Recommendations for an entry level digital SLR....

[StevieP]

A friend of mine came over at the weekend and we went through some photos she brought back from a recent holiday and the first thing that struck me was the stunning quality of the shots compared to my 7 mega pixel compant camera.
They were taken on a pretty decent SLR camera so I wanted to get some ideas of a decent entry-level (ideally sub-£300) digital SLR to start with!

I've had a look at a few review sites and the Sony A200 seems to be a decent all-rounder with a reasonable price tag - anyone got any experience of this particular model?

Being a complete noob when it comes to this, I ideally need a decent camera that can do pretty much everything automatically until I can learn how to tinker with the settings myself!

Any advice is appreciated....

StevieP

 

[Xenoxide]

The Canon 1000D or Nikon D3000 can be had for around £350ish with a 18-55mm kit lens (The Canon version is particularly good, I don't have any experience with the Nikon one).

Out of those two I'd probably be leaning towards the Nikon.

 

[Stupot_]

You'll find an SLR will not be much different than a compact on auto with the kit lens.

Read up on the subject and understand the limits of your compact camera. Find out the decisions it makes for you when it takes a photo (shutter speed, aperture, iso) and then understand how you having control over them on an SLR will help you with that 'punch' you're looking for.

 

[StevieP]

Thanks for the quick reply, although £350 is a bit over budget I'll have a look at both models you suggest!

One quick query though, you say the Canon is particularly good and you have no experience of the Nikon one.....and yet you would lean towards the Nikon!?!?!? Any particular reason why or was it a typo???

Thanks again...

StevieP

 

[StevieP]

Thanks for the advice Stupot - the reason I'm looking at an SLR is the sheer quality that my friends seemed to produce - and she said 95% of their shots were taken on "auto" settings.
The comparison between those shots and the ones off my compact were like night and day!?!? (especially AT night - my compact suffers terribly - grainy etc!)

Are you saying that by learning the in's and out's of my compact, I should be able to get to that standard without the extra spend?? (I just leave it set to "best-pic" or something similar!!)

Thanks for all the advice.....

StevieP

 

[Xenoxide]

You'll find an SLR will not be much different than a compact on auto with the kit lens.

Read up on the subject and understand the limits of your compact camera. Find out the decisions it makes for you when it takes a photo (shutter speed, aperture, iso) and then understand how you having control over them on an SLR will help you with that 'punch' you're looking for.

I disagree with some of this advice, but not all of it.

It's well known that the Canon 18-55mm second generation kit lens has excellent image quality. Sure, it wont rival any L series lenses, but for the price it really is excellent.

StevieP, for night time photos you most likely wont be able to get it much better on your compact. One area where SLR's exceed is high ISO performance. Also, SLR lenses are often faster (ie. they have a wider aperture so they let more light in), which will allow for higher quality photos in low light situations.

One part I do agree on though is to start to read up on aperture, shutter speed, and ISO, and how these affect the end result. There's nothing stopping you using the camera on "green box mode" (ie. full automatic), but you're missing out on half the fun. At the very least play around with aperture and shutter priority modes, and maybe even have a quick shot on manual.

 

[BruceLee]

Sometimes its better to learn how to fully utilise the camera you have at present before upgrading, you may have some settings in your camera that you didnt know about which may give you more control over photos.
Teach yourself a bit about photography and how they work first, try using the compact more often, give yourself some goals, if by the end of it you still feel that you want a SLR then I would do the upgrade.

A lot of times holiday pictures look much nicer just because its something different and that you dont often see. I've got rubbish photos I took whilst abroad which I like a lot more than some of the good ones I took in the UK.

So, before spending money and then ending up not using the camera I would suggest learning some more

As for camera recommendations I'd look at 2nd hand equipment to start with, a cheap 350/400/450d maybe or a D40/D50 etc Nikon wise.

 

[martinturner]

What compact do you have? There can be a massive difference between an entry level DSLR and a cheap compact. I think before you buy anything we should determine what compact you are working with. If you have a half decent compact, then yes, playing with your settings may well give you better results. That said, a lot of compacts are actually not up to par. Even changing the settings does not make a lot of difference. I noticed this with a couple of friends compacts I have played with. They are average at best and no matter how much tinkering is going to make any difference. Equally, you should not have to revert into manual mode and make loads of adjustments between shots, the camera should be good enough to take a good shot in auto. The one time that is an exception is night time; when many compacts fails. Totally depends on which one you have.

There is so much that factors in to getting a good shot; but I am presuming that her shots were just vibrant in colour and correctly exposed. When I first got a D40, it was noticably better than my Compact I had. Also, has she processed them at all? Where a DSLR will be considerably better than a compact is that is shoots in RAW; you then have so much control over the exposure, white balance and a number of other settings. This is where the DSLR comes into its own. A very slight exposure adjustment can make a world of difference. You can make adjustments to jpgs, but working with a RAW file is in a different league.

Actually, why dont you link up with her and both take some shots of the same thing; then make a comparison. Equally some example shots of yours would be good. It could be as silly as you were shooting into the sun, and hers had the sun directly behind her. This can make a massive difference to the exposure, especially on a compact.

 

[StevieP]

Thanks again for all the replies guys!!

I think I'll do a bit of research on settings etc before I jump in and buy an SLR - it sounds like I'm gonna have to know, at least roughly, what I'm doing to get a better picture!

My compact at the moment is a Casio Exlim 7MP camera but I'm not sure what model it is!

Looks like I'm gonna be doing a lot of reading!!!

StevieP

 

[Stupot_]

I disagree with some of this advice, but not all of it.

It's well known that the Canon 18-55mm second generation kit lens has excellent image quality. Sure, it wont rival any L series lenses, but for the price it really is excellent.

StevieP, for night time photos you most likely wont be able to get it much better on your compact. One area where SLR's exceed is high ISO performance. Also, SLR lenses are often faster (ie. they have a wider aperture so they let more light in), which will allow for higher quality photos in low light situations.

One part I do agree on though is to start to read up on aperture, shutter speed, and ISO, and how these affect the end result. There's nothing stopping you using the camera on "green box mode" (ie. full automatic), but you're missing out on half the fun. At the very least play around with aperture and shutter priority modes, and maybe even have a quick shot on manual.

I'm not disputing that the 18-55 is an ok lens. It's fine to start with, i used it for a year or so.

All I was trying to get across is that if the OP is only interested in the end result, rather than the process, then buying an SLR which is all about the process is perhaps not the best idea. Of course, getting one will hopefully force you to learn about the ins and outs of taking a photo, but that can be achieved on any camera. You'll be £300 better off if you find it's not something you want to get to grips with.

 

[Xenoxide]

I'm not disputing that the 18-55 is an ok lens. It's fine to start with, i used it for a year or so.

All I was trying to get across is that if the OP is only interested in the end result, rather than the process, then buying an SLR which is all about the process is perhaps not the best idea. Of course, getting one will hopefully force you to learn about the ins and outs of taking a photo, but that can be achieved on any camera. You'll be £300 better off if you find it's not something you want to get to grips with.

Modern DSLR's released over the past few years are perfectly capable of putting out excellent shots on full auto. Even if they're not great, they'll still outdo anything produced by a compact camera. As I mentioned in my post, it's perfectly fine to use the SLR in full auto, but the OP would be missing out on half the fun, hence why I recommended he read up on the process.

Given that at the moment hes looking for superior image quality on full auto, I don't think there's anything wrong with buying an SLR, as it is perfectly capable of those things (While being a good shout better than a compact), and leaves the option open for a bit of playing.

 

[StevieP]

Thanks again for all the opinions guys - I really do appreciate it and I will be doing a lot of reading to get up to speed on these things.

So assuming that I enjoy the tinkering, can anyone recommend me a decent entry-level SLR anyway?

As in my 1st post, the Sony A200 has had some good write-ups and falls inside the probably budget of £300 - has anyone got any experience of this particular model or got any other alternatives??

Thanks again....

StevieP

 

[DailyGeek]

I did write the first reply to this this morning but it didn't post for some reason?

Anyway, I've had a D3000 (Nikon) for about 7 weeks now and love it to bits. If you are new to photography, the built in Guide mode is very useful for explaining how different effects are achieved and what altering different settings will do

 

[martinturner]

Sony A200, Nikon D40 or a Canon 400D, are all budget DSLRs which can be had for a couple of hundred pounds.

My wife owns a Casio Exilim; I'm not sure about model number but whilst it looks nice, the pictures are far from what my old D40 could produce. I know for a fact that changing some settings are really not going to make that much of a difference in your situation; I have tried and it makes bog all difference. They are not 'bad', but just a noticable stretch from a mid range Canon or Panny Lumix compact.

Alternatively, if you see yourself never wanting to buy other lenses and always shooting in auto; perhaps just buy a really good compact?

 

[Xenoxide]

Thanks again for all the opinions guys - I really do appreciate it and I will be doing a lot of reading to get up to speed on these things.

So assuming that I enjoy the tinkering, can anyone recommend me a decent entry-level SLR anyway?

As in my 1st post, the Sony A200 has had some good write-ups and falls inside the probably budget of £300 - has anyone got any experience of this particular model or got any other alternatives??

Thanks again....

StevieP

Review of the A200, have a skim over the overall conclusion.

Bearing in mind I have no experience with this camera, it seems the only "downside" is the lack of Live View, although that's personal preference. Basically SLR's use a viewfinder and mirror system for framing the shots, but a lot of the newer DSLR's incorporate being able to see the image on the LCD screen on the back, like compact cameras.

Like I said though, this is personal preference. If you can live without Live View then it seems like it's decent enough.

 

[Maccy]

Another recommendation for the D3000 - I've just started with dSLR cameras and this is my first. The guide mode (as mentioned by DailyGeek) is very useful, and it produces some great snaps

 

[p0ss3s3d]

30D - Cheaper, better build. Good IQ.
450D- Little more money. Not quite as sturdy. Slightly better IQ. Bigger Screen.


IMO it's best to allocate 50% of the budget to a camera and 50%+ to one or two nicer lenses (lenses also hold money very, very well). If it was me I'd purchase a 30D becuase they can be bought easily for under £300. That gives me much more to spend on any lenses... Talking of lenses- remember this is the most important part of the camera, so my advice would be to buy the best you can afford. Start by buying a 'fast' general purpose zoom lens like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. Then if you need something else for other purposes, like wildlife or sports you can always buy more lenses...

Stick with Canon/Nikon, you'll probably thank us all later on... (Sorry for not mentioning any Nikon cameras - I'm a little lost with Nikon. I've been away from the darkside for a long while...)

 

[Mr Jones]

An alternative is the Olympus E600
http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/olympus-e-600-digital-slr-camera-14-42mm-lens-03525551-pdt.html - Since the rule change, I suspect a direct link to a competitor's page selling the product is allowed? If not, feel free to remove.

£329, and you can use the 5% promo code 5all (or all5) for that extra bit off.
The E600 is a slightly cut down version of the E620, the built in IS will be handy, along with live-view, new tech and sensor. The sensor is only a tiny bit smaller than a APS-C sensor anyway (taller vs wider). If you're interested and need more advise on Olympus lens range, I'll be happy to give more of what I know

 

[BUFF]

The A200 was probably the best value DSLR of it's era - but it's been out of production now for over a year.
The A230 is essentially a facelifted version of it (& with a sharper kit lens) but ergonomically it is smaller so some people didn't like that.
Sony also have a £50-80 cashback currently on the next up series of bodies (A450/A500/A550) which are more similar in size to the older A200 but have improved performance/features.

& that brings me around to this ...
there is no bad current production DSLR but ergonomics & user interface do vary even within manufacturers' own ranges so get to a shop & handle them all to find what best suits you.
You are more likely to use a camera that you are comfortable (both ergonomically & UI) with.

 

[StevieP]

Suddenly you all have me doubting myself!!

Now I'm wondering if I'd be better off with a "top of the range" compact so to speak!!
In all fairness I doubt I'll go so far as to start buying different lenses and while I might have a play about with various manual settings, I can imagine that 80% of the time (and 100% or the time while the missus is using it) I'll probably just use the "auto" setting!!!

Had a brief look and seen the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 or the Canon Powershot G10 for around my budget and they might be more suited to my uses if I can get a superior picture out of them compared to my current compact!?!?

I need to read up a LOT more before making a decision!

StevieP