Since I won't be shelling out cash for a hunting lease this year I have some extra fun money.

I'm in the market for a new DSLR camera, no real brand preference. I photograph for fun, so I don't need any super fancy wedding photographer camera but I've reached the limits of my old Fuji camera.

Budget is <$1000 out the door.


Edit: it will be for this outdoors project.

[This message has been edited by Max06 (edited 8/10/2012 4:55p).]

Technology has come a long way. Your lens is really where the quality separation is. If you can get any kind of image stabilization on your primary lens, it really helps. You also want to try to get low Fstop, but that'll be hard on a $1000 budget, unfortunately.

Canon, Nikon are the big two, but Pentax, Olympus, Sony and others make decent cameras.

Some of the very high end point and shoot cameras might be an option if you are sure you'll never invest in better lenses in the future.

My wife got into it years ago, and now she has a side business photographing pets, dogs mostly. $2500 camera bodies and $2000 lenses could be in your future, too.

My wife has a Canon Rebel dslr and they should be within your price range. It takes pretty dange good photos. I've sunk a few $$ into extra lenses for her "hobby" over the past few years.

I just recently upgraded to a DSLR myself. Mine is the Nikon D5100 and I've been very happy with it so far. That one runs about $650 with the 18-55 mm lens. I'm seriously looking at adding a 200 or 300 mm lens specifically for wildlife photography which will add another $150-300 to the package. Best Buy has a "deal" where they will knock $100 off the regular $250 price tag for the matching 200 mm lens if you buy it the same day as your camera. The truth is you should be able to find this 200 mm lens for $150 so this isn't a huge deal but it is a good price if you want the package and plan on taking advantage of the 0% interest thing they do.

A must have is a fast memory card. I think mine is something like 92 mb/sec. They cost more but dramatically improve the performance of any camera.

The two major brands you'll have to choose from are Nikon and Cannon. I had a hard time distinguishing between the two and found it pretty much just comes down to personal preference. Some people say that Nikon lenses are better, but I doubt that anyone but a very serious photographer could tell the difference.

I wouldn't get too hung up or pay much extra for extra ISO or megapixels. They are all so high now that a slight increase is not going to be all that noticeable.

So, out the door you should be:
Camera - $600-700
200 mm Zoom Lens - $150
High performance memory card - $50
UV Filters (one for each lens) - $30

...plus tax, you're right at your $1k budget.

Oh, and plan to take a photography class. I'm doing one right now in Austin through the Parks and Rec department. It was something like $150 for six classes, three hours each. Pretty good deal and you will get a lot more out of your camera. Yeah, they take great pictures in auto but so do "point and shoots". If you're going to spend the money on the camera, I'd highly recommend you learn how to take advantage of the capabilities.

Ask guitarsoup in the nerdery. I personally have a T3i with a 28-135 IS USM as my carry around lens. Depending on what you're planning on doing you'll want a lens that has a good middle range, or broad range, such as the 22-135 IS USM, 18-135 IS, or the 18-200mm IS. All of those lenses will run you $400+. My bag as a 50-250mm IS Zoom lens for long shots, and a 28-135mm all around, and I'm about to pick up a 50mm (nifty fifty). Realistically it all depends on what you want to do with it, what lenses will work. However, never skimp on the lens, it can affect picture quality. That doesn't mean buy the best, but don't go "budget" either unless you just want an expensive point and shoot.

The other thing is Nikon vs. Canon. Which in the nerd world equates to Glock vs. XD. I, along with my friends that have DSLRs, prefer Canon. I shot Canon when I shot 35mm. They're both good cameras though, some times it boils down to feel. A good all around rig can run you $500 (Canon T3) to whatever you want to pay. My T3i and its current lens will run somewhere in the $8-900 range.

You'll enjoy it. Welcome to the club preemptively.

There used to be an excellent digital camera thread on the nerdery. It was stickied for a long time

One more thing, when it comes to the bag, dont skimp either. It an expensive piece of equipment, protect it. On that same token do NOT buy the branded bag, such as the Canon or Nikon bag. When you travel it screams "steal me". Tamrac and Lowepro are tried and true brands. I have a Tamrac Express 7 sling bag. I really enjoy the sling style because it's quick access.

The nerdery thread was quite overwhelming, that's why I asked here.

My wife has prosumer stuff, a Nikon D700 and about 5 large worth of lenses at least. Bunch of filters and stuff, light meter, couple of big flashes, several tripods, a remote trigger, battery expansion pack, an older backup SLR body, a quality 35mm film body if she wants to go old school, about 4 camera bags and backpacks, etc.

THEN she bought Photoshop and about a half dozen other editing programs, a macbook pro, a bunch of backup drives, and I got her a 27" true color professional graphic dispay.

Don't even ask me how much all that costs. She works, and earns about as much as I do, so I can't complain.

I'm just warning you, it can start small, then you "need" something else, ad infinitum.

Also, insurance on it isn't that expensive. And a big HEAVY tripod really improves the quality of still pictures.

I carried about half that stuff all over Glacier National Park and the Smoky Mountains...

[This message has been edited by MouthBQ98 (edited 8/10/2012 5:39p).]

Guitar soup is a great resource in the Nerdery.

Also, 80% of professional photographers use either a Nikon or Cannon, so I would narrow your search to those brands.

I have a nikon D50 that I love. Got it and three lenses for cheap at a pawn shop. But if I had it to do over again I would go Canon. Only because I see a lot more used canon lenses floating around. For regulars like us there is no diffferece between the two to me. One thing of note the newer lower end bodies don't have the auto focus motor in them, they are in the lenses. Which means that old lenses wont auto focus on new bodies. Find a used body with a low picture count and sink all your cash into lenses. And get lightroom to start with for post processing. I have never needed Photoshop to fix something.

[This message has been edited by aggiegunslinger (edited 8/10/2012 5:46p).]

quote:

---

I have a nikon D50 that I love. Got it and three lenses for cheap at a pawn shop. But if I had it to do over again I would go Canon. Only because I see a lot more used canon lenses floating around. For regulars like us there is no diffferece between the two to me. One thing of note the newer lower end bodies don't have the auto focus motor in them, they are in the lenses. Which means that old lenses wont auto focus on new bodies. Find a used body with a low picture count and sink all your cash into lenses. And get lightroom to start with for post processing. I have never needed Photoshop to fix something.

[This message has been edited by aggiegunslinger (edited 8/10/2012 5:46p).]

---

Some brands have AF & IS in the body, some in the lens. Do your research. The AF/IS in body systems make for smaller, cheaper lenses. Also take a look at an advanced point and shoot, the Canon G12 does everything my Rebel DSLR does except change lenses (with a 140 mm tele limit), for the price of the DSLR body alone, in a package that you can almost put in your pocket.

I bought thr SLR for sports, but kids are grown, so I am now over camera-ed..

One thing to look at, make sure a DSLR is the way to go for you. Guitarsoup will even admit to not wanting to lug his DSLR around with him, but rather has a "Point and shoot" that will do most of the shots that he wants to take. A lot of the PnSs out there have most of the settings of the DSLRs and will run a fair chunk less. Also, look at some of the newer 4/3 cameras that are out.

I have a fairly advanced PnS camera and it's taken some great pictures but I am finding more and more often that I can't get the exact picture I want due to the limits of the camera.

Check this thread out:

http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=814020&page=1&forum_id=30

I just bought a Nikon D7000 a few weeks ago. Probably a little over your budget, but they have a D5100 that is getting good reviews too, as well as the D3100/3200.

[This message has been edited by Matt Schwab (edited 8/10/2012 7:52p).]

Take a long look mirrorless cameras. I carry a prosumer with more money in lenses than I should but I think the future is in mirrorless.

Not to hijack the thread but what about cameras for shooting wildlife? If I were sitting in a bow blind I wouldn't want there to be any shutter noise.

[This message has been edited by AGCP3 (edited 8/10/2012 8:26p).]

quote:

---

Check this thread out:

http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=814020&page=1&forum_id=30

I just bought a Nikon D7000 a few weeks ago. Probably a little over your budget, but they have a D5100 that is getting good reviews too, as well as the D3100/3200.

---

I already checked out that thread (as previously mentioned) and it's WAYYYYY too much information for me.

Dubi is right. I was referring to the new nikons.

quote:

---

A lot of the PnSs out there have most of the settings of the DSLRs and will run a fair chunk less

---

This!

I have two amazing landscape pictures (11x14) from Paradise Valley, MT hanging on my office wall that were taken with an under $300 point and shoot camera. I'm quickly finding that I'm going to need to invest some money in lenses to get the pictures I want, whereas you may be able to get a really advanced point and shoot that is all you'll ever need.

To bring this back to the OB; it's sort of like rifle vs. bow hunting. Both will get the job done and 95% of people out there won't appreciate the difference in the final product, it's just about what you are after. It's a different experience when you switch the dial to "M" and start shooting vs. leaving it in "A" and letting the camera do all the work (i.e. spray and pray).

As far as wildlife photos go - here's what I've learned. Priorities are light weight, quick to turn on, and good zoom. This is why I'm thinking I need a 300 mm. Also, these new ones have vibration reduction built into the lens and the camera so you can shoot at really slow speeds without a tripod and still get good pictures. I think this will be important for quick wildlife pics, but I don't know for sure.

I'd say go for it and spend the money. You won't out grow a good DSLR, but you may outgrow a fancy, glorified point and shoot. The entry price is about the same but you have limitless capabilities with the DSLR. I'm still very new to this compared to some on here but I'm enjoying learning about the details of photography and am shooting some really cool pictures I never would have shot with a PnS.

What I'm saying is I already have a good, fancy PnS camera and have outgrown it. This is why I'm looking at DSLR's.

I've taken great photos, award winning actually, with the PnS but I've gotten to the point where I want more fine tuning than is possible with the PnS.

We did this a couple of years ago. We have a Nikon, purchased through a package deal at Best Buy. If you are patient and give it a couple of weeks while you research the brands and features, the package for you will come available.

Cannon and Nikon are very much equals on photo quality. One thing to consider is the camera "menu" navigation. That, and the rotatable screen (Nikon was only one with it at the time) was the deciding factor for us. The rotating screen almost seemed gimmicky, until we actually got to use it. Very handy.

Also, Image Stabilization in your lenses for us regular folks is key. Also invest a few dollars in a collapsable mono pod/stick. Don't have to go overboard with this at all. We went to Carlsbad Caverns and took a few really cool pics, but had it on super slow shutter speed. Would have had a lot more if we'd had the stick, as on that slow shutter speed it was hard as heck to hold it steady for the duration the shutter was open.

Nikon or Canon..

I have a rebel T2i. I also agree with an above statement that really, the lens is one of the most important things.

Technology has improved so much that a rebel T2i like mine (500 dollar camera) is better than any pro used only 5-7 years ago. If I were to get a camera for that price range, Id get whichever canon or nikon I thought felt right for around 500-600, and then Id spend some money on a good walkaround lens (28-105 or so) and a fixed 50mm lens with a low f-stop.

Id stick with canon or nikon, just for the selection of lenses and accessories.

Max, after much research of my own last spring, I finally decided to get back into the SLR game and for my purposes I ended up going with a Nikon D5100 package. I got the two lenses and sometime hopefully in the not too distant future I can get a good fast wider angle lens, but for now it has been great and a lot of fun.

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/SLR1250.htm?bct=%3Bcimirrorless-digital-cameras

Thats close to if not the same price I got mine at and it was the best deal I could find on that combo.

1. buy a body only, the 'kit' lenses are not very good.

2. 50mm f1.8 lenses are made out of plastic, and cost around $100. they are fragile, but take some of the best pictures.

3.if you can't afford expensive glass, you can always rent from lensrental.com, and other similar sites. its better to save up for better lenses later, than to make do with poor lenses now.

4. read the manual. front. to. back. read bryan Peterson. read Scott kelby. look up 'adorama one on one' on YouTube. check out froknowsphoto.com. I have the kindle app on my phone, so my camera books are always at my disposal.

5. Google 'sunny 16' rule

6. learn to use manual mode

7. shoot in RAW.

8. shoot often.

9. never use the built in flash. buy a speedlight, (even the cheap Chinese knockoffs are decent). read the strobist blog.

10. buy an extra battery, keep it charged.

11. Flickr is your friend. many of the photos include the metadata that explains all the settings used.

Wife has a D3000 and bought an extra fixed 35mm lens with a 1.8 f/stop. She uses that lens about 95% of the time and takes great pictures b/c she learned how to use the camera. Like others said it's more about the lenses and knowing what you're doing than the body.

It is a well known fact that Canon makes the best lenses in the business. Camera bodies are all pretty equal but glass is what seperated the good from the best.

Just get yourself a pretty basic body and spend all your money on glass. When in doubt compare canon L series lense to what you can afford.

If you're dead set against the mirrorless options it really comes down to Canon and Nikon. Go to a store and pick them up to see which ergonomics you like best. If it doesn't feel right all the time you're likely to not use it as much. Canon vs. Nikon, Toyota vs. Ford. You really can't go wrong.

I did this and liked the feel of the Canon and where the shutter button was vs Nikon. They're so clise it really is all about feel.

^^^^^^^^^
Some of the best advice so far. Go handle different cameras. They will all feel a little different in your hands, and the ergonomics are very important in taking good pictures.

[This message has been edited by Hwy30eAst (edited 8/11/2012 7:38a).]

For someone who always complains about being poor, I'm not sure this purchase is a wise idea.

Unless you've reviewed my financial plan, I don't think you have any room to talk.

Found it for you Critic

quote:

---

2012-20xx Financial Plan:

Continue to buy premium items I can't afford and show them off on Texags. Complain about being broke on subsequent threads

Max06

---