Entry level DSLR?

I know next to nothing about cameras. I want lern take fotos.

So, with a budget of around 500 dollars (possibly slightly more), what should I buy?

The only person I ever learned anything about photography from was my college roommate. He always swore by Nikons, but that's all I know.

What do the numbers mean?

How do I go about learning all of the settings? Should I take a class? Is it like racing where you get better by "tightening the nut"?

Oh, I forgot. I am not opposed to buying used. Is craigslist my friend here?

I'm a Canon fan. But basically Nikon and Canon are the only two to consider - everybody else are back markers.

I bought my daughter a Canon T1(?) rebel. It sure seems like a nice camera.

Canon Rebel T2i. Buy a refurb Directly from canon

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_267070_-1

They're out of stock now, but check back every so often.

Yes, it's a little above your budget, but not much. And for that money you get a serious "no excuses" package that will also hold its value should you decide to bail out. You also get an incredibly powerful tool for shooting HD video. It's really obscene how good of a camera it is for so little money.

I have a Canon 60D and a T2i, and the T2i has actually shot a couple of our covers recently.

Like any hobby, the real money is in the accessories. In the case of photography, that means lenses. Start out with the kit lens, and as your skills and interest grow, so will your collection.

As for learning, there's plenty of options. There's plenty of good websites that run you through the basics of what different settings do, and with digital photography, trial and error is an exceptional learning tool as additional shooting costs you nothing and gives instant feedback.

There's also the adult ed route. Most communities that have adult and community ed programs will offer a photo class, and many of them are quite good. I know the two folks who teach here in Flagler,and one's a news photographer and one's a portrait photographer, so students get a good look at different styles. There's also photo clubs in every town in the world, and going to a meeting, standing up and saying "I'm new here, help." will likely get you hooked up pretty well.

As for used, unless the deal is a screamer, I'd say stick with new or refurbs. The stuff holds its value pretty well, and the prices of new gear is pretty favorable right now. May as well spend the extra few bucks, get the warranty, and not have some dude's sweat all over it.

jg

JG said: May as well spend the extra few bucks, get the warranty, and not have some dude's sweat all over it.

That's the same logic I used when I started dating my SO at 16... Ba dum tsh!

Hey JG,

On that T2i, how fast is the write speed/recovery between shots? We need something good for racing shots and similar fast writes.

Comparing it to my ancient 35mm Canon AE1, is there a digital equivalent that can rip multiple shots similar to a speed winder without having to sell a kidney to afford it?

Thanks!

-Rob

T2i is not super fast, but not bad. It'll do 3.7 frames per second. The 60D will do 5.2, and the 7D will do 8 fps.

In comparison, the 5D Mk2, which is Canon's pro-grade full-frame DSLR will do 3.9. So, really, the T2i is nearly as fast as their top-of-the pile model.

Basically the T2i, 60D and 7D use the same APS-C sensor. The 60D gives you a little larger physical package, a few more knobs and buttons, and a little finer control over stuff like ISO setting, as well as a flip out screen. The 7D gives you the features of the 60D (minus the articulating screen), but wrapped in a more weathertight, magnesium, framed body. With any of those three cameras, though, you're getting essentially the same "engine" which is the sensor.

Media card choice will also determine shooting speed to some extent. The T2i and 60D use SD cards, while the 7D uses compact flash. I'm partial to SD for their cheapness and availability, which is why I rock the T2i and the 60D. Using a class 6 card or higher, you can bang off shots as fast as the camera will allow.

jg

I am in the same boat right now except that I like the feel of Nikon's better. Is a wider ISO range a huge deal? I am comparing the D5100 and the D3100. The ISO rating of the D3100 is "Auto, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 (12800 with boost)" and the D5100 is "Auto, 100- 6400 (plus 12800, 25600 with boost)"

Is it worth paying that much more for a better ISO?

Here is the side-by-side comparo: http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_d3100&products=nikon_d5100

Any input is appreciated, I'm sure Maroon can benefit from the answer as well.

Somebody needs to invent a digital insert to convert my old Minoltas. Something that just slips in place of the roll of film. One of you guys work on that and call me when it's ready. I'm home all next week.

In reply to Joshua: Yes and no... in normal shooting conditions you'll use 100-400 (usually 200). If you're planning to shoot at night without a flash or a tripod, you'd want higher ISO, but I usually find I don't have to go above 1000 when there is some ambient light. I honestly can't imagine a scenario where you could use 12800 or 25600... I think it's a gimmick, personally.

The other issue is noise, generally higher ISO = higher noise, but not always.

DeadSkunk wrote: Somebody needs to invent a digital insert to convert my old Minoltas. Something that just slips in place of the roll of film. One of you guys work on that and call me when it's ready. I'm home all next week.

It's already been done. It's called a Sony alpha DSLR . I bought a refurb one about 6 months ago and have been very satisfied with it so far, even though 90% of what I've done has been in an automatic mode. It uses all the old Minolta glass and the IS is in the body - with old enough glass you'll lose auto focus but that shouldn't be a big deal.

I have to admit to using an older DSLR with specs that would make most spec sheet readers cringe - the original Digital Rebel. Still, you'll be astounded at the difference in quality you get from any DSLR compared to a point-and-shoot. It has the lowest megapixel rating of any camera in the house other than maybe my (free) phone, but it's the one we go to for quality images.

About the ISO - the higher the ISO, the more noise you're going to get in the picture. Granted, I don't have the latest camera, but even then I won't push it past 800 and I'll usually find a way to get more light on the shot if I have to go that far. If you're shooting outside in the day, it's irrelevant.

slowride wrote: In reply to Joshua: Yes and no... in normal shooting conditions you'll use 100-400 (usually 200). If you're planning to shoot at night without a flash or a tripod, you'd want higher ISO, but I usually find I don't have to go above 1000 when there is some ambient light. I honestly can't imagine a scenario where you could use 12800 or 25600... I think it's a gimmick, personally. The other issue is noise, generally higher ISO = higher noise, but not always.

Pretty much this. Also, some of the higher-end cameras will have additional "tweener" ISO settings (250, 450, etc.) that let you tweak shots more precisely. And, yeah, if you ever have to shoot above 6500, you need some lights.

jg

pigeon wrote: It's already been done. It's called a Sony alpha DSLR . I bought a refurb one about 6 months ago and have been very satisfied with it so far, even though 90% of what I've done has been in an automatic mode. It uses all the old Minolta glass and the IS is in the body - with old enough glass you'll lose auto focus but that shouldn't be a big deal.

Neat, I'll have to go looking for that. I've got a bunch of 80s era lenses and everything works fine, but it would be nice to have the convenience of taking scads of pictures without the expense of film.Thanks, especially since I was just goofing around with that post.

If you just want to use your old glass, you can probably get an adapter to use it on a modern camera body. I'll bet that would be less expensive than a special digital back for an oldolder body. Worth checking anyhow.

I got a refurb Canon 10D body from KEH.com a few years back, for just a couple bills. (Body only since my ladyfriend has a bunch of Canon lenses from her film setups.) It's several generations old and still kinda 'prosumer' from it's era, but it's way more camera than I will probably ever need.

If you have somebody trustworthy to help you shop/test/buy used stuff, there's certainly no reason not to. But I'd also espouse the virtues of buying from a camera shop. Like a good mechanic, they're an invaluable resource.

I went with a used prosumer pentax... had a bunch of old manual lenses to use and it can use any pentax lens made over the last 60+ years... it was under your price range...

the prosumer cameras are a bit larger and fit my hands better then the entry level toy cameras that was a little over a year ago... over the next year I snapped about 30k pics and it made its way though central america and europe... when I got back i'd found it's limits... I debated on which way to move... faster glass and a flash, an upgrade body (pentax bodies got smaller and don't fit me) or just move to a new system... I ended up moving to a canon 60d with a tamron 17-50 2.8 (need to get a fast long lens and good flashgun still but they are low on the priority list)... the canon is about 3 generations newer and better in so many ways (other then the lack of weather sealing)

I had a good grasp of photography and SLR fun already (started in 5th grade with my dads old nikromatt (full manual but did have a light meter built in)... add a good bit of time on the web reading and a lot of playing with settings on the camera itself made for fairly easy quick learning curve... but many people recommend Understanding Exposure by Understanding Exposure: http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Updated/dp/0817463003/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1309736552&sr=8-2

as far as systems... can't go wrong with with any of them really...

speaking of... need to sell the pentax kit so I can get some new toys :)