Which camera is the best?

Smokeyj

Smokeyj

Suspended / Banned
Messages
369
Name
Jackie
Edit My Images
Yes
I am in the process of purchasing my first camera! :D
I have narrowed it down to 4 and now I need some expert advice on which one to go for. :rules:

Nikon D3000 and comes with comes with an 18-55mm and a 55-200mm lens

Nikon D5000 and comes with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G lens and 55-200mm f/4-5.6 AF-S high-powered DX zoom lens

EOS 450D and comes with 18-55mm and a 75-300mm lenses.

EOS 1000D and comes with 18-55mm and a 75-300mm lenses.
 
Certainly out of the Nikon's I'd recommend the D5000 over the D3000.

Have you considered the D90 at all? Bit more expensive, but worth it.
 
Personally, I wouldn't worry about getting a 70+mm lens unless you are wanting to do wildlife. It's incredibly difficult to hold a relatively slow lens (which is what the kit lenses are) still at a long length and get a good photo.

Of the Canon options, I'd go for the 450D or even the 550D with a single wide angle kit lens. The 18-55 that comes with the 1000D is NOT as good as the 18-55 that comes with the 450/500/550D as the better lens has image stabilisation and slightly sharper.

Nikon - I have no idea ;)
 
I have not looked at the D90. I chose these 4 because they have the extra lenses with.
 
How about D90 + 18 - 105MM VR kit @ around £770.

Great camera and a great walkabout lens. Would certainly do you well until you get more obsessed :lol:
 
See above. Don't be seduced by the extra lens..... You don't need it unless you're going to be doing long range stuff. I have had my 450D a year and my 70-200 for 8 months. Looking at the pics I've taken I'm more than 60% with the 18-55, 30% with the 70-200 and 10% with the new 24-105. Given that I must have taken over half the pics with the 70-200 as "test" shots, the true image taking must be close to 75:25 in favour of the 18-55...

You're far better (unless you're a budding wildcat/bird photographer IMHO) getting the better camera over the package....
 
Flash In The Pan said:
They're all good, buy the one that feels "right" when you hold it :)
Click to expand...

Very good point, which I always seem to forget to mention :eek:

Call into the likes of Jessops and have a "feel" of the various camera's. Once you've decided, then go on the net and get a better deal.
 
arad85 said:
It's incredibly difficult to hold a relatively slow lens (which is what the kit lenses are) still at a long length and get a good photo.
Click to expand...

It think that is very misleading; it is quite easy to get good photos with a slow telephoto lens.
 
SamHH said:
It think that is very misleading; it is quite easy to get good photos with a slow telephoto lens.
Click to expand...
??? OK... show me a good handheld of something like a 450D with a 70-300 F4-5.6 at 300mm tracking a fast moving panning object with it in focus and nicely framed (not saying it totally can't be done, just that the good images will be few and far between). Really, you should see this in context. If what you are taking a picture of is still, you have good light, and you have IS, yes, you can get a picture at a long focal length.Anything other than this and I bet your hit rate is waaaay lower than 50%. I bet if you're taking photos of a bird in flight with the same setup, you'll be more like 95% dud photos....
 
From the 4 you listed I would choose the Nikon 5000 over the 3000 and def the Canon 450 over the 1000. Can't really comment on the Nikon bodies, but I can say the 450D is a belter and very well regarded - you wouldn't be disappointed with it :thumbs:
 
Flash In The Pan said:
They're all good, buy the one that feels "right" when you hold it :)
Click to expand...

johnnypanic said:
Very good point, which I always seem to forget to mention :eek:

Call into the likes of Jessops and have a "feel" of the various camera's. Once you've decided, then go on the net and get a better deal.
Click to expand...

Definately agree with both the above... I remember when I was looking for a DSLR and was confused what to get. Best thing I did was to go into John Lewis (Jessops store was Canon 'sponsored' so were pushing me to get a Canon). In John Lewis, I played around with the settings and 'feel' of both cameras and found the ergonimics of Nikon were better suited to my style.

Got the Nikon D90 in the end :cool:
 
arad85 said:
??? OK... show me a good handheld of something like a 450D with a 70-300 F4-5.6 at 300mm tracking a fast moving panning object with it in focus and nicely framed (not saying it totally can't be done, just that the good images will be few and far between). Really, you should see this in context. If what you are taking a picture of is still, you have good light, and you have IS, yes, you can get a picture at a long focal length.Anything other than this and I bet your hit rate is waaaay lower than 50%. I bet if you're taking photos of a bird in flight with the same setup, you'll be more like 95% dud photos....
Click to expand...

It depends what the OP is planning on photographing. I've used the Nikon 55-200 with my Fuji S5 and had excellent results. It's a lovely little lens. Of course there are circumstances where it's not going to be suitable, but to write off anything over 70mm is silly.

I agree with going to a shop and trying out the cameras. You can't really go too far wrong these days.
 
Last edited:
arad85 said:
??? OK... show me a good handheld of something like a 450D with a 70-300 F4-5.6 at 300mm tracking a fast moving panning object with it in focus and nicely framed (not saying it totally can't be done, just that the good images will be few and far between). Really, you should see this in context. If what you are taking a picture of is still, you have good light, and you have IS, yes, you can get a picture at a long focal length.Anything other than this and I bet your hit rate is waaaay lower than 50%. I bet if you're taking photos of a bird in flight with the same setup, you'll be more like 95% dud photos....
Click to expand...

Does it matter if you get 95% duds so long as the remaining 5% are solid gold keepers? Not still processing film are you? :shrug:
 
arad85 said:
??? OK... show me a good handheld of something like a 450D with a 70-300 F4-5.6 at 300mm tracking a fast moving panning object with it in focus and nicely framed (not saying it totally can't be done, just that the good images will be few and far between). Really, you should see this in context. If what you are taking a picture of is still, you have good light, and you have IS, yes, you can get a picture at a long focal length.Anything other than this and I bet your hit rate is waaaay lower than 50%. I bet if you're taking photos of a bird in flight with the same setup, you'll be more like 95% dud photos....
Click to expand...

Will this do?

showphoto.php
[/url][/IMG]

O.K. it was on an E-3 but I would expect a Canon to be almost as good. :D

70-300mm set at 149mm (298mm equivalent) panned at 1/200th sec. The bike was doing something in the region of 55-60mph.
 
I went to the camera shop today and had a look at the D90 and D5000. I found them quiet heavy and a bit bulky for my hands. They did not have a EOS 450 in the shop but he showed me the 500 I liked the Canon more (sorry to all the
The shop assistant told me that the D90 and EOS 450 are both a bit ‘out of date cameras’ he recommended that I look at the EOS 500 / 550 instead. Was that just sales talk?
 
Yes, definitely sales talk. If you prefer to go the Canon route, the 450D is a very good camera to start with if you don't need video.
 
Yep! sales talk.

Being 'a bit out of date' doesn't mean it'll take worse photos! Many people still use Nikon D80's Nikon D200's, Nikon D40's, Canon 20D's, Canon 350D's and other old models like that, and take absolutely excellent photos.

If the Canon feels better, I'd go for that. I picked my 40D because I preferred the feel to other cameras.

I would go for a 450 s/h if you can find one (it's got pretty much exactly the same body as the 500D), and spend the difference on lenses.

You'll get far more benefit from buying an 'old' model and a reasonable lens than a new model and a cheapo kitlens.
 
D90 out of date???? hmm

Wasnt it released a day before/after the 500d??

The 450d is quite old in camera years, but it still does the job fine.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the :help: :thumbs:
 
TCR4x4 said:
D90 out of date???? hmm

Wasnt it released a day before/after the 500d??

The 450d is quite old in camera years, but it still does the job fine.
Click to expand...


I was thinking that. It's still Nikon's most recent amateur enthusiast body! And indisputably an excellent camera.
 
arad85 said:
??? OK... show me a good handheld of something like a 450D with a 70-300 F4-5.6 at 300mm tracking a fast moving panning object with it in focus and nicely framed (not saying it totally can't be done, just that the good images will be few and far between). [...] I bet if you're taking photos of a bird in flight with the same setup, you'll be more like 95% dud photos....
Click to expand...

Just from the handful of shots in my TP gallery, this one was taken with a 400D, Tamron 55-200mm kit lens on a pretty overcast day. I found shooting birds with this set-up the best possible training, not just for wildlife but for general photography skills. Balancing ISO, shutter speed etc is absolutely vital with a slow lens and I learnt so much. After a bit of practice there's no way my bird in flight duffer rate was anything like 95%. You can have a lot of fun with a kit telephoto, I'd say go for it! :thumbs:

 
arad85 said:
show me a good handheld of something like a 450D with a 70-300 F4-5.6 at 300mm tracking a fast moving panning object with it in focus and nicely framed
Click to expand...

M'kay: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C :D (randomly picked, I hope Matt doesn't mind - I'll remove the links if asked!). Oooh, and they weren't taken on a 450D, but a 400D :D

Back to the question at hand however, truth most cameras on the market today are capable of producing stunning shots. It's more down to how the camera feels to you when you use it, and the lenses you put on the front of it. My recommendation would be to get the best body you can reasonably afford, the kit lens, and leave yourself some money for some new lenses. Then spend a few weeks, months or whatever shooting everything you can find. You'll soon get to grasps with what it is you need or want, then you dip into your 'cash you put aside' fund. Then watch as your bank account drains itself and the pile of camera gubbins in the corner grows :D
 
Tee hee.. Nice to be proven wrong ;) :D
 
Smokeyj said:
I went to the camera shop today and had a look at the D90 and D5000. I found them quiet heavy and a bit bulky for my hands. They did not have a EOS 450 in the shop but he showed me the 500 I liked the Canon more (sorry to all the
The shop assistant told me that the D90 and EOS 450 are both a bit ‘out of date cameras’ he recommended that I look at the EOS 500 / 550 instead. Was that just sales talk?
Click to expand...

If you have small hands I can highly recommend the 450d.

That was my reason for choosing it. My hands are ridiculously small - in fact my engagement ring had to be made to order because it's a child's size.
Try it for yourself, but I found it a perfect fit and the buttons and dials are in just the right place for me to reach while holding the camera.

IMHO the talk about it being out of date is complete nonsense. I weighed up the 2 options when I got mine and I couldn't see any justification for paying the extra for the 550d for the benefits it had over the 450d.
 
aI would imagine that ll of the cameras you list are decent, I have a 1000d and a Canon EIS 50d and love both, some of the pics ive taken that I like the most were taken with the 1000d, however its getting old now and has some limitations (when compared to the 50d), image size, fps, af performance, but it is decent.

Ive never used Nikon but they have to be good also, do you really need HD video, if not *** about a 2nd hand canon eos 40d or 50d, either has the peerformance and the build quality

Best Regards
 
I would have to say out of your selection the D5000 would be the one I would go for and I am a Canon user.

The 1000D and D3000 are missing some features that you would probably like to have once you develop your skills.

Once a colleage bought a D5000 and I tried it out I did really like it and I love the fact that Nikon don't cram loads of pixels in to their sensors like Canon do which results in a better image. Only downside is the lack of a AF motor in the body which is required for some lenses although I believe new lenses now have the motor built-in.

Still, if the 450d feels nicer in your hands then its a no brainer. The Canon 75-300 lens is dire though and the 55-250 IS would be a better option.
 
I agree on the Canon 75-300, in all honesty the 70-300 IS is a way better lens, in fact I would rather buy the tamron 70-300 than the Canon 75-300 as at least its around the right price for its capabilities.

Body wise I don't agree, there is more to the 500D than just added video, it handles noise better and has an extended ISO range and thats just for starters.

With body only prices as low as £439 on the 500D now its worth grabbing one, a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a canon 70-300 IS, if money is a factor in things just get the 18-55 kit lens with it and add a Tamron 70-300 for now.
 
I really can't say with any certainty which one would be the best.

But the worst camera and lens that you could ever get is/ are the ones you got but never used.
 
They will all do the job if used properly. Canon or Nikon depends on which you prefer. I would try to get lenses with IS if at all possible.
 
The best camera is one that you can use. Its the persons abliaty to use the kit that matters. If your intrested in seeing Good ability go look at Matt Sayles threads. He started with a 400D and a sigma lens, and resently be loaning my 7D and 100-400 lens, while hes been saving for a 50D after his 400D broke and was beyond economcal repair.
 
I would recommend paying the extra and going straight for the D90. I have just upgraded from the D3000 after having it for about 6months as I found it started to lack the features and accessories I needed. Got a D90 now and it is fantastic!

I would 100% recommend to anyone to get one straight away and save yourself the money of having to upgrade later.
 
knifebox said:
I really can't say with any certainty which one would be the best.

But the worst camera and lens that you could ever get is/ are the ones you got but never used.
Click to expand...

No, it's well known that the worst camera is the one from a different brand owned by somebody else. :D
 
Another vote for getting a D90. The in built focus motor will allow you to make full use of some of the older and/or cheaper lenses and in particular the AF 50mm f1.8D which is a corker!

The D90 also has easier access to the controls which we use most !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top