Looking to buy a Low End DSLR - $500 or so -

[Airforce]

Any thoughts on the Olympus E-510? One of the "must have features" I want would be live view and a price around $500. Most of my "hobby" has been nature, family photos, and my pets in action. The 10MP offered by the e-510 really impresses me for the price, but I read in one review low light would be a problem for this camera. Currently, I'm just using an old Kodak z760.

I'd actually like pictures like the one below to turn out decent :p

[marclapierre13]

K100D
K110D
GX-1S
GX-1L
E-510
Rebel XT

I have the GX-1S, love it, awesome size, decent battery life, good photo quality and good interface and body shape.
K100D is also a good choice.
etc.

edit. Oh, i saw you want "live view" thats a hard feature to come by in DSLR. If you want live view, than you should get a P&S camera.
edit #2: I hate the evolt 510, its super bulky, has a crappy interface, I just dislike it alot.

[PCMacUser]

Any thoughts on the Olympus E-510? One of the "must have features" I want would be live view and a price around $500. Most of my "hobby" has been nature, family photos, and my pets in action. The 10MP offered by the e-510 really impresses me for the price, but I read in one review low light would be a problem for this camera. Currently, I'm just using an old Kodak z760.

I'd actually like pictures like the one below to turn out decent :p

From what I understand, live-view on an SLR lowers the quality of the images due to focusing issues and most photographers don't use it.

Your demo photo could be improved with better timing and composition rather than a new camera :) Although a constant focus mode would help too, but those aren't so good on the cheaper SLRs. Just bite the bullet and get a Canon 40D, hahahah... ahh sorry, feeling a bit out of it this morning.

[termina3]

I think you'll find your photography will improve if you improve… more so than going out and buying a dSLR. While I suggest getting a dSLR for the short lag times, the picture you posted seems to be more a victim of your (to be rude and blunt) inabilities as a photographer–not your camera.

[jessica.]

Many have loved the Oly that you're asking about. The problem with reviews is they're only as good as the reviewer and their abilities to do true test shots. I hardly pay attention to reviews when I buy to be honest. That said, since you don't currently own lenses you can choose pretty much any brand you want. I would go to a camera store and check out each camera but in the end, since you're looking to spend less than $500 I would certainly direct you to some use kits. You can find a D70 with at least one lens for that price. Likewise for Canon and Oly no doubt.

[marclapierre13]

Cute dog though :)

Anyways, they are right. The composition isnt all that great. Personally, I think the photo is fine for a fun, quick shot, but cropping it would make it look way better. Also, you should try to fill the frame a little more. And although some times its ok to have the subject in the middle, you should experiment and put it on a different side of the frame. Do that, and zoom in more and get the subject to fill the frame more, and it would have been way better.

OK, sorry, went off into a critique lol.

[RaceTripper]

If you are going the dSLR route, you will ultimately have much better selection/choices in terms of lenses, flash, accessories, etc. if you stick with Canon or Nikon. Once you pick a DSLR brand, that's what you have to stick with.

Live mode is rare in dSLRs (I think the new $1800 Nikon D300 might have it), and really pretty useless anyway. Better to have a good screen (like a Katz Eye) for your viewfinder if the standard one isn't good enough for you. I have 20K+ shutter actuations on my Nikon D200 and have never longed for live view.

[JNB]

Live mode is rare in dSLRs (I think the new $1800 Nikon D300 might have it), and really pretty useless anyway.

The Canon 40D has it as well ($1300 MSRP). The only "argument" for it would be a slightly increased fps rate when doing rapid shots. Since the 40D's already at 6.5 fps, what would I realistically gain from maybe 7 fps that I didn't have at the fractionally slower response? Unless you need some serious sports or action photographic capability (then you're talking the 5D at 10+fps and $4500, but hey, it's got live view, too!), I agree it's more of a consumer feature being translated upwards in the respective lines.

Yeah, if live view is critical, go with a P&S. It doesn't appear in dSLRs until the higher end (AFAIK).

[marclapierre13]

the e-510 does have it I believe but like I said, that camera sucks.

[RaceTripper]

The Canon 40D has it as well ($1300 MSRP). The only "argument" for it would be a slightly increased fps rate when doing rapid shots. Since the 40D's already at 6.5 fps, what would I realistically gain from maybe 7 fps that I didn't have at the fractionally slower response? Unless you need some serious sports or action photographic capability (then you're talking the 5D at 10+fps and $4500, but hey, it's got live view, too!), I agree it's more of a consumer feature being translated upwards in the respective lines.

Yeah, if live view is critical, go with a P&S. It doesn't appear in dSLRs until the higher end (AFAIK).
How does live view help increased frame rate? I shoot motorsports, and even if I upgraded to a D300 with 8 fps (using the extra battery grip), I would still never use the live view. In fact, I can see using that instead of the normal viewfinder making it harder to get good panning technique, since you hold the body and lens farther away from you.

Putting live view in dSLR cameras is a marketing gimmick if you ask me. Nothing more.

[JNB]

How does live view help increased frame rate?

The mirror is already locked up and stays that way through the shooting cycle. Each shot takes a fractionally shorter length of time, hence a higher fps. As I said earlier though, I doubt it's enough to make a substantial difference (though I haven't seen any comparisons yet). I'm speaking only of the Canons, but I would presume that Nikon's implementation does the same mechanically.

[RaceTripper]

The mirror is already locked up and stays that way through the shooting cycle. Each shot takes a fractionally shorter length of time, hence a higher fps. As I said earlier though, I doubt it's enough to make a substantial difference (though I haven't seen any comparisons yet). I'm speaking only of the Canons, but I would presume that Nikon's implementation does the same mechanically.And I don't think it'll help if you have to hold the camera farther away to use live view, because then it's less stable for tracking moving objects and preventing motion blur. Having the extra fps buys you nothing in that case.

Still think it's just a marketing gimmick, to get consumers buying dSLRs when a P&S may be all they need.

[JNB]

And I don't think it'll help if you have to hold the camera farther away to use live view, because then it's less stable for tracking moving objects and preventing motion blur. Having the extra fps buys you nothing in that case.

Still think it's just a marketing gimmick, to get consumers buying dSLRs when a P&S may be all they need.

I wasn't disagreeing in any sense, in fact, I think you are completely correct. I was merely speaking to the functionality, not usefulness or value.

[RaceTripper]

I wasn't disagreeing in any sense, in fact, I think you are completely correct. I was merely speaking to the functionality, not usefulness or value.I realize that.

Just wanted to make my point clear for the benefit of anyone who thinks live view is an advantage over a good viewfinder. I think that assumption is due to the fact that viewfinders in P&S cameras really suck.

[JNB]

viewfinders in P&S cameras really suck.

Maybe one of the biggest factors in my returning to SLR's!

Back OT, the OP should first decide on what features or capabilities they have to have (and why), and then look at cameras that fill that need. I believe a lot of folks spend way too much $$ on dSLR's and never move beyond the kit lens, built-in flash, or the green box.

There are some really good P&S cameras out there that will knock your socks of, image-wise. Most of the photograph's quality, though, is in the person taking the photo, not what they took it with.

Hey, I've got some pretty nice gear, but I still take lousy shots (to me, anyway).

[Airforce]

Cute dog though :)

Anyways, they are right. The composition isnt all that great. Personally, I think the photo is fine for a fun, quick shot, but cropping it would make it look way better. Also, you should try to fill the frame a little more. And although some times its ok to have the subject in the middle, you should experiment and put it on a different side of the frame. Do that, and zoom in more and get the subject to fill the frame more, and it would have been way better.

OK, sorry, went off into a critique lol.

Well, it's a crop of a crop. I had to kick my wife out of the picture :p My problem right now is that this camera is aging(by aging I mean, it's having some problems that would cost more to fix than replace :p). I'd like something more fun to work with and learn. I figured a low end DSLR would be just that. I guess I could live without live view.

[Westside guy]

I guess I could live without live view.

I think you'll find that your camera holding technique will be significantly better using a viewfinder rather than using live view out at arms length. That in itself will lead to better pictures.

[JNB]

I guess I could live without live view.

Once you start "looking through the lens," you'll wonder why you ever bothered with it!

[marclapierre13]

Get the k100d or the samsung GX-1S. Great beginner cameras, nice bodies on both of them (they are pretty much identical)

http://cgi.ebay.ca/PENTAX-K100D-DIGITAL-SLR-w-18-55MM-LENS-1-gb-SD-CARD_W0QQitemZ120195865555QQihZ002QQcategoryZ30020QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[RaceTripper]

Hey, I've got some pretty nice gear, but I still take lousy shots (to me, anyway).I'm really good at taking lousy pictures. But it's that occasional gem that makes it worthwhile.

[fart]

get a used 10D or 20D and a 50mm 1.8. Older stuff, but can be had at amazing prices.

[SLC Flyfishing]

Second vote for the K100D only I'd recommend the "K100D super" instead of the regular K100D. It has the contacts for SDM lenses which will be the future for all Pentax lenses, (although I read that the new DA* lenses also have a screw drive for non SDM compatible cameras). The K100D super will have a screw drive for older lenses and the contacts for SDm if you someday decide to get an SDM lens. The Nikon alternative (D40 or D40x) are nice too, I'm not a fan of Canon and can't recommend any of their entry level cameras.

I think contrary to what some have said that you will improve with the use of an SLR camera. Not because it will make you a better photographer, rather because it will make you want to learn to be a better photographer. The image quality you'll get from one of these is not even comparable to a regular p&s camera.

good luck with it!

SLC

[ChrisA]

of the "must have features" I want would be live view

Why would you want "live view"? Kind of defeats the whole purpose of an SLR if you ask me. Also it seriously limits your choices. Why not get one of the really nice Point and Shoots.

Is your $500 budget for the entire system. Are you going to buy a lens to go with the camera? And what about later what other lenses will you want in a few years? If if turns out you want some Nikon lens next year you'd better have bought a Nikon body. Same with any brand. You have to plan ahead look what you might want to get next, switching brands later is expensive. Pentax is a good brand too but with any brand just make sure you want to be buying that brand lenses and body upgrade/replacements.

If you only have a $500 budget for the entire system one option is the used camera market, or better new body used lens(es). The bodies change fast and people replace them after a few years but lens technology does not change and decade old lenses still work fine, as well as new ones.

[Airforce]

My budget for the body and lenses is $500. I'm not the type of person to go used on electronics, so I think I will just hold off on this purchase. Thanks for the help folks.

[gamerz]

I am also looking at getting a DSLR for my myself, I'll probably end up going out on boxing day and picking one up. As for camera type, I haver heard great things about the Nikon D40, and Canon XT, also the steps up of those, which would be the 40x, and the XTi. Another good one to look at is the Pentax K100d, which is a great price, and has auto focus, correct me if I am wrong.

Anyways, I'll still need to do my research, im still leaning towards the Nikon D40, or D40x is there is a sweet deal :p

[termina3]

has auto focus,

Autofocus is a big, big range to talk about… I can't speak for anyone but Nikon, but every Nikon SLR has autofocus.

The D40(x) must use an AF-S ("silent wave") lens, which has an in-lens motor. These lenses are also the priciest and fastest focusers.

Most of the other bodies have focus motors, so they'll drive autofocus lenses that don't have built in motors… albeit those can be painfully slow compared to AF-S.

And then you've got the lenses without autofocus–but no modern day cameras. But hey, unless you're doing a fast-paced event, manual focus is good too.

[dabirdwell]

For the money, I have very much liked my E-500, the predecessor to the current Oly lineup. Of course I have their excellent 14-54 2.8 lens also, so I'm sure that makes my experience nicer than many who have kit lenses (although their 40-150 tele is a steal at $150 or so, or in a kit).

One semi-crazy thing to think about is going with the older Oly pro body, the E-1. I'm thinking of selling my newer E-500 and going to that. The bodies now sell for near the same price (about $400) and I have seen some phenomenal images come out of the E-1. It's 5.5MP count with giant photosites trounces the dynamic range of my 8MP E-500, and enlargements look great. Plus the thing is damn near indestructible.

Oly will give you some nice contrasty, punchy images if you learn to shoot to your strengths.

[66217]

But hey, unless you're doing a fast-paced event, manual focus is good too.

I prefer manual focus than autofocus in many occasions. Obviously macro is one, but also for almost all the other shots where I have the time to focus manually. It can be much more better than auto focus, I frequently find the auto focus of my D40x focusing in the incorrect spot.

And I also find manual focus more fun, I really don't know why.:D

[RaceTripper]

I frequently find the auto focus of my D40x focusing in the incorrect spot.If it's under warranty you should send it to Nikon for adjustment. My D200 was having problems with metering (underexposing about 2/3 stop) and it was slightly back focusing. I sent it to Nikon for service. They cleaned it up, adjusted exposure and focusing, and even replaced a couple worn parts (I've done about 20K shutter activations in the past year). It came back much better. I just got a 17-55/2.8 DX lens for it and the shots are coming out focused spot on and exposure seems excellent so far.

There's no reason you shouldn't be getting good pictures with AF, although I can see using a focusing rail for macros. For motorsports I want accurate and fast AF. Manual focus is not really an option.

[termina3]

about 20K shutter activations in the past year).

I'm nitpicking, but 20K actuations. Sorry… I feel like a complete jerk

[RaceTripper]

I'm nitpicking, but 20K actuations. Sorry… I feel like a complete jerkYeah that's what I meant to say. But yup, that is being picky. :)

Anyway, with four major auto race events, 20K is not hard to reach.

[JNB]

Yeah that's what I meant to say. But yup, that is being picky. :)

Anyway, with four major auto race events, 20K is not hard to reach.

When you said 20,000 activations, I thought you were confusing this with a Windows XP thread...

[66217]

If it's under warranty you should send it to Nikon for adjustment. My D200 was having problems with metering (underexposing about 2/3 stop) and it was slightly back focusing. I sent it to Nikon for service. They cleaned it up, adjusted exposure and focusing, and even replaced a couple worn parts (I've done about 20K shutter activations in the past year). It came back much better. I just got a 17-55/2.8 DX lens for it and the shots are coming out focused spot on and exposure seems excellent so far.

There's no reason you shouldn't be getting good pictures with AF, although I can see using a focusing rail for macros. For motorsports I want accurate and fast AF. Manual focus is not really an option.

I'll try and see, but more than being a malfunctioning unit, I think it is just that the AF sometimes gets confused. I don't know if the problems is that the D40x only has three focus areas, instead of the many more that the D200 has.

I mean, the photos come up pretty good focused with AF, but sometimes I see that with MF I can get a better result. For example, sometimes the AF won't be centered with respect to the eyes, and instead would focus on the nose, so the eyes won't be sharp. I know, it is not that bad, but something is something.:)

[RaceTripper]

When you said 20,000 activations, I thought you were confusing this with a Windows XP thread...That's probably the pain I was feeling. Or it's the number of times I've said "I have no idea WTF you just said" while on the phone with Dell support.

[termina3]

with MF I can get a better result.

Of course! That's because the definition of a better result is the result you want–right?

Manual focus gives you more control, allowing you to come closer to what you really want. Auto gives you a free ride out of work, but sometimes it'll cost you.

[RaceTripper]

I'll try and see, but more than being a malfunctioning unit, I think it is just that the AF sometimes gets confused. I don't know if the problems is that the D40x only has three focus areas, instead of the many more that the D200 has.I have no experience with the D40x, so I can't say, but I have not heard of focus problems with that camera before.

But if you have a couple weeks to spare without the camera, it can do a lot of good to send it in. I'm really glad I sent mine back. After about 16 days worth of shooting at race tracks I'm sure the cleaning alone did it a lot of good.

[Airforce]

Wife ended up buying me an Olympus e410 kit :cool: :D Gotta love an early Christmas!

[dabirdwell]

Post a few images if you get a chance. I haven't seen the 410 in person, but I do love my E-500. As long as I don't bump the ISO too high, images come out great. I'd be curious to know a little more about the sensor in that model, considering that mine is a CCD and yours is a Live MOS.

I'm serious about the 14-54 being a HUGE improvement over the kit wide zoom. It is sturdy, sharp and bright, and will focus as close as you could ever want it to. For $400, it's on par with L lenses from Canon. Well worth it if you find that you really get into photography.

[Westside guy]

For $400, it's on par with L lenses from Canon.

I'm not a Canon shooter, so I don't have a personal stake in this - but what are you basing this statement on?

[jolton]

Have you thought about a Nikon D40?

I know that right now Amazon has a great deal for around $500 and change for the kit plus a 55-200mm lens and some extras...

[stcanard]

From what I understand, live-view on an SLR lowers the quality of the images due to focusing issues and most photographers don't use it.

I'm not weighing into the brand wars (I love my Nikon, my dad loves his Pentax, I've got friends that love their Canons) but wanted to put my 2c here.

What I've read (I've had no chance to confirm) is that live view increases the noise in the image -- when you're driving the CCD constantly it heats up.

So if you're using live view you might not get the same kind of high-ISO performance most people rave about on DSLR's.

[Airforce]

So far, life with this camera is great! Still learning it of course, but even the scene settings come out fantastic!

Post a few images if you get a chance. I haven't seen the 410 in person, but I do love my E-500. As long as I don't bump the ISO too high, images come out great. I'd be curious to know a little more about the sensor in that model, considering that mine is a CCD and yours is a Live MOS.

I've taken nothing, but family and Christmas pictures via .jpeg format and about three raw, so once I get something worthwhile to post, I will. First thing I did was to grab up a 4GB 133X CF card and a tripod. :cool: Next...who knows. The only thing I hate right now is how long it takes to charge the battery; looking at about two hours or so. I think they make a quick charger, so I may grab one of those or an extra battery or two. Not a huge ordeal since the battery lasted much longer than I expected.

I used live view for a bit, but quickly moved to the viewfinder. I took a few panoramic photos and family portraits with the timer with it, but other than that, it wasn't worth the delay. This really did surprise me due to me using the lcd of a P&S since I've had Digital cameras.

The amount of adjustments available when using the .orf format (Olympus' raw format) is excellent in CS3! I've never owned a camera that did such a thing, so I've only worked with over-processed jpegs. I have a lot to learn, but it doesn't seem too challenging ;)

[termina3]

I've taken nothing, but family and Christmas pictures via .jpeg format and about three raw, so once I get something worthwhile to post, I will.

If you don't already have a photo sharing website, may I suggest SmugMug?

Other than the awesome features, unlimited bandwith and uploads, there's the amazing service who usually replies within the hour (and overnight if you email them after 11pm)--I've got a story to tell.

After the first day of school this year, a freshman went home and committed suicide. Nearly a year previous, I had been hired as the photographer for a party that he was at. I thought it would be a nice gesture to give the family some photos of Grayson. I looked through my archives, found a few, uploaded them to SmugMug and placed the order late Thursday evening--problem was, I needed to get the photos to the family by the services on Saturday.

I emailed SmugMug Help explaining the situation late Thursday evening; they moved my order to the top of the queue and upgraded my shipping to Saturday AM--all of this free of charge (well, I originally paid ~$10 for the prints and ~$25 for next bus. day shipping). I had the photos in hand by 8AM Saturday and was able to get them to the family in time. ASTOUNDING customer service. The best I've ever experienced.

Try 'em out (there's a free trial)--hopefully you'll understand why more than 80% of their customers stick with 'em.

Now for the shameless plug: save yourself $5 and me $10 by using this code: AD2YtsjXceosE . Feel free to check my SmugMug out at www.NickensPhotography.com .

[Airforce]

:)

http://www2.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/6c6486db28934cc9d93d9198df2624205g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=6wmz32ujigd&thumb=4)

Shutter: 1/6
Aperture: f.5.6
Focal Length: 42mm
ISO 100

lamp light :p

[Edge100]

get a used 10D or 20D and a 50mm 1.8. Older stuff, but can be had at amazing prices.

I agree with this. I had been shooting with an Olympus P&S (and sometimes an old Fujica film SLR), and then bought my brother-in-law's old 10D (he has since upgraded to a 30D and a 1D mkII).

That, coupled with a 50 1.8mkII and a 17-40 4L (which I also bought from him) has been a wonderful introduction to the dSLR for me. Yes, the 10D could have a little less noise, or shoot higher than 3fps, but I'm learning to take better shots, and when I need to upgrade, I'll move to a newer model.

You can get a used 20D for very little these days.

[LaJaca]

I am also looking at getting a DSLR for my myself, I'll probably end up going out on boxing day and picking one up. As for camera type, I haver heard great things about the Nikon D40, and Canon XT, also the steps up of those, which would be the 40x, and the XTi. Another good one to look at is the Pentax K100d, which is a great price, and has auto focus, correct me if I am wrong.

Anyways, I'll still need to do my research, im still leaning towards the Nikon D40, or D40x is there is a sweet deal :p

D40/D40x are great cameras. Are they better/worse than Canon, Olympus, etc? All in the eye of the beholder. I own a Nikon D50 and swear by it. I'm a nikon man for life, for no other reason than I'm a convert. It's actually like saying mac or windows - very hard to sway the minds of those who are set in their ways....