canon EOS 500D Lens Kit (EF-S 18-55 IS) £574.90
Canon EOS 500D Lens Kit 2 (EF-S 18-200 IS) £899.00
Canon EOS 550D Body £619.99
Canon EOS 550D Lens Kit (EF-S 18-55mm IS) £679.00

Possibly a bit over budget.
 
I think I've decided on the Nikon d3000.

Seems of good quality, and really easy to use. I'll go buy one tomorrow unless someone comes up with a better idea for the same price :P

Thanks so much guys. this morning I was going to buy a superzoom.
 
snakesandcats said:
I think I've decided on the Nikon d3000.

Seems of good quality, and really easy to use. I'll go buy one tomorrow unless someone comes up with a better idea for the same price :P

Thanks so much guys. this morning I was going to buy a superzoom.
Click to expand...

Good on you, it will not disappoint!
 
Great choice. I recommended the same camera to a first-time DSLRer only a few weeks ago :)
 
snakesandcats said:
I think I've decided on the Nikon d3000...
Click to expand...

have you really decided on this one .?... could you afford to move up to a D5000 ....about £480 at Jessops

this will be my next step up from my D40

there is a Nikon reviewer named Ken Rockwell - love him or hate him ! :D

but "this" is worth a read about the D5000
 
BTW the Nikon 18-55 AF-S lens is excellent
and the "VR" version is a bonus at slow shutter speeds

dont worry too much about having to buy an AF-S model if you need another lens
after all - how MANY are you going to buy ?

just look for a mint 55-200 "VR" AF-S here
 
oh god, you've sown the seeds of doubt :P

I probably could just afford the jump, but I'd feel bad for spending that much of my graduation money on a camera.

Don't you think the D3000 will do everything I'll need it to?

keeping in mind that this is an upgrade from a cheap fuji superzoom :razz:
 
snakesandcats said:
oh god, you've sown the seeds of doubt :P
I probably could just afford the jump, but I'd feel bad for spending that much of my graduation money on a camera.
Don't you think the D3000 will do everything I'll need it to?
keeping in mind that this is an upgrade from a cheap fuji superzoom :razz:
Click to expand...

hmmmm ... I dont really like saying this - as you may have already decided - and many people dont agree with KR - and many people may have a D3000
but.......KR reckons the D3000 is ...well..read the review.."here"

I used KR reviews advice in the beginning cos i knew zip - tried to glean facts out of his reviews and I chose the D40..an excellent starter and quite easy to sell when you move up

find one in the "For Sale"
I later sold the kit 18-55 AF-S GII DX and bought a used Sigma 17-70mm f2.8 - again from here - lovely lens for landscapes, which I prefer to do

I recently sold my 55-200 "VR" cos it just wasn't being used - which is a good lesson - dont buy stuff till you see the need

ps - having said that - get a good tripod ............:thumbs:
 
I seriously would recommend squezzing just a bit harder and getting the D5000. The way I look at it...

The Nikon D40 have a brilliant sensor, but the 40x wasn't quite as good. the D60 was the same, as is the current D3000. They just don't quite have it, whereas the D5000 has the same sensor as the D90, and D300/s and is a stunning unit. High ISO performance is excellent. Its not just me that believes this, a lot of others do as well, and I have proved it with my uncles D40X vs the old D50.

You won't regret it. :)
 
snakesandcats said:
Ah, jeez.

Does anyone want to sell me a D5000? .............=/
Click to expand...

:D...just bide your time and scan the "Sale" thread every day
a little tip for a newcomer -- ask to see a photo and how many shutter counts - If you're happy = grab it

there's also quite a few good on-line shops - Jessops £480 interest free, Clifton Cameras @£509

eBay is ok if you know what to watch out for - some suppliers are off-shore and Nikon warranty does not apply - for your first camera I would stick with a UK supplier with Nikon warranty
 
I really think the D3000 is a perfect first DSLR. That, or the D60 or D40, all pretty similar with the same great kit lens. Honestly, it will do everything you need. If you look at the overwhelming majority of reviews, they have very little negative comments to make about any of the entry-level Nikons.

Looking at the review which rates the D3000 poorly, all of the issues he raises should not affect you, apart from some rare colour anomalies which you probably wouldn't even notice.

Sure, the D5000 is a better camera, but it's a pretty steep step up and officially outside of your budget even second-hand (unless you see a really good deal!).

My advice: don't be intimidated by the choices, and stick with the "standard" entry-level DSLRs.
 
Hi Dave,

As has been said above, buy the D5000 if you can. It is not that the D3000 is a bad camera... quite the opposite!

Speaking from personal experience, you should buy the best camera you can afford and the the former is the better of the two. You will soon find limitations in the D3000 and will want to upgrade, which will mean spending more money.

Good luck with your decision!
 
I agree with above poster.....get the D5000. It has more to offer than the D3000 and is the sort of camera you can grow into rather than one like the D3000 which you will grow out of.

Neil
 
pinktrainers said:
I really think the D3000 is a perfect first DSLR. That, or the D60 or D40, all pretty similar with the same great kit lens. ........................
Click to expand...

Snakesandcats ...... should you be unwilling at this moment to get the D5000 - and financially there is lots needed when you start
a tripod
possibly a "Protector" filter for the lens
4GB SDHC card
camera bag etc etc
Field Guide Manual from Amazon - cos the Nikon manual is rubbish...:D

my reason for NOT recommending the D3000 is that you may upgrade later
i suggest the D40....great as a starter and LOTS easier to sell than the D3000 when/if you do upgrade
 
I'd agree with all John says apart from the tripod - I have two of the damn things and almost never use them - in 35 years of photography, they've just sat and gathered dust.
 
Arkady said:
I'd agree with all John says apart from the tripod - I have two of the damn things and almost never use them - in 35 years of photography, they've just sat and gathered dust.
Click to expand...

youth is on your side ............:lol:

my hands shake too much for slow exposures !

<<<<<< avatar is 60 years ago
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top