A beginer's digital SLR

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Why get hung up on how the camera processes the image? Get a decent one that shoots in RAW and process on computer. Optics are crucial not processing ability.

I never process any image on a computer, I find it dull and boring. I enjoy going out and taking photos, wandering around with a camera. But simply can't motivate myself to play with the image in photoshop or some such. Even cropping a photo is a chore.

I'm not saying that's right, but that is how it is for me.
 
fair point - but the member is just asking for opinions from users/owners so he can go in with a rough idea of what might suit him - instead of going in blind and walking out with what a salesman wants him to buy...

Most owners are actually clueless about the whole market and most owners tend to push what they own.

So a frequent answer is simply the statement 'Canon or Nikon'. Reason? Market dominance in a market where almost all the models are actually quite competent. But there are differences. It's a bit like somebody asking what sort of car should I buy and getting the answer Ford or Renault - but that doesn't happen in the car market because there is much more overt differentiation between product.

Queston is what does the OP intend to do. Eg. A 'Compact System Camera' may be a better choice if focusing speed isn't an issue. If video is important then again a CSC or one of the more video focused DSLR/DSLT is appropriate. If focus speed is important but size also a criteria - then possibly an Olympus 4/3 DSLR. And then there is also 'how does it feel'. If dealing with macro or using the rear screen then DSLRS typically have different operating characteristics from DSLTs. Is in camera stabilisation an advantage - not if you're getting a kit lens with IS - but possibly it is if you intend to use primes without IS.

If I had no system today - so no legacy of old lenses - then I'd be looking hard at the micro 4/3 (Fuji/Panasonic/Olympus) and Nex (Sony) compact system cameras before committing to a DSLR. (Canon and Nikon are nowhere in that market sector.)
 
Last edited:
People will still pay £400 for an old Nikon D70S and lens on Ebay when you can go out and buy a D3100 brand new from Jessops for £400. It doesn't make sense.

D70 has much heftier build quality - and an inbuilt focus motor for backwards compatibility. It's also more likely that there is a pool of D70 owners who feel they need a second body.
 
I have a Nikon D5000, its essentially a D90 body minus the internal motor on the body. I've been very happy with it.
 
I would look at the Nikon D80 or D90 if you can stretch to the latter.

The Nikon D80 is great for just DSLR, if you want to be able to record movies, the D90 would the one.

Funnily enough, I may be upgrading my D80 soon.. ;o)
 
Thanks for all the replies so far.

Answers to some of you:

I looking to use it for action shots - motor sport etc.
will be my first DSLR therefore no lenses, but would look to add later on depending upon needs.
no need for movies
I'm not one to upgrade on a regular basis.
 
I looking to use it for action shots - motor sport etc.
will be my first DSLR therefore no lenses, but would look to add later on depending upon needs.
no need for movies
I'm not one to upgrade on a regular basis.

Sounds like a DSLR or DSLT then. The autofocus is faster.

DSLT is probably too expensive (and has EVF). So that further reduces choice to a DSLR.

For motorsports you'll presumably need a longer lens than the standard 18-55 range of the kit lenses.

And that's where your problem with the £400 price will lie. You can get a decent current model Canon, Nikon, Olympus, or Pentax for about £400 with a kit lens. Older models including Sony are available for maybe around £300

A basic Tamron 70-300 is available for about £100. With a Pentax or Sony model you get in-body stabilisation means which means that even such cheap zoom will be stabilised.

There are sometime deals on older models being run out with an additional lens supplied.

In terms of quality at this level the bodies are better than the lenses.

If you raise your budget to say £500 you will find your options will increase. So for example a body plus a 18-250 lens might be an option.
 
I did that, the 18-55 I got bored of, so I put an 18-200 on my D5000 and I am extremely happy with that
 
Thanks for all the replies so far.

Answers to some of you:

I looking to use it for action shots - motor sport etc.
will be my first DSLR therefore no lenses, but would look to add later on depending upon needs.
no need for movies
I'm not one to upgrade on a regular basis.


Well, you're budget is a little slim because you'll want a longish lens for motorsports.

Lumix G2 with a twin lens kit is (14-45, 45-200) £659 and having a smaller sensor is like having a longer lens, both with optical image stabilisation too.

Pentax Kr with twin kit (18-45, 45-200) £479

Canon Eos 1100D (18-55, 55-200) both IS £679

Nikon D3100 18-55, 55-300 both VR £679


I like pentax, plenty of lenses out there, work well, small and light. But when I went digital I bought the Lumix :)
 
Another option is get a new telephoto/zoom and a decent s/h body.

In time you can add another body and the original becomes a great spare for a different lens.

Quicker to swap complete cameras than lenses in the field. Better from a dust point of view too ...
 
I like pentax, plenty of lenses out there, work well, small and light. But when I went digital I bought the Lumix :)

Does the Lumix focus fast enough?

The CSC bodies still use contrast detect for AF.

Even the lower end DSLRs should be a good bit faster on moving targets.
 
I've had no probs with the G2 and focussing, it's very, very quick with the newer lenses, a bit sluggish with the 20/1.7 but never noticeably slow. Not done any motorsports stuff since I got it though :(
 
As others have said it really depends on what you want to do. As a general observation bear in mind that technology is moving really fast. A 2 year old didgital camera is completely obsolete. Don't buy an old high grade DSLR, the modern cheap version will outperform it.

Personally I use a Nikon and lack familiarity with Canon cameras. If you decide to go Nikon buy one of the newer generation cameras, D3, D700, D300, D90, D7000, D3100. I think Jessops have the D3100 on offer at the moment with the 18-55mm VR lens. It ought to do all you want it to do. What the cheaper versions, like the D3100 lack is the internal motor to auto focus older lenses. It will be an issue to those with some favourite older lenses. If you're starting fresh on a budget it doesn't matter.

Do try it before you buy though, these cameras are pretty small.

Nikon D3100 with 18-55mm VR Lens - Jessops - Digital SLRs

Nikon D3100 good choice but don't get conned with the jessops twin lens kit,the zoom lens doesn't have vibration reduction in it
 
Nikon D3100 good choice but don't get conned with the jessops twin lens kit,the zoom lens doesn't have vibration reduction in it

Nikon's own 18-200mm VR lens is a really nice lens, but the lens is more than his entire budged. The standard 18-55mm kit lens seems to be OK though.
 
Nikon's own 18-200mm VR lens is a really nice lens, but the lens is more than his entire budged. The standard 18-55mm kit lens seems to be OK though.

For the OP's budget a Pentax with in-body IS solves the 'VR problem'.

For motorsports it's less likely that VR or IS will be so important.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom