What DSLR (again)

cat_with_no_tail

Here is what I'm after.

Having only really used fairly basic compacts before, I quite fancy dabbling with a DSLR.

It'll be used as an all-rounder, I want to do the regular sort of pics of the family and all that guff, which tbh, a regular compact handles perfectly well.

The main reason I fancy a DSLR though is that I quite fancy going to a few of the race meetings this year (XC and DH) to do some photos as I'm not going to be able to race for a while.

I'd also quite like to do some photos of TT fortnight, the classic rally and that sort of stuff.

It doesn't need to be idiot-proof, but equally, I'd prefer if you didn't need to be a genius to turn the damned thing on.

Also, any clues as to different lenses required for the above would be orsums.

Budget, dunno, I guess maybe £600 for a brand new one.

Eos 550d seems to be coming out top from what I can see (don't really need the new one with the moving screen).

Richie63

Buy the 550 d body only as the kit lens is boll0x and then mid range zoom should do you sweet.

Oh and exactly how much of the TT track can you see from your convalescence chair?

redddraggon

Nikon D3100 would be my choice.

The Nikon 18-55 kit lens is actually a pretty good starter lens. 55mm might be a bit short though, unless you are really close - so you'll want to think about picking up a telephoto 55-200/55-300/70-300 eventually.

A D3100 and a telephoto for your £600 is probably doable.

Go into Jessops etc and have a feel of the cameras - Nikon and Canon feel quite dissimilar.

cat_with_no_tail

I've seen a few reviews that reckon telephoto is a must-have for motorsport, but I don't think that applies for the TT as you're within a couple of feet of the action a lot of the time, certainly no more then 50-60ft for good shots.

This was done on the point/shoot last year, no zoom or anything. This is the absolute max distance I'd be taking photos from.



This one is more along the lines of actual distance for most of them (also taken last year on the P&S)





Richie, you've stayed at ours, you know I can high-5 them from my wheelchair as they ride past my window.

I'm shlt with all this lens business, what's a decent mid-range zoom? Linky? and would I then need another lens to get photos of the family and bike and that guff?

Clank

I've been using an EOS D10 for about 7 years now, with a fast 28-105 (2.8 fstop) lens. I bought it predominantly for motorsport shots (a couple of thousand a weekend was common) and picking off wildlife. Some of the resulting shots have been published. The lens actually serves as a good allrounder, too. I'll admit, for wildlife, I usually go for a 300mm lens.

I've preffered the Canons over Nikons and back when I bought mine, there wasn't a Nikon available that could focus as quickly as the Canons, especially on moving targets. That's changed now, but I'm used the Canon menu system so I'd be reluctant to change (I have a highend Nikon compact and the menu system is a b***h, but for digiscoping it was the best thing available).

A key factor though, regardless of breed, is to get the most light in as possible - fstop of 3.5 is about as big as you want to go - smaller preferabley. Sadly, this rights off longer focal lengths unless you have sh**loads of money to burn. It does, however, give you some really crisp features, and a better depth of field - usefull if the b*****d is heading straight at you.

redddraggon

Clank wrote:

A key factor though, regardless of breed, is to get the most light in as possible - fstop of 3.5 is about as big as you want to go - smaller preferabley.

You mean you want a bigger aperture, not smaller.

bluechair84

redddraggon wrote:

Clank wrote:

A key factor though, regardless of breed, is to get the most light in as possible - fstop of 3.5 is about as big as you want to go - smaller preferabley.

You mean you want a bigger aperture, not smaller.

Probably means a smaller f-stop.

I'd agree with above and add - spend your money on interesting lenses - not bodies. There's not much in DSLRs unless you're really into them. A 10MP sensor will do amateur shoots with no dificulties, and because all new cameras tumph this by quite a way, maybe you should go second hand leaving you even more money to spend on lenses.
I've an Olympus E-520 which is about the smallest body four-thirds camera you can get (the E-420 is the smallest). This makes it easier to carry around in a pack. I've a lens specifically for taking narrow depth of field shots (that's where the magic lies), a kit lens (3x zoom) and a tele. I'd recommend looking for a camera with image stabalisation in the body not in the lens as it makes lenses more expensive (eg Canon I think are lens stabilised, Olympus is body stabilised).
I'd like a new body though as the E-series doesn't shoot HD footage which is the direction I'm going in. The new breed of Micro four thirds (which are the same size as compacts) look like good options, but they lack many features of the full body such as hot shoe, or even a flash. The Lumix cameras look the best with regards to size, price, HD footage and quality of stills and that's where I'll be going in the Summer when I can afford to replace the Olympus.

cat_with_no_tail

I really like the look of the Nikon D3100 dragon suggested. Seems to tick all the boxes, plus I can get one new for £400 with lens kit, memory card etc.
Also, as a complete noob to DSLR, I quite like the little features like the guide mode.

Another one I've seen at a very good price is the Sony Alpha a35. Comes with 2 lenses. an 18-55 and a 55-200.
Seems to get good write-ups.
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/pro ... ntlyViewed

Worth the extra £100?

bluechair84

Cat With No Tail wrote:

Another one I've seen at a very good price is the Sony Alpha a35. Comes with 2 lenses. an 18-55 and a 55-200.
Seems to get good write-ups.
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/pro ... ntlyViewed

Worth the extra £100?

Do a quick bit of research - find out if it has automated HDr which many of the new Sonys do. The panoramic shooting mode is fan-bloody-tastic, and I shoot HD video (avchd) on my girlfriends Sony and that's fantastic footage too. They do make stonking cameras... Fewer lenses on the market than canon et al.

cat_with_no_tail

I've read quite a few reviews on both the Nikon and the Sony, and they seem to come out with similar scores.

It does have auto HDR too.

Richie63

Must admit the Sony stuff I've used has always been excellent. Olympus E500 was the last DSLR I had before saving up for a 7d and was happy with it but no HD video:)

Mid range zooms from Sigma and Tamron will do you fine rather than OE stuff best thing is to go and try the ones you like in Jessops or similar then hunt the web for the best deal.

And as for family pictures I bought a Panasonic TZ20 compact because for all your good intentions you'll never carry the DSLR around.

bluechair84

No AF lamp on the E-Series either, so in low light I have to use the flash gun (which has an AF lamp). But, the results are so good I'd never go back to the built in flash.

delcol

i prefare canon over nikon i started with a basic nikon dslr, before i got my 7d.. canon seem to have faster fps (frames per second) which is what you want for action sports especially motor sports.

the 550d is a decent starter camera, also look up the us and jap import known as the rebel t2i or kiss x4 they can be cheaper (ebay camera shops)
as for lenses look at preowned i got 3 preowned top class lenses.. ideally you want to get the best lens you can afford..
for decent preowned equipment try these guys i used him a few times to both sell to and buy from.. they decent.
if you get a camera and lens/lenses you may be able to blag some sort of discount..

click

also had lenses off of these.
clicky

.blitz

Would agree that the 18-55mm kit lenses are a bit sh*te they are like fitting RS Darts on a Santa Cruz V10. I guarantee you will be looking for a new lens in a matter of days.

try and get a body and a decent 100mm zoom and a 28mm wide angle. Or something like a 50mm F1.8D AF Nikkor lens for about £100 which will allow you to take great close-ups while still maintaining most of the 'snapshot' features of the kit lens.

Really, the body is just the start of it it's all about the lenses.

prawny

Make sure you buget for lenses with the internal motors in if you go for a small Nikon body (AF-S or whatever) That was the main reason for me stumping the extra for a D80 so I could get cheaper (but still half decent) lenses afterwards, so far 4 years later I haven't bought any, but there's still time!

PaulC7

I would go for the Canon eos 1100d and get the Tamron 70-mm lense, its a cheaply priced lense with good reviews... good place for you to start and its simple to use.

As is a canon eos 400d which ive just received courtesy of a friend, ok its a years old but just as easy to use and as with most Canons all the EF-S lenses are inter changeable.

thekickingmule

Matt, you come to a decision on what you're going for?
I'm stuck between the Canon D550, Nikon D3100 or the D5100. I've had a play with the Canon and was quite impressed, but after reading about the D5100, I'm tempted to splash out the extra cash. I'm hoping that the Jessops in Bury get some Nikons in soon. The floods in Japan are causing havoc on their technology exporting.

cat_with_no_tail

Nope, I want to go try a couple out (Sony Alpha, Nikon D3100, Canon 550D being the main ones), but I want to try a few lenses too as that's where the real quality comes from.
It's just been difficult to get into town lately as I'm still hopping about on 1 leg.

thekickingmule

Is there a Jessops on IoM? Handy tip, if you go on their website and click 'Collect from store' apparently you can go and view it and are not obligated to buy, or so a Jessops manager told me.

I'll keep you posted with what I find out.