What camera.... advise appreciated

[SimonMaidenhead]

Thinking of doing a safari later on this year, and have decided that I need a new camera in order to bring back some decent memories.
Now please excuse my ignorance, but what should I be looking for? I have a small sony cybershot 7.2 meg point and shoot, which is about 3 years old, and my phone now has a 5 meg camera built in.
What to look for with a budget of £1000?
Pixels?
Lens size?
Brand?
Number of features?

Or better still, can someone recommend a specific camera.

Many thanks in advance

[Simpo Two]

A safari is quite a specific task. You may be better off putting the lens first and the camera body second. Because you need long range and are (presumably) working in bright light, the Sigma 50-500 'Bigma' comes to mind. What body you strap behind it is largely secondary IMHO; any entry-level DSLR will do a good job. One with built-in anti-shake could be handy with this lens.

ETA link: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/search/?q=sigma%20...

Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 21st April 16:40

[jon-]

I agree with the above. A 400d body will be more than enough, just get a really nice long lens and you'll be rewarded with amazing pictures far beyond what you'd get by paying double on a body and half on a lens.

[SimonMaidenhead]

Excellent advise, cheers chaps. That lens looks like it'll fit the bill perfectly, but I think I'd need another shorter lens for general shots (think I need to up the budget a bit). With this in mind, what do you recommmend I prioritise on? Highest meg, shots per second, brand, or something more obvious that I'm missing.
Thanks again

[Goldeeno]

Possibly to even look second hand, i know a good friend of mine got rid of his 30D body for £350 i think, which is a great body, nicer to hold all day aswell. As for lens, sigma do a few nice lenses.

I considered these two:

Sigma 100-300mm F4 (£700)
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index.php?target=pr...

Sigma 50-500mm F4-6.3 (£730)
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index.php?target=pr...

The sigma 50-500 gives you that huge zoom range, so on safari, thats gonna help no end, but the 100-300 give you constant lens speed throughout its range. Not much difference really, but two i considered, untill i went way off and brought the Canon 100-400mm instead.

[Dogsey]

Agree with the entry level camera paired up with the Bigma, maybe add a nice 50mm 1.8 to the list as well for more general work, they're only around £70ish quid I think.

Oh and don't forget to show us the pictures when you get back!

[Goldeeno]

Saying that, if you can strech your budget a little more....
Canon 70-200mm f2.8 (£900) considering this lens is normally well over £1000
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-70-200mm-2-8-USM-Len...

Then you could use a converter on it as well 70-200 plus 2x converter gives you 140-400 f5.6. Plus the 70-200 is one of the best lenses ever! But it does mean it adds about £200 over your budget.

Canon 400D is a good choice, £350 now roughly plus 70-200.... £1250, converter is another £180 extra, in my eyes well worth spending a little extra to get that L series quality and a lens combination for anytime.

[Andy M]

Goldeeno said:

Saying that, if you can strech your budget a little more....
Canon 70-200mm f2.8

Canon's 2x converter is supposedly a bit of a dog, so instead of going for the 70-200mm I'd recommend Canon's 100-400mm. On a 1.6x crop camera (400D, 450D, 40D etc) you'll be looking at approx 640mm which will be perfect for you.

If you could stretch to buying a 400D, a 17-55IS and the 100-400 I think you'd be set

For reference, see: http://www.andybiggs.com/whatsinthebag.html

[jon-]

Andy M said:

Goldeeno said:

Saying that, if you can strech your budget a little more....
Canon 70-200mm f2.8

Canon's 2x converter is supposedly a bit of a dog, so instead of going for the 70-200mm I'd recommend Canon's 100-400mm. On a 1.6x crop camera (400D, 450D, 40D etc) you'll be looking at approx 640mm which will be perfect for you.

Don't forget at least a monopod that that range!

[Simpo Two]

Actually a 70-200 f2.8 with 2x teleconverter is a good option - effectively two lenses in one.

But you don't have to spend £1,000 on a Canon/Nikon one; you can get a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 for about half that, and mine was £350 second-hand.

Suddenly it's all fitting together:

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 + TC (second hand) £500
Entry level DSLR with kit lens £400
Consultancy fees for Simpo £100



(Have you noticed how nobody's bothered with pixels or FPS? That's because they're not really important, hurrah!)

Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 22 April 10:45

[jon-]

Simpo Two said:

Actually a 70-200 f2.8 with 2x teleconverter is a good option - effectively two lenses in one.

But you don't have to spend £1,000 on a Canon/Nikon one; you can get a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 for about half that, and mine was £350 second-hand.

Suddenly it's all fitting together:

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 + TC (second hand) £500
Entry level DSLR with kit lens £400
Consultancy fees for Simpo £100



(Have you noticed how nobody's bothered with pixels or FPS? That's because they're not really important, hurrah!)

Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 22 April 10:45

Don't forget your DSLR body must have at least 20MP and be able to shoot 30fps continuously for 3 minutes in RAW. (didn't want to disappoint :P)

As Simpo said around the 400 quid mark pretty much all the cameras are the same whether you go for a Canon 400d or a Nikon whatever. CMOS quality is of far greater importance than pixel count as anything over 10MP can shoot at pretty much pointless sizes for anything other than a3. Personally I'm a Canon fan, never really liked using a Nikon though I have to say their view finder is generally much better. Canon have £50 cashback on the 400d body too at the moment.

[Piers_K]

You dont want to be changing lenses to often when 'out in the field' on safari with a digi body.. all those lovely pictures with all those horrible dust spots over them...


Go for a single cover all zoom.. what depends on where you are going.. if the animals accept the cars as part of the landscape you won't need to go too long.. I found I didnt miss much in the Masai Mara with a film body and a 70-300..

[Simpo Two]

jon- said:

CMOS quality is of far greater importance than pixel count as anything over 10MP can shoot at pretty much pointless sizes for anything other than a3.

Most DSLRs seem to be 10Mp+ now and personally I found a humble 6Mp D70 produced very good A3 prints.

CMOS chips seem to be better at handling noise than CCDs and if the OP was doing his safari indoors then it might be something to consider. However in daylight I really don't think it's significant.

But I go back to my first point that when it comes to choosing a body, whilst we normally head for Nikon or Canon for future progression if nothing else, in this case using a long lens handheld from the back of a Land Rover, in-body anti-shake could be very handy. Nikon don't do this and I don't know about Canon, but Sony and Samsung do. It would be a cheaper option than buying IS/VR lenses.

[Piers_K]

Anti shake is a nice thing to have and if the OP has future use for it great.. but on safari your generally shooting in bright sunshine.. from a static vehicle (if the driver doesnt switch the engine off when near the animals.. ask him to) and you can use the window/ roof top to steady a shot if needed..

[jon-]

Piers_K said:

You dont want to be changing lenses to often when 'out in the field' on safari with a digi body.. all those lovely pictures with all those horrible dust spots over them...


Go for a single cover all zoom.. what depends on where you are going.. if the animals accept the cars as part of the landscape you won't need to go too long.. I found I didnt miss much in the Masai Mara with a film body and a 70-300..

Good advice, even with the newer Canon models self cleaning.

[jon-]

Simpo Two said:

jon- said:

CMOS quality is of far greater importance than pixel count as anything over 10MP can shoot at pretty much pointless sizes for anything other than a3.

Most DSLRs seem to be 10Mp+ now and personally I found a humble 6Mp D70 produced very good A3 prints.

CMOS chips seem to be better at handling noise than CCDs and if the OP was doing his safari indoors then it might be something to consider. However in daylight I really don't think it's significant.

But I go back to my first point that when it comes to choosing a body, whilst we normally head for Nikon or Canon for future progression if nothing else, in this case using a long lens handheld from the back of a Land Rover, in-body anti-shake could be very handy. Nikon don't do this and I don't know about Canon, but Sony and Samsung do. It would be a cheaper option than buying IS/VR lenses.

Well spotted, you're right I meant CCD.

Does anyone know whether an inbody IS is better than an IS lens? I'd have thought with ~£700 to spend you could get a reasonably long lens with IS. The 400d doesn't have it in body either, I'm not sure about the higher models.

Edited by jon- on Tuesday 22 April 12:22

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

Andy M said:

Goldeeno said:

Saying that, if you can strech your budget a little more....
Canon 70-200mm f2.8

Canon's 2x converter is supposedly a bit of a dog, so instead of going for the 70-200mm I'd recommend Canon's 100-400mm.

I had the 100-400mm and compared the results to a 70-200IS and Canon 2x. I'd say the 70-200mm combo was slightly better than the 100-400mm but the cost difference at the time was over £500, so I kept the 100-400mm.

[ehasler]

ThatPhilBrettGuy said:

Andy M said:

Goldeeno said:

Saying that, if you can strech your budget a little more....
Canon 70-200mm f2.8

Canon's 2x converter is supposedly a bit of a dog, so instead of going for the 70-200mm I'd recommend Canon's 100-400mm.

I had the 100-400mm and compared the results to a 70-200IS and Canon 2x. I'd say the 70-200mm combo was slightly better than the 100-400mm but the cost difference at the time was over £500, so I kept the 100-400mm.

I don't think there's much in it - I've lent both my 70-200 + 2xTC and 100-400 to a couple of people recently who've compared them and neither came out a clear winner.

One useful accesory for a safari would be a bean bag so you can rest the lens on the window of the 4x4. Take it out there empty, and fill up with beans or rice.

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

ehasler said:

One useful accesory for a safari would be a bean bag so you can rest the lens on the window of the 4x4. Take it out there empty, and fill up with beans or rice.

Or take it out there full and sell the contents to the natives for dinner at the end of the holiday

[CVP]

Another option would be the Olympus digital SLRs. Using the 4/3rds sensor you get a lot of pull for your money, their 55-200mm (same field of view as 110-400mm in old 35mm money) gets a good write up with very fast focussing etc. The colour rendition on the Olympuses is meant to be very nice and you get a body with built in dust removal and image stabilisation. The E510 plus that lens and a another mid range / wide angle zoom may be in your price range.

Chris