DSLR Question

[rightseatwonder]

go to craigslist. wait until a new model is announced. with the new models out every 18 months (recently released 50d 7d d5000 etc ) people dump the bodies and keep the glass and the bodies end up on craigslist.

I got a Canon 40D with 17-85 mm kit lens (not the best lens but ok for walk around shooting) (came with orig receipt and warrantee card ) and the body had 300 actuations on it .. in other words the orig owner had taken less than 50 shots( leaves the factory with about 250-300 ive been told) , for $500.00 can. its still $1300-$1800 in the stores.

spend the money on the glass. lots of glass on craislist too

while most bodies in the current generations have somewhat comparable results all things being equal, some do more than others in some areas depending on what you are shooting. Fast paced sports? birds in flight, etc etc. do you need full frame? for instance the 40D does 7.5 frames per second and the auto focus can keep up, great for sports. Others have better noise, in camera vs in lens stabilization etc.

happy shopping.

p.s there is a script you can download to run on a mac that'll tell you the actuations when you plug in the camera, the camera itself will not , and maybe not the owner either! i brought my laptop, and confirmed the count (canon bodies are generally good for 150,000 actuations so not too much of a concern for the regular enthusiast).

[sky's the limit]

I've shot/shoot both Canon's and Nikon's top end gear, and while there' been a perception for years that Nikkor produces the better glass (you got it backwards) I've seen zero evidence of this with direct comparison of my own stuff.

The overwhelming majority of Pro photographers would disagree with you, even those who shoot Nikon grudgingly admit that Canon makes better lenses. But at this point Nikon's lenses aren't *that* far behind, the quality is close enough that the differences don't matter.

I'm not sure where you guys get that from.

I shoot for part of my living, and to a person all of my associates who shoot full-time feel that Nikkor produces the better glass - I've had both top end Canon and Nikkor glass and don't see any real difference in everyday use. In fact, the difference between my D3 and my old 1D MKIII is so huge I could bolt a kit lens to it an feel happy... Even the once Canon dominated sports photography is starting to see Nikon making serious inroads, albeit with much better bodies as you say.

I personally am not brand loyal, whoever makes the best gear I'm happy to use. The quality of the person using it is always going to determine how good/poor the results are. A friend of mine who has shot for a living for 25yrs packs a D40x around for his personal use and takes some of the best shot's you'll see... just goes to show.

From Mr. Rockwell among others.

Nikon and Canon are as good as each other. Each are multi-billion dollar optical companies who have been making some of the world's best optics for numerous consumer, military and industrial applications for decades and decades.

Each makes lenses as parts of multi-million-dollar steppers used in making electronic chips with more precision anything needed for photography, and each make other optics that sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars in other applications. They each make our cameras and lenses out of the same stuff from which they create these other products.

I don't extend this same awe towards discount lensmakers, but I do have this respect for Nikon and Canon and Pentax and Leica and Fuji and Zeiss who've been making much more than cameras for longer than I've been alive. I do have a hat off to Tokina, who are related to Hoya, who are as far as I know the biggest maker of optical glass on the planet, and whose glass is found in parts of everyone's lenses.

They are different, but just as good. Anyone who tries to tell you that one or the other are garbage isn't paying attention, and most likely doesn't have the other to sell you. Nikon and Canon compete so heavily against each other that if one really were better or worse they would have gone out of business long ago.

I would agree.
stl

[BoostedNihilist]

I have a question for you STL.

I haven't purchased an SLR body yet. Where on the coast is a great place to find a used camera? I'm tempted to waste a day searching every pawnshop and camera dealer until I find the perfect deal. Maybe my expectations are a tad on the unrealistic side but I would like to find a slightly antiquated yet acceptable DSLR body for around the 200 350 range.

On the other hand, I have noticed that those minolta 70-210 f4 beercan lenses are readily available as well as cheap! I have also noticed that the maxxum 7d is getting down there in price. I am wondering about your opinion on the in body IS system, seems appealing to me. What is your general opinion on minolta (pre-sony buyout) as a choice. Is 6.1 mp really enough?

I do travel and I intend on packing my choice with me committedly? so metal construction is an absolute must. Also, cheap is an absolute must. It has to hover on that line between something I absolutely adore, yet could drop in the ocean or have stolen from me on a dime and not care too much.

[Doc]

grimey...your opinions of the D3000? It replaced the D60. Thank you...

[AirFrame]

I shoot for part of my living, and to a person all of my associates who shoot full-time feel that Nikkor produces the better glass - I've had both top end Canon and Nikkor glass and don't see any real difference in everyday use. ... Even the once Canon dominated sports photography is starting to see Nikon making serious inroads, albeit with much better bodies as you say.

I think you'll find that what's happening here is typical in the industry as well. Those who own and use Nikons will defend them as having the best, and those who own and use Canons will defend Canons. You're a Nikon owner, and while claiming that Nikon makes better glass, you immediately qualify that with the statement that "you can't really see the difference." Canon once dominated sports photography? As a sports photographer, I still see a sea of white lenses at events... And none of them are Pentax (who also uses white on their "pro" lenses). The unfortunate bit is that consumers are buying expensive gear now too... I see as many high end Nikon and Canon setups in the stands as I do on the sidelines. Makes it a little difficult to sell photos these days.

I'm not particularly brand loyal either, having owned both Nikon and Canon. But while the differences are slight, they are there. Nikon definitely has the edge in bodies, and Canon in lenses. The gap in body technology is certainly greater than in lenses, and that's probably why people mistakenly consider the package as a whole as an indicator of the quality of just the lenses.

I'm happy shooting either.

[raven54]

I own a D60, still fairly new with DSLR's, but very happy with the results so far. I grabbed a 55-200 VR lens which is amazing. Glass can get expensive for the D60 as it needs lenses with their own autofocus motor built in. I do a lot of shooting and have a lot of fun with the camera.

[Guido]

I like to take pictures!

[BoostedNihilist]

I did it! I found a deal I simply couldn't pass up and I am now the happy and proud new owner of my first digital SLR.

I went with the sony a700. Here is a video infomercial. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi9HGxorFvo

I went with it for the in body IS system. I picked up some f4 glass (28-85 and 70-210) and have a bid on an f3.5-4.5 17-35.

This camera is a really nice piece. Magnesium body, fully weather sealed and it is HUGE. It dwarfs the xti I was considering and feels a LOT nicer in the hand. I believe it stacks up nicely against a 40d. Some sony fans (like fanboy type) would contend that it is a better overall piece.. who knows. What I do know is that I can get new firmware for it which is a mega plus.

The layout ergonomically speaking is wonderful. I haven't had an SLR since the manual winder days, and for a brief period I was happy with a canon a2e.. however this thing feels very advanced by comparison. White balance, ISO, auto lock, meter mode, focus mode and manual focus are all capable of being actuated by the thumb with your eye planted in its piece. It has dual control wheels for aperture and shutter speed. The LCD screen on this thing blows my mind. It has a super contrast ratio and is very visible.. a charm to look at. I plan on picking up the vertical grip and upgrading my telephoto to a 'G' series lens after I am out of school this june! I can't wait to hit the airshow circuit this summer! (and float down the amazon taking pictures of tucans and monkeys... COME ON JUNE!)

The final push over the edge was the fact that lens and shutter had this bad boy on for $699. That is a sweet price for this camera. When it was fresh it retailed for 1400+ so I am very happy with my bargain find on this piece...

Anyways, thanks to all those who helped me along my way. I will post some photos to share with you all when I get some good light happening here (fucking winter)

[sky's the limit]

Congratulations Boosted!

Now let's see some of your shots! I'm interested to see how you find it after a couple thousand frames worth, looks to be a great little unit.

stl

[Doc]

Just bought a lightly used Nikon D200. Hasn't arrived on the door step yet. Can't wait. It's WAY more camera than I'll ever need, but the price was right, and I'm not too likely to outgrow the beast. Now, I'm lens hunting. I'd like to cover the 35mm equivalent of 28-200mm, with a 35 1.8 prime. I have a really mint Vivitar Series 1 zoom, which I'm told will meter with this camera. Any suggestions eagerly anticipated.

[Tubthumper]

A lot of good points here, STL and AirFrame. Nikon has a definate edge over Canon on their WA lenses. As for body differences...???... well, I can't say the differences are enough to tell the difference in any photo, (which is where the rubber meets the road)....or who took them...or to make me switch to Nikon. I can't afford to switch anyway, too much invested in Canon gear. I have tried both, and have taken the images home to see on the 'big screen', and have seen that differences, if any, are best seen by the 'pixel peepers', which I only become occasionally, and only when needed. Canon has a slightly better JPG engine, but in shooting RAW, no difference until you get to iso 6400, where Nikon has the edge. When people often ask me about DSLR shopping, I tell them to check out Canon and Nikon, (ignore the rest), and see which of the two you're comfortable with. I also say never let a Nikon shooter tell you to stay away from Canon, and vice-versa. An aviation shooter named Jeremy Boyd out-shoots most aviation photographers I've seen, and all he uses is Canon's EOS-1D....mk1....an old 4MP camera! I currently still have an old 20D, but mainly use two 1D mk3s, the best cameras I've ever owned or used, for my style of work and shooting.

There are good gear reviews at http://www.fredmiranda.com which are worth checking out.

For those who'd like to see an excellent aviation photography thread, with over 15500 replies, go here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/600984/606

[BoostedNihilist]

Every used a sony though? I would be interested in which experiences you have which would cause you to steer people away from great equipment...

[Tubthumper]

I'm sure they take great images, although I doubt the lenses/AF speed/AF acuracy in low light, build quality, range of lenses and other equipment will ever be what Canon and Nikon have available. I've seen the difference between Sony's 24 MP camera and Canons EOS-Ds mk3 at only 21MP, and the Canon was better, without even pixel-peeping to see it. However you have to pay additionally larger amount of $$$.

[BoostedNihilist]

Keep in mind that sony users have access to minolta legacy glass... sony does not have a full range as of yet but they are in development. Most of the aftermarket manufacturers make their lenses for alpha mount... and those who are upgrading from a legacy collection get the benefit of in body IS which is an extra cost with the lens support of which you speak (in regards to canon and nikon)

Sony has fixed some of their high ISO noise issues with firmware updates. Many nikons use sony sensors...

[Tubthumper]

I agree, in body IS would be nice. I'm sure Canon won't do it, though. With that, I think the a700 with Sigma's 120-300 f2.8 could be a killer combination. Looking forward to seeing some pics from you, let's keep this thread rolling!