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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 4, 2011, 8:55 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 7
Default yet another what camera should I buy thread!

so I have looked at low end dslrs i have looked at "pro-sumer" camera's and i have even looked at some nice / read pricey$$

to describe what I would like to photograph:
Portraits.
Night photography (stars, moons, time laps)
wood working projects I build.
general wild life out doors.

My experience level basic to maybe just about intermediate. I spent a good deal of time behind pentax film cameras and an old cannon eos rebel and realistically I prefered the pentax film and lenses choosen for specific need. I am not afraid to read the book learn how to use the buttons and go out and take shots until I get it right.

I dont figure I will be getting external flash and umbrella's right off the bat. although a decent external flash would be nice.

I also realize that my budget may not allow me to purchase everything to meet my needs right off the bat. Speaking of budget 750-1250. ish Used refurb, Ebay, a bit older is all ok by me but new is also pretty nice.

I was pretty set on wanting in body stabilization due to lower cost lenses but having spent some more time reading now I am not so certain that the lower lens cost is a valid reason to choose one over the other. However wanting in body was pushing me towards the pentax k-r (of course i could be wrong that it has this feature.
I was also saying the standard batteries were a requirement but now I think even that is probably off my list.

what questions can I answer to help narrow down my choices.
What questions should I be asking.

edited to add: video while nice is not high on my list of priorities as I figure i can use the camcorder.

Last edited by mr_onmyway; Jan 4, 2011 at 9:46 PM.
mr_onmyway is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 5, 2011, 4:34 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
wave01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,748
Default

Hi I think what you would like is a DSLR kit recommended for you, but it is not that easy. When you buy a DSLR you buy into a system so first thing to look at is what lenses are available to you. There really isn't that much difference in the price of lenses with stabilisation or with out. So you could look at cameras like Nikon and Canon both of which have a large collection of lenses. Looking at your needs then wild life says long lens with a wide aperture portraits you will need wide aperture prime lens would be best 50 m 1.4 or 1.8.
My advice would be look at all makes look at the lenses available go try them out see how they feel then look for a deal to get the best camera and lens combination.
wave01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2011, 5:33 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Both Canon and Pentax make excellent dSLRs. The primary difference is in the lenses available. For wildlife, the longest lens from Pentax is the 55-300, and while Sigma makes some that go out to 400mm and 500mm, they are expensive. They are also optically stabilized, which would be a waste on a Pentax body which is already stabilized. Depending on the wildlife, you may be better off with Canon, Nikon or Sony.

Another consideration might be your woodworking. Due to their removeable lenses, dSLRs are subject to dust getting inside the camera body if you're not careful, and using a camera with a removeable lens in your woodworking shop might be tempting fate.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2011, 9:19 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 7
Default

ok so maybe i agree i need to go do some more digging and looking. Was I incorrect that by using in camera stabilization would lead to a wider availability of lenses than cannon and nikon with them in lenses? Does someone have an example of comparable lenses one with in lens stabilization for say cannon or nikon vs the pentax lenses withought? just one or two should give me a decent idea of cost comparison.

I am not too worried about dust from the woodworking as I have no intent to change lenses in the shop even with my air filtration etc. my dust masks assure me i dont want to change the lense which just means i need to continue taking the pics out side of the shop and do the best i can to clean the lens and body before i swap lenses after exposure to any dust.

Whats generally comparable to the K-r in nikon and cannon?

thanks for the great feedback so far I appreciate it!
mr_onmyway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2011, 4:47 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Placing the image stabilization in the camera body means that older, used lenses will be stabilized on new bodies. So, if you want image stabilization, the used market is a better source of lenses for Pentax and Sony than it is for Canon and Nikon. But as far as new lenses is concerned, Canon and Nikon have as many (or more) stabilized lenses as Pentax or Sony or Olympus have lenses. And the selection of stabilized lenses from third party lens makers is increasing. But stabilized lenses are bigger, heavier, and more expensive than unstabilized counterparts.

Making a direct comparison is difficult, since there are a significant number of factors that affect lens quality. But, for instance, Canon makes some lenses that are available both stabilized and unstabilized, and while the unstabilized lens is usually better than the stabilized one, it's always smaller, lighter and less expensive.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2011, 4:48 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_onmyway View Post
Whats generally comparable to the K-r in nikon and cannon?
The closest matches would be the Nikon D5000 and, for Canon, the T1i.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Jan 6, 2011 at 4:52 AM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2011, 7:07 AM   #7
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post

Making a direct comparison is difficult, since there are a significant number of factors that affect lens quality. But, for instance, Canon makes some lenses that are available both stabilized and unstabilized, and while the unstabilized lens is usually better than the stabilized one, it's always smaller, lighter and less expensive.
And "better" in this context means that under laboratory conditions the unstabilized lenses are sharper.

In the real world however you are often much better off with a lens which is slightly less sharp under ideal conditions (tripod mounted, etc), but because of stabilization performs better in actual use.

Also, for companies that put stabilization in the lens, the lenses cannot ever be optically identical, even though they have a very similar designation.

And finally, although

Quote:
But stabilized lenses are bigger, heavier, and more expensive than unstabilized counterparts.
is certainly true, it doesn't really help very much in making a choice. Because when you are evaluating overall value and quality you really need to first get a good handle on what your overall purchases are likely to be. Will you be buying 5 lenses? 10? Only one? How many camera bodies?

The corollary of putting the IS in the lens and not in the body is that all my bodies get stabilized with a single set of lenses. It's not always obvious that you will change your lenses more than you change bodies, or indeed for many pros that they will even necessarily have more lenses than bodies certainly once you consider a 10 year period.

For example many people (me so far) tend to upgrade their bodies every 2.5 years. But my lenses may last me for 10 years or more. If you say use only 2 or 3 stabilized lenses you don't have to keep paying for stabilization in the body.

In other words it's complicated, and very far from clear that it's possible to say one is better than the other.

I would suggest that you try to look at a 5-10 year horizon and commit to the system that you think will serve you best over that entire period, even if you buy into it slowly and have to compromise slightly for your first year or two.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2011, 8:13 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 601
Default

if you'll be using your camera around wood dust, perhaps a weather sealed camera would be a plus.
pcake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2011, 9:59 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The closest matches would be the Nikon D5000 and, for Canon, the T1i.
are there concerns i should be aware of when comparing these models specifically around the iso speeds? using the following page,
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20015770-1.html
I see iso speed on canon 2t1 is 6,400/12,800 and ISO 3,200/6,400 on the nikon d5000 vs Pentax 6,400/25,600
is this a manufactures choice to limit iso speeds in an attempt to minimize noise seen by the customer at higher iso ratings?

also what does "expanded" indicate?
ISO 100 - ISO 6,400/12,800 (expanded)

also I notice both canon and nikon say no wireless flash. does this indicate that remote flash would need to be controlled via wires? (Thinking portraits/wood projects in the future where more light focused on subject to remove shadows.)
mr_onmyway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2011, 10:09 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peripatetic View Post
A
For example many people (me so far) tend to upgrade their bodies every 2.5 years. But my lenses may last me for 10 years or more. If you say use only 2 or 3 stabilized lenses you don't have to keep paying for stabilization in the body. r.

I would suggest that you try to look at a 5-10 year horizon and commit to the system that you think will serve you best over that entire period, even if you buy into it slowly and have to compromise slightly for your first year or two.
peripatetic
thanks for the reply. Typically in the past i have used the bodies for 3-5 years before moving it over to a backup with something newer so you are right that I need to look at the system. I dont know id the 3-5 year range would cause me issues given the speed which i expect dslr's will move in the future.

As for the rest of your thread I need to read it a few more times and digest before I pose something resembling and intelligent question.
Thanks!
mr_onmyway 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 2:52 AM.