What camera offers the most bang for the buck?

[papayafish]

Hey all,

I'm trying to get into digital photography after three years of working just with b/w film. Inasmuch as film photography has been satisfying, I want to move into the digital age.

So here's what the dealio is. I've been using a cheapish Canon A630 which as served well for just getting acquainted to what it would be like to digitally shoot. It allows me to manually set the f-stop and speeds, which trumps the pathetic "auto" setting.

Now I want to head off into the dSLR range to complement my Canon A-E1 film slr, but alas, it's such a stressful thing to look through and pretty expensive.

My budget is about $800 max, although, if I could get a decent dSLR for cheaper, I'd be thrilled.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

[66217]

I would recommend staying within Nikon or Canon.

With Nikon you have the D40 ($600) and the D40x ($800). The only difference of the D40x with the D40 is that it has 10 megapixels, shoots faster (3 fps instead of 2.4) and lower base sensitivity of ISO 100.

You could also consider getting a D80, but it is a little out of your budget. $1000 (body only). The major difference between the D40 and the D80 is the build quality and that the D80 has a buil-in autofocus motor. And also that the D80 is a more professional camera (it has some extras that for beginners are not important, but for professionals are essentials).


From Canon you could get the Rebel XT (around $700) or the Rebel XTi (around $800-900). I would really recommend the XTi over the XT. The XTi has some features that could make them a better option for you instead of a D40 also.

I suppose you already have some Canon lenses, so buying a Canon dSLR would be a plus. Also, the Canon XTi has buil-in autofocus motor, and other functions that make it look a bit more professional. They normally compare the XTi with the D80, not the D40.

I would suggest reading www.dpreview.com, they have a lot of info there.

I hope this helps you,:)

[robbieduncan]

Also, the Canon XTi has buil-in autofocus motor.

No it doesn't (I have one sitting right here). All Canon EF or EF-S lenses have built in autofocus motors. So no Canon EOS camera has ever needed an autofocus motor...

[Digital Skunk]

Used 30D for $800 maybe. Give you film speed and good resolution. Other than that, the stuff Roco and others have mentioned.

[OllyW]

I suppose you already have some Canon lenses, so buying a Canon dSLR would be a plus.

The Canon AE-1 uses FD mount manual focus lenses which don't fit the new (20 year old :D) EF & EF-S mount EOS auto focus cameras.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/ae1/CanonAE1claudio2.jpg

I had one of those in the early eighties which I also mainly used for black and white, it was a nice camera at the time but I prefer my 350D (XT) :cool:

[J'aime]

My two cents would be for the canon XT body + a nice lens. If you buy the body only it should only be 400-something, then you could spend 300-400 on a nicer lens than the kit.

[cube]

You can get an ubercool camera for $700:

http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=PKK10D1855

If you buy the 50-200 at the same time, you get an extra $100 rebate, which brings the total to $838 for K10D + the two lenses.

If you want just the basic kit it should be a bit cheaper from Dell after the rebate (which they don't talk about). The 50-200 is more expensive there, so you save nothing if you go for the full deal.

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&oc=PK10D

[miloblithe]

...With Nikon you have the D40 ($600) and the D40x ($800). The only difference of the D40x with the D40 is that it has 10 megapixels, shoots faster (3 fps instead of 2.4) and lower base sensitivity of ISO 100.

You could also consider getting a D80, but it is a little out of your budget. $1000 (body only). The major difference between the D40 and the D80 is the build quality and that the D80 has a buil-in autofocus motor. And also that the D80 is a more professional camera (it has some extras that for beginners are not important, but for professionals are essentials).


From Canon you could get the Rebel XT (around $700) or the Rebel XTi (around $800-900). I would really recommend the XTi over the XT. The XTi has some features that could make them a better option for you instead of a D40 also....

Are you quoting prices including kit lenses?

body only at bhphotovideo:

Canon XT $480 ($550 w/kit lens)
Canon XTi $629 ($720 w/kit lens)
Nikon D40 ---- ($525 w/kit lens)
Nikon D40x $636 ($700 w/kit lens)
Nikon D80 $875 ($980-1150 w/kit lens)

[bousozoku]

If you really want the most bang for your buck, it's not going to be Nikon or Canon. Pentax and Olympus offer better value and more features.

If you just have to have a Canon body for some reason, don't buy the kit lens. Buy the 50mm f/1.8. It's not a piece of rubbish.

[jessica.]

I would also not discount the Fuji series cameras. The camera world is not just Nikon or Canon to the open minded individual. The post just above me is correct though. If you must have Canon because that is what your film rig is (I have Nikon digital because my film rig is Nikon) then ditch the kit lens and go for that 50mm for sure. Actually, I'd pick up a 35mm instead so you can at least get that 50mm feel on your digital camera with the crop factor.

[66217]

No it doesn't (I have one sitting right here). All Canon EF or EF-S lenses have built in autofocus motors. So no Canon EOS camera has ever needed an autofocus motor...

The Canon AE-1 uses FD mount manual focus lenses which don't fit the new (20 year old :D) EF & EF-S mount EOS auto focus cameras.


It is always good to learn something new.:)

Also, should we expect that Nikon would eventually switch to all lenses having auto focus motor?


Are you quoting prices including kit lenses?


Yes, I was quoting with lens included. But it seems you got some better prices there.:)

[seenew]

Holga
http://www.adorama.com/CZHFN.html?searchinfo=holga&item_no=6

$36.00

edit: whoops, didn't read your post, haha, just the title. Ignore me. :D

[Lord Blackadder]

I picked up my Canon Rebel XT for $560 with the kit lens. B&H photo is selling the body only for around $490.

I would also recommend the Pentax K100D. It's just as good as the Canon and Nikon cameras IMO, and has built-in anti-shake.

[cube]

The same rebates apply to the K10D and the K100D. The K110D and the Super have no rebates.

This puts the basic K100D kit at $409. The Super has dust removal and ultrasonic lens support (so it's more future-proof), but it's not such a good deal at the moment, and for a bit more you get the K10D which is 10MP and weather sealed.

The K10D is in the Nikon D200 league. It just doesn't have a metal body.
To get weather sealing on Canon you have to go all the way to the 1D.
It was a great deal when it came out and much more so now.

[regan2]

you'd be hard pressed to find a difference between the canon and nikon offerings in that price range. for me, it was the nikon d40. the kit lens is completely adequate and enjoyable.

the d40x, if you consider it, is said by many to not be worth the upgrade. save your cash for a new lens.

Hey all,

I'm trying to get into digital photography after three years of working just with b/w film. Inasmuch as film photography has been satisfying, I want to move into the digital age.

So here's what the dealio is. I've been using a cheapish Canon A630 which as served well for just getting acquainted to what it would be like to digitally shoot. It allows me to manually set the f-stop and speeds, which trumps the pathetic "auto" setting.

Now I want to head off into the dSLR range to complement my Canon A-E1 film slr, but alas, it's such a stressful thing to look through and pretty expensive.

My budget is about $800 max, although, if I could get a decent dSLR for cheaper, I'd be thrilled.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

[papayafish]

Wow, this is kind of over-whelming. Thanks so much! I'm going to take some time to look through all of these. It probably won't be an immediate purchase, but I like to research ahead of time. Again, thank you!

[taylorwilsdon]

The 350D aka Rebel XT was recently on sale for $369 for the body only. Thats the best bang for your buck by any count.

[bousozoku]

Wow, this is kind of over-whelming. Thanks so much! I'm going to take some time to look through all of these. It probably won't be an immediate purchase, but I like to research ahead of time. Again, thank you!

You should probably read the other 40 or so threads on trying to buy a new dSLR, also, but you might have to request threads from 1 year ago or newer to view all of them. There is a lot of good advice (and some not so useful) available here.

[cube]

The 350D aka Rebel XT was recently on sale for $369 for the body only. Thats the best bang for your buck by any count.

Maybe by megapixel count. Only.

The K100D body goes for $329 after rebate. It has spot meter, 11-point AF and image stabilization.

Wow, this is kind of over-whelming. Thanks so much! I'm going to take some time to look through all of these. It probably won't be an immediate purchase, but I like to research ahead of time. Again, thank you!

The Pentax rebates go on until September 30. But probably some others will come for the holidays, as these have been coming and going in the last year or so.

[apple_iBoy]

after deliberating between Nikon and Canon for several months, I ended up going with a Sony Alpha A100 with a 18-200mm lens.

No complaints at all.

[colorspace]

You probably won't hear much about this camera, but it has one GREAT feature, the most important one I think, the Carl Zeiss lens is AMAZING and you can find these used for cheap.

In the original dpreview.com review of the sony this stands out:

"Superb 24 - 120 mm F2.8 - F4.8 lens is worth the $999 alone"

Several other pages pointed to the fact that to get similar quality from Canon or Nikon you would pay at least $1,500 just for lenses (no body). And now these can be had for $500 or so...

[filmamigo]

The K10D is in the Nikon D200 league. It just doesn't have a metal body.
To get weather sealing on Canon you have to go all the way to the 1D.
It was a great deal when it came out and much more so now.

K10D has a metal alloy body with a polycarbonate skin -- still pretty tough.

[cube]

The K10D has a metal chassis, not body.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PentaxK10D/page3.asp

[compuwar]

I would recommend staying within Nikon or Canon.

With Nikon you have the D40 ($600) and the D40x ($800). The only difference of the D40x with the D40 is that it has 10 megapixels, shoots faster (3 fps instead of 2.4) and lower base sensitivity of ISO 100.


I'm pretty sure that the base ISO of all the Nikon DSLR bodies is 200, with ISO 100 being done in electronics.

[jaduffy108]

I would have to suggest the Canon XTi for under $800. The D80 is where Nikon gets "interesting" IMO....and the D80 is going for $875 these days. In case you're open to expanding the budget..the D80 with a 18-70 lens from bhphoto.com...$1200. Killer combo.

Check dealmac.com. I saw new XTi's going for $679. Also sites like fredmiranda.com are a good source for used gear.

good luck

Edit: I like Digital Skunk's idea...but get a used 20D for even less!

[bousozoku]

You probably won't hear much about this camera, but it has one GREAT feature, the most important one I think, the Carl Zeiss lens is AMAZING and you can find these used for cheap.

In the original dpreview.com review of the sony this stands out:

"Superb 24 - 120 mm F2.8 - F4.8 lens is worth the $999 alone"

Several other pages pointed to the fact that to get similar quality from Canon or Nikon you would pay at least $1,500 just for lenses (no body). And now these can be had for $500 or so...

Perhaps, but Zeiss will licence their design work and name to anyone these days. It's becoming less of a distinction and more of a commodity.

[ChrisA]

If yo want best bang per buck, buy a new body and a used lens (or two used lenses) The technology inside the dSLR body is changing fast and a one generation old body is dated already. But optics is a mature technology and is not moving so fast. there are many very old lenses that are as good as new ones. A 10 year old lens is not even "old".
The used pro-quality lenses are good investments and can be sold again for nearly what you paid. They last "forever". Canon and Nion both have robust second hand markets, stuff is easy to find. Used kit lenses are a great bang to buck ratio too because they are hard to sell the price is low. The Nikon kit 18-55 lens is very good, Canon's is kind of cheap

There are exception to the don't buy a used ody rule. If you could find a Nikon D50 for $400 or less it wouod be a good deal and they are not to hard to find, if you can wait. The D50 is still current generation technology

[Abstract]

If you really want the most bang for your buck, it's not going to be Nikon or Canon. Pentax and Olympus offer better value and more features.


Agreed. Pentax offers a better camera + decent kit lenses for less money. ;)

You can say the same about Olympus, but if you want to buy more lenses, I find their lenses are expensive.

Pentax has lots of lenses, but I think you'll be limited in terms of where you can buy them. However, if you plan on shopping online at massive, trustworthy stores like B&H, it wouldn't be difficult to buy a Pentax lens, so I think the whole "Nikon and Canon lenses are more readily available" argument is blown out of proportion. ;)


If you want best "Bang for your Buck", I say go with:

1. Pentax K100D or K100D super
2. Nikon D40
3. Pentax K10D
4. Nikon D40x

The Nikon D40s and D40x are great beginner cameras for people moving to digital.

Perhaps, but Zeiss will licence their design work and name to anyone these days. It's becoming less of a distinction and more of a commodity.

But supposedly, the lens on the R1 is ridiculously good. It's one of those lenses that would sell for the price of the R1 if it was sold separately by Nikon, Canon, Olympus, etc.

[colorspace]

bousozoku,

What you say re: CZ lenses may be true in general, but by all account the lens on the R1 is abolutely fantastic. I would love to a have a lens with this range on my Canon body. Sadly their is no such beast. Nor may there ever be, I suspect that not having a mirror/space (SLR) to contend with, allows for much of the optical benefit that traditional rangefinders have had in the past and that 3/4 systems have tried to build around.

[kwajo.com]

To me, the best value in dSLRs these days is the Pentax K10D. For under $1k (I've seen $800) you get things like full weather sealing, built-in anti-shake, a very well built body, etc. that normally would force you to pay almost twice as much for a Canon or Nikon.

The K10D + DA 16-45mm SMC, is a terrific value and can produce photos rivaling the best dSLRs on the market.

[miloblithe]

To me, the best value in dSLRs these days is the Pentax K10D. For under $1k (I've seen $800) you get things like full weather sealing, built-in anti-shake, a very well built body, etc. that normally would force you to pay almost twice as much for a Canon or Nikon.

The K10D + DA 16-45mm SMC, is a terrific value and can produce photos rivaling the best dSLRs on the market.

Maybe, but Pentax lenses are expensive, and there is less selection among the 3rd party manufacturers.

[dabirdwell]

You can pick up an E-500 or better at the price point you're talking about or less with a good lens or two.

The two kit lenses that come with the OLY SLRs are good performers if you use them the right way. Far better than the coke bottle Canon gives you with the Rebel or 20D etc. You could also get the excellent 14-54 F2.8 for about $400 to go with any of the bodies. I have to E-500 with the 14-54 and have been very happy with it. I've done both amateur and professional work with it.

If you really want to go against the grain for an awesome performer, you can get the 2003 Olympus E-1. It's their older professional body, and damn near indestructible. The pixel sites are huge because the sensor is only 5.5 Megapixel, and the enlargements are phenomenal because it approximates film grain so well and the colors and contrast are so classically Olympus punchy. I am thinking of selling my 8 Megapixel E-500 and getting the 5.5 Megapixel E-1.

[Daeve]

I would also not discount the Fuji series cameras. The camera world is not just Nikon or Canon to the open minded individual.

I agree to some extent - but having a larger user base for your camera is always a plus for support.

Plus try hiring a lens that's not Nikon or Canon - much harder (if not impossible in most camera shops) to find them as they are the market leaders by a long way.

[Kirbdog]

Try find a used DSLR body. As a new generation of bodies are released there are plenty of people selling there older ones to pay for the latest and greatest.
A used Nikon D70s goes used for around $500 with the kit lens (18-70mm and it is a good lens). It is a far better camera than the D40 is.
Lenses hold there value, bodies do not. Buy used, people that buy DSLR cameras tend to take care of them very well. You dollar will go a lot farther.
I am not pushing Nikon, it just what I am familiar with.

[cube]

I agree to some extent - but having a larger user base for your camera is always a plus for support.

Plus try hiring a lens that's not Nikon or Canon - much harder (if not impossible in most camera shops) to find them as they are the market leaders by a long way.

Fuji uses Nikon lenses.

But the bodies are not cheap.

[cube]

Try find a used DSLR body. As a new generation of bodies are released there are plenty of people selling there older ones to pay for the latest and greatest.
A used Nikon D70s goes used for around $500 with the kit lens (18-70mm and it is a good lens). It is a far better camera than the D40 is.
Lenses hold there value, bodies do not. Buy used, people that buy DSLR cameras tend to take care of them very well. You dollar will go a lot farther.
I am not pushing Nikon, it just what I am familiar with.

Yes, used D70s is preferable to new D40. NOT D70 (without "s") because of risk of BGLOD.

But a new K100D kit is cheaper and it has antishake. Given that you're saving quite a but of money, maybe thinking about which other lenses you might buy in the future is not so important and you might just switch if you want later.

[netdog]

Most bang for the buck? I would have to say this "Pentax"...

http://www.aohc.it/cameras/s123gun.gif

According to the description, it's a C.I.A. single-shot gun-camera (1966)
The Stinger is a single-shot re-loadable .22 magnum pen-gun, perhaps the single most popular weapon of the C.I.A. In 1966 the Stinger has been "swallowed" by an Asahi Pentax 35mm SLR and properly cocked via camera’s film advance lever. It shot by shutter release button breaking the lens elements in front of it. photo: CIA website

For me, a close second would have to be this Leica.

http://uk.gizmodo.com/PhotoGun.jpg

You can read about it here (http://uk.gizmodo.com/2006/12/29/leica_gun_camera_appeals_to_tr.html).

Sadly, I couldn't afford the Red Dot, but I did have one of these Mattel Official Agent Zero camera guns as a kid.

http://www.timewarptoys.com/snapshot2.jpg
http://www.timewarptoys.com/snapshot1.jpg

Hope that helps!