Go back
Digital SLR Camera

Digital SLR Camera

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Would like to get one.

Any advice on cheep but cheerful bargains? been looking on eBay but they are still damn expensive..

For all my digi shots am using my phone! which has very high resolution but so limited as you would expect..

Any help here will be much appreciated.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Peachy
Would like to get one.

Any advice on cheep but cheerful bargains? been looking on eBay but they are still damn expensive..

For all my digi shots am using my phone! which has very high resolution but so limited as you would expect..

Any help here will be much appreciated.
Can't go far wrong with Canon 350D.

If you're looking for a cheaper model, maybe try one of the SLR-likes, which aren't really SLRs, but have a lot of the features. Plus they come with lens which can cover a wider range of tasks, whereas with DSLR, you need to buy a couple of different lenses.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Fujifilm/fuji_finepixs9000z.asp

D

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Can't go far wrong with Canon 350D.

If you're looking for a cheaper model, maybe try one of the SLR-likes, which aren't really SLRs, but have a lot of the features. Plus they come with lens which can cover a wider range of tasks, whereas with DSLR, you need to buy a couple of different lenses.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Fujifilm/fuji_finepixs9000z.asp

D
Cheers!

That link is pretty handy to compare.. my budget is limited to 200-250 squids so the second-hand option is the logical one to get a better value for money..

Canon and Nikon are my favourate makes, I own a Nikon F60D and that been one of the best buys ever.

But its about time to go digital..

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Peachy
Cheers!

That link is pretty handy to compare.. my budget is limited to 200-250 squids so the second-hand option is the logical one to get a better value for money..

Canon and Nikon are my favourate makes, I own a Nikon F60D and that been one of the best buys ever.

But its about time to go digital..
Fugi makes some good digital camers.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Peachy
That link is pretty handy to compare.. my budget is limited to 200-250 squids so the second-hand option is the logical one to get a better value for money..
I didn't recommend second hand, but hey?

If your budget is 200-250, then you HAVE to go DSLR-like. Getting a decent DSLR and a decent zoom lens and decent macro/wide-angle lens is going to cost you at least 1500. You pretty much get all that with DSLR-like. I dunno if you'll even get a DSLR-like for 200-250, but its your best bet.

D

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ragnorak
I didn't recommend second hand, but hey?

If your budget is 200-250, then you HAVE to go DSLR-like. Getting a decent DSLR and a decent zoom lens and decent macro/wide-angle lens is going to cost you at least 1500. You pretty much get all that with DSLR-like. I dunno if you'll even get a DSLR-like for 200-250, but its your best bet.

D
no disrespect but not true. The Nikon D50 is true SLR and they sell a very nice body plus 2 lens kit for $850.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by clive59
no disrespect but not true. The Nikon D50 is true SLR and they sell a very nice body plus 2 lens kit for $850.
Where? [EDIT] Sounds too good to be true. You really get the body and 2 decent lens' for that?

D

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Where? [EDIT] Sounds too good to be true. You really get the body and 2 decent lens' for that?

D
I'm in the US and yes ... http://store.h1photo.com/9988.html

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by clive59
I'm in the US and yes ... http://store.h1photo.com/9988.html
Decent being the key word...
Cheap isn't always necessarily good.

Here's a clip from an online review, re 1 of the included lens' http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55200.htm...
"Focus

It's slow.

It's only half an AF-S lens. Unlike the real $1,700 AF-S lenses like the 70-200 VR which have big AF-S motors wrapped around the optics directly driving the focus and allowing instant manual focus override, this cheepie has a dinky motor driving the lens through a shaft and gears exactly as if Nikon skipped it and just used the AF motor already built into the camera. Actually it probably would be a better lens if Nikon did that, since it would free up costs to be used better elsewhere. On the other hand, this lets Nikon pimp the lens with gold "AF-S" letters so camera stores can try to pitch it as a "pro" feature against the similar Canon lenses. To you and I as photographers all this AF-S means on this lens is that if focuses very quietly, but not that fast and with no easy manual override.

It has no A/M position; only a fixed A or a fixed M and the focus ring is just a thin band at the very front of the lens not seemingly intended for manual use.

To get manual focusing you need to use the focus mode switch on the lens.

It focuses slowly. I wouldn't use it for action. For less money you can get the 70 -300 G which is probably faster.

There is no focus distance scale, and therefore no IR scale or depth of field scale either. The manual focus is via a skimpy plastic ring."

The other lens got a good review...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm

I've read recommendations which say that if you are on a budget to spend your money on decent lens' rather than an excellent body and crappy lenses. The reviews quoted recommend spending 1700 on improving one of the lenses to a decent lens. That goes way over peachy's budget. I don't see the point in buying a good SLR camera and them complimenting it with 2 half-decent lenses, if you can get a decent camera with a decent multipurpose lens for hundreds less.

D

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Decent being the key word...
Cheap isn't always necessarily good.

Here's a clip from an online review, re 1 of the included lens' http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55200.htm...
"Focus

It's slow.

It's only half an AF-S lens. Unlike the real $1,700 AF-S lenses like the 70-200 VR which have big AF-S motors wrapped around the optics directly driving ...[text shortened]... can get a decent camera with a decent multipurpose lens for hundreds less.

D
I got the body and a Nikor 35-80, all for $599 and love it (so far anyway).

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by clive59
I got the body and a Nikor 35-80, all for $599 and love it (so far anyway).
for a good Digicam..which I own and love try the

Panasonic Lumix DMZ-FZ5

Leica lens. 12X zoom. 5megapixels.

Great for your average camera fan.

review at:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/FZ5/FZ5A.HTM


also great site for reviews of all cameras...

Vote Up
Vote Down

I got a Nikon D70 about a year and a half ago. Love it! And I can use the lenses from my Nikon 35mm camera on it as well.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Looking at specs from different sites and knowing I can rely on my normal camera (which is 8 years old but perfect in everyway) I think am heading towards the Nikon way again..

But I will have to see a second hand one I guess as the money is tight to splash out on a new one, and with second hand I probably get a higher spec for less money..

These links and comments came in very handy.
Cheers dudes!

Vote Up
Vote Down

If you want SLR then dont go for cheap one or dont buy SLR. I would recommend NikonD70 or D200.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Peachy
my normal camera (which is 8 years old but perfect in everyway)
Is that an SLR? If it is, and you have some lenses for it, you might be able to use them for a digital SLR of the same brand (you should check that, though), which would make a digital SLR more affordable.