Which DSLR?

[mutley 4,487]

Mods please feel free to move this to the correct forum :wink:

I am after a new camera, my old Canon compact is fine for still snapshots but useless for action. Sadly (As Fred knows from RIAT) I missed a lot of the action due to slow refresh times and limited focal length.

My compact has been good and I will post some shots of my vacation in Jersey soon, the A700 has now been claimed by Mrs Mutley and her old APS camera binned. (Welcome to the digital age Lisa!)

So I have been looking mainly at Canon as I've always had Canon but also Pentax, Olympus and Nikon.

From what I can see the two main contenders in my price range would be the Canon EOS 400D or the Nikon 40X. So which one should I buy? Do you have any personal recommendations for the make of camera? The models change so fast so you may not by familiar with specific versions.

I rate good lens quality, frames per second is important along with low power consumption.

So to all the great photographers we have here, Sam,Theo, Fred and Martyn and others, any advice :?:

Cheers

[MartinW 0]

When I was a professional Mut I always favoured Cannon. The lenses are fantastic... or at least they were in my day, I doubt that has changed.

[mutley 4,487]

Thanks Martin, not much has changed then :wink:

Cheers

[A320cap 0]

I have a CANON IXUS 700 and I am really satisfied. I suggest you go for a CANON

[simi_av8r 0]

hi joe,

mind if i put a couple penneth in to rock the boat??

all too often i see brand snobs (for want of a better term - sorry MartinW) saying get a Canon or a Nikon, they've always been better... but, i'm afraid that as camera technology has come an extremely long way since the very first pin-hole camera, so much so that only the very best can determine the differences between images, this statement simply can't be 100% truthful.

To some extent, i do agree that Canon and Nikon lead the pack, but that's not to say that i'd favour those purely because of their prestigious history or manufacturer. Also, its a widely misconstrued theory that more megapixels equals better images. The fact is that those megapixels depend on the sensor size to equal better image quality, for example, take 2 different 10MP cameras. One with a full frame sensor and the other with a 4:3's sensor.

The camera using a 'Full Frame' sensor use a 35mm (like film cameras) sized sensor and have the full 35.0mm diagonal area of the sensor camera (depending on quality, and therefore also price) to create the image. Therefore 10MP's will have a larger area to fill, and so should produce a better quality image through lower compression. This does, however, create a problem as larger lenses are required to view an object further away. This is because of the focal-length multiplier, this being 1.0 - non full frame cameras, i.e. those smaller than 35mm, tend to have a multiplier of 1.3-2.0, meaning smaller lenses can be used to view the same object from the same distance at the same zoom level...this therefore results in the need for long, heavy and often bulky, telephot lenses that very often weight more than 2 pounds (thats almost a kilo for our friends in metric countries)!

Taking then the "Four Thirds" camera, on the other hand, this has a 22.5 mm diagonal sensor with imaging area of just 21.6 mm diagonal. By then taking those same 10MP as on the "Full Frame" sensor, we must do one of two things, either make the pixels smaller (and therefore less sensitive to light) or compress them onto the 21.6mm sensor through varying the shape - as with Fuji's CCD cameras. Compression of those pixels inevitably occurs with either method and, as a result, image quality is degraded compared to the "Full Frame" sensor. Also, because of the compression, 4:3 sensors are far more susceptible to noise and in low light. Additionally, lenses for the camera are far fewer in number than those available for the full-frame sensor type cameras, however those that are available are made by the likes of the very well know companies Sigma and Lecia, and carry a much lower price tag. There are other advantages to 4:3's system however, the smaller sensor size makes it possible to make smaller and lighter camera bodies - the best example being a Four Thirds lens with a 300 mm focal length would cover roughly the same angle as a 600 mm focal length lens for the 35 mm film standard.

So, after all of that, what camera(s) do i recommend personally for you Joe..... well, none of them - yet! The answer to this question relies on one very important factor what will the camera be used for mostly??. The reason i ask this is that cameras like the Sony Alpha 100 (a personal favourite!) come as a kit, brand new, with 17-300mm lenses (:wink:) for the paltry sum of £580. These offer a huge amount of zoom, afe very light, and are just the dogs dangly's for telephoto photography of aircraft and the like around and about airfields/airshows, as well as that very fit girl/woman next door whilst concealed up a tree in the evening :yes:). If, however, you're more of a portrait/landscape/macro photographer, then you'll probably want a camera that comes with a very respectable quality 18-55mm or 18-70mm lens - the Canon 40D pretty much takes this group hands down, but you pay the price of around £860 (and upwards) for just the body only!!

well, i guess that'll do for tonight..... Joe, i really hope that info above helps you decide, as being on a Mac technical support desk i get questions like this from amateur/pro photographers all the time...

For probably the best digital camera review site going, visit DPReview. Hundreds of sample images, camera reviews by both users, professionals and such - definitely worth a look mate.

T.T.F.N

simi

p.s. please excuse the absurd length of this post - consider me flogged with a hazel branch for my stupidity concerning post length.

[mutley 4,487]

Simi,

Many thanks for your thought provoking post, as for the length of it I admire your stamina!

I am sure the most use of the camera will be for telephoto work. I was not aware of the two differing sensors. You would think the 35mm would be the best but as you say if you are to lug the thing around all day with heavy lenses you are going to end up with biceps like Uncle Martin and who wants that! :wink:

I was starting to side with the Nikon 40X. Specs show it has an image sensor of 23.6 x 15.8 mm; total pixels: 10.75 million, Nikon DX format. It goes on to say Picture Angle Equivalent in 35mm format is approx. 1.5 times lens focal length. So should have shorter, lighter lenses?

Thanks for the extra link too, I am going to read this post again when I'm not so tired.

Cheers

[allardjd 1,853]

Two comments from one who has very little to contribute to this discussion...

 

1) What's wrong with long posts?

 

2) Agree that low power consumption is a plus, but so too would a camera that can accept a standard battery in a pinch. Don't know if anyone makes one in the quality level you're looking at though. In my opinion, spending six or eight hours at an airshow with a handful of AA or 9V batteries in your pocket might be preferable to worrying all day how long your expensive rechargeable battery (which you probably can't charge at the airshow) will last. Then you could put your extra cash in an additional memory stick or two.

 

John

[mutley 4,487]

Hi John,

I am used to long posts :yes: It's nice to have advice from someone who knows what they are talking about.

As for the power debate these cameras do seem to use L-ion batteries so I guess a backup battery would be the way to go (Even at those prices!)

The L-ion batteries I think are much lighter so easier on the wrists. I've just had a look at the site you recommended Simi and they don't leave any stone unturned, brilliant!

Better be off :wink: I've got the Mother in Law visiting tomorrow (today) so need to be in good fighting form!

Cheers

[MartinW 0]

all too often i see brand snobs (for want of a better term - sorry MartinW) saying get a Canon or a Nikon, they've always been better... but, i'm afraid that as camera technology has come an extremely long way since the very first pin-hole camera, so much so that only the very best can determine the differences between images, this statement simply can't be 100% truthful.

Not a 'brand snob' at all. After a good few decades as a professional photographer I have used Cannon, Nikon Hasselblad Sinar 5x4inch studio camera, Mamiya, and many, many more. After using the majority of the top make SLR's [35mm] I found Cannon to be superior in terms of resolution. In other formats Sinar at 5X4inch [bet you've not seen a negative that big, or loaded a 5X4 slide in a pitch black darkroom after seeing a horror film??? :sad: ] and Hasselblad at 6X4cm were regarded as the best.

[That’s why they took them to the moon, NASA are brand snobs]

HOWEVER... that was in the days of sloshing prints around in dishes and agitating rolls of film in a dev tank, which was precisely why I admitted to being way out of date and said... 'The lenses are fantastic... or at least they were in my day, I doubt that has changed.' I don't doubt for one second that Cannon lenses are still 'fantastic' but please note that at no time did I say they were CURRENTLY THE BEST. :wink:

Also, its a widely misconstrued theory that more megapixels equals better images. The fact is that those megapixels depend on the sensor size to equal better image quality, for example, take 2 different 10MP cameras. One with a full frame sensor and the other with a 4:3's sensor.

It does in comparison to fewer pixels WITH ALL THINGS EQUAL, the light sensitive medium the same size and the lens the same. Better in terms of graininess or pixelation for you clever digital boys.

It's not a mystery at all to the pro or ex pro's that the size of the light sensitive medium is paramount. Ever see the results from a good old fashioned mega sized Sinar that produced images on 10x8inch fine grained black and white film, astonishing I can tell you. :yes: The lens quality is obviously also important as is the quality of the cameras manufacture, no good if the film plane isn't positioned correctly in relation to the lens. Then of course we need an operator that understands the basics.

I have seen the results from a Cannon DSLR and I was very impressed, not seen the results from a Nikon or any other but I know that the results I saw from the Cannon pleased me and as an ex pro I am very fussy.

So as you see, not a brand snob at all, comments just based on my personal experience, and at the end of the day that’s all we can offer.

[MartinW 0]

By the way, my wife has a Kodak digital, 10 mega pixels. I won't go into who she obtained it from as it causes me considerable stress, [mut will understand] but I was very dismayed when she arrived with it. The shutter lag is horrendous, must be at least half a second. By the time you have taken the photograph your subject has gone home for their tea.

Do digital SLR's suffer any kind of shutter lag? Doubt it but just wondered.

[mutley 4,487]

I understood Martin. Shutter lag would be important to me also especially at airshows.

My first Saturday job was working for a company called Derek Gardiner who sold professional cameras. We sold Hassleblad, Mamiya, Leica and Bronicas large format camera so I am familiar with the concept that the larger recording medium along with a matched lens gives a finer result. (At the other end of the spectrum we sold Zenith B's, does anyone remember them? What Junk!)

The Canon I want is just outside my acceptable price range unless there's any interest free deals going (I'd rather keep the money in my bank) So it is looking like the Nikon D40X but not until I've checked up on Sony, Fuji and Pentax or even the new Panasonic DMC-L10 with Leica lens :???:

Cheers

[MartinW 0]

I remember Derek Gardiner Mut.

My father owned a cheap Zenith SLR, they should have sent them back to Russia. :???:

We used a Bronica 6x6 SLR where I worked, before we switched to Hasselblad.

Nikon are great mut! [Yikes! I'm a two way brand snob] Gets ten out of ten in this review.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-c ... on-D40x/p1

Looks a beautiful camera mut. :yes:

[mutley 4,487]

Thanks Martin, DG were taken over by a company Called Greens, I don't know what happened to them after that.

Thanks for teh link to I'll have a read later on.

Cheers

[Magic Man 0]

Didn't know you were a photographer Martin, my respect, was always one of my dads hobbies.

Got his Canon EOS 620(?) and my old T90 up the attic and an even older AL-1 and one of the Minolta autofocus models of the late eighties together with various lenses etc.... not pro stuff (although the T90 was considered semi-pro I believe)...

Actually, a little factet for you, our wedding photographer won the AGFA wedding portrait of the year award back in 1996 (97?) with a picture of my wife! - gave us a couple of hundred from his winnings :???: ... Clive Hughes from Tonypandy.

[mutley 4,487]

I remember that picture Magic :???:

[Magic Man 0]

You do...? :shock:

[mutley 4,487]

Nope, got it wrong, it was a picture of you Sharon and Ashley at a cousin's wedding posted on JF, my memory is not as good as it was

Cheers

[Magic Man 0]

...either it is or your search foo is high

[MartinW 0]

Didn't know you were a photographer Martin, my respect, was always one of my dads hobbies.

Got his Canon EOS 620(?) and my old T90 up the attic and an even older AL-1 and one of the Minolta autofocus models of the late eighties together with various lenses etc.... not pro stuff (although the T90 was considered semi-pro I believe)...

Actually, a little factet for you, our wedding photographer won the AGFA wedding portrait of the year award back in 1996 (97?) with a picture of my wife! - gave us a couple of hundred from his winnings ... Clive Hughes from Tonypandy.

It was my dads hobby also Magic and my grandfathers. My dad still had a very old plate camera of his fathers and a twin lens reflex, [120 roll film] can't remember the make now. We used to develop black and white prints in the loft.

[mutley 4,487]

Well I chose the Nikon D40X that came with a 18-55mm standard lens and a 55-200 telephoto that is an effective 300mm when comparing to 35mil apparently.

So I am hoping to try it out this weekend at the Shoreham airshow. It's not a complicated camera at all and the telephoto has a vibration reduction mode which should do the biz with longer shots :roll:

I was very pleased with my initial shots today.

I ended up buying from Jessops who in comparison for packages where cheapest. I ordered on line but collected and paid locally, my tip of the week, always look for voucher codes on the net, I found some valid ones for Jessops which meant I got an extra £30 off the internet prices too

Cheers

[hello_basil 0]

Fantastic Mut!

I'm going in the other direction, back in time to 35mm...as I'm studying A-level Photography...

So I'm scouring the net for decent second-hand 35mm SLR's....

[mutley 4,487]

Hi Theo,

I used to love the 35 mm film format and the cameras, I used to sell them in my formative years and went on all the manufacturers courses. I would really like to see your work, will you get an on-line gallery going?

Now I'm too lazy and let the PC do all the work

Cheers

[MartinW 0]

And shutter lag Mut, I presume it's totally absent on a pricey bit of kit like that?

[mutley 4,487]

I didn't notice any lag, in continuous mode you get around 3.5 frames per second even with auto focus!

Cheers

[hello_basil 0]

I will get an online galllery going once I've bought all the necessities first!

I've put a bid in for a pristine Canon EOS 3000N with a 28-80mm Lens; wish me luck!

A-level Photography is very in-depth, it broadens your lexis and choice of vocabulary within the first few lessons so dramatically its fantastic!

But then again you don't just take Photos, you Process them in the Dark Room and you analyse them too - now that is interesting..

The only problem I find with 35mm is that if you get it wrong, you can't do anything about it! :yes:

I'm also going to be using a DSLR once I've gathered enough funds.... :yes:

Some of the Compu-geeks (Sorry I meant Magic & MartinW) will be happy to know I'm also studying Computing with the straight up, rough ride course on Programming! :roll: