# Need help finding a camera



## Squeeky (Jul 31, 2008)

I want to get a dslr but am not sure on which one, theres so many out there & I have little knowledge of what's important in a camera. I did narrow it down a little I think. I'm on a limited budget (asuming I get the nerve to buy it) and figured 1k isn't bad of a price for a dslr. For the lens I want a zoom thats like 50mm-300mm & the resolution about 8.

Two cameras I have found that sound good are the Olympus EVOLT E-510 & the canon 40d. The canon sounds better to me but also cost more. I'm not sure if it'd be worth the exspence if the evolt is just as good

I'm still not sure of what I'd take photos of but I'm thinking macro & landscapes for the most part. I don't really stick with one type, but take photos of what catches my interest at the time. I'd love one that can last a long time, so that I don't end up getting better then the camera & end up needing a new one quick. I'm not really sure what I need in a camera, not even the exstreme basics like you'd need no matter what you shoot.
Thanks for all the help to those have answered & to anyone who might help me now.


----------



## iflynething (Jul 31, 2008)

Squeeky said:


> Image Stabilization, Aperture-priority mode and/or shutterspeed-priority mode, Defineable white balance reference, no digital zoom, tele zoom 20x, 3-7 pictures per second, ios speed 6400, Face recognition, Live view display screen, Hot shoe, Red-eye reduction, tiff and/or raw format, Proprietary batterie, water and shock proof (mostly shock), and dust reduction.


 
Lets make it general with all of these. 

*Image Stabilization*: Most have this from the lens. Canon is IS, Nikon VR. Not sure about the others
*Aperture/Shutter Priority*: All DSLR's will have this (that I'm aware of(
*White Balance*: Most have this. Auto, Incandescent, etc and Preset
*Digital Zoom*: If it had digital zoom, it's not a DSLR. They are all optical and you get the zoom directly through moving the lens. Most starting cameras come with a zoom that is about a 3x equivalent. 
*Frames Per Second (FPS)*: Vary from camera to camera. I believe the Olympus is 3.5 and the Canon is 6.5.
*ISO*: Most cameras go up pretty high but usually stop at 3200 or so. There is such a thing as Ho.1 and Ho. 2 which would be equivalent to 6400, less and more. I wouldn't shoot above 800 ISO on any DSLR (maybe the D3 or D300 from Nikon)
*Live View*: Some people like it, some people don't. Personally, I DO NOT. It sucks up your batters and most camera out there dont' autofocus. Pretty sure the 40D will not focus. There is nothing more that pains me more than seeing someone holding a SLR our in front of them. Leave that to a point and shoot to use live view.
*Hot Shoe/Red Eye*: It's all in the flash for the red eye and most starter camera will have a hot shoe for an external flash. The 5D from Canon does not have this. 
*Proprietary Batteries*: ? Huh. Most will have a rechargable battery. About 500 shots for each.
*Water and Shock Proof*: Ain't happenin with a DSLR.
*Dust Reduction*: Some starter cameras will offer the sensor cleaning which will _help *reduce *_the amount of dust on the sensor. I know the Nikon D60 offers this.



To pretty much sum it up, I dont' think you're going to get away with under $1,000 for a 40D. Might need to stick with the Nikon D series (40, 60) or like the Canon XTI and XSi, Sony Alpha 350 (which has an *INCREDIBLE* live view. If that's really what you want). 

Hope this helps. As you can see, I'm pretty bored. I normally wouldn't draw out my answer like that.

~Michael~


----------



## Squeeky (Aug 1, 2008)

It does help. I've posted this on another site and they sugested the rebels and nikion 40d too. Sounds like I should get one of them types. Thanks so much for exsplaining what the things do, as I am really new to this stuff and my only knowlege is either from a year ago or from somewhere on the internet where the companys can help push me towards a more exspensive camera.


----------



## iflynething (Aug 1, 2008)

Well with $1,000, you're not limiting, but you won't get all of what you're looking for, for that price. I do shoot Nikon but I'm not biased towards it.

~Michael~


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 1, 2008)

Look at http://www.jdpower.com/electronics/ratings/digital-camera-ratings/dslr.  Nikon and Canon seem to leapfrog each other at the top, with all other manufacturers some way below.

Remember that you have to make two decisions that will affect your choices later on.  The make you go for will clearly determine the lenses you buy.  But the sensor size will also greatly affect your lens choices.  Most DSLRs have sensors smaller than a 35mm film frame, often by a factor of 1.3, 1.5 or 1.6 (depends on manufacturer).  With one of these "cropped" sensors you can use smaller lenses than for a full frame sensor, which makes the whole package smaller and lighter.  But the ultimate image quality is inherently less with a cropped sensor, and many users of these cameras have subsequently switched to a camera with a FF sensor.  Not only the old body has to be changed, but any lenses that were designed specifically for a cropped sensor won't work with a FF camera and also need to be changed.

That said, many people are happy with the results they get from cropped sensor cameras.  Two cameras that I would look at quite seriously are the Canon 40D and the Nikon D40.  Both are good, both have enthusiastic devotees.  But before you choose, decide what sort of photography you want to do and what lenses from each manufacturer might suit.  Different manufacturer's ranges do vary very considerably.

If you have an experienced photographer friend who's prepared to help, I'd seriously consider buying used.  Values of photographic gear drop rapidly, so why not take advantage of that?


----------



## Squeeky (Aug 1, 2008)

I only want what I need and I'm hopeing the camera I get has some bonuses anyway for the fun of it.


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 1, 2008)

Squeeky said:


> I only want what I need



But what is that?


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 1, 2008)

"Image Stabilization: Most have this from the lens. Canon is IS, Nikon VR. Not sure about the others"

Actually most have in camera solutions and ONLY Canon and Nikon are so lame as to leave it in the lens - increasing lens costs and making the effectiveness of the system implementation critical. One lens's VR or IS may suck while another's will be great.

I think they did it on purpose in order to maximize profits myself. They get to sell upgraders not only a new body but if you want anti-shake of some kind it's all new lenses too. 

For this reason, regardless the advertisements everybody seems to parrot and/or perhaps believe, I think Nikon and Canon are maybe the 2 worst considerations for a 1st dSLR.

Olympus, Pentax, Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Samsung, all make good cameras with more features, more intelligent features, sometimes with better build quality, and often at a lower price point than either Nikon or Canon for entry, mid level, and even occasionally at the professional level. 

It's weird tho. It's like a brandname craze or something. As long as it says Jordash it doesn't seem to matter that the jeans will fall apart after the third washing, it says Jordash on the label so people will pay $200 for a pair.  

OK, that's kind of a rant but it's pretty true. Don't limit yourself to Nikon and Canon when Olympus, Pentax, Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, or Samsung may have better smarter machines.


----------



## reg (Aug 1, 2008)

iflynething said:


> most starter camera will have a hot shoe for an external flash. The 5D from Canon does not have this.









I hope you're enjoying that crack you just smoked.


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 1, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> "Image Stabilization: ..... Actually most have in camera solutions and ONLY Canon and Nikon are so lame as to leave it in the lens - increasing lens costs and making the effectiveness of the system implementation critical. One lens's VR or IS may suck while another's will be great.  I think they did it on purpose .....



They do indeed do it on purpose, as only with the focussing motor and image stabilisation in the lens does it work fast and accurately.  Image stabilisation in the camera body is ineffectual.  Given that almost all professional photographers choose Nikon or Canon, isn't it rather strange that they're all being so seriously conned by these devious manufacturers?


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 1, 2008)

*Frames Per Second (FPS)*: Vary from camera to camera. I believe the Olympus is 3.5 and the Canon is 6.5.
*which Canon?  they vary enormously*
*ISO*: Most cameras go up pretty high but usually stop at 3200 or so. There is such a thing as Ho.1 and Ho. 2 which would be equivalent to 6400, less and more. I wouldn't shoot above 800 ISO on any DSLR (maybe the D3 or D300 from Nikon)
_*many DSLRs will shoot very well above ISO 800.**  I routinely use my Canon 5D to 1600 and sometimes to 3200*_
*Hot Shoe/Red Eye*: It's all in the flash for the red eye and most starter camera will have a hot shoe for an external flash. The 5D from Canon does not have this
_*total nonsense, as someone else has already pointed out.  **The 5D, like other high-end cameras from several manufacturers, doesn't have an internal flash*_


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 1, 2008)

"only with the focussing motor and image stabilisation in the lens does it work fast and accurately"

Bzzzzt. not true.  In-lens systems are usually slower and less capable.

My $200 camera has better IS than a $2000 lens.  I've tested this. Actually.  I hear people say: "I get this new VR lens and I took this shot at 1/20th" and seem impressed with that. I just giggle to myself and take the same shot at less than 1/4.

No, in camera systems or at least the one developed by minolta is quantitatively superior. Sony who recently purchased Minolta's camera works, has taken this a step further and is claiming to have a system that will stabilize several more stops than any other system on the market. Including their own previous system - which I use and is AWESOME.

I'm not talking about the digital systems in the Point&Shoot cams you know.  I'm talking about the ones that actually move the sensor around. Minolta, Pentax, Olympus, Sony, etc.


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 1, 2008)

I need to research this more.


----------



## iflynething (Aug 1, 2008)

peterbj7 said:


> *Frames Per Second (FPS)*: Vary from camera to camera. I believe the Olympus is 3.5 and the Canon is 6.5.
> *which Canon? they vary enormously*


 
It was implied that it was the 40D. Hence I said the Olympus (talking about the 510 he was talking about and then right after that the Canon. I was refering to the 40D.



peterbj7 said:


> *ISO*: Most cameras go up pretty high but usually stop at 3200 or so. There is such a thing as Ho.1 and Ho. 2 which would be equivalent to 6400, less and more. I wouldn't shoot above 800 ISO on any DSLR (maybe the D3 or D300 from Nikon)
> *many DSLRs will shoot very well above ISO 800. I routinely use my Canon 5D to 1600 and sometimes to 3200 *


 
And that's the 5D you're talking about here. I'm picky for noise. I have found that MOST beginner SLR's arent' that great with higher ISO. I hate to shoot above 200 on my D80 but of course sometime I have to do it.



peterbj7 said:


> *total nonsense, as someone else has already pointed out. The 5D, like other high-end cameras from several manufacturers, doesn't have an internal flash *


 
What? Yeah, most of the high-end ones don't.

~Michael~


----------



## Squeeky (Aug 4, 2008)

peterbj7 said:


> But what is that?


 I'm not really sure, I was just going by what I know and got from this one site that trys to match you with the right camera/laptop/cell phone.


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 4, 2008)

You might find this discussion interesting, on lens vs. sensor image stabilisation:-
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=546444&highlight=peterbj7

And this one on ratings of camera makes by owners:-
http://www.jdpower.com/electronics/ratings/digital-camera-ratings/dslr


----------



## WPhyer (Aug 5, 2008)

For about a year I've been looking for a DSLR and have asked the few camera "experts" that I know what I should look for. All but one said to focus more on the lenses (pun intended) than the camera body. Spend more $$ on the lenses than the camera itself because they tend to believe that the lenses are what get you the better picture versus the camera itself.

I don't know how true this is, but it makes sense seeing how most upper scale camera bodies have pretty much the same features.

But what do I know... I still don't have a DSLR (yet) 

-William


----------



## peterbj7 (Aug 5, 2008)

What your friends told you is true, but you must recognise that choice of body manufacturer and sensor size will determine what your lens choices are.  You have to make body and (at least initial) lens choices together.


----------



## roadkill (Aug 27, 2008)

If I were you (and I'm not), I would save up an extra five or six hundred dollars and get a camera that will present you with a wider range of possibilities... ie. glass. But thats just me.(who's not you)


----------

