SLR camera recommendations...

**Patrick** · February-13-10, 08:20 PM

I know we have a bunch of hardcore photographers on DYes so I figured I would try and get some opinions. You see, I want to move up in the camera world and buy an SLR camera, which would be an update from my well-used point and shoot pocket camera. I have been told to worry less about megapixel numbers and more about the quality of the lens. I have been looking in the $500-750 range.
Can anyone give a recommendation for a good SLR? Used versus new?

**Django** · February-13-10, 10:55 PM

I'm in the same boat as Patrick. I grew up using SLRs but not digital. I never gave much thought to lens quality until last December when I was using a friends camera very similar to mine, which is a medium grade point n shoot. my lens is stock, her lens was a Leica and she made a point of explaining that it was a Leica. I didnt think much of it until I started looking back at the pics I was taking with it and comparing them to mine. That high end lens kicked the shit out of my medium grade stock lens. I was really amazed at the difference.
I myself dont necessarly need an DSLR but do want a reasonably priced camera with a quality lens and one that goes down to 28mm. Its easy to find all the zoom you want but wide angle on a p&s is not so easy to find.
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around digital and all the bells and whistles. I also just realized yesterday Patrick that DSLRs have an actuall aperture that physically lets different amounts of light in while a P&S has [[as I understand) a shaded lens which lets in the proper amt of light or exposure but gives you no flex when it comes to depth of field.
I hope Im making sense. the change over from chemical to digital put me off photography for years and Im finally starting to get back into it and now bow to the digital gods.

I hope someone will correct me if my explaination's are off. I also hope someone can point me in the right direction as far as buying a new or used camera with what I want. I may just have to wait until $1500 lands in my lap and buy an DSLR that suits my needs.

Im curious what Southen has to say about lenses and what he uses to make the amazing shots hes taken. Dudes got play that kicks ass.

Sorry if I jacked your thread Patrick.

**Patrick** · February-14-10, 02:25 PM

Great post man. I am just hoping to see what is out there...maybe even buy a used SLR and invest in a good lens.

**oldredfordette** · February-14-10, 03:20 PM

Nikon or Canon, at this point the quality is nearly equal. Pick one up and handle it, if it feels right in your hands, if you can see clearly through the viewfinder, if you can afford it, it's your camera.

We are a Nikon family but I would consider a Canon.

**Patrick** · February-15-10, 02:44 PM

Well, I settled on a used Nikon D40X, which was bought from a friend. he got it as a wedding gift and used it maybe for 25 pictures. It came with a Nikkor vibration control lens so it works out. Guess I need to play around a bit. I was told that it is wise to get a UV filter right away but it seems pricey.

**Django** · February-15-10, 07:12 PM

I have a question. It seems to me that if Patrick were to put a cheap UV filter on his Nikkor lens he would only be taking pics as good as the UV filter, sort of like a chain only being as strong as its weakest link. Would Patrick need a UV filter which is as good of quality as the Nikkor lens for best quality pics?

Congrats on the score Patrick, hope you post some pics.

**Jimaz** · February-15-10, 07:52 PM

I'm no expert on cameras but I have studied some telescope optics. I seem to recall one of the reasons to get a filter is to simply protect the lens from dust, grit, etc. It's best to minimize the need to clean lenses. Any cleaning risks scratches.

I vaguely recall something like rubber cement used for lifting contaminants from the lens surface versus abrasive rubbing.

Edit: You should be careful the solvent won't dissolve any lens coatings though.

**gnome** · February-15-10, 07:55 PM

true, if you get a cheap filter, not true if you get good glass. The reason for a filter on your lens are several, but the biggest one is to protect your lens from small scratches. a small scratch will ruin a $700 lens whereas that same scratch on a $30 filter is a pain but not a suicide inducing event.

I'm a canon fan. have been since ftb days... still have that brass bodied thug and it still takes good shots even with a non-working light meter or film counter. The loss of the film counter was a tragic loss but worth the sacrifice considering what was headed at my forehead. oh well

**Jimaz** · February-15-10, 08:15 PM

... worth the sacrifice considering what was headed at my forehead.

That sounds like a story worth elaborating.

Another tip is to keep women who wear mascara away from your eyepieces.

**cman710** · February-15-10, 10:35 PM

I have had a Canon 400D [[Digital Rebel XTi) for over two years, and have been happy with it. I have mainly used it on trips, as I do not get much time to take pictures at home because I am usually busy working. I like the feel of the camera in my hands, and I very quickly picked up where most of the buttons are.

Patrick, when I was deciding whether to go with Nikon or Canon, my decision was between the 400D and the D40X. I think both are great cameras and I think you will be happy with yours. I went with the Canon because of a few minor things I liked about it that have mostly been insignificant. In retrospect, I do not think I would have gone wrong either way.

BTW, recently my wife and I bought a Canon S90 point and shoot camera. For a point and shoot, it is quite expensive. However, in the limited time I have used it, it seems to take very high quality for a non-SLR and I am happy with it. [[The ergonomics are a bit weird for my hand, though.) We are hoping to use it in the future when carrying around a heavy camera is not convenient.