Ok so hello creatives!
I'm looking to purchase a decent SLR camera for under £450. I was looking at the Nikon D3000, but there could be a better camera. I have heard thing about the Canon 1000D taking not-that-good photos, but I need some good opinion here.
Thanks
Incoming Nikon vs Canon argument.
Like the biased dick I am, I will suggest Canon.
I personally have a d50, which is discontinued now :/
But, my girlfriend just bought a d3000, and i have to say, it's pretty good. The picture quality its the best i've seen for the price range.
Actually, I'll sum what will happen to this thread up.
Canon and Nikon people argue for a page, then compromise and say that the camera image quality is nearly no different with either one, it just depends on which control set you prefer. So basically, just go try both cameras out. I love the feel of a Canon, but other people prefer Nikon.
I will try to test each one, then we can have a huge argument over Canon vs. Nikon.
The canon has live view, which is good.
But,
Who's arguing for the Sony alpha?
The Golden will, but as of now Sony's selection of lenses is quite limited, so I wouldn't recommend it.
[QUOTE=Perfumly;18456364]Actually, I'll sum what will happen to this thread up.
Canon and Nikon people argue for a page, then compromise and say that the camera image quality is nearly no different with either one, it just depends on which control set you prefer. So basically, just go try both cameras out. I love the feel of a Canon, but other people prefer Nikon.[/QUOTE]
I like the weight of my D90. It is also a bit taller too than the Canon equivalent. Although they take nearly the same pictures (with minor differences in sensor size and quality).
But yeah, Nikon. :v:
[editline]04:33PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=codenamecueball;18456484]I will try to test each one, then we can have a huge argument over Canon vs. Nikon.
The canon has live view, which is good.
But,
Who's arguing for the Sony alpha?[/QUOTE]
Nikon also has live view. They've had it for quite a while, except it blows. Don't consider live view when you are deciding on a camera. Live view on all brands is pathetic.
The EOS40D has great Live View what u talking bout
[QUOTE=Perfumly;18457666]The EOS40D has great Live View what u talking bout[/QUOTE]
It still isn't as good as it should be. Live view almost seems as if an after-thought when on SLRs. Live View has been a common feature for a few years now and is still incredibly underdeveloped.
It's not to say that Live View can't be useful, but it isn't to the point where it really makes it outstanding. It's useful only when using the viewfinder isn't an easy option.
[editline]06:51PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=The golden;18459110]Between Sony + Third Parties, there has never been a lens I wanted that did not exist.
Sony is also Minolta, so all the old awesome Minolta Maxxum lenses fit.[/QUOTE]
Oh shit. Those are awesome.
So don't base desision of live view?
Jesus christ complicated much?
Where did you hear the 1000d didn't take all that great of photos? It's an updated version of the Xti, which was a really great camera. In fact it's still a really popular camera lots of people use today, if you check out Brianetc.'s early work you'll see how great the XTI is if you know how to work it. He uses the T1i now, but there is few differences between them if I recall correctly, except for the fact the T1i uses the Digic 4 processor while the Xti uses the Digic 2. The XS is in between of both of those using Digic 3, and it's a really great camera to use. Just keep in mind it's all about the lenses, the body won't matter as much unless you're doing low lighting stuff. And the XS uses both EF and EFS lenses, which is pretty awesome.
[editline]04:05PM[/editline]
[url]http://www.flickr.com/photos/thestorey/[/url]
Just in case you don't know who he is, his photos are right there.
If you're tight on cash, get an older model camera (maybe used), and spend more cash on a lens you'll be satisfied with.
Reputable used camera and equipment site: [url]http://www.keh.com/[/url]
I bought a Canon XSi (450D) the other day after jumping between Canon and Nikon's cheap DSLRs for a while.
The lack of a autofocus motor in the cheap Nikons (D40, D60, D3000, etc) did it for me. Want a cheap 50mm prime? Have fun focusing manually unless you spend 3x for the AF-S version (which has higher quality optics anyway but we're talking basic equipment here)
I went with Canon because I didn't want to get raped on lenses.
A 1000D will take good photos if you're a good photographer. If you're just getting started then a $2500 camera would go to waste.
e:
[url]http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=rebel+xs&m=tags&s=int[/url]
lots of horrible HDR abuse but plenty of good stuff too. it's a good camera.
I shoot Canon I love em. I'm Biased... I use a 500D now but I did loads of nice work on my XTI
[url]http://www.bspixels.com[/url]
What about Pentax?
What about Kodak?
[QUOTE=Perfumly;18465146]What about Kodak?[/QUOTE]
I think they make more point and shoots. I think they made a few DSLRs?
What about
OLYMPUS?!?!?!
[img]http://www.digitalreview.ca/pics/D3000/Nikon-D3000-top.jpg[/img]
The Nikon D3000. Inexpensive and good.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NZ1TReCHOA[/media]
[editline]06:50AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Performual;18462695]If you're tight on cash, get an older model camera (maybe used), and spend more cash on a lens you'll be satisfied with.
Reputable used camera and equipment site: [url]http://www.keh.com/[/url][/QUOTE]
It'd be better if not buy used. :v:
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;18465382]It'd be better if not buy used. :v:[/QUOTE]
I'd shy away from used stuff too but this company is well known for being very harsh and honest when judging the quality and condition of each thing they put up for sale.
[b]Rating System:[/b]
[url]http://www.keh.com/PopupGrade.aspx[/url]
speaks for itself
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;18465382][img]http://www.digitalreview.ca/pics/D3000/Nikon-D3000-top.jpg[/img]
The Nikon D3000. Inexpensive and good.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NZ1TReCHOA[/media]
[editline]06:50AM[/editline]
It'd be better if not buy used. :v:[/QUOTE]
Or if you are feeling particularly special get the D5000. Although, if you want to get the 5000 go for the D90 instead. It's a fraction more, but considered vastly superior.
I think ill just get the Nikon. For £10 more I get more AF points.
i love my 450d
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;18490620]i love my 450d[/QUOTE]
But thats not a 1000D.
I'm thinking the 3000D is just better. Please, find some scandal or something to stop me buying an SLR
[QUOTE=codenamecueball;18490741]But thats not a 1000D.
I'm thinking the 3000D is just better. Please, find some scandal or something to stop me buying an SLR[/QUOTE]
Don't pay attention to the model number. Pay attention to the price tag, it tells you everything.
[QUOTE=codenamecueball;18490741]But thats not a 1000D.[/QUOTE]
well, no, it isn't, but my 450d was only 460 quid (which is kinda close to your budget of 450)
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;18494680]Don't pay attention to the model number. Pay attention to the price tag, it tells you everything.[/QUOTE]
well, not everything (like Nikon's newer cheap DSLRs took away features from the D50/D70 but were still more), but it's the best place to start
but yeah you have the 400D then the 1000D then the 450D which makes no sense
honestly if you don't need AEB for HDR and don't think you'll be buying extra lenses just yet then go with a Nikon D40, they're cheap as shit and great cameras
refurbished even cheaper, like $352 in the states
As you can see, this isn't the best place to get reliable recommendations on what to buy. Kinda irritating how people are just going back and forth with xxxD is better than Dxxxx, brand X is superior to brand Y, and whatnot.
OP, check out [url]http://www.dpreview.com[/url] for more reliable camera and lens reviews.
I've got the Nikon d5000, and love it. Quite frankly, the reason I have a nikon is that I just can't stand the feel of canon and sony's grip and button placement, so I decided to research from that point on :downs:
Pretty damn good, and from what I hear its little brother the d3000 is a heavy contender for a light price. If it's anything like my d5000, I'd at least suggest looking into it.
...hey, is anyone going to suggest penta- dammit, I see it, nevermind. also I'm not sure if kodak made 'true' DSLR's, but I know they, along with sony, made some chincey point'n'shoots that LOOK like little SLRs... I knew a guy who swore his cheap little thing was a real SLR and was BETTER than mine. :raise:
[QUOTE=daijitsu;18505168]I've got the Nikon d5000, and love it. Quite frankly, the reason I have a nikon is that I just can't stand the feel of canon and sony's grip and button placement, so I decided to research from that point on :downs:
Pretty damn good, and from what I hear its little brother the d3000 is a heavy contender for a light price. If it's anything like my d5000, I'd at least suggest looking into it.
...hey, is anyone going to suggest penta- dammit, I see it, nevermind. also I'm not sure if kodak made 'true' DSLR's, but I know they, along with sony, made some chincey point'n'shoots that LOOK like little SLRs... I knew a guy who swore his cheap little thing was a real SLR and was BETTER than mine. :raise:[/QUOTE]
I think Kodak made a few DSLRs so many years back. Also, I think they collaborated w/ Nikon (and maybe other companies?) to make some of the first DSLRs which hat 1.5 mega pixel sensors and whatnot.
If I had given myself more time when buying my first DSLR, I would have considered getting a Pentax along with Nikon and Canon.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
