Good D-SLR Camera for beginner


 Share

Recommended Posts

I want to start photoograhpy, i currently have a simple Sony digital camera, which is great for basic stuff, but i want to get some good shots.

What is a good camera for a beginner to learn with?

I've heard about the "Canon EOS 5D" but i think its a bit too good, and more importantly expensive for me!

I've just taken a search on pix mania, and come up with "CANON EOS300X", its only ?163, without a lens, which start at like ?50.

Only thing is, i want to tkae pictures of cars etc, moving, at 200mph. So its got to get good shots of that!

Any ideas?

Budget ?500 max. Inlcuding everything, memory, case etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 300x is a film camera. ?500 budget is too low for a DSLR package. I mean memory card, gotta be at least 1GB if not 2GB, so that's like ?60-120 for the memory card, decent case is around ?50 so already with your budget you're down to just over ?300. You might be able to pick up a Canon 300D for about ?200-300 but that probably won't include a lens. I think you might want to rethink your budget a little.

You can pick up a Nikon D50 with the 18-55 Kit lens for about ?530, then pick up a cheap 1GB SD card for about ?40 and a small case/bag for about ?30. That's ?600 and probably about as cheap as you'd want to go buying brand new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOS 300D - A nice digital SLR that produces some cracking results, Canon sell them on ebay pretty cheap... My friend got one for ?200 with the kit lens, Canon listed about 20 and a couple had little to no activity so he sneaked a bid in:))

Review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Cano...non_eos300d.asp

Sample pics: http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/?gallery=c...os300d_samples/

Canon ebay listing: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-Outlet-D-SLR-E...1QQcmdZViewItem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd highgly recommend a Canon DSLR, they tend to have a more tweakable RAW Format from what I've seen personally. Also in the last 4 photo magazines I bought the Canon 350D marginally beat the nikon for image quality. (In other works Canon 5/5, Nikon 4/5).

However I'd sugest you go into a camera store and ask to try them and see which one you prefer best, and then shop around for the cheapest : ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got a Canon Rebel XT, and love it. I would recommend one of the Rebels to start. The 5D is not for the general user, (It is a True 35mm replacement with Digitial), and unless your a PRO the 5d is to much, (I want a 5d, but am going to wait until for now since i have a 8.2mp camera, where 12.8mp quality is the same when you factor the imaging area).

I would check them out at a camera shop, then look at eBay, and look for the best deal, (watch the prices, as there are several rebels 6.3mp going for $900us, where the 8.2mp can be bought for $800 and change).

Good luck and keep shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would strongly suggest the D70 kit (18-70mm) as the lowest point you go with a DSLR, either that or the 350D, however the canon was too small / light for my liking, and the kit lens isn't nearly as good as the D70's.

The D70's menu system was great, and you could change virtually everything without having to use them, unlike the Canon. I don't much like the overly processed images you get out of a 350D either, and the D70 has a much better flash system. While the Canon has a higher megapixel rating, if I remember correctly, the D70 actually has a larger sensor, and a weaker filter, so it can actually resolve more detail. The overly smooth canon images mean you can actually get less detail out of an image, as you have to scale it down to get the same sharpness as a D70 image.

The D70s is an option too, but is probably a bit too expensive, for virtually no added features. It has however pushed the D70 prices down.

I wouldn't consider the D50 because it's very much like the Canon - too reliant on menus, which partly defeats the purpose of going SLR. It takes SD cards, which is a bad thing, and is just too small in my opinion.

While I loved being able to changes lenses and the speed of a DSLR, after about two months use, I decided they weren't for me, at least not the current generation of them. I couldn't justify the extra ?500 or so over a higher-end P&S in terms of image quality, and decided I'd pick one up and wait until the next generation of DSLRs before I purchase one again. I do miss the speed, physical size/weight and overall usage of the D70, but image quality, especially when brought down to web sizes isn't a huge difference, which is what matters most.

This is not a fair comparison; the DSLR has loads of bokeh, nice composition, great lighting / colour. The shot from my EX-Z750 is taken indoors with flash, full auto etc. However, look at the detail on the fur; there's not a lot between them in terms of actual detail captured. I'm quite sure I could reproduce the D70's shot with the EX-Z750 in the same conditions.

Note:> These are huge files, and I have rather limited bandwidth. Please don't waste my bandwidth.:))

http://www.andrewfee.org/CIMG0290.JPG

http://www.andrewfee.org/DSC_0807.JPG

Neither shot has had any enhancement, they're both straight out of the camera.

If you're going to be taking shots of things in fast motion though, a DSLR is pretty much required. If you shoot max quality JPEG, the D70 can shoot 3 fps until the card is full.

EDIT: I just had a look at the two again, and there's really not much point in the comparison. The stronger light in the D70 pic makes the individual hairs stand out more, giving it higher contrast and making it looks like it's sharper.

Trust me, in general there is very little difference in quality between the two, and none when brought down to web sizes. I do not plan on printing them, so for my purposes at least, the EX-Z750 is enough.

Edited by andrewfee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean memory card, gotta be at least 1GB if not 2GB

586434265[/snapback]

What? Not if he just wants to get into photography it doesn't.

I use one 'Lexar 512MB 80x Professional CompactFlash with WA Technology' which equates to about 120 shots in my 20D's largest finest JPEG mode. I've never run out of space, even on a full day's shooting.

Quality not quantity guys...

P.S: I'd highly reccomend the Lexar range of CF cards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CF card, or any card for that matter, is the least of my worries. You can get a 1GB for ?40, 512 for ?30, thats not the problem.

Andrewfee: many thanks for that info, I do have a basic sony camera, and its clear for most times i use a camera, but i did go motor racing a few weeks back and my shots were just blurr:(:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOS 300D does seem like a great entry level camera, especially considering the EOS 350D is now out..

Either that or look out for the Nikon D50. To be honest though, the Canon will undercut them on price and takes superb pictures.. so go for a Canon :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you get the Canon, get EF lenses, not EF-S. The difference is opticial area of the lense. They cost the same, (for the most part), but you will be able to use the EF lense on more cameras, where the EF-S is limited.

Personal i don't like Nikon, never have. i know some feel that they are the end all cameras, but Canon is a workhorse. Canon also makes some of the best lenses, with the best optics, (they have a few Pro lenses that are .7 or less aperture settings, and have one that is .4, now that is opticial quality).

you can even get micro-drives for $139 for 3 gig units for storage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the lexar pro 80x are standard issue for all sports illustrated photographers ;)

we've had some pretty indepth discussions about this in the past 2 months, so i don't really have anything else to add.

i'm a canon guy, i'd recommend canon. i like their system. it works for me.

nikon is good too, but they are a little different.

you need to find what works for you.

read the reviews at dpreview.com, look at the pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? Not if he just wants to get into photography it doesn't.

I use one 'Lexar 512MB 80x Professional CompactFlash with WA Technology' which equates to about 120 shots in my 20D's largest finest JPEG mode. I've never run out of space, even on a full day's shooting.

Quality not quantity guys...

P.S: I'd highly reccomend the Lexar range of CF cards.

586434980[/snapback]

I shot in RAW and filled a 2GB card in just over a day, morning to night and through. Where's this going?

I agree with the quality aspect though, get this highest quality card you can afford, then consider the highest quantity you can afford to pick up of that card. That's what I done, chose the range of cards I wanted, picked the capacity I felt was a good price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shot in RAW and filled a 2GB card in just over a day, morning to night and through. Where's this going?

I agree with the quality aspect though, get this highest quality card you can afford, then consider the highest quantity you can afford to pick up of that card. That's what I done, chose the range of cards I wanted, picked the capacity I felt was a good price.

586435147[/snapback]

Most beginners don't shoot RAW though do they? That's my argument for why he doesn't need high capacity.

If he wants to shoot fast moving cars he'll probably want some burst, so a fast card would be a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, without a doubt :) I just guessed with memory being so cheap why not go for 1 or 2GB, the Lexar 80x CF are nice, as are Sandisk Ultra III. Burst mode'll be dumping a lot of images onto that card as well ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

sorry for bringing back a old thread but i've been a bit low on cash and now would like some advise.

I can get the canon 300D on Ebay for ?400ish.

Would it be worth getting this camera, or holding out for a price drop ?!

Anyone selling one !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have a nikon D70 and it has served me well. but an important note, you want to take pictures of fast moving cars. that almost has nothing to do with your camera but the lens you put on it. are you talking about race cars from the stands? if you want to take good pictures, unforuntately you're going to need like a 70-200 mm or a 100-300 mm type of lens with f-stop 2.8 or a bit slower. thats going to cost you around $2k you could buy a used an older 80-200 mm if you go the nikon route though which could fall under a thousand.

just a heads up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have a nikon D70 and it has served me well. but an important note, you want to take pictures of fast moving cars. that almost has nothing to do with your camera but the lens you put on it. are you talking about race cars from the stands? if you want to take good pictures, unforuntately you're going to need like a 70-200 mm or a 100-300 mm type of lens with f-stop 2.8 or a bit slower. thats going to cost you around $2k you could buy a used an older 80-200 mm if you go the nikon route though which could fall under a thousand.

just a heads up.

586651330[/snapback]

ouches!

well, i want to get into photography first, then would love to be able to take nice piccies of racing i go to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.