Photography heads - good SLR digital camera?

DjArcadian

I need to get a good SLR digital camera for work. Mostly to take pictures of work our tree company does so we can create a portfolio. Biggest problem I have with the cheaper regular digital cameras is lack of depth and focal range, lack of wide lens and poor color/contrast. Primary problem when taking pictures of trees is the ones I want to focus on are usually lost in the scenery. I want to get a good starter SLR camera. Maybe something with a good zoom lens or at least a combination of a zoom and maybe a long lens. Also something that will produce good color/contrast in different light. The camera I currently have really produces shitty pictures in certain light.Any recommendations? I'd probably buy used. Really don't want to pay more than $800 all together.

mannybolone

I need to get a good SLR digital camera for work. Mostly to take pictures of work our tree company does so we can create a portfolio. Biggest problem I have with the cheaper regular digital cameras is lack of depth and focal range, lack of wide lens and poor color/contrast. Primary problem when taking pictures of trees is the ones I want to focus on are usually lost in the scenery.

I want to get a good starter SLR camera. Maybe something with a good zoom lens or at least a combination of a zoom and maybe a long lens.

Any recommendations? I'd probably buy used. Really don't want to pay more than $800 all together.

I've been very happy with my Nikon D70 though I wouldn't mind upgrading to the D80. You might be able to get good results with the D50. Likewise, my friend just got the comparable Canon in the same class and he's been very happy with its capabilities too. The Canon has a few more bells and whistles from what I've seen but I like some of the ergonomics on the Nikon better.

The thing is: I bought body-only b/c I already had AF lenses from my Nikon film SLR. Saved some money that way, for certain and if you already have AF lenses for a film camera, it might be worth seeing if they'll work with a digital camera.

But dude - if you're looking to get out the door for less than $800 for a digital SLR? Just keep in mind that's pretty much in the entry level for any reputable maker. I think you'll be considerably happier with the quality of them compared to cheaper point/shoot digitals but you're not buying into a professional range at all.

Personally, I'd give up a lot to cop this:

Bapt

but if you want a CHEAP one go with a Lumix (Panasonic)

DjArcadian

I've been very happy with my Nikon D70 though I wouldn't mind upgrading to the D80. You might be able to get good results with the D50. Likewise, my friend just got the comparable Canon in the same class and he's been very happy with its capabilities too. The Canon has a few more bells and whistles from what I've seen but I like some of the ergonomics on the Nikon better.

The D40 seems more in my price range. Any reason not to get that one?

Aser

d40 works w/ "digital only" lenses. If you don't plan on using any old slr lenses, then the d40 is absolutely fine for you.

I have a d80, no complaints about it at all, alas it is beyond your price range.

DjArcadian

So I opted for the Nikon D40. Not too concerned with lenses as the kit I bought had two. I mmmmight get a longer lens someday but if I get tired of this I'll just sell it and apply the difference to a better model.

Mondeyano

Personally, I'd give up a lot to cop this:

Checkin shots made with this on Flickr and the quality looks stunning.

On the Lumix tip I bought the 10-megapixel DMC-LX2 (which has a Leica lens) and it's served me OK. It has a slight learning curve though and you might have to make up some tricks to get the results you need - fiddle with different modes, focus on one thing and then shoot another etc. If you just plan to shoot well-lit scenes then it's great but as soon as you don't have enough light then the pictures get pretty grainy. Pretty good value at $400 though which is what I got it for.

kwality

I'm delving into this world at the moment and the new sony (old minolta) DSLR apparently has some great tricks for shooting handheld in lowlight, without too much distortion. I'll probably get it just 'cause I've got heaps of af minolta gear that I can use with it.

Anyone managed to find a digital fisheye at a good price?

Aser

if low light is a concern to you, Canon tends to have a slight edge in ISO performance vs Nikon. Nikon is closing the gap with every release.

I recommend the fuji f30/f31 for anyone looking for a simple p&s with great low light performance.

RAJ

if low light is a concern to you, Canon tends to have a slight edge in ISO performance vs Nikon. Nikon is closing the gap with every release.

I recommend the fuji f30/f31 for anyone looking for a simple p&s with great low light performance.

I'm a Canon, man and would recommend a Canon XTi body then buy a 50mm 1.4 fstop lens seperately. The results (especially in low light) is WOW. Kit lenses are usually JUNK!

If low noise at high iso's is what you are looking for... beginner cameras will suck. The Canon 30D is way better than the XTi... but if you want stellar results (ie big prints) you will need a pro camera like the 5D or the Nikon D200.

maru

i'm thinking about getting a Nikon d40 or d40x myself. my first foray into digital slrs.

mannybolone

Just to echo Raj's point: I'd get a body-only and add your own lens. The stock lenses that come with the cameras are not very good and especially will suck in low light situations.