Advice on Digital SLR £500-600 budget
Discussion
Hello All,
I have decided to invest in a D SLR and have got a shortlist together and would be interested to hear people's views on the positives and negatives of each, pictures I like to take are long night exposure's and day and night motorsport as well as the usual gumpf.
Ideally I would like a lens within the price which so far has put out my obvious first choice the Canon 40D.
List is as follows
Canon 450D
Nikon D60
Nikon D80
Sony A350
Thanks in advance for your opinions and advice.
I have decided to invest in a D SLR and have got a shortlist together and would be interested to hear people's views on the positives and negatives of each, pictures I like to take are long night exposure's and day and night motorsport as well as the usual gumpf.
Ideally I would like a lens within the price which so far has put out my obvious first choice the Canon 40D.
List is as follows
Canon 450D
Nikon D60
Nikon D80
Sony A350
Thanks in advance for your opinions and advice.
Avoid anything not Nikon or Canon as you want the most standard, expandible system as possible. This goes for availability of OEM and third party lenses, RAW converters, Cheap batteries, third-party remotes, etc etc.
Other than that, frankly any of the NikCanons mentioned will get fantastic results. And for a first DSLR at least, the image quality difference will be absolutely negligible.
I would buy what fits your hand best, is easy to use and save enough off the top to be able to afford a decent telephoto zoom on top. I agree the 40D is fantastic value for money, but a beginners DSLR may be better suited as it will help you out more, and at the top of the budget will narrow the lens choice.
The len/ses you chose will make far, far more difference to the quality of your shots than any of those bodies.
Other than that, frankly any of the NikCanons mentioned will get fantastic results. And for a first DSLR at least, the image quality difference will be absolutely negligible.
I would buy what fits your hand best, is easy to use and save enough off the top to be able to afford a decent telephoto zoom on top. I agree the 40D is fantastic value for money, but a beginners DSLR may be better suited as it will help you out more, and at the top of the budget will narrow the lens choice.
The len/ses you chose will make far, far more difference to the quality of your shots than any of those bodies.
Cheers fella I have posted on another photography forum but because I put the 40 D as an option they have all said get that, but with a lens I am looking at £800 which is too much of stretch.
I think I will have a pop into Jessops and see how I and the other half get on with them as she will use it a bit.
I think I will have a pop into Jessops and see how I and the other half get on with them as she will use it a bit.
I bought my 40D last month for £600 with a bag (decent Canon 10EG bag, it's fantastic), 2Gb CF card, spare battery (slightly more mA than the standard one) and an 18-55 non-IS lens.
The lens isn't as bad as I expected, but I was (am) a beginner to DSLR's.
Remember there is still £60 cashback on the 40D!
I see prices have gone up slightly since I bought, but I'd have a look here regardless of whether you try to get a 40D or not AJ Purdy & Co.
The lens isn't as bad as I expected, but I was (am) a beginner to DSLR's.
Remember there is still £60 cashback on the 40D!
I see prices have gone up slightly since I bought, but I'd have a look here regardless of whether you try to get a 40D or not AJ Purdy & Co.
As I said, the difference in cameras image quality wise is negligible. If you've never shot with a DSLR before any of them will be MASSIVE step up in quality over a compact. The lens choice is very important. I would seriously consider choosing the glass first, then seeing what you can afford body wise. In that order. If you can't push to an okay std lens and maybe a consumer 70-300 then you can't really afford a 40D (unless you plan to build up kit over time).
try www.camerapricebuster.com for good deals.
try www.camerapricebuster.com for good deals.
RVVUNM said:
Just bought a Canon 450d, chuffed to bits with it.HTH
Same here - got mine from Jessops (not always the cheapest) with £50 cashback and additional Tamron 70-300mm lens.ETA: This deal (but not sure if the £50 cashback still stands) - http://www.jessops.com/Store/s74764/1-136-481/Home...
Edited by sa_20v on Thursday 2nd October 11:57
Very wisely VxDuncan said:
... choosing the glass first...
Absolutely - I assumed that everybody going to a dSLR did that? Otherwise what is the point of a dSLR over a fixed lens arrangement, you're effectively paying for an entire system of which you're getting no use. You don't need a contraption with a complex mirror and shutter arrangement. You don't need the sensor dust PITA issues. you don't need the extra bulk and weight any more. You don't need the extra cost and the additional items on your insurance policies.The world, Fleabay and dealers is awash with secondhand lens that can accomplish all manner of wonderful things - and that choice is far more important than such trivia how may pixels the body will give you, or whether there's a special offer on this week.
The discussion has already taken a pro-Canon twist which is fair enough and may render my contribution irrelevant.
I use a D80 and I'd suggest against it on the basis of your opening statements about night long exposures. On exposures longer than about 2 minutes, D80 suffers appalling amp noise (basically the sensor heats up and you're left with visible, uncorrectable purple tainting in two corners of your image). The shot below was a 30 minute exposure, you can see the purple noise in the top left and bottom left corners extending at least quarter of the way across the image. In landscape mode it's the top two corners which are affected.
Sure, it has a long exposure noise reduction system that does a reasonable job but that means for every minute you're exposing, you also spend a minute afterwards kicking your heels waiting for your image to process. No-one wants to be doing that when it's cold, it's the wrong side of midnight, and your mates are moving on to their next shot. I speak from bitter experience.
Keep it below two minutes exposure time, tho, and you can get some cracking day and night results straight out of camera - check out my flickr stream and the flickr D80 group for more D80 shots. I'm sure there'll be the equiv groups and streams for Canon users.
Don't know if a similar sensor issue plagues the D60 but certainly haven't heard of it to any extent on Canons.
As for glass, Nikon can be affordable or very good quality but seldom both together. The current offerings from Sigma seem to be a good compromise between value and image quality at a non-pro level.
I use a D80 and I'd suggest against it on the basis of your opening statements about night long exposures. On exposures longer than about 2 minutes, D80 suffers appalling amp noise (basically the sensor heats up and you're left with visible, uncorrectable purple tainting in two corners of your image). The shot below was a 30 minute exposure, you can see the purple noise in the top left and bottom left corners extending at least quarter of the way across the image. In landscape mode it's the top two corners which are affected.
Sure, it has a long exposure noise reduction system that does a reasonable job but that means for every minute you're exposing, you also spend a minute afterwards kicking your heels waiting for your image to process. No-one wants to be doing that when it's cold, it's the wrong side of midnight, and your mates are moving on to their next shot. I speak from bitter experience.
Keep it below two minutes exposure time, tho, and you can get some cracking day and night results straight out of camera - check out my flickr stream and the flickr D80 group for more D80 shots. I'm sure there'll be the equiv groups and streams for Canon users.
Don't know if a similar sensor issue plagues the D60 but certainly haven't heard of it to any extent on Canons.
As for glass, Nikon can be affordable or very good quality but seldom both together. The current offerings from Sigma seem to be a good compromise between value and image quality at a non-pro level.
Cheers for the advice gents.
My reasons for looking at the different bodies is down to ISO ratings and FPS as this is something I was keen on getting the best I can to allow me as much flexibility with long exposure effects and sports photograph.
I was very much into long exposure's when I was younger in particular night shots and using very very long exposure times, I do not expect to be able to do the same with the digital SLR but I would like to have as much scope as possible, which is part of the reason for getting a decent body as I will most likely invest in a multitude of lenses over the next few years.
My reasons for looking at the different bodies is down to ISO ratings and FPS as this is something I was keen on getting the best I can to allow me as much flexibility with long exposure effects and sports photograph.
I was very much into long exposure's when I was younger in particular night shots and using very very long exposure times, I do not expect to be able to do the same with the digital SLR but I would like to have as much scope as possible, which is part of the reason for getting a decent body as I will most likely invest in a multitude of lenses over the next few years.
Edited by The Walrus on Thursday 2nd October 12:35
The Walrus said:
Podie said:
Have you mailed Kerso for prices...?
Nope not heard of Kerso before I am assuming he is a member of pistonheads ?Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff