Which DSLR

zivilesi

Hi,

I am also looking into buying a DSLR (I am an Art student). I will not bore you with questions which DSLR although I also have a sore head after reading tons of reviews, speaking with salesmen at photo shops etc.

It might sound a stupid question but... Could anybody share their thoughts whether it is worth waiting till Christmas madness / sales / offers hoping to get a better deal than to buy just now? If Christmas deals only include gifts like memory card or camera bag then I would not wait as I need it for my studies. But it is some £100 off the price or additional lense included in the deal - then I would!

many thanks

wba31

zivilesi wrote: »

Hi,

I am also looking into buying a DSLR (I am an Art student). I will not bore you with questions which DSLR although I also have a sore head after reading tons of reviews, speaking with salesmen at photo shops etc.

It might sound a stupid question but... Could anybody share their thoughts whether it is worth waiting till Christmas madness / sales / offers hoping to get a better deal than to buy just now? If Christmas deals only include gifts like memory card or camera bag then I would not wait as I need it for my studies. But it is some £100 off the price or additional lense included in the deal - then I would!

many thanks

why not buy second hand? i follow prices on camerapricebuster.co.uk, they seem to be up and down all the time, just not down enough for my liking...

Sambucus_Nigra

I'd recommend looking at Micro 4/3 cameras; 99% of DSLR with 50% of the weight and all the features you expect. Plus, the lens mounts are the same for each brand, which means you can fit a Panasonic lens to an Olympus camera; you can get pinhole attachments, and with an adapter, you can buy lenses from years and years ago and use them as well.

[Deleted User]

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

I'd recommend looking at Micro 4/3 cameras; 99% of DSLR with 50% of the weight and all the features you expect. Plus, the lens mounts are the same for each brand, which means you can fit a Panasonic lens to an Olympus camera; you can get pinhole attachments, and with an adapter, you can buy lenses from years and years ago and use them as well.

No... don't do it if you plan to keep your kit and upgrade it. The lenses cost far more than Canon/Nikons. I have a 4/3rds Panasonic and regret it. They want £300 for a 50mm prime lens!

Yes, i've resorted to buying an adapter and using manual focus lenses. I'd much rather have auto-focus though

Sambucus_Nigra

ringo_24601 wrote: »

No... don't do it if you plan to keep your kit and upgrade it. The lenses cost far more than Canon/Nikons. I have a 4/3rds Panasonic and regret it. They want £300 for a 50mm prime lens!

Yes, i've resorted to buying an adapter and using manual focus lenses. I'd much rather have auto-focus though

I love mine - however...the person asking hasn't got any kit so no need to upgrade their kit.

[Deleted User]

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

I love mine - however...the person asking hasn't got any kit so no need to upgrade their kit.

By 'upgrade' I mean 'progress your photographic kit beyond the kit-lens that comes with the camera'.

How many micro-4/3rd lenses have you bought? The entire idea behind buying an SLR is to get lenses to suit the photography you intend to do. Not to just stick with the kit lens that comes with it. I only have 1 extra 4/3rds lens, and it's not that great (it was a quite cheap Oly zoom lens).

If you want to get finiky about micro-4/3rds.. well, the sensor is smaller than in 'full' SLRs. Which means more sensor noise, and more depth of field (i.e. harder to get bokeh/background blur). Not to mention, the crop factor is very high, so to buy wide-angle lenses you've got to pay a fortune.

It's not a 'photographers' format.. it's a consumer format. It's a good backup camera since it's light, but that's it's only real benefit

Sambucus_Nigra

ringo_24601 wrote: »

By 'upgrade' I mean 'progress your photographic kit beyond the kit-lens that comes with the camera'.

How many micro-4/3rd lenses have you bought? The entire idea behind buying an SLR is to get lenses to suit the photography you intend to do. Not to just stick with the kit lens that comes with it. I only have 1 extra 4/3rds lens, and it's not that great (it was a quite cheap Oly zoom lens).

If you want to get finiky about micro-4/3rds.. well, the sensor is smaller than in 'full' SLRs. Which means more sensor noise, and more depth of field (i.e. harder to get bokeh/background blur). Not to mention, the crop factor is very high, so to buy wide-angle lenses you've got to pay a fortune.

It's not a 'photographers' format.. it's a consumer format. It's a good backup camera since it's light, but that's it's only real benefit

I have 4 lenses that I have purchased, why do you need to know? i have one excellent Panny Pancake and some of my images have been published since I moved to Micro 4/3 so I'm happy.

I have excellent pictures at very high ISOs - the Olympus EP-1 is most superb at capturing images with very little light. I know what Depth of Field is thanks - I have a qualification in photography and give tutorials and workshops in the topic - and I get most excellent DoF/Bokeh - [I did lots of star shaped Bokeh last Christmas with my nieces] - that's a function of the lens and related to the distance from the object and the aperture rather than the sensor.

So, you might not like it - but the person asking is an art student and the Micro 4/3 is more than capable at producing excellent images in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing with it. Many of my photo group have made the transition since I started singing the praises and nobody has been upset with them.

However - I am just putting it out there - I said that the person asking 'might want to look at' Micro 4/3 - I didn't go on a rant that they were the only option - just that they hadn't been mentioned and they are a very good alternative to spending huge amounts of money on a Canon or Nikon.

Each to their own and all that.

[Deleted User]

Go do some googling - depth of field is also effected by the crop factor of the sensor (assuming you intend to fill the frame to the same size per different camera).

e.g. if you had a Panasonic LX5, with it's 28mm f2.0 lens, then compared it to a 28mm f2.0 lens on a SLR - you would see that you had to get closer with the LX5 to achieve a shallow depth of field.

If you don't believe me, have a look at this tutorial on DoF - http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

I'm merely pointing out that the 'expensive Canon and Nikon' cameras have more cost-effective lenses available.

Sambucus_Nigra

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Go do some googling - depth of field is also effected by the crop factor of the sensor (assuming you intend to fill the frame to the same size per different camera).

e.g. if you had a Panasonic LX5, with it's 28mm f2.0 lens, then compared it to a 28mm f2.0 lens on a SLR - you would see that you had to get closer with the LX5 to achieve a shallow depth of field.

If you don't believe me, have a look at this tutorial on DoF - http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

I'm merely pointing out that the 'expensive Canon and Nikon' cameras have more cost-effective lenses available.

I'm sure it does, but the sensor is not something that can be altered so it is down to the user to make the decisions to get the best out of their camera and altering the distance and aperture is usually the way of doing it...rather than buying a new body.

I'm merely pointing out that the person asking the question could do worse than look at them as an option.

nsbarker

Have you determined a budget? I think that helps narrow down your potential DSLR pool. I personally own a Canon T2i, it's a great newbie/starter DSLR.