Only going to become a more complicated subject in the future for sure.
I thought it was a fine review, if i wanted to know the rest of the specs, id most likely check out one of the camera only blog sites that do more in depth testing after i used your guide to choose one i was going to think about buying.

DP review is the place to go.

Wow, I can finally post.

I realise that this is entirely off topice, but hooray. I never thought I'd see the day. It's taken six months.

PLEASE don't ban me for going off topic.

Honestly, nitpicking details aside, it really just comes down to which ui works the way you think and which camera shows what you shoot in the way you like..

for example, nikon menus make sense to me, and nikon seems to make sports/action shots 'pop' more, so i went nikon. Would any of the above work just as well? probably, but i prefer having a ui thats intuitive to me and i like the vivid colors.

@iTheophilus: You know, if you said something interesting, it wouldn't be a concern.

Back to cameras- I was curious about the olympus problem- does the camera hunt to the far or near side of the target every time, or does it go a random direction? I was thinking that maybe it's a problem with the kit lens not correctly reporting how far the focus mechanism is racked to the camera, so the camera tries to correct it in the "wrong" direction till it hits the stop, then bounces back till the AF hits.

IE, the lens says it's focused at 3 feet when the object is 3.5 feet away, and when you try to refocus, the camera goes "crap, the object is farther than 3 feet" and goes to infinity and back looking for a hit?

these reviews are great the way they are, cuz it's true, while these are SLR's, they're for beginners. where auto mode functions are only dumb in models like the canon 1D MkIII or nikon D3. these are for serious work. and guess what...when a pro wants to take casual party pics, what will she or he grab? a point & shoot or compact DSLR for some of the auto modes.

@japhar81: Good point- I've always shot with canons, and I know exactly where all the stuff is without too much effort. Go with what you know :)

As far as personal preference goes, I went with canon originally because they have a multitude of kickass macros, and I loves me some bugs.

Wait, I thought they were all obsolete.
[gizmodo.com]
Make up your mind Giz

Excellent post and follow-up, Giz. I bought my first DSLR (a Nikon D40) about 18 months ago and I am slowly turning into a Nikon fanboy. You're spot on about Nikon's entry level DSLRs not being great for beginners, though. I was lucky enough to have attended one of Nikon's "Digital Photography School" seminars and I learned a lot. Without it, it would have been much more difficult. The class wasn't free, but I felt that it was worthwhile. I still consider myself a newbie when it comes to DSLRs, but I'm out there taking pics every weekend and I feel my shots and skills are improving nicely. By the way, the D40 has that same AF lamp; and you're right - it should be easier to disable. Thanks again for the posts!

@m4ximusprim3:
Ouch. Almost. Is that like a flame?

Back to cameras. I like to shoot in natural light, without flash, using a fast ISO setting. I don't mind the noise this produces, especially if it's grain-like and not too digital, and I like to shoot with the lens fully open to get the shortest possible depth of field. Which of these cameras is best at ISO 3200? Any thoughts people?

you can tell that the canon rebels are made for beginners by the built in flash. notice that the more high-end/professional cameras are missing built in flashes (b/c the built in flashes are crap)

In response to your Nikon critique involving the AF assist lamp:
In the dark where a flash or long exposure is necessary, the AF assist light is required or you will most likely not be able to focus on anything. I am pretty sure that on all nikon cameras, the camera will not allow the shutter to release (take a picture) if the autofocus is turned on and it has not selected the true AF point. The reason why the light is so bright is so that it can focus further away. That being said a more sensitive AF sensor would help the situation, however I feel the light is more of a requirement than an annoyance.

@Anhizer - Nikon's AF sensors are as sensitive if not more sensitive than other brands. I shoot with a pro Nikon camera and I still turned the AF assist lamp off, first thing.

One neat trick (for any camera) is to use a laser pointer on the object you want to focus on in the dark and then focus on the laser dot, but that's getting off topic.

I agree with a commenter on the previous thread stating that the Olympus E510 would have been a better comparison model, as it is similarly priced (not to mention better than the E420).

Ravlen

@iTheophilus: The Depth of Field is shallow or deep. Not short or long, if you wanna get photo-snobby technical with it. But your talking depths so just think of a pool. If you were buying a DSLR today I would fully recommend a Nikon D80, D70, D100, or D70s. In the Canon family I would say 10D, 300D, 350D, or 400D. You can find them at awesome prices and they aren't any worse than these current gen cameras. I said it in the other thread but if you are good you can get awesome prints up to 13 x 19 with any of these and I've made larger prints with a 4 MP. Don't buy into megapixels or live view. Flash sync, max/min ISO, and max shutter speed are good to look at. D80 can get passable b&w photos at 3200 iso. I love mine for what its worth.

@Wilson Rothman:
Also before I head out maybe there should be a new battlemodo: Current generation starter DSLR vs. older-and-once-more-expensive-but-now-just-as-cheap DSLRs. Just a thought because B&H and the like still carry the older models and at some of the prices they are currently at I would jump all over them
For instance:
[www.bhphotovideo.com]
VS
[www.bhphotovideo.com]

@thechansen: Ah, the 300D. I remember it like it was yesterday...

then I woke up today after a couple years of practice, serious gear head syndrome, and now I'm shooting with a 5D and L lenses.

SLR photography: the kit lens is just a taste; next you're pawning your family's TV for another hit of that sweet, fast glass. B&H is my pusher - kinda. Of course, I haven't yet met a professional crack addict, so it's not as bad as it sounds. Just somewhat expensive for an enthusiastic hobbyist.

Anyway, I'd grab a 400D off eBay instead of the XSI. 10MP and that anti-dust feature can certainly be more than you need. 1.6X crop also a bonus when considering telephoto lenses.

I went with the D40, amazon has super sweet deals on two lens packages occasionally. 550 for the kit 18-55 AND 55-200. I made the DSLR jump in Jan for my golden birthday, it's by far my favorite gadget i've purchased so far, and like many of the Giz readers, I waste pretty much all of my money on gadgets, it's just an addiction. Coming from a point and shoot I'm just blown away at how awesome pictures come out with a DSLR. Nikon has an amazing lens selection, from Nikkor and of course 3rd parties. I just picked up a Sigma 10-20mm super wide angle and it's just amazing. I don't think all of these DSLR's are worth the extra money over a D40. read Ken Rockwell's review on the D40 and his comparison of it to the D60. Spend money on glass. if you really wana drop money on a body, get a D300 or D3. I almost went Canon, they are quite nice, but i like the size of the D40 much better, it's lighter, smaller, and feels like better build quality, at least compared to the XTi, i'm anxious to feel this new XSi.

what most newbs don't realize is that glass is what really makes or breaks the camera. I had two Canon L lenses, f/2.8 boys. Those were fucking great lenses. I really really like the nikkor lenses though. Even the nonpro glass seems real high quality. I like the constant f/4 ones and my 1.4 50mm prime will last longer than me. Shit even the kit lenses 18-55 VR is a pretty decent piece.

yes i agree that these cameras are targeted towards "n00bs" and poor professionals.. but these cameras can still be used for professional purposes.. and they are perfect for the people who want to experience a more "professional feel" before spending the professional dollars..

so it can be pretty ridiculous to hear someone say a 700 - 1000 dollar noob/pro sumer camera has to have great auto features to be a great camera... although i dont think thats what your really saying..

i also think canon just wants to sell some cameras lol

What about the lack of the Pentax K200D? I am interested in how that fairs since I am looking to get a DSLR and that seems to have interesting features.

I think a lot of people who buy the prosumer DSLR's want to learn about how cameras work and have the control, but probably don't have the knowledge to do it just yet. A good auto mode is important for those people because if they have a shot they have to get, and they're not confident in their abilites, they just throw it on the square and fire away.

Shit, I've been shooting since before digital and with my 5D I'm stil guilty of leaving the thing on Av for entire shoots. The auto modes are so good, unless you're trying for a specific effect, it's easier to just set the aperature and then play with exposure compensation to get what you're looking for.

GREAT piece, but I'd also like to see the PentaxK10D included in the review.

@thechansen:

Thanks - I'm really liking the Nikon D80 with an 18-135mm lens. I know the lens is a compromise, but as you say, they're great lenses given that.

By the way, I've often tended to talk about long and short depth of field in my working life in television - maybe it's a UK/US thing.

Anyway, appreciate the advice.

great article!

i think any effort to get any photographer way from the point and shoot or cell phone camera phones to real SLR cameras is great!

I bought the Canon 400D/XTi on impulse in December. I didn't think it would get used, but I find myself using the hell out of the thing all the time, and using every excuse I can get to take pictures. I'm one of the n00bs you speak of, and I bought a DSLR for practical reasons:

Everything I hated about digital cameras are addressed in DSLRs. It doesn't take long to boot up, there's no waiting between taking more pictures, the picture is taken the instant I hit the shutter, and it doesn't eat AAs. Those qualities alone mad me realize I might want to try a DSLR, because point-and-shoots just frustrated me. Now, I could never go back.

Oh, and for Canon users, I recommend this Blue Crane DVD I found for my camera. It's a terrific tutorial and introduces you to the fundamentals of photography with your specific camera.

again. dpreview.com
just my .02 but AF assist is a great feature, if it were "off" by default, nobody would ever benefit from it, because the average user would not seek it out from the menu and enable its focus-assisting goodness...