Which DSLR? - DPChallenge Forums

08/06/2007 11:57:07 PM · #1

After owning a nikon990, now the Fujis9500, Im finding its time for another step up. But I have little Idea which way to go, just what I want from the next camera.

My next step wants to take me past my current skillset so I can grow, but not past my budget of around $4000(AU) inc lense/s. I don't have any brand preferance, but would prefer it to be one of note.

I mainly shoot landscape photos and that is my preferance for the future, I cant see myself shooting weedings or portraits anytime soon. Longer shutter speeds with low noise is an attraction to me and I have no real use for many shots per second. I would prefer 10+mp but Im not sure if a full frame sensor is the way to go. Im happy to go with prime lenses as a zoom for landscape isnt particualy important.

The desire for a DSLR has stemed from a wish for a wider shot, better optics and lower noise. All things that my 9500 struggles with.

Id realy appreciate any thoughts you have about cameras you have or know about that would fit my bill.

Message edited by author 2007-08-06 23:59:23.

geoffb

08/07/2007 12:14:53 AM · #2

Originally posted by Shadowi6:

I mainly shoot landscape photos and that is my preferance for the future.

...

The desire for a DSLR has stemed from a wish for a wider shot, better optics and lower noise. All things that my 9500 struggles with.

The Canon 5D should be one you consider, although its price wouldn't allow you much for glass within your budget.

The D80 and D200 are others you should think about.

(Edit to add.)

Message edited by author 2007-08-07 00:18:18.

08/07/2007 12:20:27 AM · #3

Originally posted by geoffb:

Originally posted by Shadowi6:
I mainly shoot landscape photos and that is my preferance for the future.

...

The desire for a DSLR has stemed from a wish for a wider shot, better optics and lower noise. All things that my 9500 struggles with.

The Canon 5D should be one you consider.

Can't argue with that on the wide side. That and a 17-40L would be a nice landscape setup.

The Nikon D200 and a Nikon 12-24 would also work for wide though.

08/07/2007 12:29:18 AM · #4

Yes the canon 5d, nikon d200 are both options that I've picked up in the store, but I think you are right the canon would eat up just about all of the money. I like how solid the D200 felt, I'll have to look more in to the D80.

Is a full frame sensor worth the extra cost? initaly and then in the glass?

Message edited by author 2007-08-07 00:29:35.

08/07/2007 12:36:31 AM · #5

Originally posted by Shadowi6:

I think it depends on what you want/need. FF is the way of the future, really. The Nikon D3(or whatever) will most likely have a FF sensor in it.

Better to spend on quality glass though, than a FF sensor, IMO if that is the final budget limiter. If you plan on getting more lenses and keeping a budget for adding lenses over time, the 5d might be worth your while. If you want to get a good set of lenses and a camera to go with it and last for a few years, buy a D200 and some good lenses. That doesn't always mean Nikon. Tamron, Tokina, and even Sigma have some quality lenses also.

The Tamron 28-75, the Tokina 12-24, and Sigma 105mm Macro are some of the sharpest non-OEM mad lenses ever in each class. On the zooms, 70-200 a longer, pretty much stick with the Canon or Nikon lenses if you're picky about having real sharp results.

Message edited by author 2007-08-07 00:37:33.

Oded

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

08/07/2007 12:36:34 AM · #6

Well surely not a nikon D40
it was recently brought to my attention that they can't get it up (to a ribbon.)

Message edited by author 2007-08-07 00:37:34.

08/07/2007 12:38:41 AM · #7

Originally posted by Oded:

Well surely not a nikon D40
it was recently brought to my attention that they can't get it up (to a ribbon.)

The D40x might be a contender, but after-market lenses won't work if they don't have an on-lens focus motor, which sucks.

08/07/2007 12:49:56 AM · #8

Originally posted by Oded:

Well surely not a nikon D40
it was recently brought to my attention that they can't get it up (to a ribbon.)

lol I must admit (rightly or wrongly) that Id prefer something with more MPs. I hope that Im not just perpetuating an advertisers goal, but after having 9 on the s9500 it would be hard to go back. I love to crop :) But the price is a damn side cheaper

08/07/2007 12:57:04 AM · #9

Originally posted by Shadowi6:

Originally posted by Oded:
Well surely not a nikon D40
it was recently brought to my attention that they can't get it up (to a ribbon.)

lol I must admit (rightly or wrongly) that Id prefer something with more MPs. I hope that Im not just perpetuating an advertisers goal, but after having 9 on the s9500 it would be hard to go back. I love to crop :) But the price is a damn side cheaper

Don't do it. I don't think that MP is a myth. I think that the myth is that MP is only a myth.

Well, from 6 to 8 MP is not really a biggie. But from 6 to 10 is a huge difference.

Retroesque

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/07/2007 05:41:33 AM · #10

I've recently become the proud owner of a Canon 30D - it was an upgrade from a 300D - which I loved within an inch of it's life!

I ADORE my 30D - the 5D is too much camera for me, both at this stage of my photography, buy more physically - I have small lady hands - SMILE - and if I whacked a decent lens on it I'd never be able to take a handheld shot!

I have a few Tamron Lens - 17-35 & 28-75 - but have JUST purchased the Canon 10-22 (can't play with it yet, it's for my birthday near the end of this month).

For my mind you'd be best to spend you AUS$'s on the 30D and buy some spanking lenses.

I researched many sellers before coming up with the cheapest AUS$ price from a seller here in Melbourne !photobuff - they were recommended to me by

Roz.

They were very professional and prompt and carry a large range.

The Canon 10-22 is currently list price at Teds Camera Store $1349AUS - sale price $1299AUS - we got it with a Hoya UV filter for just $839AUS. Almost enough saved for the Canon 100mm f2.8 I have my eye on - GRIN!

Look forward to hearing what you decide.

Lisa

Message edited by author 2007-08-07 05:43:37.

RamblinR

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

08/07/2007 06:28:25 AM · #11

Hi iamwoman

Where did you get the 10-22 for that price? Photobuff shows $910.00.

Cheers

Retroesque

Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Zuiko Digital Zoom

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/07/2007 07:16:43 AM · #12

Originally posted by RamblinR:

Hi iamwoman

Where did you get the 10-22 for that price? Photobuff shows $910.00.

Cheers

Hi Maria,

I wrote about it here Link

I got a price from UR Galaxy on Ebay for $850 - they have it listed for more, but a friend and I were both wanting one, so I asked off Ebay for a price for two for cash and they offered $840 - but upped it to $850 when my friend changed her mind.

We sent a confirmation to buy email, and asked for a tax invoice, but they never replied.

Roz has said she brought her most recent lens from !photobuff - I wrote to them, told them I could get the lens + filter for $850 and asked if they'd match it - they immediately said 'Yes'.

I quickly did one more scan of Ebay and noticed they'd listed one for $839 - I took the 'buy it now' option and got it that way.

Ebay listing

This was only this past Saturday/Sunday (purchased 7.30pm Sat night, picked it up 11am Sunday).

I'm SURE if you wrote to them and told them you heard about them from me and you were wondering if you could have the same price that they'd do it.

I didn't go there, my husband did, said the guy was REALLY nice & had lots of stock.

Lisa

TomH1000

Olympus E-3

08/07/2007 08:22:11 AM · #13

Right now the hottest thing selling is the Olympus E-510. It comes with two pretty good kit lenses with great edge to edge sharpness. Low noise at higher ISO. Not as good as some of the Canons but very very close plus it has Image Stabilization built into the body. A very nice camera for under a $1000.

RainMotorsports

Nikon D60

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

08/07/2007 08:24:46 AM · #14

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by Shadowi6:

Originally posted by Oded:
Well surely not a nikon D40
it was recently brought to my attention that they can't get it up (to a ribbon.)

lol I must admit (rightly or wrongly) that Id prefer something with more MPs. I hope that Im not just perpetuating an advertisers goal, but after having 9 on the s9500 it would be hard to go back. I love to crop :) But the price is a damn side cheaper

Don't do it. I don't think that MP is a myth. I think that the myth is that MP is only a myth.

Well, from 6 to 8 MP is not really a biggie. But from 6 to 10 is a huge difference.

Megapixels has nothing todo with quality, unless of course your printing beyond its maximimum size @ 300 dpi. Pixel Quality is different and noise level is also another different issue. Dynamic range, contrast and clipping also their own seperate issues. All have zip todo with megapixels, but sensor size versus number of photosites also is its own issue.

Mephisto

Nikon Coolpix A

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

08/07/2007 08:50:51 AM · #15

hey jeffrey, that's a nice chart you did! as you can see, if you double the number of megapixels (i.e. from 6 to 12 mp) you will only get 50% more resolution. that means if you want to have a double resolution, you need quadruble number of megapixels.

that said, it's really only a bit of a difference if you go for a d200 with 10mp or with a 5d with 12mp...
the d200 is almost half the price of the 5d, plus the 5d has some problems with (super)wide angles cause of the full frame sensor (decrescent resolution and contrast in the edges).
if i were you i'd go with the d200 and some quality (third-party) lenses such as the tokina 12-24, a 28-200 (nikon or sigma with is) and a tele prime such as the sigma 180 f3.5
skip olympus, they're really as good as canon's and nikon's (in the same price range) @iso 100/200, but they still suck at higher iso's (even the new 510/410).

edit for typo

Message edited by author 2007-08-07 08:53:06.

Matthew

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

08/07/2007 09:56:48 AM · #16

The 5D and a prime or two could be affordable and meet your needs splendidly. The FF gives you effective wide coverage but more importantly well spaced, low interference pixel sites and it creates a wonderful image quality. I am seriously impressed. plus, 13MP is nicer - no matter what the figures say, in regular use those extra MP come in handy (and make submissions to stock sites easier, if you ever get into that).

Prof_Fate

08/07/2007 10:07:12 AM · #17

Originally posted by Shadowi6:

Canon 5D meets your requirements the best.
The 30D would also be a good option, but more of a compromise.
The 1D mk3 works too, but blows the budget and you don't need many of it's features (low noise being one you would want)

IMO - wait 2 months. Canon will have a 30D replacement and very likely a 5D upgrade as well. Even if you won't want the new ones, the old ones will be cheaper, allowing you more lenses wiht the same budget.

Nikon is getting better, but is still noisier than canon, and they are all crop sensors like the 30D.
Optics wise nikon and canon both make good lenses.

08/08/2007 06:13:35 AM · #18

Thankyou all for your responces, it has brought a few more cameras to my attention as possibiltitys to check out so I'll go and do that some more. I guess Im over causious but I want to make sure I'll be happy with the next one as its going to have to last a while :)