View Full Version : Help me spend my Money!
1st of January 2007 (Mon), 20:57
I still haven't purchased a D-SLR yet, but with any luck it will be happening within the next few weeks.
Heres the problem though, I'm still relatively new at this and aren't too sure what I should go with.
My max budget is about $1600 (Australian)
Firstly what camera to go with: D40, K100D, 350D or 400D (or any other anyone can recommend within an affordable range.)
Is it worth buying the body only and getting a separate lens; if so what would be recommended considering I mainly shoot landscapes
Other accessories required...eg lens cleanerAny help is appreciated.
August 15 Photography
1st of January 2007 (Mon), 21:01
I also am still learning. I cant speak for anything other than the 400D as that is what I use and is all I have used other than a P&S. With that being said, I am very happy so far with the quality of the photos I get as well as the ease of use and the learning curve. Like I said this is the only one I have used, but I am happy with it so far.
1st of January 2007 (Mon), 21:08
if your budget is tight, i would recommend getting a used body from here or FM forums, possibly a 300D. instead of spending all your money on a body invest it in good glass, get the kit lens if you want, but i like the 50mm f/1.8 for starters. it is real cheap, goes for 70 dollars. hope that helps.
1st of January 2007 (Mon), 21:14
This being a canon forum, the suggestion for a camera may be a bit biased ;) The 400D is a great camera; you can save some money and buy a used 350D or 20D probably.
As for the kit lens, it's definately not the best but it isn't terrible either. I've taken many landscape photos with the kit lens and they turned out just fine. For just starting out, the kit lens is just fine for learning the ropes.
Aside from the camera and lens, accessories you may want to get for landscape photography are: circular polarizer filter, tripod, cable release, and a camera bag. A few cleaning supplies may be a good investment too; rocket blower, lens cleaning stuff.
1st of January 2007 (Mon), 22:31
I like the sound of the K100D. 6mp is all most people need for most applications. I like the AA support. I also like the IS. If I were starting out again, I might well have started with the K100D.
2nd of January 2007 (Tue), 15:20
Now that everyone is at it, you could help me, too ;)
I'm on a tight budget, although not an extremely tight one. I could afford the 400D, but those £60-70 between the 350D and the 400D would really come in handy (viz. bag, card, skylight, half of the 50mm f/1.8). I don't want to buy a used camera, for various reasons. I am seriously thinking about the 350D – will I regret not having bought the 400D (and starved for a month)? Or, put in reverse, will it be worth the extra cost? I'm obviously concerned about the noise reduction system in the 400D – how much of it is a marketing hype and how much of it is really an advance that's worth its cost?
2nd of January 2007 (Tue), 15:29
If you plan on possibly getting into photography, consider either the Canon or the NIkon. What you are getting into is more of a system with various lenses, flashes, and other accessories. Both Canon and Nikon offer a bigger and more readily availability of lenses, flashes, and such. Some third party lens makers also may not make or slowly introduce lenses for non Nikon/Canon mounts as Tokina is doing.
Both the Nikon D40 and 350D are about same in price. While Nikon is nicer to hold and use, the Canon will give you slightly better image quality. I'd first go try holding them and see. If you are into technical details, check dpreview for all the specs and features.
Lastly, the kit lenses on D40 and 350D are both not very good. I'd consider an aftermarket lens if you can afford it like a Sigma 18-125 or a Sigma 17-70 depending on your budget. Oh, also, if you don't know what accessory to get, don't get it till you need it. Only accessory you need is a decent sized and relatively fast memory card. Go from there.
3rd of January 2007 (Wed), 08:41
Nah, I think it's going to be a Canon. I've used a G5 and various A-series p&ss, and I'm not willing to go over to Nikon. Plus, I've had a D40 in hand today, and didn't like the build very much at all. So it's primarily a 400D <--> 300D question.
3rd of January 2007 (Wed), 09:20
The 300D would probably work well, but the used 20Ds have really come down in price, so I'd suggest that you consider them & you won't have to think about upgrading for a long time. OTOH...
Great stuff from a P&S! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lesec/)
Robert Mekis - Photos gallery / Landscapes with a P&S & a 300D & Kit Lens
Post your best shots from the "kit lens"-EF-S 18-55.
3rd of January 2007 (Wed), 15:46
It looks a lot like it'll be a 350D, as things currently stand. The window of opportunity for change is closing rapidly. Esp. the kit lens photos were convincing – I expected much worse, considering the incredible amount of ranting about the kit lens.
4th of January 2007 (Thu), 03:59
Hmmm I think as I can only find a 350 new as opposed to second hand I'll pay the lil bit extra for the 400D.
Having said that, I havent been able to find any second hand DSLR's in decent condition so 400D it is then for me!
4th of January 2007 (Thu), 19:20
A used 20D just sold for $630US in marketplace.
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 17:13
Guys, the 350D is great but the 400D is far better...do you really wanna tiny lcd on the 350? Dont do it you will kick yourself get the 400D. I got the 350, hated the tiny tiny tiny screen, then two months later the 400 came out so I ebayed the 350 and upgraded. Also the kit lens, it isnt great but it will get you started and the price difference for body only is nothing. You could get just the body and the 50 f1.8 which is sooo cheep, but youre stuck at a fixed focal. Get the 400, get the kit lens if youre really tight on budget, or if you can, get the 17-85 IS lens, its now well under £400 in UK. A small bag is only £20, a rocket blower is pennies, a memory card Sandisk Extreme 111 4GB £100, there are great deals online and stateside is so much cheaper than here.
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 18:47
I've had the 300D for three years and have to say that lenses is much more important than the body. I will be getting the 70-200 F2.8 IS and 50 1.4 before I look at a new body!
My mate got himself an Olympus E-500 and kept bragging about his 8 whatever MP camera and the "zoom" it gives him because of his 2.0x crop factor. He soon shut up and stopped bragging when we compared shots of the same scene when I was using my "L" lenses!!!! :cool:
Boy do I love my Canon and more importantly, "L" lenses :D
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 19:23
If you havent already you might want to actually hold a 400D, 350D, or 20D. I am by no means a large person, but the XT (same size as the 400D I believe) just felt akward with some of my longer lenses on it. Im not saying it will feel akward to you, just pick up the cameras get a feel for them. Chances are every camera you've listed will do what you want them to and more from a technical aspect. It's just not that fun to go out and shoot if the camera feels like hell when you pick it up :confused:
Also, Larger LCD's and more MP's can never hurt but it doesnt typicaly mean that you photos will be any better. More MP's just means you can crop more or blow the picture up larger (you can get a nice 20' x 30' print with 8MP's) and a bigger LCD.... is well bigger. Looking at the histogram in the LCD is typically better than viewing the photo because you've framed the photo in the viewfinder... you already know what it looks like ;) to me it usually doesnt do any good seing your picture just a little larger in the LCD ( it could be different for you though :) ), and you can still read a histogram easily even on the smaller LCD's of the XT and 20D
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 19:46
I agree about the size of the body, I actually liked it until I tried bigger lenses, but a grip sorted that and its great. I cant agree about the LCD, the 350 is just too small. Viewing a histogram may be one thing, but how much info about composition, DOF etc do you get from that?
Im not saying the 400 is THE camera, just better than the 350.
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 21:16
I'll agree with you there, the 400D is a better camera. But generally you can get a good Idea of what the photo will look like through the viewfinder and by using the DOF preview button. I will admit however that I've found myself mashing the enlarge button to see if I've gotten the focus spot on in some of those tricky situations :lol: It would be nice to have a larger LCD at those moments. ;)
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 22:35
I had read in a phtog magazine (Pro Digital Imaging, PC Photo or another) that they are predicting that the prices of the high end dSLR cameras are going to be coming down this year. They want to get us to by more of their cameras and not their competitors.
I hope that they are right about that. I would love to get a 5D for like 1500.
6th of January 2007 (Sat), 22:41
We always end up paying the "premium" for new or high end kit, until they get established and start making a decent net profit. This helps the manufacturers with funds for the next new thing. I too hope the price of the 5D comes down this year cause I want one! :D
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.