Used SLR Cameras for 2011: Cheaply moving up from the $150 pocket camera category

[Ludeykrus]

Depends on your budget and what you shoot. The fixed ('prime') 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 will allow for great portraits and low-light shooting. The 18-55 zoom will serve as a good 'walk-around' lens to grab shots in most typical situations. Next up depends on what you.

I'm in that exact situation, and am considering picking up the 70-300mm zoom lens, since I shoot a lot of stuff from far away. The image stabilized version runs ~$510, and the non-IS version runs ~$140.

 

[random-adam]

I have the afore-mentioned used D40 with a 35mm f1.8 lens, the kit 18-55 lens, and an SB400 flash. If I were honest with myself, that setup is really all I need in a camera -- a ton of fun, way more lightweight than most other SLRs, and plenty versatile. It will always be my skills (and not the camera) that limit how good my photos look anyway. If I had to buy another camera right now, I'd pick up the tiniest Canon point-and-shoot I could get. I miss having an always-in-my-pocket camera. I really wouldn't be down with an in-between model. Either buy something tiny and swap control for portability or get a real dSLR and be prepared to learn a few things about how to shoot. "Compromise" is the sort of thing that keeps the middle east at war with itself for millennia. I learned the hard way years ago with one of these, which made stunning pictures but with neither speed nor ease.

 

[bond928]

To add to the advice in this thread, my experience with DSLR & lens buying:

1) consider getting your 50mm f/1.8 lens off craigslist at a discount. alternatively, if you're willing to wait, the "nifty fifty" 50mm 1.8 prime is on sale for < $100. monitor fatwallet and slickdeals for this periodic discount.

2) realize that 50mm = 85mm equivalent due to the 1.6x crop factor of the entry level crop-sensor DSLRs you. In short, all lens will slightly telephoto when used with a crop camera. this is advantageous for telephoto shooters but disadvantageous for wide angle shooters who need to pay more to compensate for the crop telephoto effect. personally, i skipped the 'nifty fifty' altogether and bought the canon 28mm f1.8 prime lens instead for $420 to compensate for the 1.6x factor. I realize this may overshoot your budget requirements. however, i have no regrets with my 28mm--fantastic prime lens and i plan to keep it for 4 years.

3) 18mm is okay wide. Some folks keep the kit 18-55 lens for the express purpose to cheaply round out their equipment solely as a wide-angle lens at no additional cost. If you want to go wider, you'll pay significantly more. the canon 10-22 is another lens i own, but costs more than my camera body.

4) given a decision between spending more on the lens or the body, invest in the glass. Resale is usually 80% and up whereas the body depreciates rapidly. also, to speak for Canon, the current entry-level crop DSLRs (t1i/t2i) are significantly better than their predecessors (xS, xSi), having HD video, improved sensors, and an expanded ISO range.

What helped me was surfing Flickr and looking at the types of shots you might be making. Many of the photos on there list the camera model and lens used to help determine if you might buy a prime, telephoto, or wideangle for your first lens.

Hope that helps.

 

[bond928]

also this is purely a matter of opinion but for your non-DSLR Canon options I think the S95 > S90 > G11.

The S95 is the perfected version of the S90.

The G11 is not really pocketable and not really a DSLR and not as versatile as a micro 4/3rds DSLR. Its built-in viewfinder was also entirely too small, IMO, when I was testing it a year ago.

 

[Reevolving]

Thanks for the replies. From Spoo's thread, here is where I stand now. Any feedback?

I am going to get a used Lumix LX3 or a Canon S90.
They have fast f/2.0 lenses, and should offer a different caliber of possibilities.
For now, I mainly want portraits, Ebay closeups, and indoor WAYWRN shots.

Lumix LX3 = $225 used.
Canon S90 = $280 used.
Canon S95 = $370 used.
Lumix LX5 = $400 used.

Which would you buy?

Here is what I want:
1) decent indoor lighting pics (low f/stop)
2) Macro closeup
3) bokeh effect / shallow depth of field. (low f/stop)
4) wide angle a plus (group pics)
5) Don't need a lot of zoom or megapixels.

Will the compacts above work for me?
Is it worth spending the extra $100+ for the updated one?

With the compact, I'm more likely to actually take lots of photos (vs. leaving it in the closet)
Obviously, this is the best way to learn photography.
Only then will upgrade to a DSLR if I really take an interest in photography,
and I hit true limitations with these compacts.

 

[random-adam]

S90's control dial(s) tip the balance toward it, for me.

If you get an S90, this may be worthy of your attention.

 

[Crane's]

Any one of them will work. Typically the more you spend on a P&S the better performance you'll get. All of what you want to do I'm currently doing with a much cheaper P&S. It's all in knowing the camera and its controls in great detail. Knowing overrides and how to use full manual mode is the secret to good photography no matter what camera you have (within reason of course). Some cheap P&S shots in what's typically one of the worst conditions for a camera. Snow. Peering Inside by DYSong Photography, on Flickr Red and White by DYSong Photography, on Flickr Oh So Cold by DYSong Photography, on Flickr Crystal Palace by DYSong Photography, on Flickr More can be found here. http://www.flickr.com/photos/dysong/...7625027765313/

 

[Reevolving]

Agreed, however, many cheap P&amp;S's don't allow manual. Also, they do not have fast lenses.
I see you're using an EX-S10. This has a lens of f/2.8-5.3
That seems to be a nice bokeh effect you're getting from a f/2.8 lens.

 

[Reevolving]

Originally Posted by random-adam

S90's control dial(s) tip the balance toward it, for me.
Can you elaborate? Are you saying crucial and common settings are on the S90 control dial, but must be accessed via menu on the LX3 ? Ken Rockwell says something similar about the S90:

Compared to the Leica D-Lux 4 (a.k.a. Panasonic Lumix) There is no comparison. Unless I missed something when I tried it, the Leica D-Lux 4 (Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3K) lacks the emancipating direct control rings of the S90. Sure, the Leicasonic has a control switch around the lens for cropping, but no ability to control anything useful around the lens as does a real camera or the S90. This lack of direct control, and the suffocatingly complex menu system of the Leicasonic that replaces the direct controls of the S90, relegates the Leicasonic to the consumer electronics aisle, not the photography aisle. http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/s90.htm#comp

 

[Crane's]

You don't need a super fast lens to achieve DOF and bokeh effects. Macro shooting has a very narrow DOF. Using a tele lens at short distances is another way to play with DOF. A fast lens is nice but not necessary. This was shot at f5.6 at 105mm (adjusted for sensor) _DSC4241 by DYSong Photography, on Flickr Oh and the last 5 shots I posted were shot in auto mode with some overrides.

 

[random-adam]

Originally Posted by Reevolving

Can you elaborate? Are you saying crucial and common settings are on the S90 control dial, but must be accessed via menu on the LX3 ?

That's it exactly. It's one of the few things I really loved about my old DSC-F707 -- there was a toggle or switch or dial for EVERYTHING, and I did very little menu-plodding when I wanted to change a setting. The Canon seems relatively similar in that regard.

Disclaimer: I've not put hands on either the Canon or the Panasonic, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

 

[Cool The Kid]

I have a D40 and I love it.

Get just a body if you can (should be no more than $250 shipped), and get one of the following

- Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS
- Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC

And the Nikkor 35 1.8. First two lenses are standard 3x zooms, good for general shooting + zooming in the dark, Nikkor is a "standard view" prime that's super fast in the dark + great for that blurred background (bokeh) look

Whole setup will admittedly cost about $800 but this is a setup that barring any crazy developments will be great to use for the next 15+ yrs

 

[Cool The Kid]

A little technical talk

Fancy P&amp;Ss like the S90 etc are good... really good actually... but limited, and even w/ f/2 lenses will never get the same bokeh as a DSLR

Image quality also isn't as good for a myriad of reasons

Truthfully I'd like to have a small P&amp;S for work or if I'm biking thru the city + want to stop and snap a few pics, but if I had to choose, esp for low light stuff, the DSLRs win hands down.

 

[pseudonym]

Through Craigslist, I got a brand new D40 in-box for $300. This was mostly all luck.

I got bored of the kit lens really quickly, and upgraded to the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S. I haven't changed back at all.

I'm planning to get a 50mm soon. For ~$100, there's no question about it.

 

[SpooPoker]

Originally Posted by pseudonym

Through Craigslist, I got a brand new D40 in-box for $300. This was mostly all luck.

I got bored of the kit lens really quickly, and upgraded to the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S. I haven't changed back at all.

I'm planning to get a 50mm soon. For ~$100, there's no question about it.

Any examples of the pics you got from it? I just picked up the same camera, waiting for it to arrive with the 1.8 lens.