Newbie to dSLR: Taking the next step beyond point-and-shoot cameras

Stefan,

I would like to first congratulate you and looking to take the next step in digital photography. It can be fun and rewarding, I have been enjoying SLR and dSLR photography for years. You are in luck, the two best camera manufacturers (if you talk to professionals), Canon and Nikon, both offer a starter dSLR within your price range. Nikon has the D40 that runs $599 for the outfit (kit with body and 18-55mm autofocus lens) and many additional lenses and accessories to add on later. Canon has the EOS Digital Rebel XT that has a similar kit for around $700-$800 and also has a full lineup of accessories and lenses available. Before deciding just on price, I recommend going to a photography store (preferrably one that also offers classes) and look at each model available in your price range.

You want to find out what the camera feels like in your hands, how comfortable it is holding it in front of your eye and how the controls are laid out. Hold the camera up away from your body for a while as you talk to the sales person, this will give you an idea of the weight of the camera on a shoot (how long it takes for you to feel like you have to put it down). If you get a sales person that knows their stuff, they can be a great help.

Many of the good photography stores will also throw in a class with your purchase and I would recommend taking advantage of it. Learning the basics and workflows associated with a dSLR is indispensable, especially because these classes are usually led by a seasoned professional. I won't mention names, but I would try to find a store that isn't part of a chain. You might pay a little more than the chain would charge, but the customer service and quality of classes are much better in my experience.

Best of luck with your search and happy snapping!
Chris S.

Check out the features and resolution you'll get with the latest crop of HiDef Camcorders. It's easy to extract individual frames with the current crop of under $100 video processing software. If you plan to make hundreds of 16" x 20" and up blowups then maybe a SLR with multiple lens is justified. But if you plan to share your photos on the net, put them in DVD slide shows, display them on HiDef TV screens, then a HiDef camcorder will give you a lot more versatility and photo opportunities now and in the years to come for the same dollar outlay.

Hello Stefan.
I don't know much about the cameras but I have a friend who does. Anyway I can for sure recommend the "Canon EOS 400D", the latest in the evolution in their affordable digital SLR series, the ten megapixel EOS 400D / Digital Rebel XTi. The features / specifications include the ten megapixel CMOS sensor (up to ISO 1600), a new dust reduction system, nine area auto focus, Picture Styles, a large 2.5' LCD monitor which now also provides shooting information (the second control panel LCD is gone) and better continuous shooting buffering.
Depending on the lens it should be within your budget. And you don't have to have tons of "skills" to use it neither.. Alright, i won't talk my hat off here so i'll leave it to you now .
Have a good life!
/Anton

It sounds as though you will have to buy a Canon Rebel, with a basic lens and wait for a while to add another piece of glass. I imagine that there are a few U.S. sites that can offer the camera at something close to $700.00, but I would expect the total with accessories to top $850.00. I believe 10 megapixel Canon, will give you the ability to make 16"X20" enlargements without any noticable degredation. I would be carefull buying a camera on ebay, though... You might need to visit a store and physically handle a few models to see what you are getting. The market is pretty volatile, with new models coming out every six months and the pixel count is steadily increasing. Six years ago you would have had to spend $6500.00 to get a camera with a 13.5 m.p.chip. Now you can have one for about $2000.00.

Research and try the Canon EOS digital Rebel XTi, the Sony Alpha DSLR-A100, the Nikon D40x, or the D80. If you can afford it, try the Pentax K10D digital camera. These are good entry level SLR's you can get your feet wet with.

The best option is Cannon 350EOS Digital 8MB camera with in the price range.

Hi Stephan,

You are going to love shooting with an SLR. It really affords you a whole new world of freedom, control and creativity in shooting. In fact, it's really the difference between just taking a picture and "creating" a picture. Here?s my summary of what to look for:

--What to expect from an SLR vs. Digital compact

Digital SLR?s are best known for their greater offering of manual controls and the ability to change lenses. Couple this with near instant startup, improved performance in low light conditions, high speed RAW format shooting, and better dynamic range, and you can see why so many people are making the switch to SLRs.

However, there are a few trade-offs. Obviously, SLR?s are not nearly as portable as digital compacts and sometimes get left at home as a result. You will also have to get used to using an optical viewfinder instead of the ?live LCD preview? you usually find on compacts. Some people may find this more difficult. The exception to this is the Olympus E-410 digital SLR which has an MOS sensor which displays a live preview on the LCD.

Another important issue is that SLR?s have a shallower ?depth of field? than digital compacts. This refers to(the area in front of and behind the main focus point that remains sharp or in focus. Digital compacts have shorter focal lengths and as a result can perform good close-up (also known as macro) photography right out of the box. You would have to buy a separate macro lens for an SLR to perform macro photography. That is not to say that a digital compact will provide the same quality image as an SLR with a macro lens, but simply that you should factor in the cost of adding this lens. It will likely cost you a few hundred dollars by itself.

--What to look for in an SLR

If you plan on buying additional lenses and peripherals for you camera, choosing the right manufacturer will be important. Nikon and Canon generally lead the pack in terms of quality and innovation but there are some very good values out there from Pentax, Olympus and a few others as well.

Try to look beyond megapixels when shopping, instead focusing in on dynamic range (the ability to show detail in shadows and highlights in the same image). This is where Nikon and Canon have a bit of an edge. If you are shooting indoors a lot or in low light settings, Canon CMOS sensors generally produce less ?noise? than its competitors at high ISO settings.

Perhaps the biggest consideration for anyone buying their first SLR is how intuitive it feels when you use it. Because you?re just getting started with SLRs, you don?t want to have to pull out the manual every time you decide to adjust a few settings. Every camera has its own design and layout, and some are more easily navigated than others. In my opinion, Nikon leads the industry in this department.

Your budget is really at the low end of what you need to spend to get a decent digital SLR. The Nikon D40 is about the only kit that I can think of that I would recommend for under $600.00. For a little more, the Canon EOS 400D, Nikon D40x, Olympus E-410, and the Pentax K-10D are all worth considering.

--Some SLR?s worth Considering

Canon EOS 400D ? 10 megapixels, great overall picture quality, lowest noise at high ISO settings for this price range, an industry leader with a wide range of peripherals, great software bundle supplied with kit. Cons ? not a great lens, better to buy the body and then buy a better lens separately. Kit price ? approx. $850.00

Nikon D40 ? 6 megapixels, great overall image quality, surprisingly good build quality and lens for a camera that sells for around $560.00 USD, very responsive, perhaps the best user interface in this price range, an industry leader with a wide range of peripherals. Cons ? no internal AF motor means autofocus can only be achieved with newer AF-S and AF-I CPU lenses. Kit price ? approx. $560.00

Nikon D40X ? 10 megapixels, great overall image quality, surprisingly good build quality and lens, an industry leader with a wide range of peripherals, perhaps the user interface in this price range, very responsive. Cons ? no internal AF motor means autofocus can only be achieved with newer AF-S and AF-I CPU lenses. Kit price ? approx. $750.00.

Olympus E-410 - 10 megapixels, Live MOS Image Sensor give you full time Live-View on the LCD monitor, four-thirds aspect ratio may be preferred by some. Cons ? Live view auto focus can be slow . Kit price ? approx. $900.00.

Pentax K10D -10 megapixels, good build quality with dust and weather seals (great if you plan on using your camera in less than ideal weather conditions), in camera shake reduction, great value for money. Cons ? dynamic range and image sharpness not quite as good as industry leaders. Kit price ? approx. $900.00.

--Shooting in RAW mode

Digital SLRs offer the ability to shoot in RAW mode. RAW files keep the information from the CCD/CMOS sensor before processing and allow you to change certain settings (i.e. white balance, sharpening, exposure compensation etc.) at any time, even years later. This can be changed or un-done at any time without any quality loss. RAW files do take more space than JPEG files but with the low cost of storage these days, there is really no reason to shoot any other way. JPEG files can be created from RAW files at any time for sharing with others. If you do plan on shooting in RAW mode, you?ll want to get editing software that allows you to adjust these settings. Your camera may come with software to do this but if not, a good starter software would be Photoshop Elements with RAW plug-ins.

A few final Points

1. Never underestimate the value of a good lens ? they really do make a difference. If you plan on buying a lot of glass in the future, keep in mind that your lens collection may eventually be worth far more than your camera body. Choosing a mainstream company becomes more of an issue here because you will likely want to upgrade your camera body many times over the life of your lenses.

2. Get a camera that ?feels right? in your hands and has menus that feel intuitive to your way of thinking.

3. Factor in the cost of a spare battery, carrying case, and a reasonably large memory card ? these are a virtual must.

I hope this helps. Good Luck!

Hi
I've recently gone digital after a high street chain of chemists screwed up the developing of photos taken on our 60th birthday treat from friends. I swore that I would never entrust my photos to anyone else.

I went ot the very next day and bought a Panasonic (Lumix) DMC FZ30.

The model has since been upgraded and I got mine for

Here are the selected submissions grouped in one post. Read through them and place your votes in the newsletter poll.

Answer:

digital SLR for newbies

Stefano, there are two types of digital SLR cameras you might consider: true single lens reflex cameras that have removable lenses, and 'SLR-like' cameras that look like an SLR, but have a non-removable lens.

The 'SLR-like' cameras are considerably cheaper, but have some disadvantages. They have an electronic viewfinder, rather than an optical one; electronic viewfinders don't render fine detail as well, and can be hard to focus manually. The don't have a removable lens, which greatly limits their flexibility; and they tend to have smaller sensors, which translates into higher noise levels at higher sensitivity ratings. However, they are undeniably cheap. One good example in this class is the Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ8. The camera features a superb 12X lens, has a 7.38 megapixel sensor and can be purchased for as little as $283.00.

In the true SLR range, I would suggest that you consider either the Nikon D40X or the Canon EOS 400D /Rebel XTi. Both cameras feature a 10 megapixel sensor, which will provide you with resolution sufficient to make 20 X 24 inch - or larger - prints. Both of these entry level SLR cameras are going to stretch the upper limits of your budget envelope; but they both represent excellent value, and will do everything that you seek. In both cases, the body sells for around $700, and the lens is extra. The general 'word on the street' is that the inexpensive kit lens supplied with the Canon is actually a very poor lens; you will be much better served to purchase a better canon lens, even though this will elevate you above $750. The Nikon kit lens is better than the Canon, but still is not a superb lens; again, you might want to consider purchasing a better lens.

The cameras run neck and neck, and both have many fans. I find that the Canon is too small to hold comfortably; the ergonomics on the Nikon seem better. I also find that, for my needs, Nikon lenses are superior. However, the Canon is an excellent instrument, and Canon has served generations of photographers very well.

The camera industry is going through a metamorphosis. Konica merged with Minolta, and then Minolta got out of the camera business altogether and sold their imaging technology to Sony. Pentax, long revered as the manufacturer of the legendary Spotmatic film SLR, recently called off a planned merger with Hoya (a filter manufacturer). Bronica called it quits, and the word is Mamiya is on the ropes. For this reason, I would caution you against buying a camera from a lesser known name; you might well find that three years from now, your camera company has disappeared. I think Canon and Nikon will be around for a while, but I'm not sure of anyone else.

I would also caution you against buying a lens other than an original equipment manufacturers lens. That is, put a Canon lens on a Canon camera, and a Nikon lens on a Nikon camera. Don't be tempted to put a cheaper, 3rd party lens from another manufacturer on a camera body. The reason for this is that camera manufacturers regularly make system updates available; and frequently, those system updates can cause something like the autofocus or autoexposure on the lens to stop working, due to incompatibilities between the camera and the 3rd party chipset in the lens. Tamron has had a number of problems in this regard.

Don't be too influenced by 'megapixel wars'. Realistically, anything of 6 megapixels or more is going to produce good 16 X 20 prints, which is larger than most images ever get printed. And to double the resolution of a 6 megapixel sensor, you would need to find a 24 megapixel sensor! This is larger than any commonly available sensor; even the high end Canons, in the 5 grand price range, max out around 17 megapixels.

Of more interest is the physical sensor size. Smaller sensors need more electronic amplification, which turns into more electronic 'noise' in the background image. This can be minimized with aftermarket image processing programs such as Noise Ninja, but you're better off avoiding that road. Bigger sensors = better images.

I hope this helps you find a camera that suits your purposes. Good luck, and keep on clicking! Best wishes, Charlie Worton

http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10149_102-0.html?forumID=7&threadID=246031&messageID=2480014#2480014

Submitted by: charlieworton

***********************************************************************

Answer:

WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN A DIGITAL SLR.

Hi Stephan,

You are going to love shooting with an SLR. It really affords you a whole new world of freedom, control and creativity in shooting. In fact, it's really the difference between just taking a picture and "creating" a picture. Here?s my summary of what to look for:

--What to expect from an SLR vs. Digital compact

Digital SLR?s are best known for their greater offering of manual controls and the ability to change lenses. Couple this with near instant startup, improved performance in low light conditions, high speed RAW format shooting, and better dynamic range, and you can see why so many people are making the switch to SLRs.

However, there are a few trade-offs. Obviously, SLR?s are not nearly as portable as digital compacts and sometimes get left at home as a result. You will also have to get used to using an optical viewfinder instead of the ?live LCD preview? you usually find on compacts. Some people may find this more difficult. The exception to this is the Olympus E-410 digital SLR which has an MOS sensor which displays a live preview on the LCD.

Another important issue is that SLR?s have a shallower ?depth of field? than digital compacts. This refers to(the area in front of and behind the main focus point that remains sharp or in focus. Digital compacts have shorter focal lengths and as a result can perform good close-up (also known as macro) photography right out of the box. You would have to buy a separate macro lens for an SLR to perform macro photography. That is not to say that a digital compact will provide the same quality image as an SLR with a macro lens, but simply that you should factor in the cost of adding this lens. It will likely cost you a few hundred dollars by itself.

--What to look for in an SLR

If you plan on buying additional lenses and peripherals for you camera, choosing the right manufacturer will be important. Nikon and Canon generally lead the pack in terms of quality and innovation but there are some very good values out there from Pentax, Olympus and a few others as well.

Try to look beyond megapixels when shopping, instead focusing in on dynamic range (the ability to show detail in shadows and highlights in the same image). This is where Nikon and Canon have a bit of an edge. If you are shooting indoors a lot or in low light settings, Canon CMOS sensors generally produce less ?noise? than its competitors at high ISO settings.

Perhaps the biggest consideration for anyone buying their first SLR is how intuitive it feels when you use it. Because you?re just getting started with SLRs, you don?t want to have to pull out the manual every time you decide to adjust a few settings. Every camera has its own design and layout, and some are more easily navigated than others. In my opinion, Nikon leads the industry in this department.

Your budget is really at the low end of what you need to spend to get a decent digital SLR. The Nikon D40 is about the only kit that I can think of that I would recommend for under $600.00. For a little more, the Canon EOS 400D, Nikon D40x, Olympus E-410, and the Pentax K-10D are all worth considering.

--Some SLR?s worth Considering

Canon EOS 400D ? 10 megapixels, great overall picture quality, lowest noise at high ISO settings for this price range, an industry leader with a wide range of peripherals, great software bundle supplied with kit. Cons ? not a great lens, better to buy the body and then buy a better lens separately. Kit price ? approx. $850.00

Nikon D40 ? 6 megapixels, great overall image quality, surprisingly good build quality and lens for a camera that sells for around $560.00 USD, very responsive, perhaps the best user interface in this price range, an industry leader with a wide range of peripherals. Cons ? no internal AF motor means autofocus can only be achieved with newer AF-S and AF-I CPU lenses. Kit price ? approx. $560.00

Nikon D40X ? 10 megapixels, great overall image quality, surprisingly good build quality and lens, an industry leader with a wide range of peripherals, perhaps the user interface in this price range, very responsive. Cons ? no internal AF motor means autofocus can only be achieved with newer AF-S and AF-I CPU lenses. Kit price ? approx. $750.00.

Olympus E-410 - 10 megapixels, Live MOS Image Sensor give you full time Live-View on the LCD monitor, four-thirds aspect ratio may be preferred by some. Cons ? Live view auto focus can be slow . Kit price ? approx. $900.00.

Pentax K10D -10 megapixels, good build quality with dust and weather seals (great if you plan on using your camera in less than ideal weather conditions), in camera shake reduction, great value for money. Cons ? dynamic range and image sharpness not quite as good as industry leaders. Kit price ? approx. $900.00.

--Shooting in RAW mode

Digital SLRs offer the ability to shoot in RAW mode. RAW files keep the information from the CCD/CMOS sensor before processing and allow you to change certain settings (i.e. white balance, sharpening, exposure compensation etc.) at any time, even years later. This can be changed or un-done at any time without any quality loss. RAW files do take more space than JPEG files but with the low cost of storage these days, there is really no reason to shoot any other way. JPEG files can be created from RAW files at any time for sharing with others. If you do plan on shooting in RAW mode, you?ll want to get editing software that allows you to adjust these settings. Your camera may come with software to do this but if not, a good starter software would be Photoshop Elements with RAW plug-ins.

A few final Points

1. Never underestimate the value of a good lens ? they really do make a difference. If you plan on buying a lot of glass in the future, keep in mind that your lens collection may eventually be worth far more than your camera body. Choosing a mainstream company becomes more of an issue here because you will likely want to upgrade your camera body many times over the life of your lenses.

2. Get a camera that ?feels right? in your hands and has menus that feel intuitive to your way of thinking.

3. Factor in the cost of a spare battery, carrying case, and a reasonably large memory card ? these are a virtual must.

I hope this helps. Good Luck!

http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10149_102-0.html?forumID=7&threadID=246031&messageID=2481753#2481753

Submitted by: Screaminlizard

***********************************************************************

Answer:

Selecting a digital SLR for newbies

Well, this goes beyond your question, but I?m going to suggest that you reconsider the move to a DSLR. Personally I find the move to DSLR?s hard to understand, and I think that the camera industry could make a much better camera, that almost (ALMOST !!) all non-professional photographers would prefer to a DSLR, if it wasn?t for the ?mystique? of being a DSLR.

Now let me say that I?m a fairly sophisticated photographer, and I?ve owned SLRs with multiple lenses ever since my Minolta SRT-101 back around 1970. And all of my film cameras were SLRs. But there were two reasons for that:

-I wanted ?what you see is what you get? -- a viewfinder image that was exactly what I would shoot
-I wanted lens flexibility, wide angle to long telephoto

But in a digital camera, ?what you see is what you get? is inherent ... you can?t get anything other than the image you will actually shoot through the very same sensor that records the image when you do shoot.

And as for lenses, where I am suggesting that you do go is to a ?super zoom?, a non-SLR camera with a 10:1 or 12: zoom lens .... in terms of 35mm equivalents, a lens that is roughly 24mm to 290mm.

Thus, I think that in the rush to DSLRs, the entire reason for [film] SLRs in the first place has been lost, and the industry and the consumers have made a move that really doesn?t make a whole lot of sense.

So tell me, are you so professional (definitely some photographers are), or so perfectionist (and that is your right also) that the lenses in ?super zooms? really are not acceptable, and you must actually change lenses to get acceptable wide angle and zoom? Because for myself, I?ve found that not being a professional photographer, and taking pictures for my own pleasure during my own vacations and leisure activies, the act of carrying around a camera bag with multiple lenses that borders on being a suitcase, and fooling with those lenses and other accessories detracts from my own enjoyment of the moment.

Yes, I want the pictures, and so I?m willing to carry around a relatively large and heavy, relatively sophisticated camera. But not a whole suitcase of lenses, etc. And if you are not going to be changing lenses, then the whole point of an SLR starts to get lost. I mean, what does all of the mechanical complexity and cost of a flip-up reflex lens system really buy you? It only really buys you two things, interchangeable lenses, and a true optical viewfinder (more on that below).

So what should you be looking for? And as much to the point, what should the camera companies be making for customers like me who take a lot of pictures, who understand exposure and depth of field and composition, but who don?t want the pleasure of a vacation experience to be burdened by equipment that, really, only a professional photographer would NEED:

1. An SLR-like ?Super-Zoom? camera with one really good fixed lens that is likely to meet all of your needs. 24 to 290mm, give or take at bit at either or both ends (but not less than 10:1). And all of the features (and complexity and sophistication) of an SLR. But no reflex optics, and no interchangeable lenses.

2. An electronic viewfinder that is as good as optical. Bright, very high resolution and refreshed fast (at least 60 times per second). Easily possible; but many cameras ?cheap out? and don?t do it.

3. A large image sensor, possibly 35mm full-frame, but not less than APS size. Big enough, and good enough, that ISO 800 (and maybe even 1,600) is not only present, but useable.

4. Good, effective image stabilization (electronic or mechanical)

The 3rd point is really WHY DSLRs generally are superior to non DSLR cameras; yet, there is no actual connection between having a reflex SLR mechanism or not and the sensor size. The advantage of a large sensor is low noise, which in turn enables good results at high speed (e.g. low-noise high ISO performance). Most non-DSLRs still use ?tiny? sensors (6 to 10 megapixels in a sensor the size of the eraser on a #2 pencil), but a few do use APS size sensors (sensors the size of the film negative on an APS camera), while most DSLRs use sensors the size of a 35mm negative. But there?s no reason that a non DSLR can?t use a full-size sensor, and, actually, for most people an APS size sensor (and these do exist in some non-DSLR cameras) probably is good enough. Of course, it?s harder to do a high-ratio, high-quality lens with a larger image sensor, but it?s not impossible: Tamron has been making some very good quality 28-200mm and 28-300mm lenses for FILM SLR cameras for more than a decade. But this is another reason that an APS sized sensor (but nothing smaller) may be most appropriate.

So why not go SLR?:

-SLR?s generally cannot do video
-SLR?s have really serious problems with dust & dirt getting on the image sensor
-SLR?s are mechanically complex for no really justifiable reason
-SLR?s cost more ... STARTING about double what some very good ?Super Zoom? cameras cost

Now no one makes the perfect ?Super Zoom? ... yet. But there are some cameras that are very close. As an admitted Fuji fan, I like the Fuji S6000fd (only about $330) and the S9000 (about $100 more). And there are some other very good (perhaps better) choices. But the ?perfect? Super Zoom is not far from being realized, and when all things are considered, even existing choices may come closer to meeting your needs than a DSLR unless your really NEED to be able to change lenses. SuperZoom cameras like the S6000fd are very good cameras, they are NOT ?point and shoot?, and they have pretty much all of the ?bells and whistles? of the DSLRs, without some of the problems, without all of the cost, and with one major feature (video) that for me is a ?deal killer?.

Now, however, regardless of the type of camera that you get, I have found the most useful camera site to be www.dpreview.com. They have detailed, exhaustive and very professional reviews there that will answer all of your questions that don?t require spending ?hands on? with the camera that you are considering, and the forums will allow you to discuss your candidates with people who already own them and have real-world experience with them. It?s invaluable, and it?s where I?d start.

Best of luck; all of the digital cameras available today are so much better than what we had just 2 or 3 years ago that you almost can?t go wrong.

Regards,
Barry Watzman

http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10149_102-0.html?forumID=7&threadID=246031&messageID=2478149#2478149

Submitted by: Watzman

***********************************************************************

Answer:

digital SLR for newbies

Photographers are often just as rabid in their support for the brand of camera they use and derision for the other brands as any Apple vs Windows debate, so take it with big grains of salt when a Canon user sneers at Nikon cameras or vice versa.

All of the big-name traditional camera makers -- Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, etc -- make excellent DSLRs and other companies previously known for electronics also make excellent DSLRs -- Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, etc, etc.

Some of the digital photography magazines have buyer's guides, but I find they're more useful for their descriptions of what a feature is and how it's used or if it's useful, than their rankings. The buyer's guides will help you figure out what features you need, what features you'd like, and which ones you can ignore because you'll never use them.

I've been a pro photographer for 20+ years. Each time I've bought new cameras, there were features available on some that weren't on others and it would be great to be able to pick and choose from a list and assemble a dream camera. However, you'll probably have to settle for whichever one has more of the features you need that any other camera has. Check to see when it was first released as it might soon be due for an upgrade or replacement. When it is, you can either buy the improved one or look for a reduced price on the "suddenly obsolete" one.

Lens choice depends on what you plan to photograph, but I recommend a zoom instead of the 50mm "normal" lens. (I'm using focal lengths for 35mm film cameras in this.) A 35-70 or 28-70 is very useful, gives good results, isn't heavy, and doesn't cost a fortune. What you get both longer and shorter than those ranges depends on what you shoot. There are some impressive zooms with very long ranges from short to long that can replace many lenses in your camera bag, but they're big, heavy, and pricey. For those times when you would only take the body and one or two lenses, owning that kind of wonder-zoom requires that you have "all" (so to speak) of your lenses mounted on the camera, even when you want to travel light.

If it's allowed here, I'd like to recommend a terrific book on photography. It's "Photography for the Joy of It" by Freeman Patterson. (Not to be confused with Kodak's "The Joy of Photography".) It's a marvellous book about how to "see" a photo before you shoot it and how to get that pre-visualized image on film or on a memory card. It never fails to inspire my photography whenever I read it. (Patterson has other books that are also good, but that's the best one to start with.) Whether you're a complete newbie or a pro, it's a great book.

I used to tell new photographers that film is cheap, in other words shoot a lot and learn from your results. Pixels are even cheaper, so get in the habit of shooting different angles, or with a different lens, or different shutter speed or whatever. Break the snapshooter's habit of quickly taking only one shot of a subject and moving on. When you look at all your shots of each subject, compare them critically and see what worked, what didn't -- and why.

You'll be fine regardless of which of the major camera brands you pick, but do try to ignore the brand arguments by people who should spend more time shooting pics than fighting about brands. If all of your friends use one brand, then unless you really love a particular camera model of another brand, then consider getting the same brand as them so you can borrow lenses to try out for the subjects you shoot. Otherwise, buy what's best for you. The Nikon/Canon, Coke/Pepsi, Windows/Mac debates are almost always ridiculous and unhelpful.

Jeff

http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10149_102-0.html?forumID=7&threadID=246031&messageID=2478192#2478192

Submitted by: siriusproductions

I like Canon SLRs because of the low noise, image quality, fast shooting and all the features of DSLRs mentioned by others who have replied. I have a 20D and several nice lenses. If you don't need a lot of zoom, a Rebel XTi and kit lens would be a good start. If you want a longer zoom for sports and wildlife, etc. then consider the 70 - 300 when you can afford to add a 2nd lens. I chose Canon for the image quality PLUS the large number of lenses available. If you want a good budget/bargain camera, take a look at the Olympus DSLRs that come with 2 lenses.

I also have a Canon S3 IS for a take-anywhere camera and it's a very good one but the image quality doesn't come close to the 20D in fine detail and low noise. But for a point-and-shoot, it's hard to beat.
If you decide not to go with a DSLR, then check it out or the new version S5 IS will be available in July.

JH

I started with a little Kodak point and shoot. Great outdoors in bright light. Indoor, not so good.
I switched to a Nikon D50 6mp (now they have a D40 that is a little smaller). I set out to spend 700 or less and I did it. The camera was around 500.00 with a 28-80 lens. I bought a 50mm 1.4f lens for indoor lower light settings and a 70-200 zoom lens for sports. If you want to pick up good used cameras and lenses for cannon, nikon, etc... Try KEH.com
No I don't work for them, but I've picked up my lenses for under $100 each. I use the point and shoot modes when I'm lazy and it has the Manual modes that you can toy with for cool night shots of stars or lightning.
I even picked up a Tamrac backpack that holds my D50, 3 lenses, a mini-dv camcorder and all the chargers.
I will probably switch to a 10mp in th future, but if I stick with Nikon, I'll still have all of my lenses.
good luck and God Bless

I just finally upgraded from a Point-and-Shoot to a digital SLR. I am a happy-snap kind of guy, but the point-and-shoots have two fundamental problems:

1) No good in low light.
2) Not wide angle enough for a lot of the situations I find myself in.

I tried the Fuji F30 (point-and-shoot) which is supposed to be ISO 3200, but found that it did not really do much better in low light than my previous point-and-shoot, so it really was a waste of money. It also has no wide angle lens.

So I started shopping for an SLR.

After much deliberation, I finally decided to buy a Pentax K100D, with an 18-200 sigma compact lens. I am very happy with it. The lens cost almost as much as the body, about $500 & $600 respectively in Canadian dollars, although you can get a kit for about $800 Cdn that will do the same zoom range if you are willing to swap lenses. There is no way I'm going to carry around a bag full of lenses, and in fact I feel a bit queasy about swapping them, always worrying about dust, etc. Besides, who wants to miss a shot because you have to change lenses to zoom in or out.

The K100D is only 6 megapixels, but increasing the pixels does not always increase the quality. Where SLRs really shine is at high ISO. I believe this is because the image sensor is an order of magnitude larger than point-and-shoots, which allows it to gather much more light. If you are in any kind of difficult shooting situation at all (ie low light, fast movement, high zoom, etc.) then the SLR allows you to take a decent picture in situations where you simply cannot with a point and shoot. Any brand of SLR will do better in this regard.

The reason I bought the Pentax K100D was because it was reasonabley cheap, a well respected brand, and has optical image stabilization in the body. This means that the stabilization works with whatever lens you buy. Nikon, for example, has stabilization in the lenses, which makes it very expensive, and you have to pay for it again if you but another lens.

In my very humble photographic opinion, optical image stabilization is a must-have feature these days. If you have a steady hand, you can take an indoor picture with no flash (say in a museum, or a large room) with a shutter speed as high as 1/8th of a second and get a nice sharp result, and with an ISO low enough to produce a picture that is not grainy at all. You simply cannot do this without an optically stabilized SLR,... or a tripod of course. The optical image stabilization is also neccessary when taking high zoom shots, as camera shake is magnified when you zoom in.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Richard

I used a Nikon 4004 35mm for years, I had the Zooms going from 35 to whatever. I got a new Nikon D50 for Christmas 2 years ago, and was pleased and surprised that all the zooms etc, from my Nikon 35 mm fit the new SLR D50

This camera is easy to use, and even thought I still need "lessons" on how to use it other than AUTO I get pics good enough to win Owen Mills contests

We are members of an RC-Model Airplane club and was Club Photographer for the newsletter (husband Chris is editor) for the last year. Most of the pics in the newsletter are still done by me. I have had many comments on my "series" shots when a plane is doing loops etc. that it looks like a slide show because you can take the pics so fast

I recommended this camera to a friend and she found the zooms from a person on Ebay selling his Nikon 35mm., for a VERY inexpensive price

I would check with a camera store (a real camera sales only store) and have them show you the camera, and the price of new zooms compared to buying the older ones on Ebay and I think you would go with Ebay

I cant say prescisely what you need but you can try Hp product, but make sure it is a very simple and easy to use type. Also make sure you pick one that can accept external memory, I mean memory cards. With that I think you can do something better and easier too. You can even download and install one or two of Cnet product on your system for editing, though i need to get one too for a better prodution these days for I'm using photoImpression presently and I saw one better on Cnet sometimes ago but I need to search for it again for I can't remember the name again.

Let's get something straight, SLR means Single Lens Reflex and merely tells you that the viewfinder IS NOT subject to Parallax because it 'sees' through the same lens as the 'film' does by SHARING the lens. Interchangeable lenses have nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not a camera is an SLR.

In an SLR camera, a mirror diverts the image from the shutter to the viewfinder and must swing out of the way before the shutter is allowed to open. Now some people take the easy way out and merely replace the film's emulsion with a CCD resulting in a kluge. The K.I.S.S. (keep it simple, stupid) way is to re-engineer the camera eliminating the mechanical shutter and mirror assembly entirely and using an electronic 'shutter' between the CCD and the virtual film, be it RAM or some kind of disk.
--Tony De Vito

Good luck in your search, Stefan!

I narrowed my search for a DSLR to the Canon 400D (aka Digital Rebel XTi) and the Nikon D40x. I wanted to stay under $1000 and wanted 10 megapixels so that I could have a lot of room to play with in Photoshop.

My first SLR was bought in the early 70s (a Minolta SRT-100) so I was more used to a larger body than these cameras have. This was not a difficult adjustment even with having limited use of my hands. (I'm handicapped to a degree.) The controls were equally accessable.

I couldn't really notice a difference between the kit lens with either camera. The features on the XTi and D40x were comparable, though the XTi has a sensor cleaning function built in. The veiwfinder on the XTi seemed a little clearer to me.

You have plenty of choices in lenses and accessories for both. Aftermarket lenses such as Tamron or Sigma will be a lot less expensive compared to Canon and Nikon branded lenses but offer great quality. I've shot through a friend's big Sigma tele-zoom and got really nice results.

Price was the dealbreaker for me. Across the board I felt I could get what I wanted for less with the Canon. I saved a lot more by purchasing an open-box (but fully warranteed) XTi. I also caught the Canon 75-300 tele-zoom on sale. Some vendors may include a memory card, but you can always find these on sale somewhere.

Hope this helps!

John

I started with the first digital SLR ever made for consumer use, the Olympus C2500L. Nice little camera, but only 2.5 megapixels and a fixed lens, but a true SLR. It does great macro work, on the positive side. I went with point and shoot for a while, and recently purchased a new digital SLR... the real thing with changeable lenses, this time.

I have been very impressed with this camera and with it's instructional GUI, even my wife seems to use it very easily. It has the same APS-C image sensor as the Nikon, and in my opinion, you can only make so many fleas stand on the head of a pin. The maximum reasonable number of megapixels falls somewhere between 6 and 8 for the APS-C image sensors, so you don't sacrifice very much by not getting the wowzer 8 or 10 megapixel super camera... unless you wish to make poster sized blowups of your output. I wanted to go with Olympus, as both of my previous cameras were of that make. The xD memory cards seem to have a speed problem, and the 4x3 image sensor is somewhat smaller than the one on the camera I chose. This is one place where bigger is better, but the offerings right now aren't as big as I would like, so I settled for one of the bigger in the lot.

There is little to remember about shooting with my new purchase, as this camera explains most of the choices you can make, either when you access the various shooting modes, or run through the expanded modes. Neat stuff if you are trying to learn a little about the camera, on your first few shots. I'm not quite as instinctive with it as my old Minolta X700, but I'll get there, soon.

My main issues were batteries... I wanted to use AA lithium cells for convenience of access,when batteries go dead and I can't use a charger. Then there's not having to buy high priced replacement rechargeables when I burn down the originals. I also wanted a decent kit lens, which this camera has. It's not a bad piece of glass, and it actually has a metal mount, which some of the entry level dSLRs don't. I mostly wanted to use Secure Digital memory cards, as they seem to have a speed advantage on many of the other cards, and they can be gotten for fairly reasonable prices. Less of a requirement was wanting a camera with a body-centric anti-shake system, to give better results, more easily, in more conditions, with any lens, and without the use of a tripod. The other side of that is not having to buy those super high priced image stabilizer lenses... not being a pro shooter, I just can't justify that cost.

All that said, after many choices made and changed during the shopping process, over the past year or two, I finally settled on the Pentax K100D. I was able to get it for $520 with the kit lens, and there is a fifty dollar rebate through Pentax on the camera body, right now, until late July. Any of the high level near-SLR digitals on the market cost very close to this price or higher. Most of the real entry level dSLRs are considerably higher.

I have used JPGs as my main shooting format with previous cameras, even though I had TIFFs available, but since purchasing this Pentax, I shoot in RAW only mode. The free downloadable photo utility Irfanview will view, edit, and print them, as well as the fairly good Pentax software that comes with the camera. It's like having the shot back again to adjust the camera, and you can salvage some bad shooting choices in many instances.

It's a good camera to handle, takes great images, and doesn't cost so much I can't afford to buy memory cards and batteries after buying it. To hold it is nice, too... it has a little heft, but feels nicely substantial, rather than flimsy, like some of the entry level dSLRs.

This is less an advertisement for my Pentax camera as an illustration of the process I went through and what I discovered after the purchase. I wish you well on your buying quest, and hope you are as satisfied as I am with the final purchase.