PDA

View Full Version : Digital SLR camera recommendations



globe
04-01-2011, 10:33 PM
Am taking an overseas trip in the next couple of months and was thinking about getting a digital camera that is better than one of the basic $200 point and shoots. Not sure if a SLR is the way forward (not that into photography) but wanted a decent camera with a decent zoom etc.

Any recommendations - prefer not to spend more than 1000 - 1200 if I can help it.

thanks

tutaenui
04-01-2011, 11:06 PM
Personally if you want a camera mainly for touristy things I find an DSLR a pain to cart round as they tend to be bulky and heavy and obvious. My choice would be a top of the range compact, sometimes called prosumer cameras. There are many to chose from, personally I like the Canon brand. Models worth considering would be a G11 or perhaps a SX30 IS.
Check out http://www.dpreview.com/ as it has a pretty comprehensive reviews of most popular cameras, then select a couple or three and go down to the camera shop and play. Generally there are no duds in this price range and most offer similar features, its a matter of finding one that for you feels the most comfortable in your hands.

johcar
04-01-2011, 11:56 PM
Consumer recommends:

Compact range

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5
Nikon Coolpix P100
Canon PowerShot G11
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ8
Canon Ixus 300 HS

All have a "No obvious bad points" comment. The above list is by price, descending, top price at about $900. Updated December 2010

DSLR

Canon EOS 7D ($3500)
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2 ($1400)
Canon EOS 550D ($1800)
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 ($1150)
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G10 ($1000)
Canon EOS 500D ($1450)

And a few others. Each have at least one "con", but how major they are will depend on your intended use and photographic experience.

Food for thought?

Trev
05-01-2011, 07:37 AM
I have a Canon Powershot SX20 IS which I'm very pleased with. Has 20x optical zoom and 80x digital zoom. Works on the same principle as a DSLR ie through the lens viewing, but doesn't have interchangeable lens. PC World review here. (http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf/reviews/canon-powershot-sx20-is)
:)

psycik
05-01-2011, 08:10 AM
@johcar you forgot teh Canon EOS 1000D which for the on special price for about $1000 for the twin lens kit is a great entry point into DSLRs.

They are an awesome camera, but I do agree with the above poster that they're a little bulky for a lot of travel. It could be made better by swapping the twin lenses for a single 24 - 200mm one.

I love my 1000d it takes awesome photos of my little boy, but I'm not lugging it around the world...as it's pretty heavy.

Digby
05-01-2011, 09:12 AM
I have a Nikon digital SLR D40.

That's because I am into photography.

I think for a touristy trip a normal digital camera would be fine.
They all have good megapixels these days.

pine-o-cleen
05-01-2011, 09:25 AM
Personally if you want a camera mainly for touristy things I find an DSLR a pain to cart round as they tend to be bulky and heavy and obvious. My choice would be a top of the range compact, sometimes called prosumer cameras. There are many to chose from, personally I like the Canon brand. Models worth considering would be a G11 or perhaps a SX30 IS.
Check out http://www.dpreview.com/ as it has a pretty comprehensive reviews of most popular cameras, then select a couple or three and go down to the camera shop and play. Generally there are no duds in this price range and most offer similar features, its a matter of finding one that for you feels the most comfortable in your hands.

Agree.

I'd get this:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0807/08072102panasoniclx3.asp

Nomad
05-01-2011, 01:59 PM
All SLRs are the same really. If you want lots of parts and options stick to Nikon and Canon. Sony is not bad if you want an affordable full frame camera and it's miles cheaper than Nikon/Canon but once you see the lenses it's $$$ as they use Zeiss, Sony used to be Minolta then it became Konica Minolta then Sony bought it and something happened with Zeiss maybe a business partnership.

Basically all the dSLRs produce the same image. I have a 6MP and I produce 11x15" prints matted up 16x20" in a matt board for club competitions, some people have even entered International Contests.

The cheaper ones are just as good but less options, less buttons, less ergonomics if you need instant control but they are small and lighter. Viewfinder may be smaller thou. Then you get the mid models and the pro's. The mid and pro's will go faster too so good if you are into sports or journalism etc...

I am into landscapes so I use a tripod even in the afternoon so all that doesn't matter to me. In the past and even present some might still be using a chrome colour camera - manual focus film cameras or even the digital cameras like Leica or even large formats which is cloth over your head because the negative is 4x5 inch or 8x10 inch size, which like to get into.

For most people the cheap ones are prob fine for holiday, family, scenic, flowers. If you are into your photog maybe a mid model is better$2-3k, faster responding, larger viewfinder. But then again if price is an issue there is always used. Like I got a pro model that might of been 6yrs old for like $500NZ that used to sell for $5k.

Not too much experience with pocket cams. But how is the focus particurlarly in night time? If you take a night shot of the city up in the AKL Skytower or HKG Lookup point are the buildings really in focus? I have a pocket Canon A510 and it never as sharp althou it might be the sensor for long exposures.

Nomad
05-01-2011, 02:02 PM
The cheap ones are good enof but if you really into it, maybe sports, journalism look at maybe like a Canon 50D or 7D. If you are really used to the 35mm formats with film, you may want to look at the 5D. These days I know a few people at the club who does 100% non-income (from photog) get them, these days people are spending more bucks on stuff. Just talking about Canon cos most use them, I use Nikon.

If you want a decent zoom etc ... you mgiht want a pocket cam. Or equally a slr. I don't know about pocket cams much - just my note about the night time focus issue. An SLR focus is bang on and less noisy (grainy). But then again if you want a decent zoom, a slr might get handshake blur, you can get a 18-200mm lens, or a 28-300mm lens times 1.5 on Nikon or 1.6 on Canon unless you get the pro models which is 1:1. A lens so versatile like that is like f/4.5-6.3 maybe, hence many slr people have a 50mm f/1.8 or they get the $4k pro zooms which is fixed at f/2.8 but you can go higher # if you want like f/8 or whatever....

KenESmith
05-01-2011, 06:09 PM
Want good Camera Reviews Look at ;http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/

pine-o-cleen
05-01-2011, 08:29 PM
If you want a decent zoom etc ... you mgiht want a pocket cam. Or equally a slr. I don't know about pocket cams much - just my note about the night time focus issue. An SLR focus is bang on and less noisy (grainy). But then again if you want a decent zoom, a slr might get handshake blur, you can get a 18-200mm lens, or a 28-300mm lens times 1.5 on Nikon or 1.6 on Canon unless you get the pro models which is 1:1. A lens so versatile like that is like f/4.5-6.3 maybe, hence many slr people have a 50mm f/1.8 or they get the $4k pro zooms which is fixed at f/2.8 but you can go higher # if you want like f/8 or whatever....

wut?

jcr1
05-01-2011, 08:47 PM
About 12 months ago I bought an Olympus e-620 (touted as a small dslr), mainly because I wanted to, I guess, increase my knowledge of photography etc.etc.:confused:.
I quite like it and it's not too much to carry around. I think the beauty of an slr,is the larger sensor, in certain conditions this enables great photos to be taken.
Top end compacts I think are pretty good, if they don't try to cram too many pixels onto a small sensor and in this respect the Canon G11 would be good.

I don't know, what you like, I suppose. As someone has already said, dpreview, is a good start for research on, to me, quite a fascinating subject.

Nomad
05-01-2011, 09:13 PM
wut?

The OP said he wanted a decent zoom. I'll explain. :D

Some pocket cams like the ones a few have advised are great because it is f/2.0 or something like that which is great, it let's you have a faster shutter speed, less handshake blur when it is dark.

If you want a decent zoom on a SLR camera they are much slower like f/4.5 - 6.3. A friend has a Tamron lens on his Canon and it's a 28-300mm. When you are at 28mm you can have the lowest number at f/4.5 maybe and when you approach 300mm, you can only use f/6.3. That is heaps slower than f/2.8 on some of the pocket cams. Generally speaking if you want a decent speed to avoid handshake blur you may want 1/60 speed, let's say it is dark and you get that on the pocket cam. If you wanna use f/4.5 on the SLR you only get 1/7. One reason why some SLRs users buy a 50mm f/1.8 is b/c they are much faster. That would give you maybe 1/80 or if you had the f/1.4 version lens 1/120.

SLRs are great that you can swap lenses, you might want std kit lens but when it goes day you might want a 35mm or a 50mm f/1.8 or a f/1.4 non-zoom lens. On top of that SLRs are less grainy, you can pop up the ISO to maybe ISO 3200 and it is still pretty okay.

That 1.5x or 1.6x thing. Only the more $$ cams have a full frame sensor that is the size as 35mm film. If you have the $$ ones, a 35mm lens on film will look like 35mm on digital. If you don't, the sensor is smaller so the sides get cut off showing a less wide picture. If you have a Nikon it is 1.5x. So a 35mm lens looks more like a 50mm, not the same but you get the idea. It still looks like a 35mm but the top, bottom, left and right is cut off resembling a less wide picture. Which some say, if you are into sports or wildlife, you may like those cameras, like a cheaper one or a mid one, like a Canon 7D or a Nikon D300. If you have a 300mm, it's not but people refer it to a 450mm reach lens.

pine-o-cleen
05-01-2011, 09:51 PM
I had to read that 4x to make any sense of it! But, thanks for explaining.

kenj
06-01-2011, 06:47 AM
Back in my semi-pro (35mm film) days we used to regard shutter speed should be at least lens length for hand held shots. For example, a 50mm lens shold be at least 1/60th sec - or a 500mm at 1/500th sec. That was with 100ASA film.

My favourite lenses were 24mm, 50mm, 75mm, and 180mm. I had zoom lenses but wasn't keen on using them.

My, how things have changed with digital cameras.

Ken ;)

Cicero
06-01-2011, 07:03 AM
I have one of these, SLR type without being SLR.........

http://goo.gl/r6UJh

Does all I want.