DSLR for a N00B Recs

[indesertum]

Originally Posted by mrhills0146

There is some good advice in the other thread but I won't be an asshole and tell you to read it.

Unlike the typical SF responses, you asked, so I'll try to help you out. Since I recently went through the same decision, here's what I came up with. The micro 4/3 camera body is nice - very nice, but I decided against it because of the lack of a viewfinder. The whole reason I wanted a DSLR was for fast response time. I have two little kids and point-and-shoots just don't respond fast enough to catch the images I wanted. The micro 4/3 is better, but because there is no viewfinder and you use the live view screen for everything, the response time is still a bit slower - just enough where I could notice it. For quality optics I think it's tough to beat the Pentax line, and the K-X is very well priced. Highly recommend, and the handful of pros I talked to had nothing but lavish praise for the Pentax line. Sony is a good choice too as the reincarnation of Minolta in the digital SLR world. The entry-level Alpha camera is really inexpensive and a great value. Of course the entry-level Nikon and Canon camera bodies are a great choice, and this will give you the most flexibility when you want to start buying additional lenses. Don't fall for the belief that you have to buy a Nikon or Canon to get the lens flexibility you need. Any of the manufacturers here are going to have plenty of options for upgrading lenses, but with Nikon and Canon you'll have literally hundreds and hundreds of options instead of dozens and dozens. No matter which brand you buy, you'll be able to find what you need. It can just get a little overwhelming with Nikon and Canon. Last one I'm familiar with is Olympus. The big advantage to an Olympus DSLR is that the four-thirds platform makes for a much smaller and lighter camera than the above (excluding the micro four-thirds.) Olympus lenses are really exceptional quality. You won't find the bewildering array of options that you'll find with Canon and Nikon, but the ones that are available are fine lenses. I bought an Olympus E-420 as I came to realize that no matter how good the camera was, if it was too large and too heavy, neither I nor my wife would ever want to take it with us anywhere, so what is the point? Have been very happy with it so far and got a great deal. A disadvantage to the Olympus line for me is that they elected not to produce the equivalent of a 50mm prime in a fast aperture. That's an important lens for me as a lot of the shooting I do is of the kids inside in low light. I haven't found a workaround that I like yet - there is a Rokinon "light bucket" in f1.8 that sells for only about $275 (!!!) but it's manual focus. You can also buy an adapter that allows use of the old Zuiko 50mm primes from the 1970s (which sell for $50 to $75) but of course that means completely manual shooting - no auto metering or anything. Still pondering what I want to do to solve this issue. Good luck and let me know what you think. To sum up, for portability Olympus wins. For overall quality, Pentax is tough to beat. For growth and flexibility in the future and the most robust selection of used lenses, Nikon or Canon. Cheers. Matt in Atlanta
you can get external electronic viewfinders for some micro 4/3s. i believe the gf2 has a built in one. there are a few mirrorless cameras coming out optical viewfinders., i forget which one, but one of them has a so called dual optical and electornic viewfinder which you can switch between. i dont understand your objection at all as having a viewfinder has nothing to do with autofocus speed. also all new pentax cameras are reverse compatible with every single lens pentax has ever made giving you the largest and best valued lens collection out of all the companies (i admit some exaggeration). the drawback is half of them you can only focus manually, but some of the limited pentax lenses are omfg so damn sexy. i honestly dont think you can go wrong with pentax, olympus, canon, or nikon. all pretty much the same. canon and nikon have nice lenses but they'r;e damn expensive, pentax has nice lenses (especially primes. goddamn sexy primes. luminous landscape puts the limited editions at the best you can buy and some people prefer them over the overhyped leica ones), but the some of the really good ones arent autofocus. pentax also has the most durable bodies out of all the companies (most of them are weather sealed). olympus has good value, covers all its bases, but if you're buildling a lens collection you wont go very far. full frame, high end photographer aimed, prosumer aimed, low end consumer end it all doesnt matter. they all follow the same format. some of them just have limited capabilities which you wont even need. you can get the biggest baddest one out there to stroke your ego, but in another year there'll be another biggest baddest one. photography is honestly about the photographer. you can make fantastic photographs with the shittiest cameras if you know what you're doing. the better cameras just are able to convey a difficult vision better, but without such a vision the camera is as useful as the crappier versions. im going to say this again but mirrorless is the future for regular joe consumers like you and me. exchangeable good quality lenses, no bullshit functionality, perfect size for traveling. ep2, ep1, g12, epl2, lx5, s95, gf2, gf1, nx100, nex3, nex5, grIII take your pic. they're all excellent cameras and yes you might have a few nitpicks about them, but nothing so bad that it'll prevent you from learning how to use the camera and envisioning a great shot. most photographers i know do have DSLRs, but they use them for special photography trips or if they have a project to do. for their daily stuff a lot of them use mirrorless. if you're really really set on a dslr i would go with pentax as the basic primes that you would use (50mm, 35mm, 85 mm, 105mm ) all are top of the game and an excellent value in comparison to nikon or canon. there's also quite a few excellent all purpose zooms that are more than adequte for your purpose unless you're willing to spend a grand or two on one medium upper level lens further down the road (leading to an urge to buy another one and another one), i'd go with pentax. k-5 is an excellent body and no way you'll be disappointed. pentax has best build quality out of all the brands. even some of the lower end ones have magnesium alloy bodies and are weather sealed. one caveat is that its not full frame, but again not a big deal for you.

Originally Posted by Sherman90

I'm spoiled and tend to underappreciate all the nice things I have, but I still LOVE the Panasonic DMC-GF1. Check it out.
this dude knows what he's talking about.

 

[gerbila]

You would be well-served to look into the Sony A55v.

 

[wynn]

really?.....................

 

[milosz]

Originally Posted by indesertum

i dont understand your objection at all as having a viewfinder has nothing to do with autofocus speed.

There's a pretty big gap in speed between the different forms of AF (contrast detection in compacts and u4/3, etc. vs. phase detection in SLRs). The former has gotten much, much better than it used to be, but it's still not as fast as quality SLR AF.

I'm rather pleased with the contrast detection in my S90, but with such a small sensor, it's got a lot of room for error.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Thanks for all the tips. I'm actually leaning towards a Pentax K-R, but I'm gonna check it out in person and look around a bit more, I'm not purchasing this for a couple weeks so I have plenty of time to think about it.

 

[nerdykarim]

Originally Posted by Christobevii3

The pentax k-x comes in a really cheap package, around $500-600 with two lenses. If you get that and a f 1.8 or 2.0 lense with it you'll be golden. I find the camera to be equivalent to the $900-1000 canon/nikon in quality.

Originally Posted by JLay87

Meh I was thinking about that but my photo nerd friends said that if I ever wanted to upgrade it might suck, and that they only have a limited selection of glass, which is why I should go for a Nikon or Canon which has a better selection and they work on a wider variety of their cameras.

For what it's worth, I went with K-x for my first DSLR.

My advice, though: buy a 50mm fixed focal length 1.8 (or 1.4 or 1.7) with your kit lenses. It is stupidly easy to take really nice photos with one of those. They'll be a bit cheaper on Nikon or Canon.