Bit of advice starting off

padi89

Have not posted in this forum before so bare with me please.I don't know why but i aways end up having a look through this forum,not for the talk i guess il start now though,but just to enjoy some of the photos you guys take.You'd probably laugh at the amount of times "set as background" is used by me from pics here.
To make a long story short basically what i want to do is move away from the point n shoot market into DSLR.I have been using a Sony DSC 60 for the last 2-3 years and while its been great i do feel its time to move on and up.I do spend a lot of time outdoors and i do see some amazing scenes daily,be it nature,people landscape etc.I also have family who are very heavily involved in sport at national and international level,plus i have my sisters wedding coming up this time next year.I do feel very limited by my point n shoot these days,so much so that i just don't bother bringing it with me much anymore.I would very much like to improve.
So,starting out as an all rounder and newbie ,what are my options available?My budget would be in the 750 euro region give or take.I am looking into some evening classes local to get the basics right and to follow up with time.Do i buy new,second hand?I have a friend going to the states in a couple of weeks ,so do i get him to pick one up??
I had my eye on a Canon 400D a couple of months back but people seemed to have very poor opinion on the kit lens....
Any help and advice is much appreciated.
Thank you for you time.

deaddonkey

the 350D/400D is great

the kit lens is ok

useable, but a bit soft, and not 'fast' at all
useable for daylight and bright indoor scenes, but nothing else

also, if you're interested in sport, don't even try with the kit lens

having said that, the kit lens at 18mm at f5 or so is quite nice, i use it a lot

padi89

deaddonkey wrote:

the 350D/400D is great

the kit lens is ok

useable, but a bit soft, and not 'fast' at all
useable for daylight and bright indoor scenes, but nothing else

also, if you're interested in sport, don't even try with the kit lens

having said that, the kit lens at 18mm at f5 or so is quite nice, i use it a lot

OK, thanks for the reply.So for the body 350d/400d is correct,but for a beginner with a tight enough budget ,what starter lens is recommended? A jack of all trades ,master of none will do me for the time being until i learn more.

Muineach

When I started I got the kit lens with the 350D and a Sigma 70-300mm with a zoom, I think it cost about 160-200e at the time, I think they have a newer version out now with better "glass", I found the Sigma to be very versatile as it also has a decent enough macro setting on it as well so you get to try out some macro shots. The focus is a little bit slow on mine, but i think it's improved on the newer model.

I've since moved onto a Canon EFS IS USM 20ish - 85mm (about 550e)
and a Canon EF IS USM 70-300 (about 500e, the EFS model was about 1,000e)
That's just the way I went, might be wrong

sineadw

Yep the sigma 70-300 is supposedly a fantastic piece of glass for its price. Its about €200 here but I'm guessing you'll get it a whole lot cheaper in the states. Just make sure its the newer APO one. You can do a search for shots taken with it on Flickr, very sharp.

That, the kit lens and the nifty fifty (of course :rolleyes: ) for faster indoor shots will keep you well covered for a good while with either the 350 or the 400. And you should be able to get it all around your budget if you go Hong Kong or the States. Might be a bit over...

Oh and welcome along

rahtkennades

Muineach wrote:

When I started I got the kit lens with the 350D and a Sigma 70-300mm with a zoom, ......

I'd second that. Get the 400D though. I have a 350D, and it's a great camera, but it is a few years old now!

You say you like outdoorsy stuff. To my mind, the kit lens would be fine for you for the moment, to get used to the way the camera handles. Especially with the budget you have. In a couple of months you could splash out on a decent zoom (like the above), and definitely the 50mm as recommended by sineadw above.

If you know somebody going to the US, you can certainly save big with the way the dollar is going now. Just be aware of your customs/import responsibilities!

Thirdfox

From the opposite camp here... I would also recommend you consider a Nikon D40 (the kit lens is of a pretty high standard).

See the reviews on www.dpreview.com

Sure, if your friend is going over could he get me a nifty fifty too? (For a Nikon camera of course )

Just to say that the price difference is amazing:
f1.8 50mm Nikon = E130
f1.8 50mm Nikon = $117 = E70

basically half the price!?!

Edit: Just to add you can definitely afford to get the 55-200mm VR lens too if you go the D40 route - it's a brilliant lens with built in image stabilisation (VR in Nikon terms). Probably could add the SB-400 flash too (bounce flash will work wonders on your photos)

Just something to keep in mind!

Calina

OP,

I have a 350D and would have no hesitation in recommending it. In general I also recommend the kitlens to go with an entry level DSLR like the 350D or 400D, mainly because it's the route I followed myself and found it hugely beneficial. The main reason for that is that it gives you some idea of what it is your lacking in it. With me, it lacked zoom and I went and got the much vaunted Sigma 70-300mm DG APO which is around 200E here at the moment. It is a terrific lens for the money. I do not own the 50mm - have never really felt the need for it but just about everyone I know who does have it would not be without it.

My view is that you shouldn't, at the start, get hung up on what lenses you should or should not buy. Canon give you a reasonable starter lens which allows you to explore with the camera. I believe Nikon also do. I did a holiday in Australia with the Canon kit and despite having a very steep learning curve with the camera, I have to say that it served me very well and since then I like to think I've gotten better.

TJJP

Without hitting the Nikon - Canon debate, I went Canon after years of Minolta film use (up 'till I started 5x4 that is...).

When going digital, Canon seemed to have the edge (better market, cheaper used, more users), and so I tried a 350D for a while, ended up trading it for a 30D with grip though, found the 350D too small.

In reality the glass is most important, but at the same time if budget is an issue you are unlikely to part with 2k for a lens, flash or battery grip in the near future.

On that basis, a workhorse 350/400D or 30D/40D. For the money you mention http://www.connscameras.ie/, while not the cheapest, will get you a used or ex-demo 350D/400D or 30D with standard zoom somewhere between 399 and 500 yoyos. They ain't the cheapest, but for service they are all right and they have a good range of gear from all the makers. Be careful of dealing with a muppet in there though, some of the staff are great, others are useless.

The Canon kit lens is pretty poor, but you're not going to spend a grand on a prime Canon so at 350 euro for a 350D you'll have change for the sigma later if you want (100 euro or so on fleabay) and a 4GB CF card.

If you can stretch to it, http://www.7dayshop.com is pretty good on the 30D or 40D new and pretty good for CF cards too.

My overall would be a 400D or 30D (as earlier post 350D is getting old), a Sigma 70-300mm and then think of a flash later (200 quid for starters). The bodies are all good, you'll get sigma glass easy enough and there was a sigma 500 flash on boards for around 100 quid this week.

Buy what you can to start, don't stress on the kit lens if you get it, its fine to begin and you may throw it away later, think of the extras - CF card and flash gun and you'll be fine.

TJJP

Sorry - double post..

padi89

Thanks for all the replys.I was pretty set on just going with the Canon 400d with kit lens to start off but im not to sure now.I went into my local store today to view it but i found the Nikon d40 much more comfortable to hold and use, i really liked the weight and build too compared with the Canon 400d.The price is excellent too so i am heavily leaning towards going the Nikon route.
Beside the pixel and cleaning system is there a big gap between these two?I understand when properly used both can produce great results but i am even more confused now as to which way to go.

Thirdfox

We'll have you converted yet!

Let's confuse you even further - do remember to try out the Olympus E series too - I heard good things about them. Their lenses should be cheaper than corresponding Nikon or Canon ones. And the Pentax! These cameras all have image stabilisation built into the camera so every lens is a stabilised one (Canon and Nikon argue that built in lens IS/VR is more effective (and costly!))

The dust removal feature has been tested and found to be quite ineffective (except for the Olympus system). Extra pixels are useful if you want to crop or print larger (more noise in the image too).

The Canon has more autofocus points (but I just use the centre one anyway). Can shoot slightly faster (3 fps compared to 2.5-2.7ish fps).

Also as of right now the D40 does not have a large range of short focal length prime lenses that autofocus with it - the Sigma f1.4 30mm is one of the only ones. There are plenty of telephoto primes though. And manual focus is not the end of the world.

I own a D40 and it is a pleasure to use. And I'm sure 400D users will say the same too. In the end the cameras are not that different and it's down to personal perference...

One last thing... the D40's shutter sounds (subjectively) better than the Canons - really soft It may seem like a small thing but you'll be hearing it hundreds of times a day potentially and it may also cause annoyance to others to have a very loud shutter.

Good luck with whatever you choose!

edit: see review of dust removal system:
http://pixinfo.com/en/articles/ccd-dust-removal/