[nikonuser11]

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.

[nikonuser11]

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.

[nikonuser11]

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: http://www.avforums.com/forums/digit...ad-pt-4-a.html

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: http://www.avforums.com/forums/digit...ad-pt-4-a.html

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.

[andy1249]

Im not getting into any of this fanboyism, but I stand by this ,

the lens range and price is not nearly as friendly as the two major players , which are Canon and Nikon.

as these two have lenses available from reputable dealers pretty much anywhere , including high street shops , for very very reasonable prices , to suit all pockets , this is not the case with the others ,

As for Konica Minolta , hunting down second hand defunct lenses of questionable condition on ebay is no way for a Dslr beginner to start out.

IS is another issue , its something I personally prefer in the lenses , for one thing its not needed in a lot of cases , such as wide angle etc., it really becomes useful at long focal lengths.

It can soften the image in a lot of cases and should never be on while the camera is on a tripod. As my personal preference is landscapes I personally dont want the likes of IS in the camera body.

[senu]

Priceless

Im waiting for a Canon compatible lens list. ..( ducks for cover )

In truth most folk (even enthusiasts) have a limited collection of lenses to cover their main interests
As such brand preference becomes less of a deal maker as even the less mentioned Olympus / Pentax range and non-DSLR range Eg Panansonic G1 have lenses to cater for all aspirations
It would also seem that no mainstream shop will stock a lot of lenses for any one brand.. hence the beaty of online shopping
It is true though that some lenses are easier to get hold of than others with certain brands ( and some cost relativity more)
but
Any decent budget DSLR is going to advance the OP in the quest to " go manual"
and
That book " understanding exposure" really is an easy to read book that demystifies use of such settings..

[senu]

Originally Posted by andy1249

Im not getting into any of this fanboyism, but I stand by this ,
as these two have lenses available from reputable dealers pretty much anywhere , including high street shops , for very very reasonable prices , to suit all pockets , this is not the case with the others ,

As for Konica Minolta , hunting down second hand defunct lenses of question able condition on ebay is no way for a Dslr beginner to start out.

This is true
Fanboyism as such is not to be taken that seriously
It is mildly amusing and in some ways informative

and I also agree with your point on Live view.. Ive never used it on my Canon 40D..

[Garf]

One of your comments was "actually very few Nikon lenses available that AF on the budget Nikons."

Wouldn't call that list 'very few', and I am sure no one could fit them all in one camera bag

Whether that list is less than for the A mount means nothing to me - there are more than enough lenses available for anyone.

Must be honest, I rarely venture into these 'fanboy' threads as they get a bit boring after a while. These conversations have been done to death so many times.

I'd rather spend my time using the camera than discussing it on a forum

[senu]

Be that as it may
I would suggest that the posts above are relevant and more than likely going to benefit any potential new user or any one considering a change of brand come to an informed decision

[mrpink123]

Originally Posted by andy1249

As for Konica Minolta , hunting down second hand defunct lenses of questionable condition on ebay is no way for a Dslr beginner to start out.

Well, it might not be for everyone, but that's exactly how I started out. Got some real bargains too, and developed a love for the classic 80s Minolta glass.

Anyway, I certainly don't want to come across as a fanboy, and I don't believe I am one. I can talk about Sony stuff from experience, so I give my opinion on that. But I'm sure the OP will be happy with any modern SLR, be it Nikon, Sony or any other brand.

[OrbitalPete]

*Gathers round with nostalgic memories of a 10 year old schoolboy*

Fight! Fight! Fight!

Seriously though , can we all agree now that all the manufacturers have viable entry level systems and lenses, and it's down to personal preference?

[eddiewood]

Originally Posted by andy1249

Im not getting into any of this fanboyism, but I stand by this ,



as these two have lenses available from reputable dealers pretty much anywhere , including high street shops , for very very reasonable prices , to suit all pockets , this is not the case with the others ,

As for Konica Minolta , hunting down second hand defunct lenses of question able condition on ebay is no way for a Dslr beginner to start out.

The point is that regardless of what brand a new user purchases, they will not run into any problems obtaining lenses for it. To suggest otherwise is simply misleading those looking for a cheap dSLR.

The number of lenses available is not an issue with any brand and should even come into the equation unless they are professionals at the top end.

[eddiewood]

Originally Posted by Garf

One of your comments was "actually very few Nikon lenses available that AF on the budget Nikons."

I of course meant it in relative terms to the huge amount of Nikon lenses available. There are very few of *them* that AF on budget Nikons.

I used the point to illustrate that people bang on about a lack of lenses for the Sony and then go on to recommend the D60 Yet there are MORE AF lenses available for the Sony than there are for the D60!

Hopefully that clarifies what I was trying to get across

[senu]

I dont use Sony but I have had one for use .. the old A 100
And gave my friend a hand with his K-M Dynax 7D.. Very solidly built

Sony would do well to develop a few affordable and versatile lenses as they have made remarkable headway since the early days of A 100
The K-M lens heritage is alive and well but users should be able to count on Sony to provide newer ones
One of the Brands earlier issues was the fear that Sony would not stick around for long . Now it seems clear they are a force to reckon with , Sony own brand Lenses would reinforce that

[nikonuser11]

Thanks Guys, you all lost me on the lense issue, fav for me so far is the Canon 450D with kit lense, it seems to tick a lot of boxes immediately for short and long term. Any views on it here?

[senu]

Originally Posted by cherokee1111

Thanks Guys, you all lost me on the lense issue, fav for me so far is the Canon 450D with kit lense, it seems to tick a lot of boxes immediately for short and long term. Any views on it here?

The camera itself is Ace
The Kit lens is no longer Canons Achilles heel ( Canons previous kit lens was underwhelming TBH) as it is not bad for the price
It wil not end up being your last lens.. but it is more than usable .. till you yearn for better

[andy1249]

The point is that regardless of what brand a new user purchases, they will not run into any problems obtaining lenses for it. To suggest otherwise is simply misleading those looking for a cheap dSLR

I just said that it should be taken into account , Im not misleading anyone , on the contrary Im trying to prevent that happening , buying a body without looking up the price and availability of lenses could lead to a nasty shock.

With a DSLR its not just the price of the body that has to be considered, what looks cheap at the outset doesnt look so cheap at all when the lens and accessory prices are taken into account.

[OrbitalPete]

Originally Posted by cherokee1111

Thanks Guys, you all lost me on the lense issue, fav for me so far is the Canon 450D with kit lense, it seems to tick a lot of boxes immediately for short and long term. Any views on it here?

I really like my 450. Does everything you need it to, with a few extra bonus features thrown in. Great ISO performance up to 800, useable at 1600. And obviously a huge back catalogue of lenses to play with. The kit that comes with it is pretty nice from what I've heard - I bought body only though so can't really comment.

[senu]

Guys
In case you had not noticed
The OP ( who all this is meant to help) appears to find the lens issue a tad bewildering

There is no doubt that Buying a DSLR is not just about body but also lens availability and affordability.
Also That one starts wth a budget body does not mean aspiration will not lead to upgrading so it is relevant to keep the lens issue in view
I suspect personal brand preference will get in the way of what defines availability and affordability

As such, having stated our views,... What does anyone think of the 450Ds kit lens in relation to buying it..

PS: Orbital Pete was posting same time as I was.