Spec me a DSLR for

[TheLegendOfMart]

I've had a few point 'n' shoot and a few bridge cameras before now and I've been disappointed with the picture quality, I am going on holiday in September and I have decided to spend some money on a decent entry level camera so I can play with the settings before I go.

I have no brand loyalty and am looking to spend ?400~, one that can take cheap zoom lenses would be ideal if I decided to buy one in the future, 720p HD capture is also preferable but its not a deal breaker if the camera doesn't have it.

I don't know you can get 'small' DSLRs (I don't mean the Micro 4/3rds) but I really don't want a big bulky camera.

If the camera is worth it I would consider spending up to ?500 but not a penny more.

[BajiRav]

Does your budget include a lens? If not, just look for basic 18-135 bundles, which I think are good starting points. You can't really expect a non-bulky SLR :/ but I'd say this, it's not as bad as it looks.

Start on Canon or Nikon's product page and price them out at your favorite retailer.

I usually suggest Canon and think T3i or T3 is a good option (Two people who took my recommendation are happy with theirs). I think Nikon is a bit better if you want to shoot video but that is one aspect I don't really care about (and mine doesn't have it)

[TheLegendOfMart]

I was talking about a kit, around ?400. I don't want to spend too much on a camera as I know I wont get too serious into photography but I just want something that has the settings and features I can play with to get better pics than a point and shoot.

I was considering the T3 (1100D in the UK).

[soumyasch]

If size is a concern, you can try out the mirrorless cameras, like Sony NEX series. They come with APS-C sized sensors, like the Canon/Nikon DSLRs but are much smaller and quite a bit lighter. I own one and am very satisfied with the image quality, and prefer tham much over DSLRs when I have to carry it around the whole day.

As for the downsides of the setup, the kit lens (18-55mm) is not exactly of high quality, and not very fast either. When I was a beginner, it didn't matter much. But once I gained some experience, the limitations started looking more and more severe. With lenses like the 50mm F/1.8 lens, it became very good. But the native E-mount lenses are costlier than comparable ones for Nikon/Canon.

The lack of optical viewfinder is an issue in low light. The electronic viewfinder is hard to see (and noisy) in very low light (I mean extremely low light, like night cityscapes from high up, regular night shots even outdoor night shots are not problemmatic). And auto-focus is fiddly in low light with the kit lens. Manual focus works fine and is pretty easy too.

Whatever you do, invest in good lenses. They make a more pronounced difference than the camera.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

I was talking about a kit, around ?400. I don't want to spend too much on a camera as I know I wont get too serious into photography but I just want something that has the settings and features I can play with to get better pics than a point and shoot.

I was considering the T3 (1100D in the UK).

Well I would like to share my story then for the part I bolded above. Forever I wanted a nicer camera, and in high school and college I actually dabbled with a photography thanks to a friend who was a photography major and set up his own darkroom (yes, was still the days one had to develop their own pictures LOL). Well 3 Christmases ago my wife had no clue what to get me, so she got her parents to chip in and my parents as well and got me a kick ass Nikon. With additional equipment like another Flash, another lens, etc. (my father in law also happens to be into photography), so I was all excited. Flash forward 3 years later and I have only used it a handful of times. Truth #1 is it gets annoying having to grab so many things to get a good picture, at least IMO. Truth #2 is there is a whole lot to learn to get good digital photos. It is not only a money investment, but a time investment as well. You can get decent enough photos without knowing all that much, but to really get to the next level, you need to put in a good amount of time.

So just wanted to share this all as it is a decent size investment. Not trying to dissuade you by any means, just saying make sure it is really something you want to get into before taking the plunge.

[TheLegendOfMart]

If size is a concern, you can try out the mirrorless cameras, like Sony NEX series. They come with APS-C sized sensors, like the Canon/Nikon DSLRs but are much smaller and quite a bit lighter. I own one and am very satisfied with the image quality, and prefer tham much over DSLRs when I have to carry it around the whole day.

As for the downsides of the setup, the kit lens (18-55mm) is not exactly of high quality, and not very fast either. When I was a beginner, it didn't matter much. But once I gained some experience, the limitations started looking more and more severe. With lenses like the 50mm F/1.8 lens, it became very good. But the native E-mount lenses are costlier than comparable ones for Nikon/Canon.

The lack of optical viewfinder is an issue in low light. The electronic viewfinder is hard to see (and noisy) in very low light (I mean extremely low light, like night cityscapes from high up, regular night shots even outdoor night shots are not problemmatic). And auto-focus is fiddly in low light with the kit lens. Manual focus works fine and is pretty easy too.

Whatever you do, invest in good lenses. They make a more pronounced difference than the camera.

Thanks I did look at the NEX cameras but the cost of the lenses are really prohibitive, a telephoto lense for the NEX camera costs DOUBLE what it does on a Canon/Nikon.

Well I would like to share my story then for the part I bolded above. Forever I wanted a nicer camera, and in high school and college I actually dabbled with a photography thanks to a friend who was a photography major and set up his own darkroom (yes, was still the days one had to develop their own pictures LOL). Well 3 Christmases ago my wife had no clue what to get me, so she got her parents to chip in and my parents as well and got me a kick ass Nikon. With additional equipment like another Flash, another lens, etc. (my father in law also happens to be into photography), so I was all excited. Flash forward 3 years later and I have only used it a handful of times. Truth #1 is it gets annoying having to grab so many things to get a good picture, at least IMO. Truth #2 is there is a whole lot to learn to get good digital photos. It is not only a money investment, but a time investment as well. You can get decent enough photos without knowing all that much, but to really get to the next level, you need to put in a good amount of time.

So just wanted to share this all as it is a decent size investment. Not trying to dissuade you by any means, just saying make sure it is really something you want to get into before taking the plunge.

That's my main concern, I am very fickle with gadgets and electronics I get bored very easily and things just sit collecting dust.

Looking at some pictures from my last few holidays the picture quality is really awful even on a bridge camera which made me look at the mirrorless cameras like the Sony NEX, Samsung NX, Olympus PEN etc, I don't know if I would ever use a zoom lense but the option would be nice, but the cost of lenses for the mirrorless is ridiculous, which then lead me to look at DSLRs.

I really want a NEX but I don't want to get one and then be stuck with paying what the camera cost again just for a telephoto lense and regret that I didn't go for a DSLR.

Decisions, decisions.

[jakem1]

Get a second hand 350D/400D. You'll pay less than ?400 (I recently sold a 350D for about ?200) and it still allow you to take great shots. If you decode that you're not interested you can sell the camera and get back what you paid for it.

[soumyasch]

Try looking into renting lenses as well, rather than buying them outright. Especially tele ones.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Decided to get a Nikon D3100, it was going to be a toss up between the Sony NEX5, Canon 1100D and the D3100. Ill just be using the kit lense for now.

Has everything I wanted from the NEX like the Guide mode which has automated settings, i.e. I can pick 'soft background' and it will set it up for shallow DoF, 'freeze moving vehicle or person' , etc.. until I learn how to do it manually, it also does 1080p video and has all round better specs than the 1100D.

Thanks for the information/advice all.

[BajiRav]

Decided to get a Nikon D3100, it was going to be a toss up between the Sony NEX5, Canon 1100D and the D3100. Ill just be using the kit lense for now.

Has everything I wanted from the NEX like the Guide mode which has automated settings, i.e. I can pick 'soft background' and it will set it up for shallow DoF, 'freeze moving vehicle or person' , etc.. until I learn how to do it manually, it also does 1080p video and has all round better specs than the 1100D.

Thanks for the information/advice all.

One last tip: Stay off the automated modes if you want to learn. I personally suggest starting with aperture priority, which is not very difficult to pick up.

[Argote]

The D3100 is a nice camera, put up some pictures in the gallery thread later and feel free to ask us if you have any doubts.