I want a DSLR but ?

[cherokee1111]

basic point and press frustrates me but so does manually having to adjust focus/exposure etc etc as I dont understand it all so I need something inbetween that I can learn with. Do you think the Panasonic FZ28 or FZ38 would be right?
P.S whats a superzoom camera? (told you I didnt understand)

[OrbitalPete]

I should point out that DSLRs offer everything from fully automatic point and shoot behaviour to fully manual, and several steps in between. You can easily change which settings you sue as you learn, and to be quite honest it's easy to get to grips with the basics.

As far as focussing - almost all lenses are autofocus these days, but you can switch to manual on them if you wish. Most people find themselves using autofocus most of the time with manual focus for certain situations where the autofocus is no good.

Superzooms are cameras which have large SLR-like lenses but offer the behaviour of a normal compact. Some also offer more SLR type behaviour, but the question then becomes why not just get an SLR with the associated step up in flexibilitiy and control. Super Zoom Digital Cameras

[andy1249]

basic point and press frustrates me but so does manually having to adjust focus/exposure etc etc as I dont understand it all so I need something inbetween that I can learn with.

Get the SLR and get this at the same time ,

Understanding Exposure: How to Shoot Great Photographs with a Film or Digital Camera: Amazon.co.uk: Bryan Peterson: Books

Its a magazine style book approx 110 pages showing you how to use the manual mode on any camera properly and is one of the best tutorial books out there.

[cherokee1111]

Thanks guys so you wouldnt rate that Panasonic over an SLR? in that case (remember I know very little at this point) whats a good SLR that will be good for me now and in 2 years?

[eddiewood]

Originally Posted by cherokee1111

basic point and press frustrates me but so does manually having to adjust focus/exposure etc etc as I dont understand it all so I need something inbetween that I can learn with. Do you think the Panasonic FZ28 or FZ38 would be right?
P.S whats a superzoom camera? (told you I didnt understand)

Go to Jessops and play with a dSLR on auto. After buying the one that you like, you take all the time you want to learn how to come off auto.

[cherokee1111]

Originally Posted by eddiewood

Go to Jessops and play with a dSLR on auto. After buying the one that you like, you take all the time you want to learn how to come off auto.

sounds a good plan eddiewood, thanks, same question for you then, whats a good SLR for my knowledge now and to keep me happy over next 5 years?

[OrbitalPete]

Most people agree that the best entry level line of SLRs at the moment are the Sony offerings. See this thread for lots of info: AVF Sony Alpha thread pt 4

The A200 in particular is one of their old line but can be picked up now for £200ish and is a very capable little number.

As Eddie said - it's worth going to a shop and playing with different models to get a feel for them. You'll find they all have the same kind of shooting modes - the only real differences will be number of MP, what level of ISO they can go to, screen types and whether they do video.

MP are largely not important unless you're printing A3+ size prints. Anything 10MP ish is more than enough. A good 6MP camera is still a very viable option. Quality optics make more of a difference than megapixels.

ISO is important, but there aren't really any bad SLRs for the common ISOs up to 800.

Screen type, live view and video recording are all, in my opinion, irrelevant. The viewfinder is your friend on an SLR, and while all those bells and whistles may be of use in some circumstances, they're not deal breakers. Video is an exception perhaps, but unless you're paying £1000+ for your body it's not something you should be looking at; a cheap camcorder will outclass a cheap DSLR for video hands down.

[RobDickinson]

Originally Posted by cherokee1111

Thanks guys so you wouldnt rate that Panasonic over an SLR? in that case (remember I know very little at this point) whats a good SLR that will be good for me now and in 2 years?

The Pany is convinient but limited.

An SLR can grow with you (as your bank balance shrinks).

Just about any dSLR takes a superb picture look at budgets and len's and how they feel / operate in your hands.

[mrpink123]

Originally Posted by OrbitalPete

Most people agree that the best entry level line of SLRs at the moment are the Sony offerings. See this thread for lots of info: AVF Sony Alpha thread pt 4

I am a Sony user myself, and would definitely recommend the A200. It is end of line though, so you will need to grab one quick. Avoid the new models (the A230, A330 and A380), they are overpriced. The A200, and to a lesser extent the A300 and A350, offer outstanding value. If you don't need liveview (and I doubt you do), the A200 is a great buy.

Having said all that, go into a store and handle one, and also compare it to the budget models from Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus etc. See how they feel in your hands.

[andy1249]

Thanks guys so you wouldnt rate that Panasonic over an SLR?

I have a panasonic FZ28 as a compact , for times when lugging and SLR around is not an option ( like hiking up the heros climb on the great wall , or other strenous climbs and walks where you want to travel light ) and its a very capable little camera with the equivalent of 27mm to 500mm or so on the zoom.

It also does 720p video and with an 8GB SDHC card can take a couple of hours worth !! Thats not to be sniffed at.

The problem with all compacts though , and this goes across the board , is that they dont do high ISO's very well , meaning they are quite limited in low light situations , like inside the church at a wedding for instance.

The much larger sensor on an SLR means it can take better quality photos with a lower pixel count in much lower light situations.

Another thing to consider when going the SLR route is that you are buying into a body + lens system , so while the Sony's , and the Olympus etc are all very decent cameras , the lens range and price is not nearly as friendly as the two major players , which are Canon and Nikon.

With an SLR you need to factor in the price and availability of lenses other than the kit lens , as the kit lens is not likely to be your only lens throughout the life of the camera.

I have to agree with all the posters above , liveview is over-rated and seldom used on an SLR , holding a compact out in front of you to take pictures is fine , they are not that heavy , holding an slr in front of you to take pictures gives you sore arms very quickly.

[eddiewood]

Originally Posted by andy1249

Another thing to consider when going the SLR route is that you are buying into a body + lens system , so while the Sony's , and the Olympus etc are all very decent cameras , the lens range and price is not nearly as friendly as the two major players , which are Canon and Nikon.

With an SLR you need to factor in the price and availability of lenses other than the kit lens , as the kit lens is not likely to be your only lens throughout the life of the camera.

*sigh* Here we go again....

There are plenty of lenses available for the Sony. Any Minolta AF lens made for the last 20+ years works on the Sony Alpha's. Of course you also have plenty of Tamron, Sigma etc., lenses available.

What people who bang on about lenses don't realise is that there are actually very few Nikon lenses available that AF on the budget Nikons. I suspect that there are more lenses available that AF on any Sony body than on a budget Nikon.

You have to pay a LOT of money to get a new Nikon body with an AF motor and then you have to pay again for VR lenses, the Sony has IS in it's body and any lens is stabilised as a result...

It is this that makes the A200 a bargain.

[mrpink123]

Originally Posted by eddiewood

*sigh* Here we go again....

There are plenty of lenses available for the Sony. Any Minolta AF lens made for the last 20+ years works on the Sony Alpha's. Of course you also have plenty of Tamron, Sigma etc., lenses available.

What people who bang on about lenses don't realise is that there are actually very few Nikon lenses available that AF on the budget Nikons. I suspect that there are more lenses available that AF on any Sony body than on a budget Nikon.

You have to pay a LOT of money to get a new Nikon body with an AF motor and then you have to pay again for VR lenses, the Sony has IS in it's body and any lens is stabilised as a result...

It is this that makes the A200 a bargain.

I have to agree with eddie on this one. While it may be true that there are fewer top end lenses on the Sony mount, how many amateurs is that ever going to affect? At the budget end, ebay is littered with old Minolta glass, all of which autofocuses, and can be had for a relative song. There is no problem at all with getting lenses for a Sony.

[eddiewood]

Originally Posted by cherokee1111

sounds a good plan eddiewood, thanks, same question for you then, whats a good SLR for my knowledge now and to keep me happy over next 5 years?

One that you like to hold in your hands. I liked the A200, you might hate it.

Any budget dSLR will give excellent results, just buy the one that feels right to you.

[Garf]

Originally Posted by eddiewood

What people who bang on about lenses don't realise is that there are actually very few Nikon lenses available that AF on the budget Nikons. I suspect that there are more lenses available that AF on any Sony body than on a budget Nikon.

*sigh* Here we go again....

Full list of lenses that will AF on a 'budget' Nikon - quite a few there, and enough for most people I would imagine ?


Nikkor:

AF-S DX 10-24mm f/3,5-4,5 ED G New

AF-S DX 12-24mm f/4.0G ED-IF

AF-S 14-24 mm f/2,8G ED

AF-S DX 16-85mm f/3,5 - 5,6G ED VR

AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF

AF-S DX 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF

AF-S DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G

AF-S VR DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G

AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF

AF-S VR DX 18-105 f/3.5-5.6G ED

AF-S DX 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF

AF-S VR DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED

AF-S 24-70 mm f/2,8G ED

AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

AF-S VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF

AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

AF-S 35mm f/1.8G New

AF-S 50 mm f/1,4G

AF-S DX 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED

AF-S VR 55–200mm f/4–5.6G IF-ED

AF-S 60mm f/2.8G Micro

AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF

AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G

AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF

AF-S VR 105mm f/2.8G Micro

AF-S VR 200mm f/2.0G ED-IF

AF-S VR 200-400mm f/4.0G ED-IF

AF-I 300mm f/2.8D IF-ED

AF-S 300mm f/2.8D IF-ED

AF-S 300mm f/4.0D ED-IF

AF-S VR 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF

AF-I 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED

AF-S 400mm f/2.8D ED-IF

AF-S VR 400mm f/2,8G ED

AF-I 500mm f/4.0D IF-ED

AF-S 500mm f/4.0D ED-IF

AF-S VR 500mm f/4G ED

AF-I 600mm f/4.0D IF-ED

AF-S 600mm f/4.0D ED-IF

AF-S VR 600mm f/4G ED



Sigma:

4,5mm f/2,8 EX DC HSM

10mm f/2,8 EX DC HSM

10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM

10-20mm f3,5 EX DC HSM New

12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM

14mm f/2.8 EX

17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 EX DG

17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro HSM

18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 DC HSM

18-50mm f2,8-4,5 DC OS HSM New

18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro HSM

18-125mm f/3.8-5.6 DC OS HSM

18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS

18-250mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM New

24-70mm f2,8 EX DG HSM

30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM

50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM

50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM

50-200mm f4-5,6 DC OS HSM New

50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG

55-200mm f/4-5.6 DC HSM

70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro

70-300mm f/4,0-5,6 DG Macro

70-300mm f/4,0-5,6 DG APO Macro

80-200mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro

80-400mm f/4-5.6 EX OS

100-300mm f/4.0 EX DG

120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG

120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS APO HSM

150mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro

150-500mm f5-6.3 DG OS APO HSM

180mm f/3.5 EX DG Macro

300mm f/2.8 EX DG APO HSM

300-800mm f/5.6 EX DG APO

500mm f/4.5 EX DG HSM APO

800mm f/5.6 EX DG APO


Tamron:

10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II LD New

17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II

18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II

18-270mm f/3,5 -6,3 Di II VC LD

28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD

28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC

70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD MACRO

70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro

90mm f/2.8 Di Macro II


Tokina:

12-24 f/4 AT-X 124 PRO DX II New

[eddiewood]

Originally Posted by Garf

*sigh* Here we go again....

Full list of lenses that will AF on a 'budget' Nikon - quite a few there, and enough for most people I would imagine ?


Nikkor:

So I was right, fewer than those available for the Sony "A" mount then.