First Digital SLR Camera

therealslimcj

Seems that not many people going for Sony here!

If you are a keen photographer looking to make the step up from compact to DSLR, I'd advise going for the Sony A20. Great camera, easy to use, outstanding reviews, and very good price.

TiTheRev

therealslimcj wrote: »

Seems that not many people going for Sony here!

If you are a keen photographer looking to make the step up from compact to DSLR, I'd advise going for the Sony A20. Great camera, easy to use, outstanding reviews, and very good price.

For me, it's about specialisation. Too many companies want too many slices of every pie they can reach. Sony are a good electonics company but cant really be taken seriously as a camera manufacturer because they get someone else to do it for them and just badge it as theirs. Canon have a history/reputation as a quality camera manufacturer, all their lenses are interchangable from the old SLR to DSLRs and always built with their name/reputation upheld. You dont see many, if any, PRO photographers with anything but Nikon or Canon and they know what's best

Stephen_Leak

Thanks for the advice, guys. I'm now more confused than before. I know the Canons are good - we had one when I was working in Dixons in 2003/2004 - at £1500+ for just the body!

I will have another closer look at the Canons.

I've managed to save quite a bit (thanks to MSE) by living very frugally since separating. It's almost the case of converting some of this into "hard goods" rather than be "punished" for saving them (and adding to the marital "pot") when the divorce has to get sorted early next year.

DavyBoy_2

@TiTheRev
True, but Sony do know how to make things really easy to use. Stepping up from a P&S to an SLR is quite a jump, and maybe the A20 is better for the type of user that wants the convenience of an SLR without the hassle.
For the record I went from a Sony DSC-H1 to a Canon 400D, and never had a problem with all the settings (I spent maybe a week in full auto mode).
For those that want a really light camera, with cheap lenses, look out for the new cameras from Panasonic and Olympus that will sport the Micro Four Thirds technology. These aren't "true" SLRs, as they feature a digital viewfinder instead of a Petaprism, but they will be smaller, lighter, the lenses will need less glass so will themselves be smaller, lighter, CHEAPER, and you'll be able to use the existing four-thirds lenses on the micro bodies (with an adapter).
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp

wanye

another canon fan here. started out with a 300d, then a 350d which got stolen and so i was upgraded to a 400d.

go to a camera shop. try out the ones you want to look at. some cameras will just feel wrong in your hands. personally, i love the smaller body on the 400d. i find it easier to handle than a lot of other bulkier SLRs. but other people find it is the other way round.

youll know within a few minutes which one feels right for you. again, i had already used the canon 1d, which didnt feel right, but i knew how to use it, and the menu system was quite similar to the 400d, so i felt comfortable using it without pickingup the manual

hth

Marty_J

I'd seriously recommend the Nikon D40. It's a fantastic camera, and can't be beaten for the price.

When it comes to the "cheapest, best, entry-level digital SLR camera", I don't really think it has much competition. For £225 (little more than the cost of a high-end compact), there's nothing else at that price point to touch it. It's the cheap entry-level dSLR.

Fifer

DavyBoy wrote: »

For those that want a really light camera, with cheap lenses, look out for the new cameras from Panasonic and Olympus that will sport the Micro Four Thirds technology. These aren't "true" SLRs, as they feature a digital viewfinder instead of a Petaprism, but they will be smaller, lighter, the lenses will need less glass so will themselves be smaller, lighter, CHEAPER, and you'll be able to use the existing four-thirds lenses on the micro bodies (with an adapter).
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp

Can I just point out, for clarity, that the new micro four-thirds system (which DavyBoy correctly states is not true SLR) is different from the existing four-thirds system, which is true SLR.

wanye

Marty_J wrote: »

For £225 (little more than the cost of a high-end compact), there's nothing else at that price point to touch it. It's the cheap entry-level dSLR.

you can pick up a canon 350/400d for a similar price if you shop around (ebay - try the canon refurb store)

Marty_J

wanye wrote: »

you can pick up a canon 350/400d for a similar price if you shop around (ebay - try the canon refurb store)

You could maybe get the body only for the same price as the D40. And you wouldn't get a free 3 year warranty with either of them.

Both those cameras have a top flash-sync speed of 1/200, versus the D40's much superior 1/500.

The D40's wonderful auto ISO is also really nice and almost makes it worth owning the camera on its own. If I shoot with the flash, it'll decrease the ISO to 200, and then if I try to take another shot before the flash has recharged, it'll increase the ISO so the shutter speed doesn't drop. It means I can shoot without ever having to worry about it.

Sput2001

As far as performance goes, entry level Nikons and Canons are more or less inseperable. Which one's right for you will be a matter of personal preference.Your best bet is to go into your local camera shop and just get an idea of how each one feels and carries out basic functions. You don't necessarily have to buy from them.

I'd vote for the Nikon, personally, but the Canon would be an equally good choice.