Entry-Level digital SLR
- Thread starter Alex S
- Start date
Oh, and to answer the OPs question - I don't really think you can go wrong with any of the current entry-level APS-C DSLRs, although I'd tend to shy away from the 4/3 bunch. Mainly because the viewfinders tend to be small and the smaller sensor reduces DOF control and increases noise. It's primary draw is size but if I the size were really important I'd rather have a micro-4/3 camera, which leaves the 4/3 system in a bit of a no-man's land.
Ian's suggestion is good - get Katya to a shop and just try them all out.
Ian's suggestion is good - get Katya to a shop and just try them all out.
The 7070 I think is essentially as good as bridge cameras get. Perhaps not the fastest, and perhaps high ISO noise is not the latest "best".
But it's got a good lens and features and not too high resolution.
With latest DSLR prices I definitely would go for a DSLR even just to see what it's about. A real viewfinder, real depth of field and real control.
Omer.
But it's got a good lens and features and not too high resolution.
With latest DSLR prices I definitely would go for a DSLR even just to see what it's about. A real viewfinder, real depth of field and real control.
Omer.
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
Hi Alex
The FZ28 is the latest iteration of the camera series which includes the FZ7. The FZ7 definitely does not shoot RAW, but it will record in jpeg and TIFF
The main limitations of the FZ28 are likely to be:
poor quality in low light owing the the limited aperture range and maximum ISO, although the latest Venus Engine does extract quite a lot from the noisy sensor.
Not very wide open aperture at telephoto end (F4.4)
Poor range of Depth of Focus at Telephoto end (f4.4 - f8 only)
Overall lack of DOF control (minimum aperture F8 across the whole range of focal lengths.
The advantage of something like the Nikon D40 is that you can stick a huge range of lenses on it which get round all of the above (albeit the lens choice is limited on the D40 to lenses with motors in them if you want to autofocus them).
Last edited:
Just a heads up - this seems like a decent deal:
£274 - £30 cashback:
http://www.jessops.com/online.store...a A200 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Lens-73443/Show.html
I think the biggest draw of the Sony over, say, a D40 or D60 kit is that if you're not planning on buying any more lenses in future, then it is a more useful range than most of the other manufacturers.
As for me, after last night's temptation I've just gone and bought a K-m. Impulsive, moi?
£274 - £30 cashback:
http://www.jessops.com/online.store...a A200 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Lens-73443/Show.html
I think the biggest draw of the Sony over, say, a D40 or D60 kit is that if you're not planning on buying any more lenses in future, then it is a more useful range than most of the other manufacturers.
As for me, after last night's temptation I've just gone and bought a K-m. Impulsive, moi?
Alex S
carbon based lifeform
The shop idea is a very good one but. a) it was to be a surprise, b) given that I can and will shop online, I hate wasting shop time when there's to be no sale.
So far its a toss-up between, a) give her my Olympus and have done with it, getting something else for her birthday, b) get the D40 from Amazon for £227, c) get the Sony from somewhere for about £260. (Olympus and Pentax, for better or worse, have largely been ruled out on price). I've decided that regardless of reviews, the Panasonic is unlikely to be enough better than my Olympus, if it is better.
So far its a toss-up between, a) give her my Olympus and have done with it, getting something else for her birthday, b) get the D40 from Amazon for £227, c) get the Sony from somewhere for about £260. (Olympus and Pentax, for better or worse, have largely been ruled out on price). I've decided that regardless of reviews, the Panasonic is unlikely to be enough better than my Olympus, if it is better.
Note... i can't abide to use SLR that require loads of menu button pushes to just change something simple that used to be done with a dial. That's one reason why i tend to favour either my old SLRs, or KM / Sony digital bodies. (that's not to say that the more expensive canikon bodies don't have "manual" controls - just that the entry models tend to be menu-driven)
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
Uzi,
My main reservations against the cheaper Nikons are that they won't focus with non-AF-S and AF-I lenses and that they won't meter with older manual-focus glass.
Joe
I prefer simplicity, too, but it's easy to put a Nikon D-SLR into manual mode -- just turn the wheel on the top to M. Then turn the dials to set aperture and shutter speed. Easy peasy.
My main reservations against the cheaper Nikons are that they won't focus with non-AF-S and AF-I lenses and that they won't meter with older manual-focus glass.
Joe
Alex S
carbon based lifeform
I don't want to labour this thread but I should perhaps add my film SLR experiences (model numbers forgotten but my camera bodies ranged from £300-£500). I didn't like the Canon but it was a cheapie. I loved the Contax but couldn't afford any lenses. I liked the Nikon but only used a couple of lenses. I liked other people's Pentaxes but never had one of my own. Sony didn't exist and I've never tried a Minolta or a Konica. I liked my Olympuses but didn't use them nearly enough.
The best pictures I've taken were with none of the above but with a £100 Soviet Zenith rangefinder. Never used a large format camera. The Olympus bridge digital I use is at least made of metal and seems quite good. The only film SLR I still have is a plastic Canon in a cupboard.
All the above is pretty meaningless, I admit, when it comes to buying a basic DSLR for a twelve year old apart from it has to be nice enough for me to use it with her and nasty enough for me not to pinch it off her.
The best pictures I've taken were with none of the above but with a £100 Soviet Zenith rangefinder. Never used a large format camera. The Olympus bridge digital I use is at least made of metal and seems quite good. The only film SLR I still have is a plastic Canon in a cupboard.
All the above is pretty meaningless, I admit, when it comes to buying a basic DSLR for a twelve year old apart from it has to be nice enough for me to use it with her and nasty enough for me not to pinch it off her.
dan m
pfm Member
Andy,
I wasn't aware of this camera either, but beware, they've done away with the top LCD. When walking around I use that all the time to prep the camera's aperture without having to bring it to my eye.
Dan
dan m
pfm Member
Joe,
On the Pentax digi I usually use the old glass (pentax smc-a 50) and the one new limited glass (43mm pancake) in the 'A' position - I find it's easier to see the aperture setting on the lcd and rotate the control wheel when they're at my waste. Then a quick trip to the eye, focus and fire. Especially with the super dinky pancake it's a little more convenient.
Dan
On the Pentax digi I usually use the old glass (pentax smc-a 50) and the one new limited glass (43mm pancake) in the 'A' position - I find it's easier to see the aperture setting on the lcd and rotate the control wheel when they're at my waste. Then a quick trip to the eye, focus and fire. Especially with the super dinky pancake it's a little more convenient.
Dan
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
Strangely if you use the 45mm pancake Nikkor on the D3 you have to set the aperture to minimum and then use the dial on the camera - there isn't an option to just use the aperture ring without it saying EE
Dan and Omers,
yeah, I knew about the K-m before but I'd just got the K20D and couldn't bring myself to part with it (which I'd have to do to justify the K-m) as it's one of my favourite cameras to use. In fact, of the cameras I've owned it's probably only bettered in terms of pleasure of use by the 1D and 1Ds. The results are very good too.
So yes, I know what I am giving up switching to the K-m. I've never used a camera without a secondary (primary?) LCD, but I have owned an EOS 350D which has it on the back and I got used to it. I'm generally pretty adaptable as long as I can get the result I want, so things like that (and lack of optical VF on compacts) bother me less than some staunch traditionalists.
I also used to own the K200D which I think has the same VF, so I know what to expect in that respect. Omers, I'm curious about what you said about speedier focus though. Was that relative to a K20D?
So basically, for most people I think the K20D is a far better camera but in my particular case the K-m really is an upgrade. I don't currently have a small DSLR even though that was my whole reason for buying into Pentax to begin with (with a *ist DS and pancakes). The fact that I ended up with a K20D is a testament to how nice a camera it really is. But at the end of the day, my main system is EOS: 5D, 40D and far, far too much EF glass. From Pentax I'm just looking for something small to put on the back of my Pentax pancakes and FA Limiteds - to make an everyday/light travel kit.
I did consider selling the 40D instead of the K20D as I prefer the K20D but it doesn't make sense given the EF lenses I have, and the fact that between the 5D and 40D I have much more flexibility than I would with a K20D and K-m. Obviously ideally I'd keep the K20D and add a K-m but even I find it hard to justify that.
My K-m should have arrived by the time I get home tonight. Anyone want a lightly used K20D?
finally, back on topic: Alex, if your alternative is a P&S/bridge camera then I think *any* SLR is going to be nice enough that you're going to want to pinch it off her. Worth considering size as I think the Alpha 200 is a fair bit bigger than a D40.
yeah, I knew about the K-m before but I'd just got the K20D and couldn't bring myself to part with it (which I'd have to do to justify the K-m) as it's one of my favourite cameras to use. In fact, of the cameras I've owned it's probably only bettered in terms of pleasure of use by the 1D and 1Ds. The results are very good too.
So yes, I know what I am giving up switching to the K-m. I've never used a camera without a secondary (primary?) LCD, but I have owned an EOS 350D which has it on the back and I got used to it. I'm generally pretty adaptable as long as I can get the result I want, so things like that (and lack of optical VF on compacts) bother me less than some staunch traditionalists.
I also used to own the K200D which I think has the same VF, so I know what to expect in that respect. Omers, I'm curious about what you said about speedier focus though. Was that relative to a K20D?
So basically, for most people I think the K20D is a far better camera but in my particular case the K-m really is an upgrade. I don't currently have a small DSLR even though that was my whole reason for buying into Pentax to begin with (with a *ist DS and pancakes). The fact that I ended up with a K20D is a testament to how nice a camera it really is. But at the end of the day, my main system is EOS: 5D, 40D and far, far too much EF glass. From Pentax I'm just looking for something small to put on the back of my Pentax pancakes and FA Limiteds - to make an everyday/light travel kit.
I did consider selling the 40D instead of the K20D as I prefer the K20D but it doesn't make sense given the EF lenses I have, and the fact that between the 5D and 40D I have much more flexibility than I would with a K20D and K-m. Obviously ideally I'd keep the K20D and add a K-m but even I find it hard to justify that.
My K-m should have arrived by the time I get home tonight. Anyone want a lightly used K20D?
finally, back on topic: Alex, if your alternative is a P&S/bridge camera then I think *any* SLR is going to be nice enough that you're going to want to pinch it off her. Worth considering size as I think the Alpha 200 is a fair bit bigger than a D40.