Camera help please

andygb

pault123 wrote: »

Thats why I reccomended the Sony A200 - does it all for the lowest price with a lens and supports all the Minolta lenses to boot (which can be had cheap off ebay!) - extremely intuitive to use as well

Very hard to convince the "Canon, Nikon" camp of those advantages though Paul, because they can see no further than the "White" lenses (which are actually grey), and the need to spend four or five grand on a camera body and ten grand on a lens.
The Sony range will, as you correctly point out, enable you to use the excellent Minolta and Sony lenses, as well as the optically unbeatable Carl Zeiss range, and superb alternatives from Sigma and Tamron.
I should also point out that the sensors and processors in the Sony range are also used in the far more expensive Nikon range.
The OP has £350 budget, what better camera than the Sony 200 (with possibly a couple of lenses thrown in) as an introduction to photography.

balloo_2

Try Here

https://secure.fujifilm.co.uk/shop/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/d-slr-long-zoom/finepix-s200exr

or

https://secure.fujifilm.co.uk/shop/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/view-all

Comfortably_Numb

Bowling_4_Gold wrote: »

My mate has the Panasonic Lumix FZ-28. It is not a full SLR, so you can't change the lenses, but it is a good camera if you are just starting out. ]

I have one of these, and it is excellent. It also takes good videos. It has been updated now to a newer model, but is an ideal step up from standard compacts.

I also picked up a Nikon D40 when they were just over £200, and it is brilliant too, but it does need another lens or two to get the benefit from it.

Having said that though, it takes great indoor photos.

darich

andygb wrote: »

Very hard to convince the "Canon, Nikon" camp of those advantages though Paul, because they can see no further than the "White" lenses (which are actually grey), and the need to spend four or five grand on a camera body and ten grand on a lens.
The Sony range will, as you correctly point out, enable you to use the excellent Minolta and Sony lenses, as well as the optically unbeatable Carl Zeiss range, and superb alternatives from Sigma and Tamron.
I should also point out that the sensors and processors in the Sony range are also used in the far more expensive Nikon range.
The OP has £350 budget, what better camera than the Sony 200 (with possibly a couple of lenses thrown in) as an introduction to photography.

I'm a Canon user and I think your reply is a bit stereotypical.
You'll probably find that most photographers use either Canon or Nikon and will recommend what they use because they like it.
Sony users will recommend Sony, Toyota drivers recommend their car, in fact anyone who uses something they find to be of good quality will recommend it to others.
I'd recommend Canon but it's because I use it and can speak from expereince. I've never used a Sony DSLR so I can't recommend it but that doesn't make it a bad camera - it just means I've never used one. Same way I've never driven a Mercedes so can't recommend them but I understand they're good cars.

And the reason they spend 5k on a body then 10k on a lens is because most other manufacturers don't cater for that market. Canon and Nikon do.

Everyone has their own preference and that's fine but given the majority of photographers use Canon or Nikon you're always going to find they get more positive reviews than anything else.

EDIT:Canon and Nikon can also accept Sigma and Tamron lenses. I have a Tamron wide angle and in the past have owned a Sigma. Adaptors are also available (for just a few pounds) to allow Canon and Nikon cameras to accept lenses from Mamiya, Praktica Pentax, etc

A._Badger

darich wrote: »

I'm a Canon user and I think your reply is a bit stereotypical.
You'll probably find that most photographers use either Canon or Nikon and will recommend what they use because they like it.
Sony users will recommend Sony, Toyota drivers recommend their car, in fact anyone who uses something they find to be of good quality will recommend it to others.
I'd recommend Canon but it's because I use it and can speak from expereince. I've never used a Sony DSLR so I can't recommend it but that doesn't make it a bad camera - it just means I've never used one. Same way I've never driven a Mercedes so can't recommend them but I understand they're good cars.

And the reason they spend 5k on a body then 10k on a lens is because most other manufacturers don't cater for that market. Canon and Nikon do.

Everyone has their own preference and that's fine but given the majority of photographers use Canon or Nikon you're always going to find they get more positive reviews than anything else.

EDIT:Canon and Nikon can also accept Sigma and Tamron lenses. I have a Tamron wide angle and in the past have owned a Sigma. Adaptors are also available (for just a few pounds) to allow Canon and Nikon cameras to accept lenses from Mamiya, Praktica Pentax, etc

All very good points, to which we might add that Sony is an unknown quantity in ths market which might, or might not, stay the course.

I spent a fortune over 20 years buying and using Minolta equipment (in an occasionally professional capacity) and while I was always impressed with the system, the company ditched all its users when it switched from manual to autofocus. Nikon did not.

It then stumbled again, when it was swallowed whole by Sony.

Who knows whether Sony will remain in the still camera market? It's a consumer behemoth which could decide there's not enough money in still photography in a few years time and walk away.

At least with the big two, because of their professional base, you can be certain that they will remain interested and involved as long as there remains a market for still cameras.

pault123

All the points are valid and I completely agree but the OP asks " We have a budget of aaround £350 and Dh is enroling on a photography course in the New Year."

Show me a Canon or Nikon DSLR for that budget WITH lens!?



£320 at currys, cheaper online at various vendors.

Sput2001

pault123 wrote: »

All the points are valid and I completely agree but the OP asks " We have a budget of aaround £350 and Dh is enroling on a photography course in the New Year."

Show me a Canon or Nikon DSLR for that budget WITH lens!?

Nikon D3000 with 18-55mm VR lens, £339.24 (counting the £30 cashback) at Amazon. And I'd take Nikon over Sony (Minolta) any time.

A._Badger

The thing to remember about buying an SLR camera (in fact any camera that takes interchangeable lenses) is that you are not just buying a camera - you are buying into a system.

Once you buy your second lens you are more or less locked into that brand and as you acquire more accessories specific to that brand, the more locked in you become. If that brand disappears, or in the future offers poor features - you're still stuck there.

This means you need to look into a crystal ball and ask, not what is cheapest today, but what will be around in five, ten or twenty years, as a brand. That's because, now we are digital, bodies are more or less disposable, outdated in five years - more that ever, it's the glass that counts (and costs, of course).

You need to be able to keep using those expensive lenses and accessories with a body that will work with them. You also need, for heaven's sake, to be able to buy a brand and model-specific battery in most cases, even to get them to function!

That is why I would say stick with the names that have made photography their home and are dependent on that market. You can argue the toss between Canon and Nikon but the fact remains that if anyone is going to be here in a decade, they are. They are also going to offer the widest possible range, because they cater for professionals as well as amateurs.

I know this from expensive personal experience. I have two bags full of Minolta bodies and lenses that are, more or less, worthless.

I won't make that mistake again and have signed-up with Nikon - though Canon could have been an equally valid choice.

darich

pault123 wrote: »

All the points are valid and I completely agree but the OP asks " We have a budget of aaround £350 and Dh is enroling on a photography course in the New Year."

Show me a Canon or Nikon DSLR for that budget WITH lens!?

£320 at currys, cheaper online at various vendors.

Based on the OP's comments about not having a clue or being none the wiser I'd recommend NOT buying a DSLR of any type.
As A Badger says - you're buying into a system which is a pretty big commitment, in time (to learn) and in a financial way.

Since I've used it and know it, I'd recommend the Panasonic DMC FZ28 bridge camera for around the £220 mark.
Good camera with fully manual option of you want it.

If the OP had asked which DSLR to buy I wouldn't recommend a Nikon. But that's not because I don't think they're good - it's because I've never used or owned one so can't advise someone else to buy one.

A._Badger

Actually, I agree with darich (as I posted earlier in this thread). At that stage, I doubt I'd buy an SLR at all. In that case, a Panasonic would make a lot of sense.

The only problem I have with them (and almost all compacts in fact - except the Canon A Series, which I use for grab shots) is the lack of an optical viewfinder. LCDs are all well and good, but I have yet to find one that works in bright sunlight. The Canon I have seems to have been one of the last to feature this and it's something I wouldn't want to do without..