Digital SLR Cameras

*PSYCHO KILLER* · 03-16-2008, 05:48 PM

I'm interested in purchasing a digital SLR camera, but at the same time I don't want to break my bank over a camera. Photography is just a small interest of mine, but I don't really know a lot about it. I've only used point and shoot cameras, but I'd like the versatility of an SLR camera. I am not a professional photographer, and do not intend to be a professional photographer, but I love experimenting with photography.

Are there any relatively inexpensive (I would consider under ~$350 to be relatively inexpensive) SLR cameras of appreciable quality? Is the body of the camera that important, or is it the lens that defines how good the camera is? I wouldn't mind having a camera with a sub-par/mediocre stock lens as long as the body doesn't blow.

I don't want to spend an extravagant amount of money, simply because it might prove to be too excessive for me, but I'd also like to buy something that would easily permit me to upgrade the quality without having to buy new equipment.

Nomi · 03-16-2008, 07:09 PM

They simply do not produce DSLRs at that price range. They've dropped to $600 as of late for the lowest end brand, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a fully functional used DSLR for $350. Save up $600 and buy yourself a proper body, kit lens, and something resembling a protective case/filter set. Some older, incomplete kits (or body only) DSLRs float around eBay but this is a dangerous place to buy; DSLRs should really be purchased new or in-person used from a reputable shop with warranties on their used goods. I really want to stress the not buying used from eBay bit. A lot of people get screwed.

If you look into new, cheap DSLRs, I would go for Nikon. Their consumer-level DSLRs are sturdy and reliable and for the kits, it's a fair price.

If you're looking for advanced features in a low price range, check out the Canon Powershot S3/S5 IS. You can easily grab a used S3 for cheap, or a new S5 if you prefer. They are incredibly high quality cameras with SLR features and 12x optical zoom. If you want better than point and shoot without the financial pounding of a DSLR, you absolutely cannot go wrong with this line.

As for basic quality understanding: the body and the lens both matter very much. With low-level cameras, they're marketed as Megapixel=quality. This is simply untrue. The quality of the image sensor greatly impacts how good the picture will be. A lower-MP camera can produce a MUCH more beautiful image if it has a better sensor. For DSLRs this also applies, but lenses have more of an impact. A high-quality lens and the correct camera settings can make a drastic difference in image quality. For a beginner, I wouldn't worry all that much, as most basic kits will give you what you're probably looking for. The finer details must be learned, and better lenses can always be purchased later. Any newer DSLR will room for improvement in terms of quality if you buy better lenses. You won't 'max out' by body restrictions anytime soon.

I learned DSLR on a Nikon D100 with an amazing lens set, then had access to a Nikon D70, D70s and then a Canon Digital Rebel XT. I preferred the Nikon D70s above all else, but it lacked the vertical grip option the D100 carried. Those are pretty outdated now I suppose, and I haven't had DSLR access since high school, but I've always loved Nikon bodies over Canon (conversely, I prefer Canon lenses to Nikon lenses). The consumer-level Nikons (I have used a D40 recently, that's as up-to-date as I am) are very sturdy and the lenses aren't bad if you're buying a kit. Can't go wrong with them. They're also fairly idiot-proof and beginner-friendly, with picture-coded preset options instead of leaving you with a bunch of dials you don't understand. The Nikon D40 should be somewhere around $400-500, which is astounding given that I started when you'd be hardpressed to find a body under $1k.

*PSYCHO KILLER* · 03-16-2008, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomi

If you're looking for advanced features in a low price range, check out the Canon Powershot S3/S5 IS. You can easily grab a used S3 for cheap, or a new S5 if you prefer. They are incredibly high quality cameras with SLR features and 12x optical zoom. If you want better than point and shoot without the financial pounding of a DSLR, you absolutely cannot go wrong with this line.

This is sounding reasonable, but what exactly would I be missing out on if I went this path instead of a DSLR? Like I said, I want to get something that will allow me to mess around and play with features and whatnot.

Nomi · 03-16-2008, 08:42 PM

The S3/S5 (there is no S4, and the S2 has a weaker sensor) are both excellent for features. They have the same presets as consumer-level DSLRs (Sports priority, low-light priority, portrait, etc) and they also feature the same P/A/etc settings as DSLRs. You will be able to adjust ISO, aperture, etc. just as you would on a DSLR.

Drawbacks: it is small, which may be weird to some people. It's huge for a point and shoot but may feel tiny compared to a full DSLR body.

Lenses! It has a fixed lens, so there is no versatility as with a DSLR. You cannot change lenses according to the situation. It has 12x optical zoom, which is fantastic for a point and shoot, but it's no mega telescope lens like you could do with a DSLR if you so chose.

quality- It's beautiful and you can make large printouts lovely, but it's still weaker than many DSLRs armed with a decent lens.

There is no room to upgrade with a P&S camera. DSLRs afford you the chance to buy a better lens, or one with zoom, or super range, or amazing low-light abilities. What you buy with the S5, you're stuck with. If you can pick up a used S3 for $200, I would give it a try. They have nice resale value as they're a preferred model, so if you don't like it, I doubt you'll be out more than $50 at all.

Nikon D40 is probably your best bet if you have your heart set on a DSLR, or finding a respected used equipment shop or vendor. Maybe hit up some studios and see if they're selling old equipment. Shops unloading older stock usually have insanely low prices.

*PSYCHO KILLER* · 03-16-2008, 09:23 PM

Honestly what you've mentioned would probably be enough for me, but I'm turned off by the fact that there is no upgradeability. I mean if I'm saving up for a camera I might as well go big(ger), right?

Nomi · 03-16-2008, 10:07 PM

I'm inclined to agree. I was my high school's newspaper and yearbook head photographer and photo editor for four years, and I did a shitload of photography from all areas (sports, people, artsy shit, etc). I don't have my own camera so I've been removed from it entirely for two years. Mind you, I don't even have a point and shoot or camera phone, here. It's difficult given that I spent four years of my life attached to a DSLR and associated equipment.

Almost bought the Canon S2, then the S3, and I toyed with the S5/S3 pricedrop last year. I've never purchased it. It's a fantastic camera but it just wouldn't feel right to me. I love DSLR and god damnit, I want my 5lb lenses. I figure someday I'll save up and buy a used or refurbished Nikon Dwhatever consumer model.

DeusExMachina · 03-21-2008, 01:30 AM

I have a nikon D80 with a 28 - 80 lens. It ran me about 1050 with 1 lens. If you are a real camera enthusiast and like to travel and take pictures, then I think it is worth buying a decent DSLR camera. I won't go into details about the d80 unless u ask me.

In my opinion the best DSLR cameras are Nikon, Pentax and Canon.

If you search online you can get some good deals. Though you may be able to find a DSLR camera body for 350, I doubt you can get a Camera AND lens for 350.

Avoid photoconnection.com

WiLLiSTER · 03-22-2008, 02:07 PM

Dell has a Canon XTi with a 18-55mm lense for $589.

The Dell Online Store: Build Your System