Sorry you must get this a lot.
Discussion
But I'm in the market for an entry level DLSR with a £380 budget (not body only).
It'll be used to take pictures of my car and more importantly Vegas. Well not more importantly but yeah.
To the point I don't really know what I'm looking for and I am aware I can get a lot more bang for buck if I open my wallet but right now the wallet belongs to other things. So please fire away with your suggestions :thumb up:
Cheers guys and girls.
It'll be used to take pictures of my car and more importantly Vegas. Well not more importantly but yeah.
To the point I don't really know what I'm looking for and I am aware I can get a lot more bang for buck if I open my wallet but right now the wallet belongs to other things. So please fire away with your suggestions :thumb up:
Cheers guys and girls.
PSBuckshot said:
So I can get a lot of lenses and then when i go to the F1 and general cool places I can take much better photos.
Plus it's a bit like owning a Mac. If you know what I mean.
Hmmm. Having a better camera will not make you take better photos. For that it takes a lot of practice and patience. If you are after an SLR then any of the entry level DSLR's from Canon, Nikon or Sony will be absolutely fine. The best advice would be to go in to a shop and hold/try the different types. Some people find that certain makes fit their hands better and the controls are laid out more to their liking than others. Plus it's a bit like owning a Mac. If you know what I mean.
As you don't own any lenses at the moment you don't have any reason for staying with one particulay brand so try things like the Canon 1100D, Nikon D3100 or if you don't need a proper SLR something like the Sony NEX series which are compacts but allow different lenses to be fitted.
I really don't know what you mean by, "it's like owning a Mac".
With a normal camera these are as good as my pictures can get within my skill level.
They are not great, far from it. But they stretched my cameras ability as they're grainy after the zoom.
Quality be the main reason I'm DLSR hunting.
It's not the reason as much, just after an entry level DLSR within my budget.
They are not great, far from it. But they stretched my cameras ability as they're grainy after the zoom.
Quality be the main reason I'm DLSR hunting.
It's not the reason as much, just after an entry level DLSR within my budget.
PSBuckshot said:
Quality be the main reason I'm DLSR hunting.
It's not the reason as much, just after an entry level DLSR within my budget.
In that case www.camerapricebuster.co.uk is your friend.It's not the reason as much, just after an entry level DLSR within my budget.
Trust me when I say all the entry level DSLR's are in the same ballpark when it comes to image quality. The difference will be how you get on with the camera.
For your budget you will only be getting a short lens, around an 18-55mm would be my guess as that is what most entry level stuff in your price range comes in at. It may be worth trying to lay your hands on an extra £200 for a twin lens kit which would give an 18-55 and a 70-300.
I'd recommend getting yourself a second hand Canon 450D or similar with lens or two to get you going (you can pick up a body for about £250). Or maybe a 30D if you want something a little larger and better built.
You can always upgrade to a new body at a later date as well as the lenses
Look here (hopefully you can see the page) smack on budget
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread...
You can always upgrade to a new body at a later date as well as the lenses
Look here (hopefully you can see the page) smack on budget
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread...
'twas just about to type what the previous 2 posters mentioned
I'd look for a used body (Canon or Nikon) and a couple of lenses - probably 18-55 and 55-250 (or even 70-300 if possible). That'll give you a good spread of range, from landscapes to motorsports.
Plus that'll be a lot more camera equipment for your money - buying used would probably mean almost £800
On the Canon side the ***D models are a little smaller, lighter, less immediate controls and are a bit cheaper. The **D models are larger, heavier, more controls at your fingertips and are a bit more expensive. Probably personal preference whether you want something lighter / smaller for travelling, or heavier and 'semi-pro' like the **D range.
I'd look for a used body (Canon or Nikon) and a couple of lenses - probably 18-55 and 55-250 (or even 70-300 if possible). That'll give you a good spread of range, from landscapes to motorsports.
Plus that'll be a lot more camera equipment for your money - buying used would probably mean almost £800
On the Canon side the ***D models are a little smaller, lighter, less immediate controls and are a bit cheaper. The **D models are larger, heavier, more controls at your fingertips and are a bit more expensive. Probably personal preference whether you want something lighter / smaller for travelling, or heavier and 'semi-pro' like the **D range.
Simpo Two said:
Main problem there is the location - a better camera isn't going to get rid of the waving hands or catch fencing!
But yes, motorsport/airshows = DSLR.
It's not the hands etc that bother me, I quite like that as it adds atmosphere but I was getting at that it's quite grainy. I'll have a look at the ones people suggested though. Danke. But yes, motorsport/airshows = DSLR.
Simpo Two said:
If you need really long range and currently use a compact or bridge camera with 1,000x digitalmegazoom, then you may be in for a shock in DSLR-land as lenses over 300mm start getting expensive. Just a thought.
Indeed. Maybe something like the following may be better (equivalent of a 24-840mm optical zoom) http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0042RUAQ...Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff