which slr should i get?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mikeeramones, Jul 7, 2008.

  1. mikeeramones macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    #1
    well okay i've been doing some research and searching the forum best as i can,
    and so far
    i have 5 choices

    a)Nikon D-60
    b)Nikon D-40
    c)Canon Rebel xSi
    d)Canon Rebel xS
    e)Canon EOS-30D


    okay well im gonna be using my camera as an introduction to photography, and just a hanging out camera, such as going to concerts, hanging out with my friends.

    what's bothering me is that i'm leaning towards d60 but i heard that this camera isnt really great for taking pictures with high iso, and i need high iso to take pictures at concerts.
     
  2. harcosparky macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #2
    If you are considering the Canon 30D ......

    Step up a bit and get the 40D !!!!

    Canon's line was the 10D --> 20D --> 30D --> 40D

    I had the 10D, when the 20D came out I felt the differences were not enough to warrant buying the 20D since I already had the 10D and it did the work I required well enough.

    I never was a big " next increment " upgrade person, though there are many who " just can't wait " until that next new model comes out I take the more sensible approach. That being said the differences between the 30D and 40D were more than substantial enough that I opted for a 40D.

    I even own what some here would call an 'old outdated' 5D, but those who refer to it as 'old outdated' are sitting on the upgrade bus.

    In any case I highly recommend the 40D from Canon.

    CONCERTS ?????? Back in the days of Santana, Chicago, Led Zepplin, Marshall Tucker Band, Freddy Fender and the like .... I shot concerts with ...... ok you might wanna sit down for this, it will shock you ...........

    ISO 400 B&W Film

    I swear it is funny, kids today say they must have ISO 3200/6400 .... and we did concerts with 400 .... on occasion we 'pushed' the 400 to 800 if we wanted to.

    Maybe the need for such high ISO's is a true indicator that digital sensors are nowhere as good as film, I dunno.
     
  3. M@lew macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #3
    T-Max 3200 or Neopan 1600 is good too. ;)

    Plus B&W film has more latitude than a DSLR, probably making it more suited. Low light anyway. :D

    But back to the original question - Depends what you can afford. If I HAD to choose out of the ones you listed:

    D60 is pretty much the D40 so D40 if you want Nikon.

    If you need fast FPS, the 30D will be the best out of the Canons. Live View XSi. XS is a bit of a waste IMO, the 400D/XTi will be enough if you're seriously considering the XS.
     
  4. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #4
    AFAIR, they're all ISO 1000-1250 films, all the 3200 ISO films were simply ISO 1000-1250 films with a push in development. I always shot them at EI 800 and got significantly better development. Neopan's a little too high contrast and way too low shadow detail for me, and I preferred shooting Delta 3200 to T-Max- but I generally developed everything B&W in Hutching's PMK formula rather than go with a specific T-grain developer. Most of my B&W work was on 120/220 film, so Neopan wasn't going to be a big player for me anyway even if it had a longer toe and could hold shadow detail. Neopan 400 pushed two stops is about 1/3rd of a stop off Neopan 1600 and should hold a little more in the shadows, so if you're still shooting film, you might try that.
     
  5. khollister macrumors 6502a

    khollister

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #5
    So I will disclose I am a longtime Nikon user up front (over 20 years) ...

    The D60 is a D40X with updated image processing. They are 10mp cameras with very nice image quality for the price point. I also feel the entry-level zooms that Nikon offers with the low end kits are much nicer optically than some of the budget Canon lenses. Once you start moving upscale, the differences disappear.

    The D40 is a 6mp camera that is currently a fantastic value from Nikon. It's noise performance is slightly better than the D40X/D60 due to larger photosites in the lower res sensor (lower pixel density). The largest potential issues are a fairly simple AF system (only 3 sensors) and the inability to AF with other than AF-S lenses (ones that have internal focus motors). I have a D40X as a lightweight backup body (D300 is the other one) and don't find either issue to be a problem. Any of the low end Nikons take very nice pictures and have matrix metering systems tuned to be a little more user friendly for those coming from the P&S world than the high end stuff.

    The Rebel XSi is supposed to be a very nice camera as well, although I have no personal experience with it or the latest 30D/40D bodies. The Nikon TTL flash system is more robust, but that might not matter to you.

    Any of the camera you list should perform pretty well as ISO800 or less. All will show some image noise at ISO1600+ Whether you need this is subject to debate. Many folk's idea of concert photography is limited to well light stage shots of the performers as opposed to off-stage stuff that might be considerably darker. Do you currently have a P&S you are using? If so you might analyze what ISO & shutter speeds you typically use to get a hint as too expected performance. I personally do not think there is going to be a huge high ISO difference in the most of the cameras you list. I have used ISO1600 on my D40X (similar to D60) with some moderate off-board noise reduction and the images were fine unless you are trying to make posters. I happen to like Noiseware, which is moderately priced. If you are going for gritty B&W stuff, you might even be able to go higher.

    The D60 is a very capable little camera (it is quite small for a DSLR aside from Olympus) that is also pretty quiet mechanically - it doesn't let everyone in a 1 block radius know you just took a picture. While the AF system only has 3 sensors, it is quite accurate, pretty fast and works in fairly low light. It is just missing the fancy scene recognition stuff and is obviously not the best choice for sports photography where you want sophisticated AF tracking. My personal opinion is the Canon's often trade complexity for reliability in AF. Nikon has traditionally not had all the bells and whistles in AF implementations, but what is there works well. Again, at the pro level things are different (they are all very good).

    Keith
     
  6. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #6
    Getting a faster lens will go MUCH further in low light than doubling the ISO. Moving from the typical f/5.6 kit lens to an f/1.4 prime buys you four stops which is the same effect as multiplying the ISO by a factor of 16.

    Which body you buy hardly maters much in terms of low light ability, unless you have a large budget the differences are in the range of about 1EV or so.

    Buy the body that fits the range of lenses you intend to collect over the next few years.
     
  7. nutmac macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    #7
    If you want the cheapest SLR possible, get the Nikon D40. IMO, D60 isn't worth the premium since you can get Canon Digital Rebel XS (greater lens selection, better AF) for about the same price when it comes out (or get Digital Rebel XTi now). Nikon D40 and D60 have limited lens selection (only AF-S), which rules out many (all?) fixed focal lenses suitable for low light photography.

    As for D30, D40 is really the way to go (or even XSi if ergonomics isn't an issue).
     
  8. ButtUglyJeff macrumors 6502a

    ButtUglyJeff

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Location:
    New York. The state, not the toilet.
    #8
    In terms of ISO, I might go with the XSi first, instead. It has a newer processor then the 30D. And I've noticed greater ISO capabilities with any newer version SLR, regardless of manufacturer.

    But, I also agree with the 40D if you can swing it. I'd take a used 40D, over a new anything on your short list there........
     
  9. Somepix macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Location:
    Beauce, Québec
    #9
    Two weeks ago I got a brand new Nikon D80. For me it's a great camera because :

    has inbody AF motor (may use all Nikon lenses)
    has auto bracketing (for HDR)
    and more ...

    And I bought a AF 35/f2 lense (very sharp, fast and not so many $$$). On an APS-C captor de view angle is close to that of the human eye (or 50mm on a Fx captor). So I try that out, and will see if I want a greater or smaller VA and how much.

    I will try not to buy DX lenses, so in a couple years, they will all fit on my brand new ... D700 ;-))

    Think about it, maybe it's a good outfit for you !
     

Share This Page