O/T Looking for a DSLR camera

[NikUK]

I've got a Nikon D200 DSLR with a variety of lens and kit. It gets a a bit much lugging it about at times but the results are worth it. As we're not far apart you'd be more than welcome to come over and have a look at it. The new Canons do shoot great HD footage and I personally would make the swap, as video is a road i'm looking to go down but as you say video isn't important then either Nikon or Canon are great. Once you decide though you will spend lots on lens and extras over time (trust me) . This will then make it very hard to swap makes in the future if you wanted to.

Have you thought of getting maybe a better spec camera by buying second hand? have a look at Grays of westminster (www.graysofwestminster.co.uk) or Fixation (www.fixationuk.com)

[Lurksalot]

Most of the DSLRs will give you a good start and all the advice you get will probably make more sense AFTER you have bought a camera .

Even if the menus feel intuitive at first you may find that as you develop your technique things may crop up that another camera does better .

I use Olympus , with only drawback being very long exposures have a bit of 'noise' due to the sensor size. however it is a few years old now and they may have come on since then.

It uses the 4/3 lens system and is supposedly the only system specifacally designed for digital. lenses are thus widely available from a number of different camera manufactures who use the same standard although Zuicko stand out as great glass.

So I would probably start second hand and maybe try a few different cameras until you find one that fits you.  after all you will get upgraditis with a camera aswell  

[Bob Green]

but then you should get a video camera for decent vids surely?

My thoughts exactly.

A DSLR is a personal choice and I happen to prefer Canon.  Don’t get too hung up on the megapixel thing.  8 megapixels will give excellent images but it is mostly about the quality of lens you use.

[Fat Albert]

Utter Rot on bridge cameras

You would not be able to get these sort of shots with a bridge camera though.

The Casio EX-F1 can shoot 60 frames per second at 6mp, it has a mode that shoots continuously, such that when you press the shutter you get 30 frames from before the press plus the 30 frames after the press. It's almost impossible to miss that moment when your son heads the winning goal! The slow motion video (up to 1200fps at reduced resolution) feature is also very useful for analysing technique.

The Fuji HS10 has a 30x lens (28mm through 700m 35mm equivalent) and an excellent sensor. 99% of users would not be able to tell the difference between shots taken with the Fuji and those with the DSLRs mentioned, other than they don't need to be a weight lifter to carry the camera bag with them, somewhat compensated for by the extra weight of their wallets

I use the HD video capability of an HS10 to video my rugby clubs 1stXV every saturday, it is entirely appropriate for this use and I prefer it to the Panasonic SD700 3CCD camcorder for the job, because the manual zoom makes framing a doddle.

Having one camera that can do it all is pretty b****y convenient.

Don't get me wrong, I come from an SLR background, I know that for that 1% of the camera using population that can appreciate the additional quality and capability of quality DSLRs, they are technically superior. For the 99% of people who just want to take good quality pictures and video, they are an unnecessary expense.

[Mark (smokey mow)]

Thanks again for the words of advice so far.  I've Just got back from town (I left the credit card at home )

Found the chap in Jessops very helpful and willing to let me have a good prod and poke at a collection of DSLRs.  

I looked at the Canon 550D but that's probably a bit more money than I'm looking to spend at this time.  The 500D seems pretty comparable and cheeper but is 12mp as opposed to 18mp not that I see that as being a problem at all.  The canon seems to have a few more features and gimmicks than Nikon but I'm not sure how many of them I'm ever going to be using on a regular basis.

For Nikon I was looking at the D5000 range and in particular this package with both 18-55 and 55-200 VR lenses which strikes me as very good value.  The menu navigation on the Nikon I found easier to use and quite intuitive without having the benifit of the user manual to hand, whereas with the Canon it wasn't quite so easy.  The Nikon is a heavier camera and I didn't feel quite as comfortable with the grip but the build quality felt better and much more solid than that of the Canon.

Tricky choice but at the moment I'm swaying toward the Nikon D5000, still plenty of time to change my mind yet though

[Chasmon]

I got the D5000 for christmas from the g/f. I broke the lens a couple of weeks ago while away skiing. Fell on the thing while it was in the bag not on the slopes just on ice. Took great pictures up until then. Thankfully its covered by my insurance. I'm not a buff but the g/f took advice from some experienced people and to be honest with the reviews I've read I think she chose the right one.

The camera body is fine but the lens body is not that robust. I think its because its a good lens with vibration reduction and all but they've got the cost down by using plastic in the construction. The mount to the body is plastic and this is where it broke. To be fair all my weight landed on the thing and on a hard floor.

I do think I now need to go on a course to learn how to use the thing to get the best out of it.  

[pistonbroke]

One feature i wouldnt want to be without for tele photo shots is image stablisation (anti lens shake)

Some SLR's have it built into the camera electrickery in the body .

The more expensive types have it included in tele photo lens itself rather than the body .

Not sure what the adv / dis advantages of each are , but it does mean much greater cost for stabilised  telephoto lens' aginst normal telephoto's

[Bob Green]

One feature i wouldnt want to be without for tele photo shots is image stablisation (anti lens shake)

Some SLR's have it built into the camera electrickery in the body .

The more expensive types have it included in tele photo lens itself rather than the body .

Not sure what the adv / dis advantages of each are , but it does mean much greater cost for stabilised  telephoto lens' aginst normal telephoto's

Used correctly, IS is a great feature.  However, never use it when using a tripod as the IS is looking for something to stabilise so it works overtime looking for what is not there, if you get my drift.

[nikpro]

You will be happy with either a Canon or Nikon; both produce great cameras.

I prefer the colours the Nikon cameras produce 'off the sensor' but it's purely personal.

Don't worry about it Mark, either choice is very good; youve done the right thing by going and handling the different options - just don't buy from Jessops - they are crap.

[KerryS]

I have a Canon EOS300D with kit lens that needs to go on a well known auction site but could be a cheap toe-dip into DSLR?

[carpetstu]

While we are on the subject do I understand the lens thing right now?

18mm - 50mm with f 2.2 is a good all round indoor outdoor lens with reasonable zoom?

70mm - 300mm f4 to 5.6 is a better outside long range lens (telephoto)

18mm - 200mm f3.5 is a great indoor and outdoor lens for wide angle and  portrait shots etc.

I seem to follow , if I am right that for long distance it will be a higher mm starting number and upper number, but limits the width of vision. if its a wider range with low number from 1 -20 it will get a wider shot?

And the higher the f number the less light it lets in ... so high f numbers better for outdoor use?

[Matt Seabrook]

Utter Rot on bridge cameras

You would not be able to get these sort of shots with a bridge camera though.

The Casio EX-F1 can shoot 60 frames per second at 6mp, it has a mode that shoots continuously, such that when you press the shutter you get 30 frames from before the press plus the 30 frames after the press. It's almost impossible to miss that moment when your son heads the winning goal! The slow motion video (up to 1200fps at reduced resolution) feature is also very useful for analysing technique.

The Fuji HS10 has a 30x lens (28mm through 700m 35mm equivalent) and an excellent sensor. 99% of users would not be able to tell the difference between shots taken with the Fuji and those with the DSLRs mentioned, other than they don't need to be a weight lifter to carry the camera bag with them, somewhat compensated for by the extra weight of their wallets

I use the HD video capability of an HS10 to video my rugby clubs 1stXV every saturday, it is entirely appropriate for this use and I prefer it to the Panasonic SD700 3CCD camcorder for the job, because the manual zoom makes framing a doddle.

Having one camera that can do it all is pretty b****y convenient.

Don't get me wrong, I come from an SLR background, I know that for that 1% of the camera using population that can appreciate the additional quality and capability of quality DSLRs, they are technically superior. For the 99% of people who just want to take good quality pictures and video, they are an unnecessary expense.

Sorry I wasn't aware a bridge camera could shoot at 3200iso with very very little noise or can it? The F1 car was shot in very very low light hand held at ISO 3200 if so I am talking rot if not may be you would like to retract that statement

[Matt Seabrook]

Oh just found it ISO 1600 max so that's a no then

[Norman Verona]

The difference is a lot simpler than that.

One takes pictures

The other makes pictures

No prize for guessing which is which.

[Mark (smokey mow)]

One feature i wouldnt want to be without for tele photo shots is image stablisation (anti lens shake)

Some SLR's have it built into the camera electrickery in the body .

The more expensive types have it included in tele photo lens itself rather than the body .

Not sure what the adv / dis advantages of each are , but it does mean much greater cost for stabilised  telephoto lens' aginst normal telephoto's

Used correctly, IS is a great feature.  However, never use it when using a tripod as the IS is looking for something to stabilise so it works overtime looking for what is not there, if you get my drift.

Newbie question but would I be right in thinking that image stabilisation is something that can be swtiched off if I'm using a tri-pod ?

All the camera's I'm looking at have either image stabilisation or Vibration reduction (as Nikon call it) within the lenses.