• The "Which camera is right for me?" thread V2 - Get a used Rebel
    1,690 replies, posted
I'll buy it for one dollar!
[QUOTE=Maximum Mod;34226940]I've been thinking about selling my [url=http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d5000/]Nikon D5000[/url] and my [url=http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/zoom/telephotozoom/af-s_dx_vr_zoom55-200mmf_4-56g_if/index.htm]Nikkor 55-200mm f/4 lens[/url] and upgrading to a better lens and a D7000, what do you think I'll get for them?[/QUOTE]Not too much for a the D5000, check ebay for prices. What exactly do you define as a better lens?
Im buying a camera soon but i can't decide between the Canon 550D (T2i) or Canon 600D (T3i) is the 600d really worth $200 more than the 550D? I hear most people saying that they are pretty much the same camera, exept for the swivle screen. Im going to be using it for alot of filming, aswell as photo's. But does the 550D have all the same features as the 600D?
honestly they literally are pretty much the same camera sans the swivel screen
This may or may not be the right place to ask, but I'm looking for a DSLR for film. [url]http://www.amazon.com/Canon-T3-Digital-Camera-Imaging/dp/B005LW580O/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1326692014&sr=1-2[/url] Anything more affordable than this?
No such thing. A digital camera with film?
For film. As in, shooting video is necessary.
[QUOTE=MisterM;34227804]Not too much for a the D5000, check ebay for prices. What exactly do you define as a better lens?[/QUOTE] Something with more zoom would be nice, since I like photographing motorsports
I think I may sell the Pentax KX and get a used d5000 (or5100) body of ebay. I have a bunch of old Nikon lenses that I know work with it. I have a 50 1.4, a 80-200 F/4, and a 28-80 Kit lens so I think I'll be good in that department.
I dropped in my rolls for developing today from Morocco. Very excited. Also had a go at the Nikon V1 while I was there. It's really, really fucking sweet. Feels so solid - really nice weight to it. I would feel very comfortable using it as a carry-round camera.
[QUOTE=Dolton;34241045]I think I may sell the Pentax KX and get a used d5000 (or5100) body of ebay. I have a bunch of old Nikon lenses that I know work with it. I have a 50 1.4, a 80-200 F/4, and a 28-80 Kit lens so I think I'll be good in that department.[/QUOTE] How much are you thinking of selling it for? I've been thinking of getting one for a while, as I don't have a DSLR, but have a ton of m42 lenses.
[QUOTE=Dolton;34241045]I think I may sell the Pentax KX and get a used d5000 (or5100) body of ebay. I have a bunch of old Nikon lenses that I know work with it. I have a 50 1.4, a 80-200 F/4, and a 28-80 Kit lens so I think I'll be good in that department.[/QUOTE] go for a 5100 otherwise i'm serious it won't be an upgrade even with the lenses you have.
[QUOTE=Trogdon;34249008]go for a 5100 otherwise i'm serious it won't be an upgrade even with the lenses you have.[/QUOTE] Oh I should have mentioned that, I'm not looking for an upgrade. I am looking for more lens/equipment selection and a more open path to move up on for the future. While I really like the KX, there really aren't many options equipment wise other than old film-era lenses.
[QUOTE=Pickwickian-;34241402]I dropped in my rolls for developing today from Morocco. Very excited. Also had a go at the Nikon V1 while I was there. It's really, really fucking sweet. Feels so solid - really nice weight to it. I would feel very comfortable using it as a carry-round camera.[/QUOTE] the v1 has a tiny sensor compared to other EVIL cameras, it probably takes a decent picture but imo its a overpriced piece of shit, the fuji x-pro 1 looks pretty sweet with its hybrid viewfinder, the sony nex7 has a good sensor as well, shame about the body ergonomics and menu's
[QUOTE=waylander;34259667]the v1 has a tiny sensor compared to other EVIL cameras, it probably takes a decent picture but imo its a overpriced piece of shit, the fuji x-pro 1 looks pretty sweet with its hybrid viewfinder, the sony nex7 has a good sensor as well, shame about the body ergonomics and menu's[/QUOTE] The Nikon has a tiny sensor on purpose. It's more about a camera capturing the moments than carefully composing your picture and getting the best quality. The v1 is made to be small and portable, for situations you might not want to lug your DSLR, while the nex line is set at replacing your DSLR. The x-pro viewfinder is supposed to be meh, the optical one is nice but the electronic is nothing special, especially when compared to the OLED of the nex 7.
that is nonsense reasoning for the v1 having a small sensor, look at comparable camera's they are almost as small (imo its better not to be to small or it ruins ergonomics, especially with anything other than a pancake lens mounted), cheaper, just as good feature wise and all have larger sensors. of current models i would get either the nex7 or panasonic gf2/3 (the panasonic for video), i do want a nex7 and voigtlander 25mm but am waiting to see what canon offer first probably the biggest selling point of the x-pro/x100/x10 are there optical finders and controls, the x-pro in particular will probably be seen as a cheap alternative to a m9
The smaller sensor enables the camera to have smaller lenses. The nex 5 is about as small if not smaller when compared to the v1, but the size advantage is lost instantly when putting any sort of lens aside from the pancake on it. the Nikon allows you to get a great zoom range in a portable package, while still maintaining good quality pictures. The primary purpose isn't for portraits with blurred backgrounds, it's an all situation camera with a lot more punch than a point and shoot. the nex 7 has allegedly the best aps-c sensor sized picture quality there is, which is a pretty big achievement for sony. canon is not going to enter the mirrorless race, and if they do it's going to be something along the lines of the v1, something that doesn't compete with their line of DSLRs. Sony doesn't have as big of a hold on the DSLR market so they needed the nex models, and they really have paid off for them. the optical viewfinders are nice, but i'm not really sure what the selling point of them is. when compared to a nex they are definitely lacking in features, but fuji does make some extremely nice lenses. to me they seem more marketed towards the flashy market that buys expensive hip things. certainly a capable camera, but nothing overly special about it.
i disagree, canon proved with there dslr range they dont mind releasing models that undercuts other models in there range and there are gaps between the pricing levels of the 1100D>600D and 600D>60D/7D for mid level and highend mirrorless cameras
[QUOTE=Maximum Mod;34238454]Something with more zoom would be nice, since I like photographing motorsports[/QUOTE] Anyone?
[QUOTE=Maximum Mod;34275227]Anyone?[/QUOTE] Well you want more zoom than your 55-200 so, assuming you don't want to spend too much, I'd go for a Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300 f4.5-5.6 Still not the best for sports because of the maximum apertures it has.
The 17-40 f4L is ridiculously sharp, I am in love, thanks guys.
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;34276112]Well you want more zoom than your 55-200 so, assuming you don't want to spend too much, I'd go for a Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300 f4.5-5.6 Still not the best for sports because of the maximum apertures it has.[/QUOTE] What would you recommend if price wasn't an issue?
Have any of you used the Nikon 12-24mm f/4 or Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 ? I'm not too interested in what I've seen from third parties, too much sample variance reported and the Nikon lenses are the only ones I can extensively try before buying without major hassle. The Tokina, as highly regarded as it is, doesn't have a good range of zoom.
Oh man, I'd love a wide-angle so much. Never had anything wider than 18 and I think the candid stuff I could get with something wider would be a lot of fun.
I'd recommend the Sigma 10-20mm, either the f/3.5 version or the f/4-5.6 version. The build quality is excellent and the optics are excellent, especially for the price you're paying.
[QUOTE=Pickwickian-;34297420]Oh man, I'd love a wide-angle so much. Never had anything wider than 18 and I think the candid stuff I could get with something wider would be a lot of fun.[/QUOTE] I've always found myself wanting to have more in the frame and that's at 17mm on a D7000. [QUOTE=Roll_Program;34297555]I'd recommend the Sigma 10-20mm, either the f/3.5 version or the f/4-5.6 version. The build quality is excellent and the optics are excellent, especially for the price you're paying.[/QUOTE]The constant aperture is nice, and its probably better built than the 10-24 but maybe not the 12-24. All of these lenses suffer from poor sharpness wide open at the widest which is to be expected, but my understanding is the Sigma is the worse of them all. Can't complain at the saving. I can get the 10-24 or 12-24 for £669, but I'm trading in a Speedlight against it which brings it down £150 and selling my Tamron 17-50 2.8 which will be another £150 or so.
The Sigma 10-20mm is sharp wide open. I have some extremely nice A3 prints from it, some shot fully open. Sure there's sharper wide open, but it's already good enough as it is.
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;34298487]The Sigma 10-20mm is sharp wide open. I have some extremely nice A3 prints from it, some shot fully open. Sure there's sharper wide open, but it's already good enough as it is.[/QUOTE] Corner sharpness acceptable for what it is? I'm quite anxious of what sort of sample I could get, even though my 35 1.8 was very good I could have gotten a poor performing one. I guess I could buy a Sigma 10-20 and send it back to Amazon if the results weren't sufficient, but I think trying the Nikons for free at Grays is worth doing. Thanks for the suggestion.
Yeah, you can always send it back if you get a dud, but that's very unlikely.
I've been looking at upgrading to a Pentax K-r from my old Pentax *ist DL. Looking on dpreview's interactive comparison, the camera seems to produce better images than the competition. I enjoy some macro photos, but mostly enjoy landscape, especially urban-scape. I don't do much ultra-low light, but I'd like to be able to. I especially enjoy Black and white, but that's something I apply in Photoshop anyways. Is this camera recommendable? Will it be a significant upgrade form my *ist? I'm an amateur, but I'd like to eventual earn money through photography. Will this camera keep up? I've also been looking at some rebels, the Nikon 5100, and even the Fujifilm x100 (due to it's smaller size, so it's not so awkward taking urban-shots.) UPDATE! I bought a K-r. Went to the photo shop today. I'm happy!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.