Dslr

[Bene]

My father wants to get a DSLR camera. He loves photography and enjoyed it when he was younger and now he wants to get back to it.

I would consider it an amateur hobby. He is looking for advice on a good D-SLR camera to get. I think he will be doing nature photography and also urban photos like NYC. You know, just take a camera on the weekend and go out shooting.

He might take some classes to learn about the digital aspect of it including editing on the computers.

I don't know anything about photography so I am asking here. What camera would you recommend and why? He said his budget is $600 - $800 .

Arigato!

[Gene]

Originally Posted by Bene

My father wants to get a DSLR camera. He loves photography and enjoyed it when he was younger and now he wants to get back to it.

I don't know anything about photography so I am asking here. What camera would you recommend and why? He said his budget is $600 - $800 .

Arigato!

I like the Canon Rebel Series of DSLR. I have a friend who is a professional journalist and photographer who uses two of the older versions of this camera in his work and is still very satisfied with his equipment.

The new models are I believe at 12 mega pixels and have decent lenses in the bundle sold at some locations. The price range should be in the upper end of what you mentioned. There are a lot of good lenses available for this camera.

I have the Canon 20D and am happy with it but really could do everything I desire with the Rebel.

[Ali from The Office Diet]

Afraid I'm not into photography beyond a very amateur level, but Chris Garrett (who is a great writer on blogging) has a DSLR blog at DSLRBLOG - Adventures in Digital Photography

Hope that might help!

Ali

[goldtoe360]

Canon Digital Rebel XT 8MP Digital SLR Camera - $377

I bought mine about a year or two ago for around $490 without the lens kit. It's a great camera!

osusume desu


some links:
Steves Digicams - Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT / EOS 350D - User Review
DCRP Review: Canon Digital Rebel XT
Canon Digital Rebel XT (body only - black) Digital camera reviews - CNET Reviews
Canon Digital Rebel XT review EOS-350D

[openeyes]

I'd go with either the Canon rebel or the Nikon D40, depending on which system I wanted to get into. Both are good, and are in the ~$450 price range.

Recommended Cameras is one link you might check out

[James Hayden]

The first thing that needs to be considered: Does your father already have an assortment of lenses and accessories from a recent film slr? I say recent because if he has a film slr, but he got it more than say 20 years ago, then even if the lenses can be attached to modern cameras, they aren't going to have the necessary internal electronics be fully compatible, and may lack Must-Haves, such as the ability to autofocus.

The important thing to remember about any SLR is that the quality of the lens you use is going to most likely be the limiting factor. You can spend thousands of dollars on the latest camera body, but if you cheap out on the lens, it can cripple the camera.

I personally shoot Canon, and highly recommend Canon dSLRs, as they have been the industry leader in digital imaging for nearly a decade, so I will concentrate mostly on Canon. Nikon is the other major player in the dSLR market. Sony, Pentax, Fuji and Sigma also make DSLR systems, and I honestly don't know much about them, as they are on the fringe of the market and don't have a large following of professional users.

Canon and Nikon are very similar values. Both brands make high quality, dependable equipment and are similarly priced. Nikon seems to have a large following by news/editorial photographers, whereas Canon has a following among wildlife/landscape/nature, and sports/action photographers, but there is a lot of overlap.

There are 3 tiers in the dSLR world, the lower two of which may appeal to your father.

First, there is the entry-level tier. This includes Canon's Rebel line (300/350/400/450D), and Cameras like the Nikon D40. These cameras are marketed towards hobbyists and people who want more capability than a compact digital camera. They usually offer just a glimpse of the features available on higher-end models. Price range is usually below $1000.

My impression of the Rebels has consistently been that they are too small to comfortably hold, and they are made almost completely of plastic. I use my cameras professionally and they get beat up, but for someone who lightly-uses their cameras, they are fine. One other pet-peeve about the latest rebels is that they are heavily menu-driven. I personally would rather have a dedicated button than have to use the rear lcd and directional buttons to change frequently used settings.

The next step up is the "Pro-sumer" tier. These are cameras that are geared toward either advanced hobbyists, or professionals alike. Examples of Prosumer bodies are Canon 20/30/40D and 5D, or the Nikon D70 and maybe D200/300. These cameras are of a higher quality than the entry-level models, and far more durable. They usually are constructed of a strong, but light metal, and don't rely as heavily on menus, making the learning curve a little steeper, but improving usability. Price range is typically $1000-2500.

The top of the line models are in the Professional tier. They pull out all the stops on these cameras, and the price tag reflects it. They are fully and completely customizable, rugged, and ergonomically designed for ease of use. All the major camera functions (except for mirror lockup ) can be accessed via dedicated buttons on the exterior of the camera, and menus are reserved for user settings that do not change frequently. The autofocus systems on these cameras are insane and do not miss a beat in the hands of a skilled user. They are fully weather-sealed for outdoor use. Examples include Canon's 1-series, and Nikon D3/2/1 Price Range $3000+

Don't be put off by the price ranges I quoted above. Whenever Canon updates a body, everyone immediately dumps the old version and goes with the newest, even though the improvements have only been marginal for the past few years.

I recommend buying a used 20D for around $4-500. Here is a quick rundown of Canon's mid-grade cameras, so you can see why I recommend it.

First there was the D30. This was a $3000 3-megapixel camera from 2001. This is definitely old technology, as is the 6mp successor, the D60. These cameras were great back when they were the only contenders, but they have been made completely obsolete. A common use for them is converting them to take infrared photography, but I doubt there's anyone who still uses these clunkers as their main/only camera.

Then came the 10D. No one knows the exact logic behind how Canon chooses the names for its cameras, so don't think about it too much. . The 10D used the same sensor as the D60, but sported better hardware, such as improved autofocus.

Finally, we arrive at the camera I recommend, the 20D. This is the first camera where they really worked all the kinks out of the system. The prior models all poor battery life and much trouble taking photos in low-light situations, but the 20D is very usable and in my opinion was the first consumer-grade camera to surpass the detail and quality of scanned 35mm film at an affordable price, and still holds its own ground even 4 years and 2 replacement models later.

After the 20D the was the 30D, which is basically the exact same camera, but they made the rear screen bigger and added a "direct print" button, which is pretty useless. Then they released the 40D, which has yet an even bigger screen, and the only feature added that actually makes a difference in the usability of the camera is LiveView, but that is not worth 500 dollars extra in my opinion.

You might be thinking "If I can get a used mid-grade camera at $4-500, then couldn't I get the entry level version for even less?" Surprisingly, that is not the case! Once a camera enters the used market, its price keeps on decreasing, but only to a certain point. Virtually all canon's obsolete models sell for around $300 no matter how old they get. The 20D goes for slightly more because there is still a demand for it, but 30Ds still sell for 6-700 dollars, even though it's the exact same camera. Go figure!

This is a good thing though. It means the camera is virtually depreciation free. If your father buys a 20D today at $450, then in a couple of years when the 20D really IS obsolete, he can sell it for $300, assuming he takes care of it, and buy a newer, but not quite-brand-new camera. This is how I buy all of my camera bodies, because development is fairly slow. No one is coming out with any new camera technology that really shakes things up anymore. It's just the same body with a few extra megapixels and some marginally useful functions added as a creature-comfort.

Don't get suckered in to the marketing. More "Megapixels" doesn't necessarily mean it's a better camera. I, and many, many other professionals rely on a camera that only has 8 megapixels, and we can make billboards from those images if we want. We were able to back when the top of the line cameras were only 4 megapixels. I have a pair of 20Ds which I still use, and wouldn't hesitate to pick up another one if something bad were to happen to one of mine.

As far as lenses go. You're going to want the highest quality you can afford. If you decide to get a Canon, then the absolute best value lens you can buy is the EF 50mm f1.8 Mark II USM. That's quite a mouthful! It runs about $70 dollars, and is great for portraits and any can be used in low light. The build quality is plastic, but don't be fooled, the image produced is unusually high-quality for canon's cheapest lens, and is right up there with its $350 cousin.

Lens choice is primarily decided by what type of photography you want to do.
"Nature Photography" is kind of broad. Landscape photographers generally use a wide-angle lens, but wildlife requires supertelephoto lenses, neither of which can be found in the price-range you're seeking unless you heavily compromise on lens quality and subsequently, image quality. A compromise may be best in terms of what suits someone who isn't sure what they want to shoot specifically. He can try different focal lengths and different subjects and see what catches his fancy.

The nice thing about lenses, is for the most part, they hold their value extremely well, unlike camera bodies which depreciate sharply in the first few years after their release. You can buy a high-quality lens today, and as long as Canon is still producing cameras that use those lenses, it will retain much of its value even 10 years down the road, so don't be afraid to splurge a little on the lenses. You can always re-sell it for close to what you paid, and sometimes a little more, if you find that you rarely use it. This becomes even truer if you buy the lens used to begin with!

This is getting to be a really long post, so I am going to stop here. If you have any questions or need me to clarify anything, don't be afraid to ask! The world of digital photography can be really confusing, even to someone like me who has been absorbed by it on a professional level. I hope you find this information useful!

[Bene]

My dad just a couple days back got the Nikon D60 along with an extra long range lens I think. It cost him about ~$900 but now he has second thoughts about it. He is thinking about returning it and buying used for cheaper.

So what I'll do is forward that info to him James. Where would you guys recommend he buy a second hand camera? Ebay? Thanks all and thanks James for all that information.

Edit: no he doesn't have any old camera equipment.

[openeyes]

Originally Posted by Bene

Where would you guys recommend he buy a second hand camera? Ebay? Thanks all and thanks James for all that information.

I was about to ask the same question. The main trustworthy site with some used cameras I know of is adorama.

[goldtoe360]

How about B&H Photo Video | Digital Cameras, Camcorders

The 20D sells for $489 used.

Reading James Hayden's post makes me want to get a 20D.

[James Hayden]

Yeah, for the price a 20D is a superior value to the D60 based on the specs I am seeing at dpreview.com. The D60 has the latest round of bells and whistles, such as sensor-dust removal, and it has 10mp to the 20D's 8, which will not make much of a difference.

Some things about the D60 that strike me as noticeable limitations:

1) It has a CCD sensor. CCD sensors tend to suffer from digital noise and color shifts. If he plans to use the camera in low light, the image quality will suffer.

2) It appears to have an inferior 3-zone autofocus system. The 20D has a 9 Point autofocus system and three different autofocus drive modes. The viewfinders on both of these camera are inferior to what came standard with film cameras, so it's nearly impossible to manually focus a lens without making special custom modifications to the camera (It will likely void the warranty too!), so having accurate autofocus coverage is very important.

Here's a mockup of the D60's viewfinder: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ni...viewfinder.gif

And here's a mockup of the 20D & 30D viewfinders: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/30D/viewfinder.jpg


3) The D60 can only shoot at 3fps max.

On the other hand, the buffer of the D60 surpasses that of the 20D, however, the 20D also can shoot nearly twice as rapidly (5fps), and for casual shooting you probably won't fill the buffer. The D60 claims an "Unlimited Buffer", where the 20D will shoot something like 22 JPEGS in succession at 5fps before it will need to rest for a moment and digest those photos before it can continue shooting. If you shoot in RAW mode, the buffer depth becomes more comparable between the two at 6 images for the 20D to 9 images for the D60. If you choose a lower JPEG quality on the 20D, it will also increase the number of photos you can shoot in succession.

4)I just noticed that the D60 uses SD memory cards. The 20D will use Compact Flash, which is less easy to lose and I think it may even be slightly cheaper. There's no need to run out and buy some huge, super fast memory card, so don't let a camera store salesman tell you otherwise. The 20D has a writespeed of about 5mb/sec, so any card that exceeds that write speed will work. I personally use RiData 150x, and also SanDisk Ultra II for my 20Ds and have a ton of them. I like to keep my cards around 2gb. This allows for 500 JPEGS or 200 RAW files to be stored on one card. I shoot RAW 95% of the time, which is more for advanced/professional users than casual amateur shooters, but I don't like to keep more than 200 images on one card in case it gets lost or corrupted as a measure of security. A decent 2gb compact flash card can be had for about $35 dollars or less now, as manufacturers have ventured on into the realm of the 16 and 32GB cards It's hard to believe I paid over $100 for a 1GB card only a few years ago! I hope your dad wasn't talked into buying some expensive SD card.

I should also mention that you should beware of the 'all knowing' camera salesmen. I've come to realize over the years that most of them don't know as much as you'd think they do about cameras, and are just trying to make a sale by steering you toward something that isn't necessarily the best value for your needs. Not that I blame them. They have to put food on the table somehow

Anyway, I didn't see where you live at, but the local Best Buy here always has a 40D, a 5D, a D40, a D60 etc out on display where you can pick them up and handle them. Sometimes they even have a charged battery so you might be able to actually use it. He could try out different ones and see which one he likes better. If you don't have a big electronics superstore that has dSLRs on display, you could always settle for a Ritz/Wolf Camera, or a Mom & Pop business, but if you go that route, try and actually buy something from them if you can. I always feel bad if I go to a small store to see something in person, but then go buy it online somewhere.

Where to buy? I've purchased some cameras off of Ebay, but buyer beware! Read the auction carefully, buy only from sellers with good feedback, and make sure they are willing to refund your money if the camera arrives and is not as advertised. I've never personally had a bad experience with a dSLR purchased from ebay, but I bought a film slr once that was in worse condition than advertised, but it didn't affect the camera operation, so I kept it.

B&H is a very reputable seller. I've had thousands of dollars of transactions with them and never once had a problem. Also look at Adorama.com, as I believe they sell used equipment, and also KEH.com. Adorama and B&H are based out of New York City, and KEH is out of Atlanta, and if you live close to either of them, they have a storefront you can conduct your dealings in person if you like, or have a hands-on look before you buy.

[Gene]

Originally Posted by James Hayden

I recommend buying a used 20D for around $4-500. Here is a quick rundown of Canon's mid-grade cameras, so you can see why I recommend it.

Your post in my opinion was comprehensive and accurate. Like you I enjoy the feel of my 20D more than the Rebel which is indeed make of materials which feel less substantial and durable.

Also as you mention the optics, the lenses are more important than mega pixels. However, when everything else is equal except the mega pixels of the imaging device I lean towards more mega pixels.

I also concur that a used 20D in good condition might well be ideal for the person.

[James Hayden]

Originally Posted by Gene

Your post in my opinion was comprehensive and accurate. Like you I enjoy the feel of my 20D more than the Rebel which is indeed make of materials which feel less substantial and durable.

Also as you mention the optics, the lenses are more important than mega pixels. However, when everything else is equal except the mega pixels of the imaging device I lean towards more mega pixels.

I also concur that a used 20D in good condition might well be ideal for the person.

My opinions may be a little out of place in a "technology & technical skills" forum, since I'm more concerned with the practical consequences of my gear rather than obsessing over minute details no one even notices. I'm only interested in how it will look as a print. Color reproduction and dynamic range/exposure latitude are the sensor characteristics that you can actually see in a print.

If everything else is equal except for megapixels, the device with more megapixels generally will have more noise, and less dynamic range, because the photosites are more densely packed and each one will have less light-collecting area available to it.

Just for fun, we can look at the practical difference in print size between a file from an 8mp 20d, a 10mp 40d.

20D Image size: 3504 x 2336
Print size at 300ppi: 11.68" x 7.45"
Print size at 150ppi: 23.36" x 14.9"
screen resolution 72ppi: 48.66" x 32.44"

40D Image size: 3888 x 2592
Print size at 300ppi: 12.69" x 8.69"
Print size at 150ppi: 25.38 x 17.38
Screen resolution 72ppi: 54" x 36"

You gain 384 pixels in width, and 256 pixels in height.

300ppi is what most labs print at, but I've ran some tests and I can barely perceive a difference between a file printed at 300ppi and 150ppi, and I've shown the prints to non-photographers who say they are absolutely indistinguishable. 72ppi is the spacing of pixels on most monitors, so when you open an 8mp image and zoom in to 100%, you're looking at a 48x32 image.

So for all practical purposes, there just isn't much of a difference unless we increase the size of the sensor.

So how good is the color rendition and dynamic range on a 20D? I have a quick comparison I can use as a (non-scientific) demonstration. The top image is from a $3500 professional body, and the bottom is from the 20D, both shot with the same lens, using the same settings only moments apart from each other. I tried to approximate the field of view, but they don't match up exactly.



This isn't meant to be art or anything. I chose the scene because it was right outside my house, and had a wide range of tones and colors for comparison.

The sensor on the 20D didn't capture the shadows as well as the larger sensor on the 1d Mark II. You can see it most noticeably on the shaded part of the trucks. They are noticeably darker and hold less detail. The other thing to notice is that the blue in the sky is much different on the 20D. I actually think the blue on the 20D is prettier looking, but the sky in reality was far closer to the color produced by the more expensive sensor. The expensive sensor renders the gray asphalt more neutrally also. The reds and greens are pretty close, but the reds in the 20D have a little more magenta.

So basically, it's an awesome camera for the price. I can't think of anything a casual shooter would need that this camera doesn't provide.