I want a Digital SLR

Jono · 2 Jul 2007 at 16:22

That's right. I blatantly can't afford one, but I want one anyway.
I can afford one, but y'know what I mean...

I'm definitely (after searching(!)) torn between the Canon 400D and the Nikon D40/x - not quite sure which would be better for someone who's been taking pics for a while, kinda getting there, but still manages to take utterly crap pictures for time to time.

I'm fascinated by HDR and RAW mode images and the possibilities RAW offers.

I'm also kinda confused by the AF problems some people have mentioned about the Nikon, and the quality of the kit lens with the 400D.

I don't have huge spade hands, so even the smaller casing size feels good to me.
Obviously the kit lens with either won't last me for ever, but whichever kit lens (if I even go for the kit, or just the body and some better lens to start with?)

I really don't want to post this next sentence, but I will: I'm going to be shooting quite a lot of macro type things (I feel I should get some insect shots) but also landscapes. One of the main uses, until I get used to it will be for taking pictures of things I can convert into really high textures for use on 3d models. So lots of bits of wood, walls, concrete, asphalt etc. From a distance of maybe 1m up to 10m away (at a guess).

Any idea what combination of body/lens (if the kit lenses are totally unsuitable) would be best for this kind of thing?

I don't want to spend a massive amount, unless I can get it from a place that lets you buy now pay later type thing... I want a camera soon, but can only afford a certain amount ~£500 give or take a couple hundred at a push.

Over time, this won't be such a big issue, I can see myself being able to afford a few decent lenses as an investment.

I'm sorry for posting this given that it's clearly not the first time, but all opinions are appreciated.

Cheers.

BUFF · 2 Jul 2007 at 17:37

You can find a Sony A100 (silver) +18-70mm kit for £350 atm from a large catalogue store near you ....
Terrific value (it's rumoured that they bought a lot of stock from the troubled

Topcat · 2 Jul 2007 at 17:51

BUFF said:
You can find a Sony A100 (silver) +18-70mm kit for £350 atm from a large catalogue store near you ....
Terrific QUOTE]

You can, but don't !!

Just decide between the 2 you have listed, they're in another class compared to the Sony and you'd only regret it.

BUFF · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:20

I've used the Sony & it's perfectly OK - if anything it's spec. puts it slightly above the other 2 & it probably produces the most detailed images of the 3 (subject to glass of course).
All 3 are very close in performance but the Sony adds in body stabilisation (& yes, it works).

FreeStream · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:26

Get the 400D.

The stock lens is fine for a starting lens.

And once you have enough cash get a Sigma 17-70 or 24-70

Edit:

BUFF said:
I've used the Sony & it's perfectly OK - if anything it's spec. puts it slightly above the other 2 & it probably produces the most detailed images of the 3 (subject to glass of course).
All 3 are very close in performance but the Sony adds in body stabilisation (& yes, it works).

Eh!?!?!?! How does that work!? :confused:

Raymond Lin · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:29

Concorde Rules said:
Get the 400D.

The stock lens is fine for a starting lens.

And once you have enough cash get a Sigma 17-70 or 24-70

Edit:

Eh!?!?!?! How does that work!?

The image stablization is on the sensor, where in a Canon system its on the lens.

BUFF · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:32

Concorde Rules said:
Eh!?!?!?! How does that work!?

It moves the sensor to counter shake rather than the lens.
It's the Konica Minolta system (because Sony bought KM's camera division) but people like Pentax now have similar.

Both the in lens & in body systems work pretty much on a par but the advantages to the in body system are that every lens fitted becomes stabilised & you only pay for the technology once (you can also say that people tend to upgrade bodies more often than glass so if the tech improves you're more likely to benefit).

FreeStream · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:32

Raymond Lin said:
The image stablization is on the sensor, where in a Canon system its on the lens.

Thought as much. Prefere the lens version tho

Raymond Lin · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:39

BUFF said:
It moves the sensor to counter shake rather than the lens.
It's the Konica Minolta system (because Sony bought KM's camera division) but people like Pentax now have similar.

Both the in lens & in body systems work pretty much on a par but the advantages to the in body system are that every lens fitted becomes stabilised & you only pay for the technology once (you can also say that people tend to upgrade bodies more often than glass so if the tech improves you're more likely to benefit).

The down side or advantage of the lens IS system is that each IS is built for that lens. So the amount (strength or what not) of IS needed for a 100mm compared to a 600mm would be different and the manufacturer can tailer the IS for that lens. Where in body IS will have to work harder for a longer range to compensate and may not work as well either (thou i've not tried it, just speculation).

Topcat · 2 Jul 2007 at 18:42

BUFF said:
I've used the Sony & it's perfectly OK - if anything it's spec. puts it slightly above the other 2 & it probably produces the most detailed images of the 3 (subject to glass of course).
All 3 are very close in performance but the Sony adds in body stabilisation (& yes, it works).

I wasn't really referring to the Images Quality as it may be "OK" but from the reviews I've read it doesn't get close to the Canon and Nikon peformance not to mention build quality. Getting the Sony would tie you down to a minority lens/flash fitting and you'll always be thinking that you could have had better....

BUFF · 2 Jul 2007 at 20:14

The Sony actually tends to produce marginally more detail than the other 2 (it's a trade off - more detail at lower ISOs against more noise at higher).
Build quality wise I would say that it's ahead of the Canon (haven't used the D40X only the D40 so won't comment on that).
Whilst it's a "minority" lens/flash fitting it doesn't really tie you down as Sigma/Tamron etc. make lenses in it (not to mention the millions of Minolta lenses in use & hence available s/h) & you can get your Metz's etc. too for flash.

I definitely wouldn't say that either the Canon or Nikon are better - I know some professionals that use the A100 precisely because it retrieves more detail.
All 3 are good cameras with very similar performance & all 3 have pros/cons but I don't see too many 400D/D40X kits for £350 & that makes it blinding vfm atm whilst this offer is on.
The usual advice to go & try them in a store still holds up though as what suits one person ergonomically may not another (in my case I don't find the 350D/400D comfortable at all).

Topcat · 2 Jul 2007 at 21:59

Just out of interest BUFF, once the Sony User wants to upgrade slightly from his Entry Level SLR what do you suggest as the next camera ??? I'm sure he'll want to make use of the lenses etc he acquired during his Sony life, would be a waste of money not to..

triggerthat · 2 Jul 2007 at 23:50

If you want to save a wee bit, then look at the 350D Canon. Fantastic camera

aztechnology · 3 Jul 2007 at 08:11

Topcat said:
Just out of interest BUFF, once the Sony User wants to upgrade slightly from his Entry Level SLR what do you suggest as the next camera ??? I'm sure he'll want to make use of the lenses etc he acquired during his Sony life, would be a waste of money not to..

Sony did show a "Pro spec" model at PMA in March, and also rumoured about a intermediate model. There where no solid details. Internet Rumour has an anouncement forthcoming on the 9th July.

BUFF · 3 Jul 2007 at 16:20

Topcat said:
Just out of interest BUFF, once the Sony User wants to upgrade slightly from his Entry Level SLR what do you suggest as the next camera ??? I'm sure he'll want to make use of the lenses etc he acquired during his Sony life, would be a waste of money not to..

Presumably he wouldn't be doing that in the next month or 2 though ...?
& although the Sony may now be classed as entry level due to price it really isn't a basic camera at all, as I said in terms of spec. it offers more than either the Canon or Nikon.
There are 2 confirmed new models coming & suspicions that there are, in fact some others too.
As aztechnology said there is rumoured to be an announcement on 9th July.

Jono · 3 Jul 2007 at 16:31

Kinda have my eyes on a 400D (body only?) and Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro lens.

Thoughts?

I have a tripod, but I'll need CF cards... what else?

Messiah Khan · 3 Jul 2007 at 16:36

Jono said:
Kinda have my eyes on a 400D (body only?) and Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro lens.

Thoughts?

I have a tripod, but I'll need CF cards... what else?

Looks good to me. Might be worth throwing in a UV or clear filter to protect the lens. Also have you got a camera bag? Microfiber cleaning cloth might also be usefull.

Jono · 3 Jul 2007 at 16:44

Not one that will be suitable. Any cunning recommendations?

For any of the items you just mentioned?

Topcat · 3 Jul 2007 at 16:48

I think you're missing my point BUFF. I'm not saying that the Sony does not represent reasonable value for money and indeed you can find favourable reviews for it, you can also find unfavourable.

Photography, especially DSLR, by nature becomes addictive when you get into it. You'll crave a new lens, flashgun etc. and OK for some they may have to save a while, but birthdays and Christmas can help

you can before long have a nice collection. Then there will come a point where you want to upgrade the camera..

Both Canon and Nikon have a history of making Fantastics cameras. Sony don't, but they do have the help from Minolta. So there are Rumours of other models, will that make them good, no idea possibly not.. Sigma for instance make great lenses but their cameras never get the same recognition. With Canon and Nikon, assuming there's no disaster, you can pretty much assume you'll have a great camera to choose from.

I can't be bothered continuing with this thread anymore, the original poster knows what my advise is, and only he can decide what route to take.. Let us know what you get.

Messiah Khan · 3 Jul 2007 at 16:58

Jono said:
Not one that will be suitable. Any cunning recommendations? For any of the items you just mentioned?

Have a look at;
Lowepro http://www.lowepro.com/
Tamrac http://www.tamrac.com/
Crumpler http://www.crumplerbags.com/ (possibly the worst site in the world!)

It really depends on *** you want from a bag. Do you want one just big enough for a camera+lens, or do you want something that allows you to attach the kitchen sink as well? I persoanlly need something thats got decent amount of space for equipment, but also a fair bit of space for clothes, food etc.

I recently decided on the Naneu Pro Alpha special edition woodland cammo;
http://www.naneupro.com/products/mo-a/#
As it was one of the few that offered what I need. Im getting it imported from the US so should have it in a week or so.

As for UV filters, Hoya do some decent ones without needing a bankloan. Ideally I would want most of my filters to be B&W ones, but they are expensive.