# Camera Advice



## Holly (May 13, 2006)

Ok.. Been talking to other photographers I know personally.... Its time for me to find a digital SLR.. I currently have my Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ30.. and doing indoor pics with this just isnt EASY...   They suggest I do indoor pics with an SLR... 

SO I think IM on a search for one... I was thinking of the NIkon D200, but right now its a little OUT of my range price wise.. Id like to stay under 1,000

Suggestions would be great... 

Holly


----------



## lostprophet (May 13, 2006)

well I sell cameras for a living so I know for a fact that ALL current Dslrs are good, very good. Canon and Nikon are the BIG two, The D200 is stunning but so is the D70s. Canon have the 30D which is great.

30d is higher RES than the D70s but unless you are after HUGE enlargements you may not need the extra pixels.

My camera is 8.2MP and I can get A3 sized prints that look sharper then reprints from my old 645 system.

But no matter what camera you get, invest in GOOD lenses as they make all the difference.

The truth is which ever camera you get you will love it


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (May 13, 2006)

Holly said:
			
		

> Ok.. Been talking to other photographers I know personally.... Its time for me to find a digital SLR.. I currently have my Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ30.. and doing indoor pics with this just isnt EASY... They suggest I do indoor pics with an SLR...
> 
> SO I think IM on a search for one... I was thinking of the NIkon D200, but right now its a little OUT of my range price wise.. Id like to stay under 1,000
> 
> ...


 
For that money, I would seriously consider the sony dsc-r1. check dpreview.com It ISNT a DSLR but it has a great lens and a decent-sized sensor.


----------



## Digital Matt (May 13, 2006)

For that price, you are looking at an entry level dslr, like the Nikon D-50, or the Canon Digital Rebel XT.  I would stay away from cameras lik ethe sony dsc-r1, because it's just a different version of what you already have, and leaves you limited in the same ways you are now.

If you are going to spend $1000 on something, you want to be able to expand with it.


----------



## harlantk (May 13, 2006)

Holly:
I have been looking at your work, and the "first" thought that came to my mind was the most camera you can find!, Downpayment of the first thou and finance what ever you need! Or sell a kid, or the hubby or ....  jk
Buy as MUCH as you can get away with now, go for that one camera that will be with you for a very long time!
Wish I could 
Tim


----------



## Don Simon (May 13, 2006)

In what way do you find yourself limited for indoor photos? If they tend to be blurred because you can't take fast enough exposures to avoid camera shake, then what you need is a faster lens and/or higher ISO. Buying a DSLR with kit lens will help with the latter but not the former (the lens on your FZ30 with a widest aperture of f2.8 is faster than most kit zooms). As lostprophet said, it's all about the lenses. IMO you should prioritise the lens/lenses over the camera, and if necessary go for a less expensive camera (e.g. D50 instead of D70) in order to get a better lens.


----------



## thebeginning (May 14, 2006)

you can get a 20d for under $1000 new if you look well.  Dell has deals every once in a while, and I know people that have bought a kit with a cf card and accessories off ebay for $1100.  it definitely can be done.  Check the 20d out, it's the best you'll get for your price range.

I'll agree that lenses are important, but I think the claim that you should buy a cheaper camera to be able to afford better lenses is rediculous.  Even if you did get better lenses, you may have wished later on that you had bought a nicer body.  You can always buy better lenses much easier than replacing a camera body.  Also, 'nice lenses' might be anywhere from $300 to $3000, so saving a little bit of money by going with a 'lesser' body won't get you anywhere substantial.  You want to start with something cheap? buy the canon 50mm 1.8.  It has great optical quality for the price, has good low light capabilities, and can be used for portraits very well.  You will expand your lens collection for quite a while, you're not buying everything you'll ever need right now.


----------



## Holly (May 14, 2006)

O WoW! Lots of different replies..   Better Lenses.. Here is my problem.. I have a panasonic.. I already have a telephoto lens and a wide angle lens. PLUS the macro set.. LOVE this one by the way!  I have not actually received my telephoto lens yet... 

SO Far this is ALL the lenses that come for this camera.. UNLESS I can use other brand lenses with mine...


----------



## benhasajeep (May 14, 2006)

Well don't forget you have value with what you currently have if sold as used.  Unless you plan on keeping it for a spare.  If you plan on serious work, don't get a lower end camera.  Keep what you have until you can afford the better camera.  Even if that is a year down the road.  Thats advice for the body.  Now for a lens remember you don't have to buy new.  There are lots of great used lenses.  Also instead of buying a Branded lower quality or medium quality lens.  Maybe start with a good 3rd party lens.  Lower price but you get the good glass.


----------



## Don Simon (May 14, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> the claim that you should buy a cheaper camera to be able to afford better lenses is rediculous.


 
Oh. Sorry everyone, I didn't mean to lower the standard of the discussion with my stupid ideas. Ignore me and listen to the more experienced people who know better than me about things like what camera/lens combination to buy, or how to spell rediculous.


----------



## bigfatbadger (May 14, 2006)

To be honest, if I may describe you aas a beginner, I don't think a beginner would notice any difference between the d200, d70 or d50 (or if they do,only minor cosmetic things, certainly nothing too useful to them).

If your priority is indoor shots, I agree with Zaphod, get a d50 and a 50mm prime 1.8 lens and go from there. Don't buy everything at once, you need time to work out what you need. 

BTW Holly, the lenses you have bought for your lumix are different to the ones people are describing. The lenses for the lumix alter the focal length only (i.e. lower it or raise it) whereas the other lenses alter the focal length and have different apertures. If you don't know what this means (and I'm *not *assuming you don't) then it would be worth reading up on before you even think of buying a dslr


----------



## Rolleistef (May 14, 2006)

Hi,
What i'd do is buy a Canon Rebel euh I dunno the US name, well, it's the EOS 350D here in Europe. The cheap black one, you see what I mean.
or of course a 20d if you find one!

Pros : v.g noise correction
        You can fit other brand lenses (including the fabulous M42 ones, SMC Takumar etc)
         It's said they are more reliable than Nikons.

Cons : hm it's a dslr


----------



## thebeginning (May 14, 2006)

ZaphodB said:
			
		

> Oh. Sorry everyone, I didn't mean to lower the standard of the discussion with my stupid ideas. Ignore me and listen to the more experienced people who know better than me about things like what camera/lens combination to buy, or how to spell rediculous.




well said, thanks for your insightful contribution.


----------

