Jump to content

Recomendations for a decent digital SLR


Recommended Posts

The Nikon d300 is a good starter SLR and you can get it for less than 2 grand (great price for what you get).

 

I'm actually still shooting with my old D100, and for testing purposes it would be more than adequate, and is truly a workhorse. It doesn't have the pre-shooting controls that the D200 and D300 have, but shooting in RAW mode you can still do an amazing amount, and you can get them used for under $500.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I'm actually still shooting with my old D100, and for testing purposes it would be more than adequate, and is truly a workhorse. It doesn't have the pre-shooting controls that the D200 and D300 have, but shooting in RAW mode you can still do an amazing amount, and you can get them used for under $500.

 

Yep, second that. I had a D100 before the D300 and it never let me down. We were using it for around 5 years.

 

Cheers, Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My recommendation:

 

Neither of the above. Nikon and Canon both are behind the curve, and are unable to get out of the old 35mm film format mindset, as shown by their inistance of having multiple sensor sizes, which means that they cannot optimize their lenses for digital, else they shoot their "full frame" cameras in the foot. (See the Canon 17-85mm fiasco, great lens that doesn't work on half of their lineup)

 

The future of digital is to be just that, digtally oriented. Olympus, Samsung, Pentax, Panasonic are all rushing ahead with compact sensor cameras and optimizing their lens lineup for a digital future. That means whatever lens comes out for the Olympus will work on every Olympus DSLR (Panasonic and Leica DSLR too, as they all use the same lens mount). No re-cropping, readjusting of factor epending on if your sensor has a 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 or 1.8 factor. All optimized for the job from top to bottom.

 

I'd sooner worry about future-proofing myself than in locking myself to a pair of companies that can't even make up their minds what their sensor crop factor is from model to model.

 

Disclaimer: I sold DSLR's for over 3 years. I saw how the market went. Neither Canon nor Nikon were rushing out the new concepts first. What they did was bring out bragging points. Sure, the XSI is 12MP, but it's also only 10-bit, meaning that it has less total overhead. Sure, Nikon just brought out a live view, but it's on a fixed point limiting it's usefulness. They both lag a good year or two behind Pentax, Leica, Panasonic, Samsung and Olympus. If you want to see the future, check out those brands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...They both lag a good year or two behind Pentax, Leica, Panasonic, Samsung and Olympus. If you want to see the future, check out those brands.

 

Let me second that vote for Pentax. Their inclusion of weather sealed bodies and sensor based image stabilization systems as standard features put them a class ahead of what Canon or Nikon are doing.

 

I still wish I could have bought the Pentax instead of the Canon.

Now if only the Pentax would take my Canon lenses... <_<

Edited by Daniel Sheehy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither of the above. Nikon and Canon both are behind the curve, and are unable to get out of the old 35mm film format mindset, as shown by their inistance of having multiple sensor sizes, which means that they cannot optimize their lenses for digital,

 

Hi, I'm shooting with circa 1980's Nikkor primes on my D3 and they work very nicely.

 

Show me a Samsung which I can shoot clean ISO 3200 on at 14 bit RAW

 

-Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, I'm shooting with circa 1980's Nikkor primes on my D3 and they work very nicely.

 

Show me a Samsung which I can shoot clean ISO 3200 on at 14 bit RAW

 

-Sam

Looks pretty clean on my wifes camera. But, let's throw it on the other foot, show me the sub-$1400 Nikon with 14MP?

 

I thought the XSI was 14-bit

Canon up-bit's the pictures off of the sensor for editing. I figured that trick out with the original XT. The extra bits are useful for editing afterwards, and for correcting noise issues. But I did mean the XTi, not the XSi, as I left working for them before the XSi came out, so I have not studied it in as much depth as it's predecessor. The XSi's RAW files are, indeed, 14-bit, which says that they may have improved the sensor to 12-bit and are keeping the same techniques for improvement, or have truely made a 14-bit sensor which would be welcome news indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DSLRs are, well, DSLRs. A lot of shortcomings with any manufacturer. Maybe in a few more years?

 

In the meantime I personally still use film without the problems of originating with digital capture. Yes, it means processing and drum scanning (expensive.) But with the (subjective) look of film and the ergonomics of a film camera (think Leica M series) and yet big, workable files. It works for me as I prefer not to chase technology (not yet.)

 

And anyway, the only real way to go with digital at the moment is with high-end, high dynamic range, digital backs (way expensive, still.) Or hire someone to work on site such as Industrial Color (which is akin to renting a Panavision, Thomson, etc.)

 

This opens up some of the same motion film debate of film versus digital. But they are parallel issues, indeed. Is it worth going with low end digital (i.e., equivalents of the current DSLRs) or stick with film for now? Or should one forgo film but only using high digital capture?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
This opens up some of the same motion film debate of film versus digital. But they are parallel issues, indeed. Is it worth going with low end digital (i.e., equivalents of the current DSLRs) or stick with film for now? Or should one forgo film but only using high digital capture?

 

 

If you're a serious professional, I can think of very few reasons why you would choose low end equipment when you can afford something better.

 

Although the economics clearly favor digital, choose whichever format gives you the best desired results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
The Pentax K20D is the digital camera I have my eye on, especially because of backwards compatibility with older lenses.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012311pentaxk20d.asp

 

Jason

My wife and sister run the older versions of that camera, and frankly the results are marvelous. And it's not just lens compatible, but other accessories such as remotes, flashes, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...