Best inexpensive digital slr.
- This topic has 10 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated Jul 8, 2007 at 2:46 am by
.
-
Posts
-
I have decided that it is time to move from 35mm to digital. It is a difficult parting seeing as how my 35mm has been around the world and taken thousands of wonderful pictures. But alas the old minolta 700 is wearing out and needs some repairs that would cost close to what a new digital slr would cost. What is the best camera for a newcomer to digital slr’s?
OK…I hope I can express my point of view without offending anyone on this board.
Well Nikon can certainly make that lens compatability claim. I know nothing about Canon though.
Edit: didn’t catch you were only focusing on the D40, yeah they changed some things up with the mount there. I’m pretty sure you can still use most if not all of the old lenses in manual mode though.
Yes…I was meaning specifically the D40.
I’ve got no idea, buddy.
I’m just starting to wade through all of it myself, I just know at least some of the old lenses will mount, unsure of what features are available.
“inexpensive” is a relative term. Check the price point on a D2x. Dude has been taking pictures allready, maybe he wants something mid-level, who knows.
I don’t know if theres an easy answer to a question like this 🙂
Each maker, to one degree or another has pros and cons. read enough forums and you start to get a feel for some. for example only. Canon seems to have an edge in noise reduction (broad statement) and seems to enjoy a sizeable advantage for sports and wildlife shooters who favor Canons lenses/systems. Goto any of the major wildlife forums etc and the overwhelming majority are canon shooters. Check the side lines of any sporting event and 95% of the shooters are using Canon L lenses.
From what I gather its a combination of numerous things from noise reduction to better (faster more accurate) AF systems ( AI servo). Conversely the techies seems to feel Nikon has more reliable and better AF in one shot modes ( Landscape, portrait) etc. Theres also lots of debate as to which system renders colours better 🙂Does either make one or the other “better”?
Who knows 🙂 I dont think so.
I went Canon initially because thats what Im comfortable with.While I can maybe give some idea or thoughts on what I think of Canons entry level DSLRs ( the XT and XTI) that doesnt in any way mean I can fairly comment on Nikons, Pentax or Sonys. What i would suggest is that regardless of which maker you decide and which of their bodies include room in your budget for glass both immediately and down the road. Bodies are only tempoary and like cars depreciate quickly. Glass if taken care of can last decades.
Im using Canons 30D and Ive got some very good glass including some L. Im going to drive the 30D into the ground and hopefully (wife willing) buy a 1DIIn in a year or so.
Glass last, bodies dont.
Thanks for the replies, this kind of discussion is what I was looking for. I know that everyone has their favorites but I am just beginning this process and will take all the knowlenge I can get. Thanks
I took the jump to a DSLR about 4 years ago or so. Went to CO and spent $500 on film and processing. Decided that that would have been a good down payment on a DSLR. I bought a Canon 10D. I have used it over the years and shot some good pictures. It has probably saved me a ton of film/processing money over the years.
I recently bought a Pentax W20. It’s a waterproof point and shoot. It’s 7MP and takes great outdoor pictures. And it’s safe to take it on the river.
I still use the 10D and only have two lenses for it.
-wayne
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.