Dslr Advice

[No Crust Racing]

Hi Guys,

I'm looking at picking up a DSLR for the missus for her b'day and I've spent a fair bit of time researching the options, it's mind boggling.

She's an amateur for sure but I think she'd get into it a bit once she had it and by her own admission really wants a better camera than the Canon IXUS point and shoot I have.

Now that said, I'm not looking to spend a fortune but I figure that around 12-1300 for a kit isn't a bad place to start.

Some of the things that are important is the ability to record HD videos, the ability to buy more lenses from a wide range and not costing a bomb, the ability to take good quality low light (indoors at parties etc) type pics and the ability to capture quick moving objects (like me at the track!)

Some assistance would be greatly appreciated.

At this stage the Nikon D5000 looked ok if that helps at all. I was looking at D300S and the like until I looked at the price and no it doesn't have to be Nikon.

Cheers!

[funkymonkey]

Don't buy a DSLR to record HD videos. Buy an HD Video camera to take HD Videos.

Canons in general are cheaper in Australia and their lenses are more prolific here. You'll find yourself importing a lot of gear from the US/Japan/HK if you buy Nikon (I use a Nikon D90).

If you're future proofing your Nikon, get something with FX (or "full-frame" in Canon terms) capabilities, that way the lenses you buy can be used with better bodies in the future... as cameras get cheaper expect FX to become the standard in a couple of years, if not sooner.

Another defining factor with DSLR's is the autofocus motor. On some cameras the motor is in the body, which makes lenses cheaper to buy, but the initial investment is higher, also you're not locked into as many proprietary lenses. Cheaper cameras have motors in the lens, which makes all subsequent lens purchase expensive.

Then you have features like articulating lenses, extra control wheels (1 or 2 wheels to fine tune settings etc), subject tracking, intervalometers, etc which all make it harder to pick. If you're getting really pro, make sure the camera can control off camera strobes (D5000 can't).

Basically write down all the stuff you wanna do with it, how much you want to spend, and when you plan to upgrade and it should help you narrow the options.

[No Crust Racing]

I've tried that to this point and it's not helping me a whole lot.

Our list of wants is small, as I mentioned above.

HD video is desirable because we hate carrying around more crap than we have to and we're not trying to make a DVD so 1280 @ 25-30FPS will be fine for us, it doesn't have to be the best video around just better than my Canon compact.

Good to know Canons are a bit cheaper here and handy info on the lense stuff regard full frame and the motor info. How do I tell if the motor is in the lense or camera? To start with I'm sure she will be fine with the 1-2 lenses that usually come in the kit.

What we wanna do with it is take better pics than our compact, be able to take good pics in low light conditions with or without flash, take HD video from time to time and take action shots in varying light conditions.

Upgrade would not be for a while and price range as mentioned would be around 12-300 for the kit for starters. In the kit I'm expcting a camera, 1-2 lenses, a battery, possibly a memory card, a strap (a bag would be nice).

[funkymonkey]

well with SLR's the lowlight really comes down to the sensor being able to take clear pics at 1600 or 3200 ISO, and using a low aperture (high speed) lens. The latter can be added later, and the former is something most cameras on the market these days can achieve (at least ISO 1600 clarity anyways).

I'd recommend a EOS 500D over a Nikon D5000 for you because the Nikon only allows 5 minute videos in HD (720p ie DVD quality), whereas the canon allows 12 minute clips in Full HD (1080p ie blueray quality) and 18 minutes in HD (720p). It also has slightly better sensitivity at ISO 1600 and ISO 3200, which means less noise in low light.

If you want an australian version (ie don't wanna deal with warranties that are return to base or not valid in oz) then the cheapest twin lens kit is here:

http://camerapro.net.au/canon-500d-twin-18...tock-p-243.html

smidgen over your budget.

[No Crust Racing]

that looks like a good kit

questions though, with regards to the AF motor being in the body on the D5000. A bit of research showed up that there were heaps of lenses for it anyway?

The D90 appears to be able to use external flash equipment which I'm sure matters if you wanna do semi-pro sit down stuff. And the D90 has an additional battery grip option from Nikon where as the D5000 does not.

Does the 500D have the motor in the body or lenses and is there good lense support?

what would be a good choice out of those 3 so far if she decided she wanted to get a bit more serious and get some really good lenses and so forth?

[No Crust Racing]

From what I'm seeing the D90 seems to come up trumps in review against those two and appears to be the more future proof and higher grade camera.

If I went that route is it a good idea to get something like this

http://www.becextech.com.au/catalog/produc...2f2e264bb76b9ba

Or would it be better to buy the body only and buy a good lense?

[djr81]

From what I'm seeing the D90 seems to come up trumps in review against those two and appears to be the more future proof and higher grade camera.

If I went that route is it a good idea to get something like this

http://www.becextech.com.au/catalog/produc...2f2e264bb76b9ba

Or would it be better to buy the body only and buy a good lense?

The 500D has been replaced by the 550D so keep that in mind.

You will get a camera with a couple lenses in a kit cheaper than buying lenses seperate to the camera. The twin lense Canon kits are pretty good value.

[No Crust Racing]

And how about that Nikon I posted, does something like that look to be good value?

From what I can see the D90 has a bit more headroom for her if she decides to get a bit better and wants to do a bit more.

[No Crust Racing]

I just noticed the second lense is not a Vibration Reduction lense so I imagine trying to get clear pics at full distance without a tripod might be next to impossible lol.

[funkymonkey]

D90 is a DX camera not an FX. So not so future proof. It's the best bang for buck camera, although its a little too complicated for someone just getting into SLR's. Remember once you have lenses that are good, then all you have to do to improve the picture is upgrade the base that takes the pic.

[No Crust Racing]

OK mate thanks heaps for the input

I can't see Full Frame being in my price range anytime soon and her birthday is in a few weeks

At this stage I think I'll hunt for a decent D90 kit. It might be a steeper learning curve but she's a smart cookie and she's like me in that we usually buy something better than base model so we know it will serve us for a while once we've learned how to operate etc.

Once again thanks for the assisatnce guys.

[funkymonkey]

oh btw, D90 sucks at video though firsthand experience.

[MRSAMO]

Hi Guys,

I'm looking at picking up a DSLR for the missus for her b'day and I've spent a fair bit of time researching the options, it's mind boggling.

She's an amateur for sure but I think she'd get into it a bit once she had it and by her own admission really wants a better camera than the Canon IXUS point and shoot I have.

Now that said, I'm not looking to spend a fortune but I figure that around 12-1300 for a kit isn't a bad place to start.

Some of the things that are important is the ability to record HD videos, the ability to buy more lenses from a wide range and not costing a bomb, the ability to take good quality low light (indoors at parties etc) type pics and the ability to capture quick moving objects (like me at the track!)

Some assistance would be greatly appreciated.

At this stage the Nikon D5000 looked ok if that helps at all. I was looking at D300S and the like until I looked at the price and no it doesn't have to be Nikon.

Cheers!

Dan I'll make this simple:

Video - get a Canon

Photo - get a Nikon

This is for the long haul as Nikon can't compare with Canon for 720p or 1080p video recording. Canon already make excellent video cameras so they know their stuff, this is the first time for Nikon so it'll take them a while to catch up.

Lens wise Nikon has more "cheaper" lenses to choose from, especially for the non-AF bodied cameras like the D40, D60, D80. The D90 is the only one of the consumer Nikon bodies that has a built in AF motor the other are the older models (D70 and D50 which I have). This translate to more expensive body but better valued lenses. Also, they will support legacy lenses which is a good thing because lenses don't lose much in value whereas bodies do.

The D90 is an excellent DSLR, a far better camera than all the other lower/previous models including the D100 (which is an old model just like the D70), I was going to get this when I first heard about its HD video. Unfortunately 5 minutes isn't very long and it is incredibly difficult to film your subject especially in motion. I guess when you hear about the jello effects you'll understand that HD video recording on DSLR still has a way to go. Nikon is not the preferred choice for video capturing, end of story.

Photo-wise, the D90 is almost as good as the D300/D300s! Can't get better than that especially at that price. It will be a while until you've exhausted everything you could do with a crop sensor DSLR and move up the scale to something more significant like a full frame DSLR. Of course, you've probably made photography a side business and can afford to spend big on bodies and lenses.

I've also noticed that most people who can't be arsed with post processing (ie. me) buys a Canon.

One thing I love about Nikons over Canons is that they feel better in the hand and are way way easier to use.

To summarise: If your girl is a MRS. then get her a DSLR, if she's a GF then get her a PnS comsumer camera which is almost as good but without all the lenses so far far cheaper.

[No Crust Racing]

"To summarise: If your girl is a MRS. then get her a DSLR, if she's a GF then get her a PnS comsumer camera which is almost as good but without all the lenses so far far cheaper."

God that made me laugh lol

Well it's been over 3 years, we live together, we're building a house etc etc Hell I'm trying to find her a racing seat for the DRIVER side of my track car.. she's a keeper.

Anyway...

I know of the 5 minute limit on HD video and that's OK as it's not something we'd use a lot of. I've looked ats sample videos online, some are fine and some are pretty average. The D90 also doesn't have autofocus on vidoe recording which sucks.

What's the equivalent to a D90 in the canon range, 550D?

While the canon does do 1080, it only does it at 20fps =\

I'm not sure how keen she'll be to get into post processing to be honest. She's IT literate but doesn't have a huge love for spening hours in front of the PC.

Thoughts?

[funkymonkey]

What's the equivalent to a D90 in the canon range, 550D?

EOS 50D

[No Crust Racing]

K cheers will check that out also, if it's as good as a D90 in every other way but better video then it might be worth considering too.

[THENIG]

I bought a canon 550D a few months ago to play around with photos & video equally.

As has been said before if u just want to take photos then most people say the Nikon's would be the go.

If you want video then go a canon, only downside is jello effect when panning quickly, but IMHO if your trying to make video look professional best to keep the frame still and let your subject move within it rather than panning across your subject. Nothing worse than watching home videos with camera moving around all the time during the scene.

just to correct whats been said before, as for difference between canon & nikon lenses, i think its the image stability built into the lense not the auto focus that differentiates the two brands.

Canon bodies don't have image stability built into them, its built into the lenses (any one labelled with 'EF-S'( S for stability)), nikon however built the image stability into the image sensor, therefor whatever lens you attach to the body can be image stabilized (this can be good if u buy cheap 35mm lenses off ebay with an adaptor ring to suit your camera), in my experience thats generally what makes canon lenses more expensive (because they have more moving parts in them). The only lenses you will find that don't have auto focus (either make) are older ones built when 35mm film was around & some prime lenses so you will have to focus with the focus ring.

Another thing to note is neither canon or Nikon will auto-focus (track a subject) while recording video (hence why panning is a bad idea), I think I can tap the shutter button during filming HD video with the 550D to re-focus on your subject but be warned, if you are using the kit lens, the built in microphone will pick up the sound of the gears in the AF system and it can be really distracting & annoying. Best to manual focus of buy a HD video camera. This is why I would recommend if you are buying the canon save your money, buy the body only & put the money you saved towards a proper 'L' series lens, kit lenses are a bit rubbish.

Another thing you should honestly look at if you really want to make great video more than photos are the micro 4/3 cameras made by Panasonic. Look up some reviews for the GH1 and the recently released G2 & G10. They should fit your budget if u buy direct from hong kong through somewhere like B&H. They may not work aswell in low light but they are smaller (more likely to take them around with you instead of leaving them at home), have heaps of pre-programmed settings for photos & video if your an amateur. i think the latest ones even have a touch screen which can do some pretty cool stuff during filming.

search vimeo.com for video's taken on the canon & panasonic GH1 to see if they are going to match your expectations.

Also if you are wanting to edit video you better think about buying a mac, video editing software that can process 1080p properly is expensive if u want to keep it legit.

further reading:

dpreview.com

cameralabs.com

43rumors.com

P.S. a D90 is an awesome camera for stills, I know people who shoot weddings for a living and have sold all their canon gear to trade up to nikon stuff because the they could get more accurate/consistent pictures with the nikons.

Don't let stuff like built in external flash control dictate your decision, if you stay amateur you will most likely never have the need for it and even if you do, you can buy two flashes (one master one slave) for the price difference say between a 550D and a 7D body (which has it built in) or a third party controller that plugs into your camera & sits in the hot shoe for a $150 bucks.

just my two cents.

[No Crust Racing]

Thanks for all of that mate.

After having a look at your suggestions I think it boils down to this for me.

The 550D is a touch too expensive and the Panasonic's compromise too much in the way of still photography. HD Recording is nice to have but not the primary function. I think if we want awesome HD video we'll have to shell out for a propr HD video camera.

I'm yet to buy myself something even suitable for taking in car footage yet..

Thanks guys. Appreciate the wealth of knowledge and assistance.

[FST513]

If your looking to buy a 50D it doesn't do HD video. Only the 5DmkII or the 1DmkIV do HD video for the semi-pro and above range and they are way out of your budget and totally not what you need. So you'll be looking at the 500D or 550D.

I don't see what Rocklee means by "Most people that can't be arsed to do post processing buy a Canon". How is this true? Anyone that is serious about photography will process ALL photos, no matter what. By this statement it sounds like you are saying Canon is better just because you don't have to process.

For E.g. Auto white balance is wrong 99% of the time and requires adjustment in PP software e.g. Photoshop/LR. Your thought of an eyedropper on something that "looks grey" could be right 20% of the time, but the other 80% will be wrong. So thats 1 step of processing thats universal.

Anyway, getting off topic, i shoot Canon and i like how it feels in my hands and the ease of use. I found Nikon menu's to confuse me too much and too hard to navigate. Thats why i chose Canon (when i was a n00b) and i've stuck with them.

They are cheaper than Nikon once you start heading into the pro level range of lenses by a mile and they are more widely available in Australia as Funkeymonkey stated. Also a lot more places RENT canon lenses than Nikon lenses.

If you want to shoot off camera strobes or flashes, you'd be crazy to be triggering them through the camera using a flash. Especially because its so inconsistent in sunlight/glare/bright conditions. You would want to be buying wireless triggers for this (cactus V4's, Alien Bee cybersyncs, pocket wizards etc..).

Seeing as its for your girlfriend and no matter what you will eventually upgrade it, use what is suited to her and her needs and what you'll be using it for and in the long run upgrade is my advice, but thats just my personal opinion.

[MRSAMO]

If your looking to buy a 50D it doesn't do HD video. Only the 5DmkII or the 1DmkIV do HD video for the semi-pro and above range and they are way out of your budget and totally not what you need. So you'll be looking at the 500D or 550D.

You forgot the 7D which does 1080p and is the so-called big brother of the 550D which is probably out the OP's budget. I would think the 500D or 550D would be perfect if he chose Canon, or D90 if he chose Nikon.

I don't see what Rocklee means by "Most people that can't be arsed to do post processing buy a Canon". How is this true? Anyone that is serious about photography will process ALL photos, no matter what. By this statement it sounds like you are saying Canon is better just because you don't have to process.

For E.g. Auto white balance is wrong 99% of the time and requires adjustment in PP software e.g. Photoshop/LR. Your thought of an eyedropper on something that "looks grey" could be right 20% of the time, but the other 80% will be wrong. So thats 1 step of processing thats universal.

Anyone that is serious about photography will consider a number of factors, not just a complete reliance on post processing!

For the 90% of people out there if they could get the picture right the first time then Canon would favour their style more than Nikon, that's what I'm saying. Of course, you can set a whole lot of stuff on the camera like contrast, sharpness, saturation etc as well as all the SLR stuff to get a nice result while shooting pictures on any camera. I find that I had to do some post processing on my Nikon, slightly less so on the Canon for general happy snaps.

Anyway, getting off topic, i shoot Canon and i like how it feels in my hands and the ease of use. I found Nikon menu's to confuse me too much and too hard to navigate. Thats why i chose Canon (when i was a n00b) and i've stuck with them.

They are cheaper than Nikon once you start heading into the pro level range of lenses by a mile and they are more widely available in Australia as Funkeymonkey stated. Also a lot more places RENT canon lenses than Nikon lenses.

This argument comes up all the time because people simply have different preferences but Nikon is much easier to use right off the bat, this is backed by so many pros and magazines. Naturally things get easier the longer you use any camera.

I know of the 5 minute limit on HD video and that's OK as it's not something we'd use a lot of. I've looked ats sample videos online, some are fine and some are pretty average. The D90 also doesn't have autofocus on vidoe recording which sucks.

What's the equivalent to a D90 in the canon range, 550D?

While the canon does do 1080, it only does it at 20fps =\

I'm not sure how keen she'll be to get into post processing to be honest. She's IT literate but doesn't have a huge love for spening hours in front of the PC.

Forget auto focusing on any of the V-DSLRs. Most people end up using manual focusing anyway. If this is a big issue for you then you should really get a normal video camera instead and let it do all the work. Some can capture images but is nowhere near as good as DSLRs.

550D does 24fps, 500D does 20fps. 550D is the better model.

Again, I'll keep it simple. Do a search on youtube and vimeo on 550HD samples and D90 samples to get an idea of how each one do video, then ask OP lots of questions

And lastly, bear in mind of the filesize that you will be work with if you buy a Nikon with 12 megapixels or a Canon with 18 megapixels. The larger the file the harder your computer has to work to process each image and the longer you have to wait. The same goes for HD (720p) and Full HD (1080p). The difference in filesize between the 2 is significant especially to those starting out (ie. consumers).

Personally, if its a Canon, I'd invest in the 550D and get a nice zoom lens (ie. 18-200 1.8) and prime lens (50mm 1.8). Having 1080p already on the camera will prepare you for future use on video recording when the time come. Even if that isn't very soon you can still use 720p which IMO is still bloody good. Look up some videos to be convinced.

Another thing you should honestly look at if you really want to make great video more than photos are the micro 4/3 cameras made by Panasonic.

This is a totally different route that's just starting out. If this is the next generation of PnS cameras then I think this technology will do very well. Personally I'd rather go with the companies that's been promoting the best camera technology the longest (dslr).