# Best DSLR for SLR newbie



## Gen.Ben (Jan 23, 2008)

Hey guys. I love photography, but never really had a great camera.

In the past I have just had point and shoot ones. I think a Canon A75 and my current camera is a Sony H5.

I have decided I want to go with a DSLR, wouldn't mind buying used but only if it's in good condition. What would be the best Camera + Lens combo for less than say... $750?

I have been looking at the D40 and it looks alright. For the lens someone recommended me the sigma 18-200. Suggestions?

Also, for the storage. I have a crappy old Ipod Mini 4gb that the battery is shot so I don't use it. In it there is a Hitachi 4GB Microdrive, seeing how most DSLR's support Microdrives would it work if I formatted it correctly? 

Thanks.


----------



## BradUF (Jan 23, 2008)

I have heard about lens issues with the D40 and that they are going to stop making it soon. Not saying that it is a bad camera just pointing that out. Maybe someone here can share some more info on the D40...


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 23, 2008)

A search on this forum of the D40 will reveal it's pro's and con's. As for it being discontinued, I haven't heard that till now. So I can't comment to that. As for a lens for the D40, I would stick with the Nikon kit lens to start with. If for no other reason than it's resale value. If you decide to upgrade, it will be easier to sell. The D40 makes fine images but has it's limitations. But for the price there is a lot of value there IMO.


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 23, 2008)

What about a Canon? Some type of Rebel?


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Jan 23, 2008)

I don't know a lot about Canon, but I've heard good things about the Rebel XT and Rebel XTi. Anyone vouch for that?


----------



## shorty6049 (Jan 23, 2008)

other than feeling cheaper than pretty much all other amature dslrs on the market, i guess the rebels are good. My brother is looking to upgrade, or sidewaysgrade (i know, not a real word) to something besides his d40 becasue nobody makes autofocus lenses for it right now. If you plan on only using the kit lens you'd be fine, but if you want more lenses, they'll be harder to find. He played with a rebel xti at a store and said he didnt like it. They're small, light , quiet, and affordable. but they really do feel cheap (i challenge anyone to say differently) I guess my personal suggestion would be a sony a200 (shipping next month) or maybe the a100 (discontinued now but still a good camera) you could also look at what pentax has(k10d) but honestly, i loved my a100 (although the a700 is a lot better as far as build quality, image quality, and shutter noise, its also about twice as much at 1350$)

good luck


----------



## HASHASHIN (Jan 24, 2008)

the rebel doesn't really feel cheap in my hands, it just feels really light.

i added the battery grip to it, and it feels much better in my big hands now.  I love my xti, it takes great pictures, and i can use canon L glass.  For the price it has great features, id get the new XSI though if you are going to get a new entry level canon camera.


----------



## H0LLYW00D (Jan 24, 2008)

i just an XTi and it is an awsome first camera, I know Canon just released the XSi but dont know much about that model.


----------



## fauxto (Jan 25, 2008)

Trenton,

The Canon has lower noise at high ISO.  But the kit lens is not very good at all.  I have students with the lens who get purple fringing, soem samples that are unsharp at infinity - but then you see $2500 Canon lens that have to be recalibrated.

Please don't buy a cheap aftermarket lens.   I would rather use an old digital Rebel with a Canon "prosumer" lens, than an $8000 1Ds III with that sucky kit lens.  Consider a 50 mm as well as a zoom - it's sharper, faster, smaller, and cheaper.  

It's more about the lens than the camera, at this point.  Except for Pentax, all DSLR's can make pretty goods images without too much post processing.   That said,the Nikon is better built than the Canon Xti, but has more noise above ESO 400. I think the Nikon handles better, and the kit Nikkor lens is pretty good for a slow consumer lens.

Ken


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 25, 2008)

Im looking at the prices of the D70. They are in my range. Should I go with one of those over a rebel or D40?


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Jan 25, 2008)

Gen.Ben said:


> Im looking at the prices of the D70. They are in my range. Should I go with one of those over a rebel or D40?



Well, the D70 is compatible with far more lenses than the D40, and the body isn't all that dissimilar from a D80. I've used my brother's D70 some, and it feels pretty good. So, if you're gonna go Nikon and you're coming down to D40 versus D70, I say go D70 just because of all the lenses you can use for the D70 compared to the D40.


----------



## Antithesis (Jan 25, 2008)

If you want to go slightly cheaper, you can get a d40 and then buy a Nikkor 18-70 AF-S for a lens and you should be good for a while. The 18-70 is considered a very good lens, especially for the price. 

A lot of people don't like the d40 because it cannot use 'normal' AF lenses, but there are a lot of really good lenses out there that use AF-S or similar focusing systems. You may eventually want to upgrade to a higher level body, but the d40 would be fine for most of what you would want to do as a beginner.


----------



## XtremeElemenT (Jan 25, 2008)

I own a d40 and love it, I own a 50mm f/1.8 af lens and it works fine. Sure it does not auto focus but I manual focus every shot I have ever taken with the camera. You still have a wide range of lenses to put on a nikon d40 but only a handful will autofocus.  It all depends on what type of photography you will be doing.


----------



## shorty6049 (Jan 25, 2008)

XtremeElemenT said:


> I own a d40 and love it, I own a 50mm f/1.8 af lens and it works fine. Sure it does not auto focus but I manual focus every shot I have ever taken with the camera. You still have a wide range of lenses to put on a nikon d40 but only a handful will autofocus. It all depends on what type of photography you will be doing.


 

although thats true, i'd still think i'd be a nuisance in the long run. Why buy something knowing that you wont be able to autofocus with a lot of the lenses you can afford? My brother is selling his d40 and this is one of the reasons


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 25, 2008)

Does the D70 have that problem?


----------



## nhsmitty (Jan 25, 2008)

I've had a D40x for a couple of months now with the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses.  I haven't even used the 55-200 since I want to work on picture quality and composition without throwing another lens into the mix right now.  Might be flawed logic but I'm a newbie that NEVER put any thought into taking a proper photograph with my A75, only snapshots, and not very good ones.  

As long as you don't let the fact that some lenses lack autofocus on the D40 get you down it won't be a problem.  It is kind of disheartening to read where this or that fantastic lens won't autofocus though.

I've decided that either (hopefully) more lenses will come about in the future for my camera when I'm ready to move along with lenses, or I'll get another camera if the situation remains the same.


----------



## andrew99 (Jan 27, 2008)

I just bought a D40.  It came down to a choice between the D40 and the Cannon XTI.  The specs seem very close (to a beginner like me, at least).  I ended up choosing the D40 simply for the bigger LCD, it felt more solid to me, and I found many good reviews for the D40 on the net.

I bought my D40 at a camera store (Black's Photography, here in Canada).  I asked about the D40x, and they told me it is discontinued, but not the D40.  But I always takes sale people's comments with a big grain of salt.


----------



## RockDawg (Jan 27, 2008)

fauxto said:


> Except for Pentax, all DSLR's can make pretty goods images without too much post processing.


 
So you're saying that Pentax has subpar image quality compared to other brands? Which model? Can you link to some reviews that say that?


----------



## RockDawg (Jan 27, 2008)

BradUF said:


> I have heard about lens issues with the D40 and that they are going to stop making it soon.


 
Can anyone verify that?


----------



## D-50 (Jan 27, 2008)

stick with Canons or Nikons, if you choose Nikon the D70 would be a good option, if you can find a D50 that would be a decent option as well.  Both these cameras will grow with you whereas the D40 will limit you as you get more interested in photography and better lenses.  I started with a D50 three years ago and loved it. I moved up to a D200 when I felt I could honestly use and appreciate some of the features the D200 has over the D50.


----------



## shorty6049 (Jan 27, 2008)

lets not discourage anyone from buying other brands though. Canon and Nikon are of course the most popular, but they can also act as blinders to anything ELSE that might be out there.


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 27, 2008)

I think I will pick up a D70 body on ebay and buy an almost new nikon 18-55 lens for cheap from a friend. I think that will be a decent starting setup. Any other suggestions before I buy these?


----------



## Antithesis (Jan 27, 2008)

Gen.Ben said:


> I think I will pick up a D70 body on ebay and buy an almost new nikon 18-55 lens for cheap from a friend. I think that will be a decent starting setup. Any other suggestions before I buy these?



Spend the extra $100 and get a used 18-70, the build quality is siginificantly better than the 18-55, the image quality is a bit better and the little extra reach in zoom will give your more composition options. I never use my 18-55 anymore because I have a super-wide and a 50mm prime, but if I had the 18-70 I'd probably still use it pretty often.


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 27, 2008)

If I am going to be spending $200 on a lens, I might want to spend a bit more and get one that has more zoom.

How would a sigma 18-200 be?


----------



## Antithesis (Jan 27, 2008)

Gen.Ben said:


> If I am going to be spending $200 on a lens, I might want to spend a bit more and get one that has more zoom.
> 
> How would a sigma 18-200 be?



It's a really new lens from what I know, and I haven't read any reviews. Super zooms tend to have inherent flaws. The more I read about the nikon 18-200 VR, the more I think it might actually be a decent lens. But, a third party lens like a Sigma trying to recreate something like that is bound to have some issues. You might want to look into the Nikkor 18-135, good range, good price and decent image quality.


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 27, 2008)

Inherent flaws as in?


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 27, 2008)

Would getting two lenses make sense? Say a 55-200 and a 18-55/18-70

?


----------



## Gen.Ben (Jan 30, 2008)

Hey guys, I need to make a decision soon, so should I go with two Nikon lenses (18-70/18-55 and a 55-200) or that Sigma?


----------



## H0LLYW00D (Jan 30, 2008)

i found that after getting two kit type lenses i wish i had gotten one better lens and learn to shoot with it.


----------



## D-50 (Jan 30, 2008)

The 18-70 is decent a great lens to start with, the 55-200 is nothing to write home about at all. I have never used the 18-200 but a ten times zoom is bound to have issues.  Honestly though you will not notice the issues if you are just getting into photography.  As soon as you use your first decent lens though you will look at your old lenses with disdain and thats when photography gets really expensive, no longer will you be able to find an "acceptable" lens without droping $1000.


----------

