Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
I have a Olympus E510. It's an older camera, but it also feels pretty solid and takes some nice shots. I know that olympus doesn't really have the same support as Canon and Nikon, but I found that for a first DSLR, it's not too shabby. Pentax makes some really nice cameras as well, as I have played around with my brothers a little. Now neither of these have the 1080p video ( in fact neither of them have video), but for someone that is interested in cameras and amateur photography, these are decent options if you are looking at getting into amateur photography...
I'd love to play with a DSLR, but I just can't justify it... I know how to set the manual settings, but for the cost of the cheapest one here, I could get a Sony DSC-WX1 that does great night shots, automatic panoramas, and most importantly, it's small enough I could have it on me when I need to take a picture.
I'm not coming out against DSLR or anything, but for my uses... they're just so huge I'd never have it with me, and the price is so high I couldn't buy one for non-professional use.
@fuchikoma: Heh, I've noticed that too about cameras. I can never be arsed to bring it with me. (I have a Panasonic-something-or-the-other better than your average compact camera but not as good as a DSLR making it pretty big, but not too big)
@fuchikoma: most of us DSLR users have a P&S to go along. I take both on vacations, and the PS still gets plenty of use. But when you start looking at pictures from your trip when you get home, the DSLR advantages are quite clear and makes me wonder why I didnt lug the better camera around that day.
But yes, the new Sony WX1 is quite amazing in low light and panoramics... havent seen 100% crops side by side tho, I just toyed with one at a friends house.
@irfan: That would be ideal... but I'm not a photographer, so I'm afraid I can only drop $400 on a camera every 5 years or so.
To me, I'd get a DSLR for more artistic effects like depth of field, very long exposures, bokeh, or HDR, but a while back a friend and I were comparing our cameras - he had some kind of 7MP Olympus DSLR and I had a 7MP Sony DSC-P150. In extreme darkness you could see the sensor noise on my camera, and he could just set a very long exposure, so that was a clear win for him if we were printing hi-res posters or competing in a photo competition.
But ultimately, while he's very happy with it because he does make use of all the features, when we compare ordinary shots, his camera's pics look 3-5% better, but his camera cost about 220% as much before lenses. I'd love to have all the manual features he does, but I just can't pay that when I take about 50 shots a year and keep about half that many...
@fuchikoma: plain and simple, if youre only taking 50 shots a year then a DSLR makes no sense... neither does a $400 point and shoot. Id just get a year old model of a Canon PowerShot SDXXX for maybe $200 and call it a day.
If you're talking about "new cameras still sold in some capacity", I think the rock-bottom priced but best image quality cameras are the Canon 450D (xsi) and the Nikon D40.
The Nikon D3000 is a D60 with an idiot guide, and the D60 is a D40 with a rangefinder and a few more megapixels... no big deal.
The Canon 450D retains better high ISO quality than the 500D (t1i) in some respects. The T1i's main draw is the video and slightly improved (in my opinion) ergonomics, but the 450D is a hell of a lot cheaper.
@NewbiusMaximus: You've just laid out the internal conversation I've been having over the last week trying to make the decision which one to get. Well, except I dallied a bit with the idea of a micro 4/3. I like the idea of a small camera for convenience but the lenses are few and rather expensive to justify for a beginner like me.
@FigNinja: I would like a m4/3 camera too, but again, they are out of most price ranges. I think that the Nikon D40 is already rather small, same with the Rebel XS (which is another great choice). If you prefer something small but gives great pictures, a Nikon D40 or a Rebel XS with a 50mm prime lens (I prefer a 35mm myself but the 50mm is cheaper), is pretty compact, very inexpensive, yet produces high quality images. The 50mm f/1.8 "teaches" you how to be a good photographer as well... namely how to abuse depth of field and how to zoom using your feet =D
@NewbiusMaximus: Yeah. I was definitely planning on the 50mm. It seems just the thing to learn on and I need a pretty fast lens for the conditions I'm shooting in. I was thinking of going with a used body, maybe a couple models back.
@taketheleap: I agree with the refurb statement. I think I'm gonna order a Pentax K10D from Best buy for $380! That was an $800 camera new a little over a year ago. Body only, but I already have a pentax that I can swap over the lenses, flash, etc. I also read a couple of blogs that people are saying these are new old stock, but Pentax won't let them be sold for new.
@taketheleap: When I decided to jump from a p&s to a DSLR, I picked up a refurb Nikon D40 2 months ago with the kit lens for $360.00. With what I saved over a D3000, I also bought the 200mm lens, a Speedlight and a nice Crumpler case. Total outlay $690.00
@FigNinja: I signed up to the Nikon list directly (Canada, Toronto area) just by asking to be on it. I'd call up your local Nikon rep and see if they have a refurb list; costs nothing to get on, huge deals!
I want to recommend the Olympus E-520 for an amateur camera, it's pretty cheap ($450 with a 14-42mm lens), has a ton of modes, and gets great shots. I got one at about the same time a few friends of mine got Nikon D40s and D60s and they were stupefied how I was able to achieve different effects with great ease (bokeh for instance) when they weren't. What's nice about it as a beginner camera is that its manual explains stuff pretty well, and the special modes have preview pictures embedded with explanations ("sunset" will show a picture of a golden sunset then say that it emphasizes yellows).
@Drew Garrett: I've been considering the Olympus, too. It seems well-reviewed and if micro 4/3 takes off, you have some lenses you could easily use with a smaller body. Olympus seems to have a loyal, if small, following. They don't get much notice. Everyone's centered on the Nikons and Canons. They seem to have really good jpeg conversion and color fidelity, though.
I've got a Canon 7D, and while the video is pretty decent, it doesn't really compare to my Nikon D300 as a still camera. The autofocus still kind of sucks as compared to my Nikon, and image quality, while debatable, is lesser than my D300. I was actually pretty disappointed when comparing the two, as I had bought the Canon to replace the Nikon, but now I've decided to keep the D300...
@sydcinema: If you had moved to the Canon 7D, it would have been a lateral move at best. The 7D is pretty much a direct competitor to the D300S, which isn't much of an upgrade over your own camera (unless you want the video).
I am assuming that if you bought such an expensive camera that you would back it up with a few Nikkors, in which case the move to Canon would have made even less sense. However, the Canon 7D is a hell of a camera, and it would be interesting to see how Nikon responds to it for the next Dx00.
@wardy89: I have access to everything Canon makes. In other words, all the good ones, as well as using a Nikon adapter for some of my Nikon lenses. If anyone's looking at getting a 7D for image quality alone, I'd suggest looking at the 5D for a few $ more. It's autofocus is terrible, but I don't know of anything out there for $2700 that matches it in image quality, and video performance seems to be a bit better than the 7D as well, save for the frame rate issue. Don't get me wrong, I really like all the cameras I mentioned as well as a ton more, (They're not mentioned in the article so I won't get into that one) but I have yet to find a camera that does everything I'd like it to do really well, so that requires I use several different cameras for different jobs...
@SewerShark: LOOK BEHIND YOU, A THREE HEADED MONKEY!!!: Not always? If your lenses are crap, even low resolution sensors can pick out things like chromatic aberration, distortion and softness. And then what happens if/when you decide to upgrade your camera? You're still stuck with a crappy lens, with your exceptional sensor! It only leads to crappier images... if you buy a good lens, you'll use it even if you upgrade your camera bodies. They also retain their values quite a bit better, since DSLR bodies plummet with depreciation like cars do.
@NewbiusMaximus: The same way you can upgrade your body, you can upgrade your lens. I never said that the lenses were not important, but they are part of a equation.
Yeah, no love for Sony or Pentax. Canikon fanboys only for this thread.
These cameras all have merit, but it's silly to ignore the fact that you can get fantastic results from other brands.
I'm a Pentax fan, and while you won't see me shooting for Vogue or SI, I can buy equipment adequate for any amateur (don't pump yourself up too much) and save boatloads of money.
@dMek: You could always try Olympus or Sony, or even Pentax. I've heard good things from my friends who own them, and they have a relatively large selection of lenses that can rival that of Nikon or Canon. And the in-camera stabilization would save you a load in the long run; both Canon and Nikon have to add in stabilization via the lens, and that increases the price of those lenses.
That said, I'm still using Nikon for the sole reason that I love my old lenses, and want to keep using them. Nikon's F-mount has essentially stayed the same for the past 35 years, and the gigantic number of lenses possible is the deal sealer for me.
Plus, finding cheap, high quality Nikon-mount lenses on eBay is incredibly easy.
@dMek: yep, but the sheer volume of accessories and lenses available for Canon and Nikon dwarf all the other brands, which is why I will always have one of those two.
Bluecold:Of volcanic temperament but soothed by a custard pie balsam. was starred
Bluecold:Of volcanic temperament but soothed by a custard pie balsam. was unstarred
True. (Actually though it's the AF-S 1.4 50mm, my favorite, and sharpest lens) Some of what I do is product photography for which I get paid. Still, even if I was strictly amateur I still like the fact that there is a huge range of accessories to choose from.
Nikon and Canon aren't the only DSLR brands..... I've been very happy with my Olympus E-510. I've used it for over 2 years now, and I love it. I also got an E-P1 over summer, but that's a bit pricier.
@spyker3292: Have you had good results using any of your Oly lenses on your E-P1? Also, is the E-P1 AF as slow as people say? I really like the idea of this combo.
04:22 PM
11/26/09
11/26/09
I'm not coming out against DSLR or anything, but for my uses... they're just so huge I'd never have it with me, and the price is so high I couldn't buy one for non-professional use.
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
But yes, the new Sony WX1 is quite amazing in low light and panoramics... havent seen 100% crops side by side tho, I just toyed with one at a friends house.
11/26/09
To me, I'd get a DSLR for more artistic effects like depth of field, very long exposures, bokeh, or HDR, but a while back a friend and I were comparing our cameras - he had some kind of 7MP Olympus DSLR and I had a 7MP Sony DSC-P150. In extreme darkness you could see the sensor noise on my camera, and he could just set a very long exposure, so that was a clear win for him if we were printing hi-res posters or competing in a photo competition.
But ultimately, while he's very happy with it because he does make use of all the features, when we compare ordinary shots, his camera's pics look 3-5% better, but his camera cost about 220% as much before lenses. I'd love to have all the manual features he does, but I just can't pay that when I take about 50 shots a year and keep about half that many...
11/28/09
11/26/09
The Nikon D3000 is a D60 with an idiot guide, and the D60 is a D40 with a rangefinder and a few more megapixels... no big deal.
The Canon 450D retains better high ISO quality than the 500D (t1i) in some respects. The T1i's main draw is the video and slightly improved (in my opinion) ergonomics, but the 450D is a hell of a lot cheaper.
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/27/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
I just picked up a Nikon D70 from Nikon for $200, 18-55mm lens included.
Most times it's something basic wrong with the camera that Nikon will fix in 10 minutes and resell for a tiny fraction of the cost of new.
The camera is five years old, but for $200, you really cannot go wrong.
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
10:15 AM
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
I am assuming that if you bought such an expensive camera that you would back it up with a few Nikkors, in which case the move to Canon would have made even less sense. However, the Canon 7D is a hell of a camera, and it would be interesting to see how Nikon responds to it for the next Dx00.
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
It is only about $480 @newegg, and comes with the lens, battery/charger, etc.
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
These cameras all have merit, but it's silly to ignore the fact that you can get fantastic results from other brands.
I'm a Pentax fan, and while you won't see me shooting for Vogue or SI, I can buy equipment adequate for any amateur (don't pump yourself up too much) and save boatloads of money.
Make great photos, not great brand endorsements!
11/26/09
My goal is to eventually pick up a K-7 when the price drops down to where the K20D is right now, but for now, I'm staying out of the DSLR wars.
11/26/09
11/26/09
That said, I'm still using Nikon for the sole reason that I love my old lenses, and want to keep using them. Nikon's F-mount has essentially stayed the same for the past 35 years, and the gigantic number of lenses possible is the deal sealer for me.
Plus, finding cheap, high quality Nikon-mount lenses on eBay is incredibly easy.
11/26/09
11/26/09
11/26/09
True. (Actually though it's the AF-S 1.4 50mm, my favorite, and sharpest lens) Some of what I do is product photography for which I get paid. Still, even if I was strictly amateur I still like the fact that there is a huge range of accessories to choose from.
11/26/09
11/26/09