Help choosing a new Digital Camera

[morrow]

I am looking for a new Digital camera for my wife and I. We are expecting our first child in May so we thought now would be a good time to purchase a nice digital camera. We are looking for something that we can build off of later, buy new lenses and filters ect... Can I buy something nice for around $1000 to get me started or should I spend more. We will basically be using it for family pictures (vacations, birthdays, holidays ect) and pictures of autos of course. Any suggestions would be greatly appriciated. I have a simple point and shoot right now, so this will be my first nice camera purchase.
Thanks in advance,
Ryan

 

[NeoNSX]

Get anything Canon.

 

[coolnsx]

Get anything Canon.

Agreed, I bought the Canon 30D and am VERY happy with it. Also I was able to use my EOS 35mm glass as a bonus.

 

[da3dalus]

Go to ebay and pick up a Nikon D70s or Conon Rebel XT. BOth are great "Entry Level" DSLRs with loads of lenses for each, tons of features to confuse you (its not that bad really, they all have an auto option if you get really stuck). I ended up buying a mint D70 body that had been upgraded with the D70s firmware for 400 bucks and bought a 70-300mm Sigma Lense (great for long shots, but a bit to "telephoto" for everyday use) for about 150.00 bucks.

You can still get new versions of both cameras with kit lenses for under 900.00 shipped.

The Canon has higher Mega Pixel, but frankly anything over 6.1 is just a bragging right. For me, i went with the Nikon because i like the color reproductions of the photos much better than with a canon, just my person preference, but whatever.

Check out DPreview.com and check out the reviews on both cameras and make up your own mind!

Hope this helps!

 

[SoCalDude]

If you end up choosing an easy to use point and shoot, then a Canon SD 800 would be great. 7 mp with IS (Image Stabilized).

SD 800 review

It's my next camera.

 

[Motegi]

I really like my Canon and Nikon DSLRs. The aftermarket accessories and lens choices are limitless for these brands.

Something to consider would be if you or your wife own a film SLR with multiple lenses. If so you might consider purchasing a DSLR of the same brand so that you could "re-use" your old lens collection. Most DSLRs use the same lens mounts as their film counterparts of the same brand. There are newer DSLR specific lenses now that take into account the smaller sensor surface areas in the DSLRs as compared to 35mm film but when you are just starting out it is convenient to be able to use your old SLR lenses.

If you are starting into SLRs de-novo with no legacy equipment to consider then another consideration would be the new DSLR bodies that integrate image stabilization right in the camera body rather than in the lens. Several of the manufacturers now include this in their newer cameras (Pentax, etc). This is a huge potential money saver as compared to non-stabilized camera bodies since the image stabilized lenses tend to be much more expensive than standard lenses and you have to pay the premium with EACH lens rather than only once in the body.

Good luck!!!

 

[nchopp]

All good advice. The newest Canon Rebel (XTI) is a fantastic piece of hardware for the price. And, if by chance you should decide, "Hey, this is a lot of fun!" it gives you plenty of room to grow. Any lenses you buy that work with it will work with any other Canon SLR, digital or film (well, as far back as Canon's EOS mount goes).

The Canon 28-135mm IS is a GREAT walk-around lens - would set you back about $385 or so.

 

[Motegi]

... something else I forgot to add. From my readings over at the DPreview and StevesDigicams forums it appears to be a consensus that the camera body really is a secondary consideration as compared with the lens. Therefore you may want to allocate a greater proportion of your budget to the lenses rather than for the camera body. People will spend MANY MANY times more money on their lenses than on the camera body itself.

The differences between budget lense and higher end lenses can be significant in terms of detail, distortion, color, focus, speed, etc. The lenses have tiny motors inside that can affect the speed and accuracy of the autofocus. The greater amount of light that is transmitted through a pricier lens equates to greater versatility and shutter speed when taking photos especially in lower light.

Be sure to read the posts in the photo forums that I mentioned above!

 

[rasir_x]

for portability i would get the Canon SD900 10mp. As for SLR it's really how much you want to spend? I use a Canon 5D @ work since it has an actual 35mm image sensor, but it cost the company 3k for just the body.

 

[morrow]

Thanks Guys. This is going to be harder than I thought, so many choices. I am looking at the Canon XTI and Nikon D80. I just spole with my brother in law, he is an amature photographer, he says he has used both of the older versions of the Canon and Nikon, he says it is a toss up between the 2. On paper both look very good. I have always heard great things about Canons SLR's: apparantly their DSLR's are just as good.

 

[DocL]

First you need to decide what you are going to be using the camera for. Do you plan to take action shots of moving objects, or do you plan on using it at parties, around the house, family, and car shows? Secondly, do you plan on printing anythin glarger than 3x5's and the occasional 8x11, or are you going to mostly send pictures via e-mail? For most casual users, a 2-3megapixel camera is all that is needed. All the hype about 10-20megapixel camera's is just an advertising plot to get you to spend more money. I have two Cannon DSLR's, but I wish that I had a knock around point and shoot digital camera as I hate processing all of my RAW dslr photos.

 

[demigod]

I'm thinking about upgrading from my Nikon CP8700 to a Nikon D80. Anyone have any experiences with this camera? Also would it be worth it to pay the extra $ for the D200 or not? Thanks in advance.

 

[Malibu Rapper]

If you end up choosing an easy to use point and shoot, then a Canon SD 800 would be great. 7 mp with IS (Image Stabilized).

SD 800 review

It's my next camera.

I have one of these and it's enabled me to capture a lot of great memories due to it's very portable size. Got it for under $300 a few months ago. I did read that it has some issues with fringing but for a non-professional like me, the pictures look great. I dropped it on a hard stone tile surface in Bangkok and it only jarred the case open which I was able to fix by taking the covers off and now there's only a minor scratch in the corner and it is a tad bit loose. But the thing is built very well and I thought it was history when I dropped it. I think though at morrow's price point he's looking into getting an SLR. I'd get an SLR too but I wouldn't have 1/4th of the pictures I have now because those cameras are just too big and clunky.

 

[Wick]

Given the usage you mentioned for this new camera you're considering to buy, and the fact that you didn't reference any existing SLR lens, I'd recommend the Canon Powershot A640.

Very highly rated, 10M with big LCD display, and easy to use with lots of features and functionality as you progress in your level of photograpic skills and needs.

-Wick

 

[Hiroshima]

Sorry I am comming in so late, but you may also consider the Sony Alpha. I am a die hard Canon guy but the Sony has full time IS (it moves the sensor) that will work with every lens you slap on it. For someone who does not have any money invested in glass, it makes sense to look into more than just the usual suspects. (Canon and Nikon).

That said, I think the optics on Canons are superior to those that Sony/Minolta have. Canon used to be the leader in noise (or the lack thereof) but Sony Alpha /Nikon D200 (they use the same image sensor) is so close you would be super hard pressed to be able to tell the difference between the two just based on noise. This was not the case with the D100 Vs the 20d.

IMHO I would skip the SD700IS or the SD800. They fine but the images that come out of them are not that great. My coworker got a new SD700 IS and her old A85 (think 3 year old larger P&S) had better actual resolution and less noise. It is a nice camera (we have an SD630 as our point and shoot) but it is no SLR, nor will it be fast enought to capture kids.

I would still recommend Canon's over other brands mostly because I have used them for a while now. But the new Sony is worth a look for the image shift alone (and the virtually identical sensor as on the D200 {sony makes Nikon's image sensors}). The lead gap that Canon had is nearly gone as far as the body goes. I still think it leads the field on lenses however.

Last bit of advice: Invest in glass, more than the body. I have replaced by body 3 times in the last 3 years but have maintained (relatively) the glass I own. Glass usually makes more of a difference than the body. But since you asked about what camera to get, and not what lense, I felt inclined to answer the question you actually asked.

Cheers, and LMK if you have any other questions.

Jeff

 

[Hiroshima]

I'm thinking about upgrading from my Nikon CP8700 to a Nikon D80. Anyone have any experiences with this camera? Also would it be worth it to pay the extra $ for the D200 or not? Thanks in advance.

I had the CP8700 and you will love the D80. I have played with one and the ergo alone will blow you away (not that the CP is that bad). The image quality is nutty compared to your 8700 also. The ISO on the CP is dismal after ISO-50. The D80 is great up until ISO-800.

Cannot answer wheter the D200 is worth it over the D80 as I am not a Nikon guy, but I do know the D80 will crush your CP8700.

As a side note, if you decide to keep the 8700 I have a Nextphoto filter adapter that allows you to use filters on your CP. If you decide you want to keep the CP, PM me and I can send you the adapter I have. It is nice and cost me $25. You can have it if you want it. (I can cover the $0.39 postage:wink: )

 

[demigod]

I had the CP8700 and you will love the D80. I have played with one and the ergo alone will blow you away (not that the CP is that bad). The image quality is nutty compared to your 8700 also. The ISO on the CP is dismal after ISO-50. The D80 is great up until ISO-800.

Cannot answer wheter the D200 is worth it over the D80 as I am not a Nikon guy, but I do know the D80 will crush your CP8700.

As a side note, if you decide to keep the 8700 I have a Nextphoto filter adapter that allows you to use filters on your CP. If you decide you want to keep the CP, PM me and I can send you the adapter I have. It is nice and cost me $25. You can have it if you want it. (I can cover the $0.39 postage:wink: )

Cool thanks man. I'll PM you. :biggrin:

 

[NimbleSexyXquisite]

Definately get a DSLR!, Nikon D80 is good, but the Nikon D200 is just in its own league.

If you are going to spend $1000 might as well go witht the D200, the body alone is $1000-$1200, and just buy a chessy lens for now. Thats what I did. The D200 is professional grade as well. You can pass this camera down to generations to come.

Good Luck! A good Camera is a great investment.

 

[scorp965]

If you're looking for a DSLR I would recommend Pentax for easy lens availability (there are thousands of lenses freely available for their K-mount cameras), the new Sony offering, essentially a rebranded Konica Minolta, also has some potential with regard to lenses... I wouldn't focus on mega pixels so much, quality glass makes the difference when it comes with DSLR's.

If you're just after a high quality point and shoot, and don't want to spend money on lenses (I have spent several times the cost of the body on lenses for different situtions since going DSLR) you're looking for a 'prosumer camera', essentially a highly involved fixed lens camera, that will give you the option of adjusting every feature you could adjust on a DSLR. In this market there are two standouts, the Sony DSC-R1, which is a fantastic camera I almost purchased, and the Panasonic FZ-30K, which is the camera I ended up buying and using for a few months before buying the Pentax DSLR. In the day time the Panasonic was a great camera, but at night it got a little too noisy for my taste - the Sony DSC-R1 has a larger sensor, so it would be less prone to this noise, DSLR's have even larger sensors, and offer the most flexibility, but you need to know what you're doing, and you will need to purchase lenses for them, which can cost significant money.

It depends on what your needs are... most photographers don't need, and really don't want, to buy a DSLR.

fwiw, the setup I use for most of my pictures is as follows...
Pentax *ist DL
Dicain Battery Grip
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70mm 1:2.6-2.8

I also have lenses for macro, big zoom, and fisheye. The tokina is my 'walking around' lens. When I purchased the DSLR I bought the 'kit' out of instinct, eg something to learn on, but less than a week after getting the camera I bought the tokina, and haven't touched the kit lens since. When you buy the camera resist the urge to buy the kit, buy the body only, and snag something decent on ebay. For the Nikon series, when people buy the D50, the typical recommendation is to buy the D70's kit lens (which D70 owners tend to get rid of at their first opportunity).

 

[JDMnsxR]

for entry level... honsetly the REBEL (canon) XT series or XTi's are great bang for the buck... almost neck and neck with their 30D-20D cameras.... (only photo enthusiast could really utiilized the major differences)....

i had a LOT of friends who shoot as hobbiest, and starting out... and they picked up an XT with lens kit for around 600-700.... its a good start... then you can start spending money on good lenses... and upgrade BODY later in future if you make a bigger commitment to shoot~!!!

 

[JDMnsxR]

i recently upgraded from a 10D to a 30D for more intensive shooting purposes... a lot of my lenses i still kept...

i'm hoping to jump into the 1D territory in the near future... we'll see how far this photo thing goes... :biggrin:

 

[morrow]

Sorry I am comming in so late, but you may also consider the Sony Alpha. I am a die hard Canon guy but the Sony has full time IS (it moves the sensor) that will work with every lens you slap on it. For someone who does not have any money invested in glass, it makes sense to look into more than just the usual suspects. (Canon and Nikon).

That said, I think the optics on Canons are superior to those that Sony/Minolta have. Canon used to be the leader in noise (or the lack thereof) but Sony Alpha /Nikon D200 (they use the same image sensor) is so close you would be super hard pressed to be able to tell the difference between the two just based on noise. This was not the case with the D100 Vs the 20d.

IMHO I would skip the SD700IS or the SD800. They fine but the images that come out of them are not that great. My coworker got a new SD700 IS and her old A85 (think 3 year old larger P&S) had better actual resolution and less noise. It is a nice camera (we have an SD630 as our point and shoot) but it is no SLR, nor will it be fast enought to capture kids.

I would still recommend Canon's over other brands mostly because I have used them for a while now. But the new Sony is worth a look for the image shift alone (and the virtually identical sensor as on the D200 {sony makes Nikon's image sensors}). The lead gap that Canon had is nearly gone as far as the body goes. I still think it leads the field on lenses however.

Last bit of advice: Invest in glass, more than the body. I have replaced by body 3 times in the last 3 years but have maintained (relatively) the glass I own. Glass usually makes more of a difference than the body. But since you asked about what camera to get, and not what lense, I felt inclined to answer the question you actually asked.

Cheers, and LMK if you have any other questions.

Jeff

Thanks for the advise Jeff. I still have not made a desicion. I am goling next weekend to my brother in-laws house so he can take some pregnancy pictures of my wife. He has a couple canon DSLR's so I am leaning toward the canon brand so I can borrow from his lens collection. :biggrin: I think I will get a decent body for now, like the XTI and focus on a good lens collection, then invest in a better body in a few years and keep the xti for casual use. At this point anything is better than my point and shoot that is now 3yrs. old!

 

[Hiroshima]

Thanks for the advise Jeff. I still have not made a desicion. I am goling next weekend to my brother in-laws house so he can take some pregnancy pictures of my wife. He has a couple canon DSLR's so I am leaning toward the canon brand so I can borrow from his lens collection. :biggrin: I think I will get a decent body for now, like the XTI and focus on a good lens collection, then invest in a better body in a few years and keep the xti for casual use. At this point anything is better than my point and shoot that is now 3yrs. old!

NP, as a side note, if you are looking to shoot children, my humble recomendation would be to buy a Rebel XT or a used 20d over an XTi. I have the XTi and it is about 2/3 of a stop slower than the XT or the 20d. In real world terms that means that given an F-stop, and an ISO setting the XTi will require about twice the amount of open shutter time than the XT or the 20d. So on the XT you may need 1/60th of a second and on the XTi you would need 1/30th. (That is big.) It is a pretty well known issue with the XTi, however nearly no camera shops will tell you or even know about it. This is not an issue if you always shoot outdoors, however with children (especially young ones) you are not outdoors.

In real world terms, having a less sensitive sensor means you have to either increase your ISO, therby increasing the noise in your picture, add a flash (there are good and bad things about that), or decrease your F-stop (which on consumer lenses do not get near wide enough to take natural light pictures).

XT's can be had for cheap and a used 20d is still a better machine than the XTi (IMHO basically due to the better ergo, spot metering, and more sensitive sensor).

Many, including myself, will tell you that the lens is more important than the body, however, if you do decide to go with the XTi (as I did) recognize before you start that the camera body is less sensitive than the others out there. So if you invest in a expensive F2.8 lens, it will perform on the XTi more like an F3.5-F4 lens (2/3 to 1 full stop slower). It makes a big difference. If this is greek, ask your brother who sounds knowledgeable and he can show you what I am talking about on his cameras.

LMK if you need any other ameture advice. PM, e-mail or post.

Jeff