Recommend an entry model DSLR

[Allen]

Hi,

I know someone who is looking at getting an entry model DSLR, they are looking at spending around £300-400.

Unfortunately, my knowledge of digital cameras is very limited, but I know lots of people on here use them and have good knowledge of them, so I'm putting this one out to you please.

Anyone have any ideas of a nice model in this price range? Something that will be easy to use and has a nice optical zoom, flash, viewfinder and a small LCD screen for reviewing pictures taken? I don't know if these are standard on a DSLR, so please don't think I'm a noob for not knowing!

Thanks in advance.

[fuddam]

www.kenrockwell.com - will give you some good advice about what is *REALLY* needed. see the D40 article

[Allen]

Cheers, will take a look at that site.

[Hicks12]

My dad bought a good DSLR for around £400(it was less i think). He does his research on most buys and he spent ages looking for a good one, ill grab the model in a few as it is pretty good.

edit: Ok it's a canon EOS 400D.He got it from jessops iirc and got them to chuck in a decent lens(like £100 i think) and some other useful things .

Hope this helped.

[YorkieBen]

There are 'mixed' views about Ken Rockwell and particularly about his objectivity in his camera reviews.

For £300-400 quid you are looking at imo:

Sony A200 or Sony A300
Canon 1000D
Nikon D60
Pentax K-m


They all have ups and downs, I think you would be happy with all of them.

I have a Sony A200, it has in built image stabilisation, sensor cleaning, 10.2 megapixels. The A300 is the same but has 'live view' - i.e. like a normal point and shoot camera you can use the screen instead of the viewfinder to view shots - if you haven't used a dslr before you may find the idea of not being able to use the screen to frame shots as strange but the viewfinder on a dslr is totally different to those on point and shoot cameras.

The Canon 1000D has liveview, 10.1 mexapixels, senosor cleaning. It doesn't have image stabilisation built in but then it comes with an image stabilised lens. The disadvantage of this is that not all canon lenses are image stabilised whereas any lens you put on a sony will be stabilised. However in lens stabilisation also stabilises what you see in the viewfinder (because the lens is stabilised), whereas the Sony only stabilises the actual digital sensor.

The Nikon D60 has 10.2 megapixel, sensor cleaning etc. Doesn't have liveview or stabilisation built in (but its kit lens does) but it is limited in the lenses it can use as it lacks an inbuilt autofocus motor. Image quality on the D60 is supposed to be good though and the kit lens is supposed to be a bit better than most kit lens.

The Pentax K-m has in built image stabilisation, sensor cleaning, 10.2 megapixels. No liveview.

Tbh whatever entry level dslr you pick you will get good images from. The best bet it to go into Jessops or some other camera store and pick up the cameras, don't always listen to the store "expert's" spiel because it is often either wrong or biased*

The camera that feels best in your hand and you find most intuitive will be the best, I liked the Sony because it has quite a chunky grip (plus it is a little cheaper than other cameras).

Remember on top on the camera and kit lens your friend will need to buy a memory card (buy online, shops are a ripoff), a bag, maybe a second lens (a 55-200 telephoto lens is a typical 2nd buy, alot of brands do the camera, kit lens and 55-200mm len bundles) so the £300-400 may need to include this?


*(in Leeds Jessops you hear them directing them towards Canon even if they mention the Sony or Nikon. Even when one guy came in mentioned that he had a Minolta SLR previously - they neglected to mention any lenses he might have left coiuld be used on the Sony)

[Allen]

Thanks very much, will defo pass this info on.

[Hicks12]

The canon 1000D is only £290 at tesco, http://direct.tesco.com/product/images/?R=205-0667

[Whiternoise]

D40 will bite you in the arse with lenses though, in a manner of speaking. Bear in mind you're limited ot only using AF-S lenses for autofocusing. You can still use older lenses, and some of the old favourites are still very usable (ie they'll meter and you can change the aperture in camera) but lack of auto focus does get a tad annoying!

Once again, i'll repeat myself, the D40 is a great camera. If i had the chance to buy again i probably would have waited a bit longer and bought a D80, but the D40 will do the job. My Uncle does professional photography and he used a D40 at a wedding and said it worked perfectly. I've not had a problem with the 6MP. The issue mainly crops up when you see a lens you want that you could pick up for 70 quid (say the 70-300mm Sigma) but since you need the AFS version, you're looking at three times the price.

That said, the Canon alternatives will be good, and you have the advantages of older lenses. Personally i would stick with the "big two", as i think you're guaranteed a decent camera from a camera company rather than an electronics producer that knocked out a couple of SLR's on the side. Of course that's being harsh, but with Nikon and Canon you're almost guaranteed lens compatibility (and indeed new lenses) in the future. Ultimately, go with what feels best in your hand.

I've never looked back with regards to the view finder issue - takes a while to get used to, but once you realise that it's actually better than live view, it's great.

Are they willing to put aside a bit of their budget for another lens? Not much point getting a DSLR if you're only going to use the kit lens on auto! You can get a decent addition for around £50-100, the 50mm prime springs to mind. This takes us back to the company issue, you're essentially buying into the brand, so bear in mind what lenses are going to be available to you to use.

EDIT:

Accessory wise, to complement the above..

Memory card - cheap, don't worry about it 2GB is more than enough for a beginner
Bag - more expensive than you think, £30 roughly for a decent make like LowePro
Tripod - not immediately necessary, but £50+ for a decent model (have a look at the Manfrotto Modo Maxi)
External Flash - not really necessary to begin with, expensive too
UV Filter - handy as a lens protector, anywhere from £5 on ebay to £30 for a decent quality one

[YorkieBen]

That said, the Canon alternatives will be good, and you have the advantages of older lenses. Personally i would stick with the "big two", as i think you're guaranteed a decent camera from a camera company rather than an electronics producer that knocked out a couple of SLR's on the side. Of course that's being harsh, but with Nikon and Canon you're almost guaranteed lens compatibility (and indeed new lenses) in the future.

Well to start off Sony make most of Nikon's digital sensors for their SLRs so they aren't exactly inexperienced in that field.

And they took over Minolta's camera and lens division - Minolta have a long and illustrious history in optical design. Incidently like Canon systems you can use older minolta lenses, some of which is extraordinary.

And finally Sony have autofocus Carl Zeiss lenses unlike any other SLR system.

The likelyhood of sony bowing out of the slr market is pretty unlikely (unlike Olympus and Pentax), their market share has gone through the roof in just two years (close to 25% in Europe I believe). And I am not aware of any lens compatability problems with sony cameras? True the Sony system yet doesn't have tilt and shift or super telephoto lenses but how many people can afford to drop several thousand pounds on a 800mm stabilised lens. Alot of the newer sony lenses (and the older minolta lenses) are at least the equal of the Canon 'L' and the Nikon pro lenses.

For entry level I personally would either look at the Sony A200 or A300, or the Canon 1000D (the price at tescos is great) because as you mentioned you are far too limited with lenses with the Nikon D40/60 with the lack of AF.

[Whiternoise]

Oh certainly, Sony wasn't the best example i concede!

Zeiss lenses are veeery nice - bit like how Panasonic use Leica lenses in their consumer cameras!

Personally i like Nikon, so i would go with them, but Sony does have its merits. I just think you have a much wider variety of lenses with Nikon - excusing the D40/D60(?). I haven't actually had a problem with the lenses being limited, Nikon have recently produced some AF-S Prime lenses (very expensive, but.. they now exist - 50mm 1.4 and the 60mm macro). AF-S does have a fair few advantages over screw-drive in noise and in a number of cases speed, so you might say that with AF-S, USM, HSW (whatever the canon/sony/etc equivalents are) you are buying into the future. It's certainly not a deal breaker, although with the addition of other cameras having more compatibility, there's less point to it.

I don't think there's any chance they'll drop out of the market either, unlikely that most of the SLR builders will drop out of the market either. You're still buying into a brand though, so it IS worth looking at what other lenses are on offer and what's likely in the future. Nikon do have an extensive back catalogue of lenses to pick through, and Zeiss lenses aren't always the cheapest (compare the standard 50mm primes from Nikon and Carl Zeiss - lens quality you're paying for is arguably exceptional, but the prices are very different - at least from a quick froogle search).

It's all personal preference though, people will argue to the end of the world whether Nikon > Canon > Sony > etc

My advice to the OP would be to handle the ones in the budget range, see which one feels nicest to use, ease of operation and if you need to seriously consider lots of (possibly expensive) lenses then worry about that after you've got the hang of using it. As always, lenses tend to keep value a lot better than camera bodies! The A200 was/is a very good camera for an entry SLR and with good reason, and i second the recommendation there. And to echo what's been said, the picture quality will be pretty good no matter which one you get. Improvement will come with better glass and practice.

[brammers]

Zeiss lenses are veeery nice - bit like how Panasonic use Leica lenses in their consumer cameras!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2359/...ae3deccd_o.jpg

Yup - consumer heaven right there

To the OP - Sony a200, a300 if you like Liveview (using it like a P&S), old stock Canon 400D or Nikon D60 - but the big moot point on that is the lack of an in-body motor... It's a bit too baby nikon for my liking - lovely with the stuff that comes in the box, very limited if you try to move away from that.

[kopite]

I got a sony a200 for christmas and its brilliant

Im a total n00b when it comes to photography so After reading a shed load of reviews I decided to get this camera. If you order before 30/12 you can still get the cash back offer from sony which drops the price a further 30 quid

[Allen]

Thanks for all the replies so far guys, I will defo pass all this info on.

And as far as buying with upgrades in mind, I don't think that will be a problem. It's not going to be used for professional usage, so I'm sure the lens that comes with the camera will be good enough for the "amateur" usage it will be used for.