[andyr300]

Whats the concensus on this model, a good buy?

I was also looking at Nikon, but this live view feature seems like it could be very useful and not present on the cheaper nikons.

Thanks for any help

[mypspname]

is it only live view you are after? then i think 1000D is the cheapest option. but for £100 more you can get 450D , which is any time better than 1000D.

[andyr300]

no, im after a good intro DSLR, was looking at the 450d aswell,cant make my mind up

i thought live view would be a good feature to help me get my shots right? and its missing from the Nikons, except the more expensive ones.

[senu]

Get the 450..

[tapzilla2k]

The 450D is the camera to go for out of the two.
It's better value for money given the extra features on the 450D, and hell even a mint condition 400D is better than the 1000D.

[senu]

Originally Posted by tapzilla2k

The 450D is the camera to go for out of the two.
It's better value for money given the extra features on the 450D, and hell even a mint condition 400D is better than the 1000D.

You dont like the 1000D, then?
It seems a little pointless but I guess the 400D had to die someday and the 450 was meant to coexist with and not replace it

[pixelpixel]

The 450D is the cheaper 40D.

[Munchkinn]

I didn't think the 1000D got very good reviews. I certainly wouldn't buy it.

[RobDickinson]

1000D is a decent camera, without the 450D around it'd be a decent recomendation, its only real drawback is its very limited in RAW framerate and buffer size.

So if your happy shooting jpg in burst then its woth it.

but the 450D isnt all that much more.

[tapzilla2k]

Originally Posted by senu

You dont like the 1000D, then?
It seems a little pointless but I guess the 400D had to die someday and the 450 was meant to coexist with and not replace it

I'm bemused by canon calling it the 1000D. I'm sure it's a good camera, but the 450D does appear to be the better buy. At least until Canon release the next model.

[Yandros]

Originally Posted by tapzilla2k

I'm bemused by canon calling it the 1000D. I'm sure it's a good camera, but the 450D does appear to be the better buy. At least until Canon release the next model.

Reverse numbers system...

xxxxD < xxxD < xxD < xD

As for Liveview, it's mainly useful for when you can't look through the viewfinder (camera very high or low for example). Other than that, it's a marketing move to reassure compact camera buyers that DSLRs aren't scary things.

I'm not quite sure why there are a load of negative comments about the poor 1000D, yet praise is lavished on the Nikon D40.

The D40 is 100 quid cheaper at about £230. The D60/1000D come in at about £320, and then the 450D at about £440. The 1000D is basically a very slightly downgraded 400D (7 vs 9 AF points and a smaller buffer), at a price point that's now competing with the baby Nikons (with, may I point out...no liveview, 3 AF points, and an even worse buffer/frame rate!).

andyr300 - I don't think any DSLR is likely to restrict you as a novice shooter, unless you have very particular needs. For example, if you want to shoots sports, I'd suggest gettting something with a faster framerate, bigger buffer and better AF system. However as a first step, you many find that money spent on lenses, flash, tripods, software...you name it...actually offers better 'bangs for the buck' than the body itself. If you have a pretty good idea what sorts of things you're going to be taking photos of, you'll be able to work out what else you need to buy. If at this stage you really don't have a clue, then I'd suggest a pretty low end body (Sony A200, Nikon D40/D60/Canon 1000D), which may leave you money in the pot for extra toys.

Btw, the D40 just dropped AGAIN, to an all time low of £215, which works out at effectively £140 for the body . If you're looking for a 'dip you toe in the water' DSLR, get that or a 1000D (or Sony A200). If you're looking for one that you'll keep for a few years and you have a fair budget if you get the bug badly..look at the Canon 450D/40D/Nikon D90.

[andyr300]

its fairly likely ill go more budget for the time being and if i get really into it will just upgrade in a few years!

[pixelpixel]

One issue with getting a D40 is your going to have to make sure the lens allows AF (Auto Focus) with the Canon and Sony you will be fine.

I would get down to a shop and try them out. Just see which one fits you. Then after that worry about the rest. No point have shinny shoes when they don't fit.

[RobDickinson]

Does make me laugh as the 1000D is inferior to the 450D its 'crap' and the D40 which is notably inferior is better.

Though the D40 is cheap now, and you can work round most of its limitations, the body motor thing isnt as much of an issue now.

[senu]

Originally Posted by andyr300

its fairly likely ill go more budget for the time being and if i get really into it will just upgrade in a few years!

That is one way to look at it
but
Since you will more than likely stick with a brand ( and buy in to a system)

Hold them first ( dont just go on price) and be aware that the money spent now getting what feels comfortable isnt money wasted
The "how it feels in your hands " is a big decider
Even the 450D is way more VFM than the 350 or 300D were a few years ago

I felt the 1000D was a let down in that it wasnt a lot over the 400D, not that there is anything wrong with it
FWIW I sincerely feel the 450D is actually better..insofar as it is also better than the 400D although all 3 have a similar form factor and build

Be rest assured all ( used well) will give you decent enough photos

[senu]

Originally Posted by RobDickinson

Does make me laugh as the 1000D is inferior to the 450D its 'crap' and the D40 which is notably inferior is better.

Though the D40 is cheap now, and you can work round most of its limitations, the body motor thing isnt as much of an issue now.

I quite like the D40 but I dont laugh but feel dismayed when in trying to praise it, folk just dismiss better cameras out of hand as being poor VFM
It is confusing to folk intending to buy any of them

[Ian_S]

Another thing worth considering with the Canons is that you get Digital Photo Professional as part of the price. Although it has its quirks, it is a full RAW editing software package (for just Canons) and is I understand quite a bit beyond what you get for free with entry level Nikons.

Also if you are on a budget, with Canon you do have 20 years of EF lenses to choose from on fleabay that will all work without having to worry about AF motors etc. Might be worth a look.

As others have said though, from a picture quality perspective it is hard to go wrong these days regardless of choice, so don't fret over it too much. Just go with what you feel comfortable with in your hand.

[senu]

DPP is rather good. It is what comes with all Canons. I use it fairly regularly ( despite having Lightroom
What it lacks in advanced features ( catalouging) It makes up for in useful features , a simple GUI and ability and it encourages you to shoot RAW right from the start
I dont think the Nikons ( entry level or higher have a similarly well endowed software )
DPP , EOS utility ( for remote shooting) and Zoom browser are very handy although they dont replace the need for the likes of Photshop ( or Elements ) for finer PP

[Sorj]

I believe the 1000D is entry level camera. What this does is to pry those compact P&S users to come over to the DSLR market. That is why the entry level Dslr is big business. It is limited in features and possibly for those who just wanna have fun and not too bothered with the advanced settings of a Dslr. Liveview imo has been recently add to entry level DSLRs to ween compact P&S users away. It does have its good uses though.