Time for a DSLR

[Spitfir3]

Thanks for all the advice peeps, much appreciated. Looking at reviews and comments etc im thinking of going with:

Canon 350D with 18-55mm lens
EDIT Sigma 55-200mm f/4-5.6 DC (Canon AF) OR Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro DG (Canon AF)? worth paying a bit more for the 300mm?

I know its hard to discuss these matters on this forum, but where would I get the cheapest of these on 'internet? Is it possible to just buy the body or would I need the stock lens for normal portrait photos etc. Also, on the sigma lens it looks like its got selectable settings for distance and something else.. it is a lens you screw into the body and it will auto focus right?

Image stabilization? dont all modern DSLRs have this? I got so many bad results using my s5600 cause I moved whilst taking the photo - will I get that?

cheers

 

[Bolerus]

you can usually find the body without the kit lens, but in my opinion, unless you are going to buy expensive lenses, go for one with the kit lens.

the kit lens plus the sigma 70 - 300 is a good range (in fact exactly what i have for my d50)

Nope, not all cameras come with Image stabalisation. As far as I am aware the sony A100 (which is really a slighlty reworked and rebadged minolta dyanax 7D) is hte only dslr to have it on the body.

Nikon and Cannon cameras have Image stabalisation available, but only via lenses, EG the cannon IS range and the Nikon VR range

you can find plenty of prices on the net for the bodies and the kits

search for exactly that "best price for a *****" in google and you will get them.

before you go out and spend your cash, are you sure you need a dslr, I say that because the fuji 5600 gets rave reviews, I suspect, without any disrespect intended,from what you have asked on this thread, that you really just need to learn how to handle the settings on your camera and spending 400 on a new set up wont really help you much.

 

[Spitfir3]

before you go out and spend your cash, are you sure you need a dslr, I say that because the fuji 5600 gets rave reviews, I suspect, without any disrespect intended,from what you have asked on this thread, that you really just need to learn how to handle the settings on your camera and spending 400 on a new set up wont really help you much.

Well, I wouldnt say that ive mastered all the settings but I do know how to use them and often do. I want to upgrade as: the quality of the photos is just not good enough, auto focus is pretty poor and slow (especially when im trying to get aircraft moving at high speeds etc) and the manual focus is terrible - id be there for like 5 minutes which just doesn't work

AFAIK I can't really get past the above problems and I do get very frustated with my fuji (although it's a very good camera) - if there was something I could do to solve my probs I wouldnt want to buy a DSLR.

I think its a good investment, and especially with the different lenses etc it'll be upgradeable.

one last question before I buy, 300mm's a little more expensive that the 200mm sigma - is it worth the extra £50?

cheers

 

[BUFF]

Nope, not all cameras come with Image stabalisation. As far as I am aware the sony A100 (which is really a slighlty reworked and rebadged minolta dyanax 7D) is hte only dslr to have it on the body.

Some Pentaxs (& presumably Samsungs based on them) do as well & I think that Olympus also have 1 now.
I wouldn't be surprised if eventually it becomes a standard feature as it is for most prosumers.

& the A100 is more of a reworked Dynax 5D than a 7D

one last question before I buy, 300mm's a little more expensive that the 200mm sigma - is it worth the extra £50?

depends where you are shooting but I think that you'll need the 300mm reach even with a digital crop factor of ~1.5x.

 

[Spitfir3]

okie dokie, im gonna get it now then. Can't wait

btw, whats the difference between the:

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro (Canon AF)
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro DG (Canon AF)

there's a £50 difference - ouch

 

[A.N.Other]

okie dokie, im gonna get it now then. Can't wait

btw, whats the difference between the:

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro (Canon AF)
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro DG (Canon AF)

there's a £50 difference - ouch

Make SURE you get the APO version. APO stands for apochromatic (wiki it), meaning that there is a better quality of glass in the lens, which will give less chromatic aberration.

// EDIT // The 70-300 APO DG Macro gets very good reviews in any magazine you care to look at. The 70-300 (non APO) doesn't even feature.

 

[Bolerus]

in all honesty when you are talking lenses, £50 is really nothing at all.

Every body says get the APO version, my own sigma 70-300 is the non apo

where as the one at work is the apo, but its on a minolta as opposed to my own D50

I am pretty happy with my lens. But again like with most things, you get what you pay for

If you can afford one, try and get a 500mm that would be good for aviation (you did say ypou wanted to photograph aviation didnt you?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolerus
Nope, not all cameras come with Image stabalisation. As far as I am aware the sony A100 (which is really a slighlty reworked and rebadged minolta dyanax 7D) is hte only dslr to have it on the body.



Some Pentaxs (& presumably Samsungs based on them) do as well & I think that Olympus also have 1 now.
I wouldn't be surprised if eventually it becomes a standard feature as it is for most prosumers.

Is is on a lot of prosumers, in one form or other, I was talkign DSLRs though

 

[BUFF]

If you can afford one, try and get a 500mm that would be good for aviation (you did say ypou wanted to photograph aviation didnt you?)

the Sigma 50-500mm is very popular but way outside his budget.

Is is on a lot of prosumers, in one form or other, I was talkign DSLRs though

So was I
Pentax DSLRs now have it (which means Samsung too) & as I said I think that Oly do too now.