Forum home Mountain biking forum The hub

Advise on a cheap camera?

ringwoodlightsringwoodlights Posts: 50
edited November 2012 in The hub
I'm looking to buy a DSLR to stick in the camelback but don't want to pay a fortune, I figure that something 2-3 year old would be more than good enough to start and hopefully not eat into my bike fund too much! Any ones to look for or ones to avoid?
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”

Kinesis XC3
Trek 1.5

Posts

  • How cheap is cheap?

    Also are you mostly after stills or video too? If you want some really good video then a Panasonic GH1 or GH2 are the dogs (although strictly speaking not technically a DSLR )
  • YeehaaMcgeeYeehaaMcgee Posts: 5,740
    Nothing to avoid really. All DSLRs from a similar year as about as good as each other. Depending on how old you're going though, if you want live-view capabilities, you'll be far better off with a Sony.

    For what it's worth, I regularly carry my DSLR in my camelbak on the bike, and snowboard, and it, along with several lenses have survived some spectacular craches so far.
  • GiraffotoGiraffoto Posts: 2,078
    Look at the Nikon D5100 + 18-55mm lens kit at about £430 - it's all the dSLR that 9/10 people will need, and does video too. Also consider the 55-200mm lens to go with it if your budget stretches that far
    Specialized Roubaix Elite 2015
    XM-057 rigid 29er
  • Thanks guys, it's mainly stills I'm after as I have a works GoPro I can borrow if I need one. I'll have a look at those you've mentioned, cheers for the help.
    “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”

    Kinesis XC3
    Trek 1.5
  • YeehaaMcgeeYeehaaMcgee Posts: 5,740
    The video on a dslr will pi** all over a gopro!
  • ADLADL Posts: 138
    Have a look at mirrorless cameras. They are generally smaller and lighter than DSLRs, with image quality on par with entry/mid level DSLRs.

    Panasonic are notable for very good video, their GH2 beats the vast majority of DSLRs in terms of video quality... G3 and G5 are cheaper and pretty qood as well. Olympus E-M5 shoots pretty nice stills, but it's quite expensive and its video is not that great. Sony NEX 5-N and 5-R are also pretty good.
  • YeehaaMcgeeYeehaaMcgee Posts: 5,740
    The trouble with mirrorless cameras is that they cost as much, or often more, than a decent DSLR. Often significantly more, in the case of Olympus particularly.
  • ADLADL Posts: 138
    The trouble with mirrorless cameras is that they cost as much, or often more, than a decent DSLR. Often significantly more, in the case of Olympus particularly.
    Agreed. Especially when new, the price is often over the top. But then the previous generation gets considerably cheaper. Lumix G3, GH2, Sony Nex 5-N don't cost that much these days.
  • YeehaaMcgeeYeehaaMcgee Posts: 5,740
    But then the previous generation of DSLRs also drops in price.
    I've fiddled with various mirrorless system cameras at several tradeshows, and I still can't see the point.
    There's definite advantages to something like Sony's SLT system (as well as drawbacks), but I honestly can't fathom any reaaon for buying into any other mirrorless system.
  • how do the fujifilm bridge camera's do in all this, we've got a couple at work and they seem ok to the untrained eye. and they are cheap enough to rattle round in a rucksac?
    pity those who don't drink, the way they feel when they wake is the best they will feel all day


    voodoo hoodoo
  • YeehaaMcgeeYeehaaMcgee Posts: 5,740
    Fuji bridge cameras are ace.
  • that might be the mrs christmas present sorted then :wink:
    pity those who don't drink, the way they feel when they wake is the best they will feel all day


    voodoo hoodoo
Sign In or Register to comment.