Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 2, 2008, 12:29 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 20
Default

Hi,
I am looking at these 2. I like the focusing of the D300 and the vr 18-200 lens. A bit high in price though.
I will be getting a wide angle lens down the road as well as a flash.

What are you guys arguments?

Thx.
K.

babanou is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 2, 2008, 1:38 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Almost without question, the D300 is the best camera in its class. Speed, build quality, and feature set is top notch. It's probably 1/2 step up in level from the 40d and that is reflected in the price. If you can afford it, and understand it takes some work to get the best out than go for it.

However, despite how good the D300 is, the 40d represents a great value at its current prices. With the understanding that lenses are important, you could get a very nice setup for less by going the canon route. Sure you'd give up some speed and features, but the 40d is still a semi pro camera, that is more than most people need. Unless you had an investment in Nikon equipment, or just a huge inclination to buy Nikon, I would look very closely at the 40d with today's current pricing.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2008, 2:10 PM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

How are you going to use a camera (what types of subjects, what conditions, etc.), and what will the images be used for?

Why those two choices (D300, 40D) and why the 18-200mm?

Challenging conditions may require totally different lenses, and you may want higher quality glass in some cases, depending on what you're shooting, the viewing/print sizes needed and purpose for the images.

If you're just looking for a general purpose "walk around" outfit for personal use, then a lens like the 18-200mm can work fine for most purposes (keeping in mind it's not really bright enough for use without a flash indoors if your subjects are not stationary; and lenses with a less ambitious focal range from wide to long will generally give best results, with less distortion, edge softness, etc).

For other lens mounts, if you really want a super zoom type lens, I'd also consider the less expensive Tamron 18-250mm (available for multiple lens mounts, including Canon, Nikon, Sony/Minolta, and Pentax)

You may also want to consider some of the competing camera models like the Sony DSLR-A700 and Pentax K20D. These have an in body based stabilization system (so, a lens like that Tamron 18-250mm would be stabilized on them).

But, you may need a different type of lens, depending on what you're shooting and the conditions you're shooting in.

Again, I'd let members know more about why you're looking at those camera and lens choices, and give some detail on what types of subjects you want to shoot, conditions you'll shoot in (indoors, outdoors in good light, etc.), to get better informed responses.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2008, 2:19 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 20
Default

Mostly indoor shooting, some walk around outdoor shooting too. Mainly kids at this point (mine).
I have a Canon Elan film body around so maybe I can use that one with new lenses (doubt it though from what I've heard).

I have big hands so the bigger the body the better. Didn't really like the focusing on the Pentax (noisy and slow to me it seems). As for the Sony, just don't like the whole kit.

Was really impressed by the D300 but at that price, I just want to assure it's worth it (apparently it is).

That's about it...
babanou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2008, 2:58 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

The 18-200 is not going to be all that great indoors unless you pick up a speedlight. That lens is a good performer, but not exceptional, and the D300's resolution means you really have to have good technique to get outstanding results. Really, none of the kit lenses will do well indoors without flash. So if you go with the D300 you're looking at adding another $200 or so minimum, because you'll need at least the SB600 flash. That will also add to the weight of your kit. Or pick up a 50mm f1.8 lens for under $100 for those poor lighting situations indoors, although you may occasionally find that to be a bit long for indoors.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2008, 3:04 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 20
Default

I had pretty much factored in a flash in my budget.

So maybe a 40D with a 17-85 lens instead would be a better fit?

I'm actually not sure I *really* need to go to 200mm...It's more for whenever I will need the zoom I won't have to go for another lens. Maybe a better short range+ wide would be a better buy...
Whether with a D300 or 40D...
babanou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2008, 3:08 PM   #7
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

rj has nailed it.

The D300 is a pro camera, the 40D is a semi-pro. This is reflected in the price.

Image quality is almost identical but the D300 has a bigger and better feature set.

If you are looking to just get the one 18-200 lens then with respect I'd suggest that the D300 is probably more camera than you need. A D80 is probably a better match.

The Canon 40D is EXCELLENT value at the moment, it's a heck of a camera for the price.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:27 AM.