Recommend me a DSLR

[Lonestar]

Right now my camera is the stately Samsung Digimax L85. This is better than, say, my Blackberry's camera, but it isn't super nice. I'm also currently on a bit of a hiking kick, and would like a better camera for those purposes. Ryan has a Canon Rebel, and likes it, but I would like some more opinions.

For the record, while I'm not looking for the cheapest DSLR on the market, I certainly don't want a super-expensive one either. Like, less than a grand. Hell, less than $800.

[Kenny_10_Bellys]

Get a Nikon or Canon, anything else is just trying to be Nikon or Canon. Dont worry about megapixels, it's nowhere near as important as a good lens. Dont worry about extra lenses right now either, get the best camera + lens combo you can afford. The standard 30-80mm ones that tend to come as the base package are fine for most things. The Nikon and Canon ranges kinda intermesh, with their products falling between each other price-wise, so get the onethat suits your purse and dont worry about make. When I was a semi-pro everyone used Nikons, with Canon getting the lower end market more. Now it's so blurred I dont care what I buy so long as it fits the kit I already own. You wont be disappointed by either brand, they're the best for a reason. I like Canons, but recently switched to Nikons (D50 and D60) for pottering around as they're light and easy to use. For weddings I use a Nikon D300, but it's bloody heavy and more for looks than anything else.

[aerius]

Personally I'd stay away from DSLRs for hiking since I think they're too bulky to be lugging around. If you need the fast focus capabilities of a DSLR then get whatever's a couple steps up from Nikon or Canon's entry level these days, I've lost track of it but they're all good and you basically go with whichever one's easier to use.

I'm an absolute minimal person for lugging crap into the woods on my mountain bike rides so my personal choice would be the best compact camera you can get, and that would be the Canon S90 which has the largest sensor & fastest lens of any compact camera. You can just shove it into a pocket when you're not using it so it's not in the way, plus you don't need a separate carrying bag & straps.

The absolute largest I'd go would be the Panasonic GF1 which gives you pretty much everything you'd find in a DSLR minus the viewfinder and puts it in a much smaller package. The kit with a zoom lens is in your price range if you grab it off Amazon.

[phongn]

I have a soft spot for Pentax, actually, and their K-x is well-priced and a very competent camera. Nikon and Canon are the pro choices, yes, but it's unlikely Lonestar is headed that route. Plus, Pentax has in-body stabilization. The kits lens is good enough for someone starting out - though I started out with a Tamron 17-50/2.8 and it's freaking amazing.

Aerius' proposal for an S90 is spot-on - it's a fine little camera. The GF1 is also very nice though its lack of in-body stabilization (compared to its Olympus cousins the E-PL1 or E-P2 is annoying)

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I use the Panasonic GF-1 and I'm pretty cool with it. I'm a bit not so convinced by how good the Image Stabilization tech really is because my hands are pretty jerky and unstable. It boils down to photographic technique in my opinion. The GF-1 is also pretty popular with the old lens crowd and people have been grabbing Voigtlanders, Carl Zeiss and Leica rangefinder lenses which are small and optically excellent to use with the cam. It helps that the camera has some user-friendly features that aid with the use of these lenses. (It's for that reason I consider it a "poor man's digital rangefinder)

Pentax has been getting good reviews of late and they have a good plethora of lenses and seem to be less muddled by QC issues, unlike Canon and Nikon. If you go with Canon and Nikon, you are likely to get the best electronics available for sure. But electronics are just one part of the package. I'm quite tempted to go with the Pentax route in the future, but Pentax lenses are rather hard to get where I am living.

[phongn]

I use the Panasonic GF-1 and I'm pretty cool with it. I'm a bit not so convinced by how good the Image Stabilization tech really is because my hands are pretty jerky and unstable. It boils down to photographic technique in my opinion.

If your hands are jerky and unstable than stabilization can't do much for you. It's designed to compensate for relatively minute movements given reasonable technique. And you are not going to get a sharp shot at 1/5 sec without stabilization or a tripod.

The GF-1 is also pretty popular with the old lens crowd and people have been grabbing Voigtlanders, Carl Zeiss and Leica rangefinder lenses which are small and optically excellent to use with the cam. It helps that the camera has some user-friendly features that aid with the use of these lenses. (It's for that reason I consider it a "poor man's digital rangefinder)

I have considered selling some of my gear and jumping ship to the M43 system and doing exactly that, as it happens.

Pentax has been getting good reviews of late and they have a good plethora of lenses and seem to be less muddled by QC issues, unlike Canon and Nikon. If you go with Canon and Nikon, you are likely to get the best electronics available for sure. But electronics are just one part of the package. I'm quite tempted to go with the Pentax route in the future, but Pentax lenses are rather hard to get where I am living.

Pentax has fine prime lenses but their other selection is merely competent. I'm also lusting after the 645D (though hardly have that much money to spend!)

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Heh... Money. I have been lusting over a bunch of relatively cheap Voigtlander rangefinder lenses, and tempted to grab some Leica and Zeiss rangefinder lenses on the used market, but money as always is never enough. For now, I'm merely contenting myself with Panasonic's lenses (which are good for what they do) and a single old Leica Summicron-R 50mm f2 I managed to get for a few hundred dollars.

Actually, Panasonic's LX3 camera is decently small and has excellent optics for its size. It is the cam that sparked Canon's decision to put in a large sensor into their G11 and S90 cameras.

[General Zod]

The Canon Rebel EOS XS is a nice entry level DSLR. I haven't found many uses for its Live View modes, but if you're comfortable adjusting the various settings it's a fairly easy to use camera. It's a bit more limited on lens selection than the Nikons or higher level Canons, though. (It ran me about $600 and change for the body + kit lens). The lenses are what's going to wind up costing you ultimately, so if you want a good selection going a step or two up would be a good idea. The XS as it is has a somewhat limited choice of lenses because it uses an EF-S mount, and most canon cameras use an EF mount. It's really a bit bulky for hiking, unless these are short strolls. Personally I find it a bit cumbersome after more than an hour around my neck, but ymmv.

[Instant Sunrise]

The Canon Rebel EOS XS is a nice entry level DSLR. I haven't found many uses for its Live View modes, but if you're comfortable adjusting the various settings it's a fairly easy to use camera. It's a bit more limited on lens selection than the Nikons or higher level Canons, though. (It ran me about $600 and change for the body + kit lens). The lenses are what's going to wind up costing you ultimately, so if you want a good selection going a step or two up would be a good idea. The XS as it is has a somewhat limited choice of lenses because it uses an EF-S mount, and most canon cameras use an EF mount. It's really a bit bulky for hiking, unless these are short strolls. Personally I find it a bit cumbersome after more than an hour around my neck, but ymmv.

Uhm... EF-S mounts can take EF lenses, but EF mounts can't take EF-S lenses.

Remember though, when you buy a DSLR, you are buying into a system, and you can't easily mount lenses or use flashes from one system on another.

If you go with Canon, pick up a used XS, XSi, T1i or just get a T2i.

[General Zod]

Uhm... EF-S mounts can take EF lenses, but EF mounts can't take EF-S lenses.

It can take them, but you wind up with a cropped image.

[phongn]

Uhm... EF-S mounts can take EF lenses, but EF mounts can't take EF-S lenses.

It can take them, but you wind up with a cropped image.

You are unclear as to what you are saying (particularly given the context Instant Sunrise was referring to - that you claimed a limited selection of lenses on an EF-S body)

[General Zod]

Uhm... EF-S mounts can take EF lenses, but EF mounts can't take EF-S lenses.

It can take them, but you wind up with a cropped image.

You are unclear as to what you are saying (particularly given the context Instant Sunrise was referring to - that you claimed a limited selection of lenses on an EF-S body)

Because there aren't as many lenses specifically designed for an EF-S body, and using EF lenses will result in cropped images even if they can technically fit. This is just nitpicking in any case.

[MKSheppard]

You really are a dumb fucker, Zod.

I've been using a 28mm EF Lens on my Rebel XSi since December 2009; and it's my "go to" lens now; since it offers me infinitely more f-stops and also is a bit clearer and brighter than the original 18-55 IS Kit lens that came with my camera.

The crop factor isn't that bad, sure, you may have to take a couple steps back to fit something into the frame; but most cheap point and shoots require that anyway.

[Beowulf]

Aerius' proposal for an S90 is spot-on - it's a fine little camera. The GF1 is also very nice though its lack of in-body stabilization (compared to its Olympus cousins the E-PL1 or E-P2 is annoying)

I've been thinking of getting E-PL1 myself. Don't have the $$$ at the moment though. Or at least, my wife doesn't think we have the $$$ at the moment, which amounts to the same thing.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Because there aren't as many lenses specifically designed for an EF-S body, and using EF lenses will result in cropped images even if they can technically fit. This is just nitpicking in any case.

Unless you can afford a medium/full frame camera, image crop is a fact of life?

[phongn]

Because there aren't as many lenses specifically designed for an EF-S body, and using EF lenses will result in cropped images even if they can technically fit. This is just nitpicking in any case.

You've got it backwards. The area projected by the lens is cropped, but the image itself is not. This actually works to an advantage since the "sweet spot" is likely to be within the sensor area.

You only get actual image cropping (or vignetting) if you put an EF-S lens on an EF body.

Unless you can afford a medium/full frame camera, image crop is a fact of life?

For that matter, most digital medium format cameras are crop sensors!

Heh... Money. I have been lusting over a bunch of relatively cheap Voigtlander rangefinder lenses, and tempted to grab some Leica and Zeiss rangefinder lenses on the used market, but money as always is never enough. For now, I'm merely contenting myself with Panasonic's lenses (which are good for what they do) and a single old Leica Summicron-R 50mm f2 I managed to get for a few hundred dollars.

Leica's good glass indeed and their R-series lenses go for seeming peanuts not that everyone's abandoning their SLRs.

Also, for the 4/3rds system, Olympus has a stable of f/2 zooms! Pity they cost so much (like, $2K each) but those look outstanding.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Leica's good glass indeed and their R-series lenses go for seeming peanuts not that everyone's abandoning their SLRs.

Pretty much. The only issue with R-lenses is weight. They weigh a fair bit, and my third-party lens adapter isn't altogether cut out for it I think. Probably ought to invest in a Panasonic Leica R adapter. There are also a number of Contax/Yashica Carl Zeiss lenses that are also quite well sought after too.

Also, for the 4/3rds system, Olympus has a stable of f/2 zooms! Pity they cost so much (like, $2K each) but those look outstanding.

Hmm.. which ones? This page has only a few around f2.8 zooms.

The real pity is that Leica and Panasonic gave up on the 4/3 format. They had a number of pretty good zooms (the 14-150mm f3.5-5.6 in particular) but they stopped there. They also produced the fastest 50mm equivalent lens as well.

Ah well. Leica's strengths are in prime lenses and not zoom after all.

[aerius]

The GF1 is also very nice though its lack of in-body stabilization (compared to its Olympus cousins the E-PL1 or E-P2 is annoying)

I totally forgot about the E-PL1, I figured that a flash was needed for the camera and the GF1 was the only one I could think of at the time. The Olympus is definitely a good bet too, same sensor & lens system, and it has a flash as well.

[phongn]

Also, for the 4/3rds system, Olympus has a stable of f/2 zooms! Pity they cost so much (like, $2K each) but those look outstanding.

Hmm.. which ones? This page has only a few around f2.8 zooms.

The 14-35/2 and the 35-100/2.

The real pity is that Leica and Panasonic gave up on the 4/3 format. They had a number of pretty good zooms (the 14-150mm f3.5-5.6 in particular) but they stopped there. They also produced the fastest 50mm equivalent lens as well.

Did Panasonic give up? It looks like they're just slowly adding to what they need. That 20/1.7 looks very nice, too.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

The 14-35/2 and the 35-100/2.

Hmm.. don't see it there...

Did Panasonic give up? It looks like they're just slowly adding to what they need. That 20/1.7 looks very nice, too.

Oh the 20/1.7 is very nice. I use it very often, in addition to the 7-14. They gave up on the 4/3, but not the m4/3. The difference is pretty large because the flange length for the 4/3 is longer and you need an adapter to use 4/3 lenses on a m4/3 camera.

[phongn]

The 14-35/2 and the 35-100/2.

Hmm.. don't see it there...

Second in standard zooms and first in telephoto zooms.

[Marcus Aurelius]

The GF1 is also very nice though its lack of in-body stabilization (compared to its Olympus cousins the E-PL1 or E-P2 is annoying)

I totally forgot about the E-PL1, I figured that a flash was needed for the camera and the GF1 was the only one I could think of at the time. The Olympus is definitely a good bet too, same sensor & lens system, and it has a flash as well.

The Panasonic µ-4/3 cameras have considerably faster autofocus than the Olympus ones. If you want to have a true DSLR replacement you should go for Panasonic, which has nearly as good AF as entry level DSLRs. The Olympus Pens are more like large sensor compacts with interchangeable lenses, that is the AF speed is not better than the best compacts.

That said, if you only shoot landscape, still life and posed portraits, then the AF speed does not matter, but the sensor shift stabilization is a nice feature. On the other hand, if you constantly shoot small kids playing, animals of any kind (either pets or wildlife), sports or moving vehicles, you really need a DSLR for good results. Even the Panas will not really cut it.

[FSTargetDrone]

New from Sony, the Alpha NEX series may be worth a consideration.

I have a Canon XSi like Sheppard. I'm really happy with it. I decided I wanted a DSLR late last year and choose a model that wasn't brand new release. Of course now I lust after lenses...

[aerius]

New from Sony, the Alpha NEX series may be worth a consideration.

Damn that sucker's small. And it's got an APS-C size sensor. I'll be all over that camera as soon as they come out with some fast prime lenses. Hopefully it doesn't have some kind of mind blowing stupidity in the user interface to ruin it all.

[FSTargetDrone]

Damn that sucker's small. And it's got an APS-C size sensor. I'll be all over that camera as soon as they come out with some fast prime lenses. Hopefully it doesn't have some kind of mind blowing stupidity in the user interface to ruin it all.

If you missed it, check out that particular review's look at the interface.

Sony NEX-5 Operation

The Sony NEX-5 packs a lot of features into a very compact body whose design emphasis the use of what are known as "soft" controls, whereby the function of the controls changes depending on the camera's current operating mode. There are also relatively few external controls, and this means that many features are accessed via menus shown on the LCD instead of via dedicated or soft buttons. The result is a clean and attractive body that's for more approachable than your typical button-packed, intimidating digital SLR. The on-screen graphical user interface proves equally welcoming to beginners, featuring a handful of large, friendly icons on its front page, and an easy-to-navigate flat structure. There's also an uncommonly detailed Shooting Tips function that acts as a built-in guide to photography, offering advice on everything from topics for beginners such as how to hold the camera or frame a portrait, right up to tips for advanced amateurs on prefocusing for fast-moving subjects, and how to capture star trails.

The NEX-5's design offers up a total of six buttons, as well as a control that serves double duty as both a control wheel and four-way arrow pad. Of these, the dial and three of the buttons are soft controls, whose current function is usually indicated on the LCD display adjacent to the control itself (although just occasionally, the soft controls still function even when no label is provided on-screen.) The topmost soft button adjacent to the top right corner of the LCD display generally activates the NEX-5's menu system, which opens with six selections, each linking to a submenu and prefaced with a friendly icon and logical name. By default, as each icon or menu item is highlighted, a description of its function pops up on the screen after a brief moment of inactivity. The Shoot Mode submenu acts much like -- and indeed, provides a visual representation of -- a Mode dial, allowing the camera's operating mode to be chosen. The Camera submenu groups together some of the most common photograph functions, such as drive, flash, and focusing modes. The Image Size submenu is self explanatory (and also contains options for aspect ratio, quality / compression types, and movie resolution / compression. The Brightness / Color submenu collects settings such as exposure, sensitivity, white balance, creative styles and the like. Playback options are also grouped in their own submenu, while the Setup menu acts as a repository for more advanced settings that aren't often changed, as well as options that don't logically fit elsewhere.

Menus can be navigated either by using the four way arrow pad, or by turning the command wheel. The soft key in the center of the command wheel generally makes selections, while the upper soft key steps back out of a menu page or option, and the lower soft key is used to access extended settings if available. The command wheel is also used to adjust shutter speed and aperture in Manual or Priority exposure modes, and the Background Defocus control when in Intelligent Auto mode. Since there's only one command wheel and two variables to adjust when in Manual mode, the down arrow button switches between the two variables. In other record modes where Exposure Compensation is available, the same button allows adjustment of the compensation amount. The left and right arrow buttons respectively access the drive mode and flash mode dialogs, while the up arrow changes the display type. A dedicated Movie button is used to start and stop video recording, separate from the still image Shutter button.

That's just part of it. It's too lengthy to quote here, I think.

Definitely an interesting camera.