Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Entry-level, budget dSLR?
- Thread starter soco
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mr. P,
Have a look at the used section of B&H photo in the link below. They have several Canon 50 and 60D bodies that are in your budget.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/SLR-Digital-Cameras/ci/15488/N/4294182649
BTW, I love my 2.8 lenses. Only two, though. Tamron 28-75 and Canon 100mm macro. Forgot that I have a 1.4 50, also...
Too much good stuff!
Dale
Have a look at the used section of B&H photo in the link below. They have several Canon 50 and 60D bodies that are in your budget.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/SLR-Digital-Cameras/ci/15488/N/4294182649
BTW, I love my 2.8 lenses. Only two, though. Tamron 28-75 and Canon 100mm macro. Forgot that I have a 1.4 50, also...
Too much good stuff!
Dale
I got an entry level DSLR a few months and I went Nikon for a very simple reason: all my friends have Nikons (including a few pros). I have tons of glass I can borrow for free 
Mine is a Nikon D5100 and it's a capable little camera, but like anything else it's much more what you do with it (and making sure you've got a decent lens). Most of the cameras in this price range have pretty similar feature sets.
Mine is a Nikon D5100 and it's a capable little camera, but like anything else it's much more what you do with it (and making sure you've got a decent lens). Most of the cameras in this price range have pretty similar feature sets.
I mostly agree with this. However, with regards to Canon APS-C format specifically, IMHO the best "Normal" prime you can get for less than $500 is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, which is a crop-sensor lens (it actually uses a regular EF mount, not the EF-S mount, so mechanically it will mount on full-frame. But since it's optimized for crop sensor, it will exhibit heavy vignetting on a full frame).
The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens is probably my favorite lens for my T3i, and even though I am seriously considering moving up to full-frame in the not so distant future, I have no regrets purchasing it. I tried the Canon 35mm f/2 and the 28mm f/1.8, and they're just not as good as the Sigma. Of course, the Canon 35mm f/1.4 clearly superior, but it's also a $1300 lens...
Then again, I only paid $300 for my 30mm/f1.4 used, so it's not like it was a huge investment. If I only get 2-3 years out of it, it was still money well spent. The 50mm primes are just too tight for indoor work on an APS-C sensor; I really think if you're going to get one prime for a crop sensor, it needs to be in the 28mm - 35mm range. I also have a 50mm f/1.8, but I don't use it anywhere near as much as I use the 30mm.
However, the 30mm/f.14 is probably the last crop sensor only lens I will buy (and the only I have bought, other than the kit lens); any future purchases will EF compatible so I can bring them with me when and if I move to full-frame.
Last edited:
Seconded, it's my always-on lens with my D7000. It's very fast, reasonably cheap (especially compared to Canon's and Nikon's f/1.4 lenses of the same focal length) and sturdily built.
Non-sense, it will not pay off. Lenses retain their resale value very well, so you can sell it if you upgrade to full frame later on (most people don't!) at minimal loss. I've bought mine in December 2009 or January 2010, and the resale value is only slightly ~60-70 below what I've paid. That means if I sell now, I got to use this lens for ~20 /year. On the other hand, I would have never been able to afford the full frame f/1.4 lens from Nikon (I'm a Nikonian, but Canon's 35 mm f/1.4 costs also a multiple of what I've paid for the Sigma).
Interesting, luckily you can get very good shots in these situations with equipement that doesn't cost a whole lot of money. Things like autofocus speed and burst rate don't matter. If you're shooting still imagery, I would consider getting a decent crop body and some older lenses even some that don't autofocus.
I'm not sure how well versed you are in photo gear... It is pretty universally accepted that having good lenses produce better pictures than having the best bodies. Lenses are grouped into two main categories. Primes and zooms. Contrarily to zoom lenses, primes don't zoom
. They have a fixed focal length meaning that if you want things to be bigger in the frame, you have to get closer. Prime lenses usually come with a larger aperture than their zoomed counter parts. Say, a typical cheap 50mm prime lens opens to f/1.8 where as the stock zooms usually open up to f/5.6 at this focal length. This means that when opened up, the 50mm lest's in 3.5 times more light in. Not only does this allow you to take pictures with much less light, it also reduces the depth of field. Something that can be used to give creative control (and abuse) to your picture taking. Lastly, primes tend to produce sharper images than zooms, this was especially true with older zoom designs and not so much on modern equipement. From my understanding, this is due to large glass elements but also due to the fact that the lens doesn't need to focus at different focal lengths. Also worth notting, primes are much smaller and usually cheaper than zooms.Needless to say, a zoom is versatile and you would need a few primes to cover the same possibilities. So when getting this first camera body, you'll probably want to get a some lenses that are better than the stock zoom. I'm not saying that the stock zooms don't allow you to take decent pictures, but they are restrictive and don't produce the best of what your camera can do. So first off, you'll need to choose some focal lengths that you want. Landscape type pictures are usually shot with a wide angle lenses.
[...] okay I just realized that if I keep up this level of detail I'll end up writing a book and I need to go to sleep...
I'm a Canon shooter, but the nikon d3200 looks like a really good deal, IMHO. I also really like primes if you want to take that route, I'd advise getting the cheap 50mm f/1.8 for 100$ and the 35mm f/1.8 (I really wish Canon had a similar lens) for 200$. If you feel like you don't need the autofocus, you might want to consider getting a cheaper used 50mm as they are very common and you should be able to get something decent for around 50$. Also, for landscape something around 24mm might be useful and can be found at a decent price used. - This might not be the gear most people would advise you to get but is still an avenue worth considering.
Also, if you'll be shooting lots of still imagery, don't underestimate a good light but stable tripod. Also if you're shooting outdoors, some gradient filters might be interesting.
This is all great information but at this point the OP's head may be spinning horribly.
With the gear that's out there now you really can't go too far wrong and $900 can go a long way. Make the move to dSLR within your budget and start shooting. You won't regret whatever choice you make. You'll learn and have a lot of fun along the way.
With the gear that's out there now you really can't go too far wrong and $900 can go a long way. Make the move to dSLR within your budget and start shooting. You won't regret whatever choice you make. You'll learn and have a lot of fun along the way.
Last edited:
If OP lives in an area where there are photo clubs, I would recommend to join at least one club.
In a good club you will get all kinds of practical advice on equipment, locations to shoot, shooting techniques, recommended local dealer. One of our clubs has a monthly program from a professional (sometimes a Canon Explorer of Light or Nikon Mentor) and also a second monthly meeting that is a photo review on a given topic. You can learn lots by attending a photo review. Both of our clubs also do field trips.
In a good club you will get all kinds of practical advice on equipment, locations to shoot, shooting techniques, recommended local dealer. One of our clubs has a monthly program from a professional (sometimes a Canon Explorer of Light or Nikon Mentor) and also a second monthly meeting that is a photo review on a given topic. You can learn lots by attending a photo review. Both of our clubs also do field trips.
You should not be looking at camera bodies, you should be looking at lenses. After you find the lens you want then budget in the camera body, it doesnt have to be new, used cameras are just as good. Camera bodies are only important after you have a good set of lenses, you will get FAR better results with a good lens on a really old body than a kit lens on a brand new one.
Looks like we have a Nikon fanboy.
Yes, Nikon has a bigger dynamic range than Canon. But it doesn't do anything when the user shoots in JPEG, as this starting photographer is most likely to do.
And as for image quality, it's all about the lens. My Canon T2i with a 70-200 produces images that a D3 with a crummy kit lens would ever dream of making. And since all entry DSLRs come with the same 18-55mm lenses, there are no appreciable differences between the image quality, especially at the lower ISOs.
Canon, speaking of which, tends to have better low-ISO performance. If you trust DxOMark, then you're also oblivious to the fact that they awarded the D800 a better score in lowlight performance than the 5D Mark III, which is completely absurd! In the end all benchmarks are synthetic and does not reflect how much you might enjoy a certain camera.
Cheaper the camera, the smaller they tend to be. I can't use the Rebels without a battery grip because they're too darn small. but the 7D fits like a glove. I've heard the D5100 and D7000 have amazing ergonomics, so give them a try too.
In the end, it's all personal preference; try them out. You might like the T3i, the 60D, or even the D5100 or better! Whatever camera you try out and find to your liking is the one to get.
It's like choosing a wand in Harry Potter; you have to try to see which one is best for you!
This.
Lol. Don't worry, my head is spinning too. I peeked in this thread, hoping to get some basic insight, but most of it is flying over my head.
Seriously, don't worry about it and don't over-think it. Over-thinking will come later as you can tell (me included). Get any dSLR within your budget. There are so many advantages over a point & shoot that you won't regret it.
Here's what you do .... After the current weather insanity subsides , take the E to 34th St and walk down to B&H on 9th Av. Go upstairs and handle the entry level cameras from Canon and Nikon and see which one fits you best . when you find one you like , get it with the kit lens , 18-55 or whatever . Pick up a couple of 8G memory cards and maybe a spare battery , go home , read the manual , and go out and shoot . Download the images and see what worked and what didn't . Just shoot jpeg's for now , once you get the hang of the gear then move on to RAW . Pretty much all the information in this thread re: importance of good glass is absolutely correct , but if you agonize over it you'll still be wringing your hands over what to get and it'll be next March .You gotta start somewhere and the kit lens will get you going and won't break the bank . Don't use any of the picture modes or the 'green square' brain dead mode. Just shoot on Av , Tv , P , or manual ( start with P). Get ( or borrow from the library)a copy of UNDERSTANDING EXPOSUREby Peterson , read through it and experiment . Don't stress , show us some of your images on POTD , no one will laugh . Above all , Have Fun!!
You're awesome. Thanks for keeping it simple and inspirational. Although it wasn't directed at me, I am motivated by what you say.
You can get a T3i bundle for around $600 after rebate with a 18-55mm kit lens + 55-250mm telephoto + a Canon 9000 photo printer + some other goodies. You can't beat that unless you go used.
Another option is used, older, higher end bodies. The main benefit is better controls especially small displays on top of the unit to display camera settings which entry level D-SLRs don't have.
Another option is used, older, higher end bodies. The main benefit is better controls especially small displays on top of the unit to display camera settings which entry level D-SLRs don't have.
… and the Canon fanboi offers a rebuttal. I don't think that's very useful for the OP.
@OP
Don't get caught up in fanboy wars here: you should go out and try how these cameras feel in your hand. Pick the one that feels best. Done. Don't worry about specs, all dslrs are a giant step up from a point and shoot (even the cheapest dslr with the cheapest kit lens) and if used correctly, these cameras can produce stunning images (e. g. the predecessor to the D3200 used to have the exact same sensor as its much, much more expensive brother, the D7000).
Also, you should include mirrorless cameras (except for the Nikon V1, that one has a tiny sensor!) into your considerations: they're much smaller and offer similar/the same image quality.
Another thing: don't forget to include a sturdy bag (that is a must!) which has some room to spare, and think about whether you get a 50 mm prime (or equivalent).
I'm just showing facts here.
And I'm not saying "NIKON SUCKS" by any means, I'm saying try the darn cameras out before deciding.
I want to say thank you to all of you who have offered advice. I think I'll be checking out the T3i, D3200, and whatever else I can get my hands on. I'm excited!
I'm not going to be buying crazy lenses or anything. I just want a nice camera to learn finer photography with. I do appreciate the lens recommendations though. Thank you!
I asked what I thought was a simpler question, and wound up getting a little scared here lol. I'll keep it simple for now. We'll get complicated and expensive later.
Can you link to this?
I'm not going to be buying crazy lenses or anything. I just want a nice camera to learn finer photography with. I do appreciate the lens recommendations though. Thank you!
I asked what I thought was a simpler question, and wound up getting a little scared here lol. I'll keep it simple for now. We'll get complicated and expensive later.
Can you link to this?
Last edited:
Canon has the t2i with kit lens refurbished for $356
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_267070_-1
And the t3i with kit lens for $448
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_283207_-1
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_267070_-1
And the t3i with kit lens for $448
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_283207_-1
No, you're trying to arrive at the correct conclusion using factually incorrect arguments and contrived examples (putting a €€ lens on a €€€€ body). I think this really detracts from the more important issue (which I believe you're also making): it's that each and every of these cameras are more than good enough, and if you take a good photo, a (real or imagined) 1-2 EV disadvantage at dynamic range is meaningless. And you can mitigate these disadvantages if you really know your gear. m4/3 cameras, for instance, have smaller sensors and tend to be at a disadvantage when it comes to image quality. Yet, I think, in many instances, m4/3 cameras offer a viable alternative to dslrs, especially cheaper dslrs.
Nikon and Canon are great, and you can't go wrong with either - honestly.
A consideration is that generally, the first brand you're buy you will be locked into. As the consensus is that you buy a good DSLR body, the best glass you can afford, and then upgrade the body over time.
Basically, if you're in to one stream be it Nikon or Canon, you want to choose the ergonomics that suit you best. From the feel of the camera in your hands, button layouts and menu system. Technical differences aside, and they are mostly minor, this is what was most important for me. There's nothing more annoying in using equipment that I find frustrating, and unintuitive to use.
So with that in mind, I would suggest that you try to play with a Nikon and Canon camera for a day or more, taking the kind of shots you'd like to. This makes sense due to the possible investment in time and money. It'll be worth it
A consideration is that generally, the first brand you're buy you will be locked into. As the consensus is that you buy a good DSLR body, the best glass you can afford, and then upgrade the body over time.
Basically, if you're in to one stream be it Nikon or Canon, you want to choose the ergonomics that suit you best. From the feel of the camera in your hands, button layouts and menu system. Technical differences aside, and they are mostly minor, this is what was most important for me. There's nothing more annoying in using equipment that I find frustrating, and unintuitive to use.
So with that in mind, I would suggest that you try to play with a Nikon and Canon camera for a day or more, taking the kind of shots you'd like to. This makes sense due to the possible investment in time and money. It'll be worth it
The T3i & D3200 are equally a great choice. As mentioned above, take your time checking them out (with battery and lens) in the store. Go with the line that feels really good in your hands. The feel of a camera is important.
Don't forget to come back and post some shots in the Photo of the Day thread. There are some awesome photographers (not me) that post there. They'll provide very helpful feedback when you ask for it.
Glad to hear your excited soco...you should be.
I'm going to muddy the waters a little bit with my suggestion, but have you thought about Pentax? You can get a lot of camera for $900 with Pentax. There are a vast collection of legacy lenses you can use on a Pentax digital even ones from the 35mm era. Basically any Pentax film era lens will work on a digital. Many of them are really affordable, as an example I picked up a film era lens on the weekend (attached to a camera) for a $1.50. Personally I like the ergonomics of Pentax and the way it feels and operates. It does have some drawbacks, in a group you will likely be the lone Pentax shooter and currently there are no full frame Pentax cameras, for example.
Some things to consider:
What are you planning to shoot and under what conditions. What features are important to you (the difference between must haves and nice to haves). How does it feel in your hands, both to carry and to use. Spend some time with other photographers and check out some camera forums. Ask other camera users why they chose the brand they did and if they would still choose it if they were starting out again. I can guarantee that the Apple vs. PC debate is nothing compared to the camera flame wars.
I chose Pentax as it offered me the most full featured DSLR for the money. I had no clue how it fitted within the DSLR world. If I were to do it again I would still stay with Pentax.
Some things to consider:
What are you planning to shoot and under what conditions. What features are important to you (the difference between must haves and nice to haves). How does it feel in your hands, both to carry and to use. Spend some time with other photographers and check out some camera forums. Ask other camera users why they chose the brand they did and if they would still choose it if they were starting out again. I can guarantee that the Apple vs. PC debate is nothing compared to the camera flame wars.
I chose Pentax as it offered me the most full featured DSLR for the money. I had no clue how it fitted within the DSLR world. If I were to do it again I would still stay with Pentax.