Entry Level DSLR

wingnut

Ok so its the d50 - d70s - 350D - 20D. Things I am aware of:

1. There is millions of camera forums and review pitting these cameras against each other, and discussion boards discussing.
2. They have strengths and weaknesses in different areas.
3. The choice should depend on the intended use/budget.
4. The are Nikon nuts and Canon nuts who swear by one or t'odder.
5. This issue has been discussed before (but I am looking for 'fresh' views).

I'm still stumped as to which one to choose. I am aware of the differences technically but I am only starting out in photography (current camera pana FZ5 :rolleyes: ) I am looking to build a mini kit as cheaply as possible but with decent quality (who isn't).

Considerations:
1. D50 - probably the most popular route into DSLRs. What I like: build quality, sd memory, a twin lens kit would be very affordable. What I don't like: Kit lens is good, but not great by nikkor (high) standards.
2. D70 - I like: excellent kit lens / build quality / features. I don't like: price
3. 350D - Once again an affordable twin lens kit (with battery grip c. €1000). I like: 8 megapixels (before anyone starts I am aware that the diff between 6 - 8 is not significant and only useful for crops). I don't like: kit lenses not on a par with nikons offering,
4. 20D: one of the best options but more than I was hoping to spend to get the range I would like.

Geneal Consenus:
All good cameras, aimed at different markets without a conclusive winner. The nikons have very good kit lenses (esp. d70). Both Nikon and Canon have excellent selection of accesories and lenses. Other offerings such as the Olympus E-500 have nice features (soinic dust clean for sensor) but image quality isn't as good. Same goes for KM 5d with OIS in the body (that and KM going out of cameras). Panasonic have an SLR on the way I feel would be perfect for me (the DMC L1). OIS on Lecia lenses, based on the 4/3rds system. Alas, I am sure that will be out of my price range.

Main Interestes:
I like sports and nature photography so a decent zoom is a must. I will also be taken photos of plants for catalogues, brochures etc. I like the idea of buying a one off kit to keep me going for a while before I look at buying expensive glass (once again I am a newbie). I would like to keep the budget down but I can strectch if I really need to, but where is the point of dimishing returns.

Possibilities:
I have been looking at some sigma and tamron lens that cover a wide range. 18-200. I am aware there is a sacrifice in quality over separates but the reduced risk of dust and the 'walk around' ability appeals to me (thats what I love about the FZ5 - 'allinone' package). I realise this defeats the purpose of an slr to some extent but would be quite happy using the 18-200 for a year or two untill I decided to got a bit better.

What am I looking for?
I would like to hear how other boarders are faring with their D50, d70s, 350d and 20d. Do any of you regret your purchase. Does any know a 'killer package' I might be able to pair a decent lens with a good body for under €1000 and still have a nice range.

Comments, observations would be appreciated.

wingnut

Phew that was a long post

nitrogen

It's all about lenses and of course, the photographer.

The D50 is a very good camera (Check my site in my profile to see examples), it's lenses where you should spend your cash.

melekalikimaka

and in the red corner weighing in at 250 pounds....NIKON

and in the blue corner weighing a scrawny 120 pounds....CANON

DING DING FIGHT

DonkeyRhubarb

Im in your exact same position. In fact, I came on just now to ask that exact same question, but with only one difference. I was also looking at the EOS 30D. Check out: http://www.komplett.ie/k/kl.asp?bn=10480 . They don't have the D70s, which I am strongly thinking on, but their prices are good. I buy from them all the time and have found them very reliable.
Specifically, komplett have the 350D with two lenses for 1098, a good deal, but Im a sceptic of the build quality (compared to the Nikons.
I have a slightly bigger budget than you (around 1500), as I dont intend on upgrading for a long time after this.
I recommend you look at these cameras on komplett, and if anyone else can shed some help, especially if you own any of these cameras, I will appreciate it just as much as wingnut.

Regards, Mike

Dimy

I think SD cards on the D50 is a negative point rather than positive... Anyway, you said it all yourself, there's no real winner there, all camera's you mention have their pros and cons, just whatever you do, don't buy anything else but Nikon or Canon! Also don't judge on the lens that comes with the kit... eventually you'll dispose of the kit-lens and buy something better to replace it, so judge the camera not the glass.
I'm very very happy with my 350D, it's an excellent camera, maybe a little small but if you have a battery grip that problem is solved. You can buy the Sigma 70-300mm lens for about 200 euro's so that's a good budget telephoto lens to add to your collection (You can buy the same lens with a Nikon mount even if you choose to go for a Nikon). It's a tough decision, but I don't think you can go wrong there, all camera's you mention are winners.

joolsveer

Dimy wrote:

... Anyway, you said it all yourself, there's no real winner there, all camera's you mention have their pros and cons, just whatever you do, don't buy anything else but Nikon or Canon! Also don't judge on the lens that comes with the kit... eventually you'll dispose of the kit-lens and buy something better to replace it, so judge the camera not the glass.

Why would you advise anyone not to buy cameras made by other makers? Olympus and Pentax are two of the manufacturers who have a track record in making excellent SLRs and the Olympus dSLRs get very good write ups. Until recently I had not used Canon products and though I am happy with the 1000FN and 350D I don't think they are superior to other makes e.g. Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, (these are all the brands I can think of at the moment).

melekalikimaka

joolsveer wrote:

Why would you advise anyone not to buy cameras made by other makers? Olympus and Pentax are two of the manufacturers who have a track record in making excellent SLRs and the Olympus dSLRs get very good write ups. Until recently I had not used Canon products and though I am happy with the 1000FN and 350D I don't think they are superior to other makes e.g. Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, (these are all the brands I can think of at the moment).

I'd tend to agree with Dimy,Canon/Nikon are the market leaders... most commonly used, why go off buying something few have, support and accessories are a fraction of main two.

Dimy

joolsveer wrote:

Why would you advise anyone not to buy cameras made by other makers? Olympus and Pentax are two of the manufacturers who have a track record in making excellent SLRs and the Olympus dSLRs get very good write ups. Until recently I had not used Canon products and though I am happy with the 1000FN and 350D I don't think they are superior to other makes e.g. Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, (these are all the brands I can think of at the moment).

Yeah right, that's why in every magazine and online tests the Canons and Nikons come out best.... (talking about DSRL here, not oldschool SLR ;-))

DotOrg

from somebody who owns two dSLRs and uses them almost every day, the body isn't important, the lenses are the most important thing by far!!!

joolsveer

Dimy wrote:

Yeah right, that's why in every magazine and online tests the Canons and Nikons come out best.... (talking about DSRL here, not oldschool SLR ;-))

If what is important is the lens I would stick with what I've said and go for companies who are involved in the optical area and make lenses for medical and scientific purposes as well as camera lenses e.g. Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, Minolta.

Dimy I guess you seem to be harbouring some kind of a grudge. I'm not why should you? I am willing to start afresh. I would prefer that we don't engage in snide comments.

joolsveer

melekalikimaka wrote:

I'd tend to agree with Dimy,Canon/Nikon are the market leaders... most commonly used, why go off buying something few have, support and accessories are a fraction of main two.

To me that is like saying that as Microsoft are the software market leaders in terms of sales we should switch to the monopoly.

melekalikimaka

joolsveer wrote:

To me that is like saying that as Microsoft are the software market leaders in terms of sales we should switch to the monopoly.

well whats the point in buying something that has inferior preformance, quality, service and accessories. I use Linux by the way, I think a camera is very different to a piece of software

wingnut

I appreciate that the glass and the photographer play a bigger part in the picture than the camera body. I wan't something that will get me going in one go, I have a few hobbies that suck my money so I'd like to just pay and forget for a year and maybe look at upgrading then.

BTW the 30D is a replacement for the 20D I believe

Fionn

my 2¢

i did some research choosing a D SLR and came to the conclusion that it was a toss up between Nikon and Canon, after comparing lots of sources i decided on the Canon EOS 350 D kit (2 lenes and a battery grip)

Dimy

joolsveer wrote:

If what is important is the lens I would stick with what I've said and go for companies who are involved in the optical area and make lenses for medical and scientific purposes as well as camera lenses e.g. Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, Minolta.

Dimy I guess you seem to be harbouring some kind of a grudge. I'm not why should you? I am willing to start afresh. I would prefer that we don't engage in snide comments.

Sorry about that jools, maybe that's my bad sense of dutch humour, I was merely kidding when I said "oldschool" and not being serious. As you can read in your flower picture topic I really liked the photo's I saw there.

Lenses are of course important and you're likely to switch bodies, but what I added is that you shouldn't judge on kit-lenses that come with the body. Also.... Canon is involved in the optical area...they make lenses for cameras! Why should they specifically be involved in making opticals for medical and scientific purposes? I don't really see the point there as that's a completely different market. HP is also making equipment for the medical/scientific purposes, that doesn't mean their computers are of better quality than companies that aren't. And as for a monopoly goes.... maybe they simply make superior equipment? A monopoly isn't always bad... but a little bit of healthy competition between Nikon and Canon in this case never hurts and will push both companies forwards. I think the other companies are just a few steps behind these two, that's all. Not saying their camera's are bad, I just wouldn't buy them.

halenger

joolsveer wrote:

If what is important is the lens I would stick with what I've said and go for companies who are involved in the optical area and make lenses for medical and scientific purposes as well as camera lenses e.g. Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, Minolta.

Dimy I guess you seem to be harbouring some kind of a grudge. I'm not why should you? I am willing to start afresh. I would prefer that we don't engage in snide comments.

I think Pentax aren't doing so well in the dSLR market at the moment. We'll see where it goes after some time. Of course they have a great range of older lenses to choose from but they aren't out there with Image Stabilization and things like that as far as I'm aware. They're in entry level still...

Olympus are promising enough - depending on your view of the 4/3s system. But here's where your arguement falls down a bit. The range of lenses is zilch compared to Nikon, Canon and even Pentax (I really don't have a clue of any of their recent lenses but PK has been around for a long time and Sigma at least still appear to make their new lenses for Pentax).

A friend of mine has the E-500. He loves it but he has a lot of trouble finding suitable lenses. At the moment he's trying to find something similar to a 50mm f/1.8 (35mm would be about the same when Nikon/Canon crops are taken into account) but he just can't find one. His only real option would be to buy a convertor and buy a Nikon/Canon/old Olympus mount lens. Even then he'd lose everything - no metering, no auto focus etc.

There are lenses on the way for Olympus but they're not here in a large variety yet.


I'll give a thumbs up to the D50. I have that at the moment. I will be splashing out on some new lenses soon, that's about all that's 'limiting' me at this point in time.

melekalikimaka

aye the camera is super, i have it too, but this is the problem , doesn anyone reccommend a camera they DON'T have?

Thirdfox

What about panasonic/leica? They have a new 4/3 systems dSLR coming out right?

halenger

Thirdfox wrote:

What about panasonic/leica? They have a new 4/3 systems dSLR coming out right?

That may be all well and good but they'll want a lotta lenses to back it up. It is a real stumbling block for anyone who is looking at getting seriously into cameras and all. Maybe a few years down the line. I'm happy with Nikon though so I'm happy enough to start investing in lenses.


...of course I don't have an unbiased opinion and while it might not be the most helpful thing to heartily recommend your own gear I think it's a good indication that whatever way you go (Nikon/Canon or even other) you'll be well pleased with your new toys.

peepingtom

i have the d70s and that comes with a wicked lense ... 18-70mm

its perfect for most situations