Recommend me a good, cheap, 1st decent, digital camera

[monthefish]

As above really...

I've only ever used cheap, basic digital cameras but have been amazed by the quality of some of the basic shots, taken by people with no real talent, but have a half-decent camera.

Is a Canon EOS 1000D Black + 18-55mm Lens Kit any good? (Don't want to spend much more than about £300 - £350).

Edited by monthefish on Thursday 19th August 15:23

[tgx4776]

monthefish said:

As above really...

I've only ever used cheap, basic digital cameras but have been amazed by the quality of some of the basic shots, taken by people with no real talent, but have a half-decent camera.

Is a Canon EOS 1000D Black + 18-55mm Lens Kit any good? (Don't want to spend much more than about £300 - £350).

Edited by monthefish on Thursday 19th August 15:23

Right it's probably your best option for compatibility in the long run. Have you gotten your hands on one and played with it a bit?


I have heard from reviews that the Nikon D3000 is ste. If you Like Nikon (I do) a used D40X is your best option even better then the D60. and will be in your price range.

You could give Sony a go as well but there are mixed reviews and I wonder how long they will be around. Olympus is good with good reviews but I have heard lenses are getting to be a pain to find.

but give what ever you like a go before you buy and make sure you will want to use it. it's great if you have a friend with a similar camera.


or save up a few more quid and buy yourself the Pentax K-x with HD video and Nikon like controls for about $400. then pick up some old Pentax lenses for next to nothing.

Edited by tgx4776 on Thursday 19th August 17:03

[heyho]

tgx4776 said:

You could give Sony a go as well but there are mixed reviews and I wonder how long they will be around. Olympus is good with good reviews but I have heard lenses are getting to be a pain to find.

With a budget of £350, this is hard to beat:

http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/product/645370/SO...

I don't think Sony are going anywhere sometime soon, as they have just released 3 new alpha mount lenses, and the long awaited A7xx is due out sometime this year, along with another couple of bodies.

[monthefish]

heyho said:

tgx4776 said:

You could give Sony a go as well but there are mixed reviews and I wonder how long they will be around. Olympus is good with good reviews but I have heard lenses are getting to be a pain to find.

With a budget of £350, this is hard to beat:

http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/product/645370/SO...

I don't think Sony are going anywhere sometime soon, as they have just released 3 new alpha mount lenses, and the long awaited A7xx is due out sometime this year, along with another couple of bodies.

That looks fine.

I know nothing about cameras, and was just going for Canon as it is (one of) the known brands.

The one I linked to said it has an '18 - 55 lens kit' whereas that on has a '18-55mm optical zoom'. Does that mean the Canon lenses are seperate but the Sony's are built in?

[GetCarter]

monthefish said:

but have been amazed by the quality of some of the basic shots, taken by people with no real talent, but have a half-decent camera.

I am also amazed at the crap some people take with very good cameras!

(not in this forum of course!)

Stick to Nikon or Canon and you won't go wrong.

[LongQ]

monthefish said:

The one I linked to said it has an '18 - 55 lens kit' whereas that on has a '18-55mm optical zoom'. Does that mean the Canon lenses are seperate but the Sony's are built in?

I would guess they are one and the same specification for practical comparison.

You really have 2 routes to follow here.

1. Take your time, research, work out what the marketing speak means and become familiar with the options and terminology.

2. Dive in, buy something (not too expensive), and gain understanding as you go.

Either approach could go either way in terms of your ultimate satisfaction with your choice - but you willl likely never be able to compare anyway - the market moves constantly.

Which of the above most closely matches you usual approach to purchasing decisions?

[Simpo Two]

monthefish said:

The one I linked to said it has an '18 - 55 lens kit' whereas that on has a '18-55mm optical zoom'. Does that mean the Canon lenses are seperate but the Sony's are built in?

This is the problem with marketing-speak - it confuses normal intelligent people like you who are trying to learn.

When compact digital cameras were young they had no 'zoom' lens at all. Instead, they sometimes had a 'digital zoom' which means they just cropped the middle bit and expanded it to fill the screen. That's why digital zooms are st, and the 'proper' way to zoom is optically. Optical zoom good, digital zoom bad.

The Canon advert just tells you the focal range of the lens because it assumes you know the rest. Sadly the Sony advert says 'optical zoom' to try engage with the compact crowd, but ends up using compact terminology in DSLR-land.

Both are 'optical

[Puggit]

Panasonic Lumix G1

[tgx4776]

I recommended not going for Sony because i know sales have always been lowish. The company will be around for a while but for support in the future and an array of lenses from the past I'd Stick with Nikon, Canon or Pentax.

[-Pete-]

GetCarter said:

monthefish said:

but have been amazed by the quality of some of the basic shots, taken by people with no real talent, but have a half-decent camera.

I am also amazed at the crap some people take with very good cameras!

(not in this forum of course!)

Stick to Nikon or Canon and you won't go wrong.

Get a Canon or Nikon DSLR new or 2nd hand, 6+Mpix, start with a std zoom lens and then just start spending money as you realize another lens would be handy. A few £K later...

[XG332]

Go into Jessops and annoy a sales assistant for a few hours playing with cameras until one feels right and you cannot think of anymore questions.

[Vvroom]

OP- you've got mail.

[trix-a-belle]

XG332 said:

Go into Jessops and annoy a sales assistant for a few hours playing with cameras until one feels right and you cannot think of anymore questions.

+1
I'm just down the road from Warehouse Express and went to annoy them for an afternoon as my compact died so I bit the bullet and got a dslr.

I came away with a Sony A550 which has me set for a good while to come. I preferred having the image stabilisation within the camera body to save confusion and expense of lenses. I also had a sony cybershot before & was very happy with the menus and quality of picture & my dad & mate both have sony's that are getting on now but they still rave about and are not being overly shadowed by the up to date models

eta: & the benefit with Sony's is you can use Minolta lenses too that can still be picked up in various places so don't rule them out

S

Edited by trix-a-belle on Friday 20th August 09:42

[monthefish]

Thanks for all the advice chaps and chapesses.

GetCarter said:

Stick to Nikon or Canon and you won't go wrong.

This was/is my thinking.

Vvroom said:

OP- you've got mail.

Received.

XG332 said:

Go into Jessops and annoy a sales assistant for a few hours playing with cameras until one feels right and you cannot think of anymore questions.

I'd love to, but closest Jessops is probably 100+ miles away, and I'll need the camera before I next venture that way.

LongQ said:

You really have 2 routes to follow here.

1. Take your time, research, work out what the marketing speak means and become familiar with the options and terminology.

2. Dive in, buy something (not too expensive), and gain understanding as you go.

On a tight timetable, so I think option 2 is what I'll be doing.

Simpo Two said:

This is the problem with marketing-speak - it confuses normal intelligent people like you who are trying to learn.

When compact digital cameras were young they had no 'zoom' lens at all. Instead, they sometimes had a 'digital zoom' which means they just cropped the middle bit and expanded it to fill the screen. That's why digital zooms are st, and the 'proper' way to zoom is optically. Optical zoom good, digital zoom bad.

The Canon advert just tells you the focal range of the lens because it assumes you know the rest. Sadly the Sony advert says 'optical zoom' to try engage with the compact crowd, but ends up using compact terminology in DSLR-land.

Both are 'optical

Thanks for clarifying.

A chap I know, who is fairly into his photography (and has £k's worth of kit), showed me what the various lenses achieved, including one really wide angle lens (would that have been an 18mm?) which captured around 180(+?) degrees of vision. That lens was a seperate 'add-on' item (and therefore Optical zoom I take it) - will the above cameras achieve the same effect on their '18mm setting'?




Anyone know anything about a Canon 1000D?

[SamHH]

monthefish said:

Thanks for clarifying.

A chap I know, who is fairly into his photography (and has £k's worth of kit), showed me what the various lenses achieved, including one really wide angle lens (would that have been an 18mm?) which captured around 180(+?) degrees of vision. That lens was a seperate 'add-on' item (and therefore Optical zoom I take it) - will the above cameras achieve the same effect on their '18mm setting'?

No, an 18mm lens will not give you a 180 degree wide image, it'll be more like 75 degrees diagonally. You can buy lenses that will go wider, although I'm don't think any give a 180 degree horizontal field of view.

Edit: try this for examples of what various focal lengths (that's what the 18mm number is) look like:

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/learning_center/tools...

Edited by SamHH on Friday 20th August 11:57

[Seight_Returns]

No direct experience of the 1000d but believe that it's very similar to the 400d that I own and that was Canon's entry level DSLR about 4 years ago.

I think it would be an excellent first DSLR. It's low price is because it has an older sensor with "only" 10 MP, a more primitive autofocus system with "only" 7 points, a slower continuous frame rate with "only" 3 frames per second and a smaller LCS display of "only" 2.5 inches. None of these will restrict you much if at all as a beginner progressing to intermediate.

I'm going to give my daughter my 400d as she's showing an interest and some aptitude in photography - if I didn't have this to give her I'd be buying her a 1000d.

Make sure that the 18-55 lens that comes with it is the newer IS version - it's much better than the non IS one (because of better quality optics, not because it's got IS). Some come packaged with the new lens and some with the older one.

Add the Canon EF-S 55-250 zoom and the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 prime, neither of which are expensive, at some point in the future and you'll have a pretty capable bag of tricks for not much money.

[Simpo Two]

monthefish said:

A chap I know, who is fairly into his photography (and has £k's worth of kit), showed me what the various lenses achieved, including one really wide angle lens (would that have been an 18mm?) which captured around 180(+?) degrees of vision. That lens was a seperate 'add-on' item (and therefore Optical zoom I take it) - will the above cameras achieve the same effect on their '18mm setting'?

More like 8mm I'd say! It was either a proper fisheye lens or a fisheye adapter screwed onto the front of another lens (much cheaper but lower quality results). 18mm is about as wide as most affordable lenses go, but it's perfectly wide enough for normal use.

[LongQ]

Seight_Returns said:

No direct experience of the 1000d but believe that it's very similar to the 400d that I own and that was Canon's entry level DSLR about 4 years ago.

I think it would be an excellent first DSLR. It's low price is because it has an older sensor with "only" 10 MP, a more primitive autofocus system with "only" 7 points, a slower continuous frame rate with "only" 3 frames per second and a smaller LCS display of "only" 2.5 inches. None of these will restrict you much if at all as a beginner progressing to intermediate.

I'm going to give my daughter my 400d as she's showing an interest and some aptitude in photography - if I didn't have this to give her I'd be buying her a 1000d.

Make sure that the 18-55 lens that comes with it is the newer IS version - it's much better than the non IS one (because of better quality optics, not because it's got IS). Some come packaged with the new lens and some with the older one.

Add the Canon EF-S 55-250 zoom and the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 prime, neither of which are expensive, at some point in the future and you'll have a pretty capable bag of tricks for not much money.

Pretty much what I would say.

As another lens option I recently had the use of Sigma 18-200mmm lens (non IS) and was impressed given its low cost (circa £200) and compact size and weight. It has a few foibles at the extreme limits but nothing to concern one much and some were related to the camera (400D) rather than the lens.

At the budget you might also have a look the 450Ds on the Canon Outlet site on eBay. 'Refurbs' (but don't worry about that they should come at a few quid less than the best shop prices if you bid carefully) but with a full 12month Canon warranty. Refurb seems to mean that the boxes are not in retailable condition or that it has been shipped originally to a different country and now repacked with UK plugs and so on.

450D will give you a little bit more than a 1000D - most notably a 9 point focusing system rather than 7 and a few more Mpix in the sensor. But either should produce fine results as a low cost starter system. Later you add lenses and then maybe upgrade the body, then .... let's just say if you get involved it's a hobby that will keep you involved.

[heyho]

tgx4776 said:

I recommended not going for Sony because i know sales have always been lowish. The company will be around for a while but for support in the future and an array of lenses from the past I'd Stick with Nikon, Canon or Pentax.

Not quite sure what you're getting at, but maybe you are not aware that Sony Purchased Minolta's DSLR division in 2006 and continued production of the alpha mount system, allowing every Minolta AF lens to be used on all Sony DSLRs, meaning large choice of lenses from the past, and all stabilised to boot.

Sales maybe low in comparison to the big 2, but since their entry into the market, Sony have been the largest growing manufacturer of DSLRs, well ahead of Pentax I believe. In fact, if you believe everything you read on the internet, there have been a few questions asked over the future of Pentax.

I'm not suggesting for a minute that the OP should rush out and buy a Sony, but just pointing out a very good offer. If I thought that Sony were not likely to be around in this market in the near future, I'd jump straight onto a 7D tomorrow, but they are making all the right noises at the moment.

[GetCarter]

I think he's probably saying that there are shed loads of Nikon & Canon DSLR specific lenses for sale out there (both new and second hand), as they dominate the market, and Sony are a very distant third (even with Minolta lenses).

Sony make great DSLR cameras of course, but are not usually used by professionals, they are aimed at the (get the bucket for the name) pro-sumer.

When it comes to vid, it's a different matter of course.

Edited by GetCarter on Friday 20th August 21:50