Dslr

[james1787]

With the birth of our first child on the way, my wife and I decided its time to upgrade the camera. It's been a while since I've had an SLR. I used to love using one back in the 35mm days, I still have them all somewhere in a camera bag. I used to enjoy taking lots of photos with them. Lately it's been point and click digital cameras, they take some decent pictures but I really miss the versatility of an SLR.

I have roughly a $1000 spending budget +- a little. I was looking at some of the Canon cameras, such as a T60 or T7. I know some of you love photography and was wondering some of your thoughts? Or perhaps should I be looking at something else? It's been a long while since I've looked into any sort of SLR and was hoping to get some input.

Thanks!

[SUBversive]

Congrats. I would check out the Nikon d series. Like the d7000. I have a cannon ae1 35mm but have always loved Nikon. I've had nothing but good times with it. I admit I over buy and it is over my head but I like having more possibilities rather than less. Good luck.

[wantonebad]

Look up some threads with the username SLRDude as a poster, some very good advice in those camera threads with him as a contributor.

[Kingair]

Go to http://www.dpreview.com

All the info you need . . . .

HAGOne

[GradyPhilpott]

The Nikon D7000 is now selling for under $900, body-only, on Amazon. It's a great camera and paired with a relatively inexpensive 50mmD f1.8 prime lens, you'd have a great camera/lens set up for the newborn (50mm would be 75mm in DX format and an excellent portrait lens) and the D7000 would be a great platform upon which to build.

The D5100 is also a good dSLR and is going for under $500, body-only, on Amazon. Add a 50mm f/1.4G lens and you'd still be within your budget.

Either route would give you an excellent rig to start a new hobby and memorialize your child's development.

[james1787]

Thanks for the suggestions! There is a lot to read up on out there, I've been doing some searching here on rolexforums as well out on the web. Here's a question, I have some older Tamron lenses. I think they had an adapter for pentax bodies. Would they work (with a different adapter) with a Canon or Nikon? I took some photograpy courses back in school as well as I did some photography work for the school and shot with manual everything cameras.. but haven't for a while! They weren't autofocus lenses, just manual lenses.

The D7000 looks pretty nice, I know Nikon is known for their great optics. I can remember wanting an old vintage Nikon F series camera years ago. From what I'm reading it's more important to focus on quality lenses. There are lots to choose from, I figure I'll start with a pretty general lens.. then get into macro stuff or higher zoom stuff later.

Edit: Grady, thanks for the post. I guess you could call it rekindling an old hobby I loved. Just curious, what is the difference between the 50mm 1.8prime and the 50mm 1.4 lens? The 50mm looks like a good place to start with the newborn. I started with the same type of lens with my old film SLR cameras.

[SUBversive]

I'm not sure about the older lenses myself. I have some. But think Grady is right about starting with the body and a decent new 50mm lens. I have old cannon lenses but not sure it's worth trying to convert. For me it's one of the areas I'm ok starting over new with.

[GradyPhilpott]

The Nikon F-mount has been around since about 1959 and is compatible with any camera made since then.

The D-series lenses are fully compatible with the D7000 and above because those have screw drives.

The D5200 and below will need a G-series lens for full compatibility.

Still any F-mount lens will work, but with some functional loss that can be compensated for by manual adjustments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_F-mount

[james1787]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

The Nikon F-mount has been around since about 1959 and is compatible with any camera made since then.

The D-series lenses are fully compatible with the D7000 and above because those have screw drives.

The D5200 and below will need a G-series lens for full compatibility.

Still any F-mount lens will work, but with some functional loss that can be compensated for by manual adjustments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_F-mount

Ah cool, that is reasurring to know. I just need to take the Pentax K-mount adapter off my Tamron lenses. (I remember purchasing the adapter so it would work on my pentax camera body) No worries on the manual adjustments.. that's how I learned originally. I just have to get re-acclimated to that.

I also found my Cokin filter system in my camera bag. I forgot I had that! I had their A series filters, they were always fun to play around with. I'd just have to make sure I have the right adapter ring for whatever lens. I see they are still out there and available.

LOL another expensive hobby re-kindled!!

[S52]

I'm a Canon guy myself, but you can't really go wrong with either a Canon or Nikon. Be careful as I found SLR equipment to be sort of like watches... can become very addictive, and good glass is very expensive!

I started with a pre owned canon D60, then quickly moved up to a 40D, and now here I am with a 5DMk2 and some L glass

Another idea would be to check out some rental websites... just google DSLR rental. You can rent some bodies and lenses to try before you buy at pretty reasonable prices...

I am used to the Canon system, and anytime I pick up a Nikon I am lost with the controls... so it might be good to handle both and see what makes more sense/ is easier for you!

[Kingair]

Originally Posted by S52

I'm a Canon guy myself, but you can't really go wrong with either a Canon or Nikon. Be careful as I found SLR equipment to be sort of like watches... can become very addictive, and good glass is very expensive!

I started with a pre owned canon D60, then quickly moved up to a 40D, and now here I am with a 5DMk2 and some L glass

Another idea would be to check out some rental websites... just google DSLR rental. You can rent some bodies and lenses to try before you buy at pretty reasonable prices...

I am used to the Canon system, and anytime I pick up a Nikon I am lost with the controls... so it might be good to handle both and see what makes more sense/ is easier for you!

That's correct . . . once you start with the Canon L series . . . 300 & 400 mm f 2.8 . . .

HAGM

[JasoninDenver]

I have been real happy with my Nikon D5000 and highly second Grady recommendation of the D5100. I will upgrade to the D5200 when it is released.

Instead of a prime for a first lens I would go with the Nikon 16-85 and the get the prime when you know for sure what length you want.

However, if you can throw down the change for the Full Frame, you won;t regret it.

[conrail]

If you're going to use old full-frame lenses you might consider investing in a full-frame dslr body - there are lots of great pre-owned deals to be had on them, including ones with low shutter actuations. A used Nikon D700 might be around your price range now. I picked one up last year for $1600 - I'm sure they've come down. Not to mention, they're amazing for anything remotely wide angle.

[S52]

Originally Posted by conrail

If you're going to use old full-frame lenses you might consider investing in a full-frame dslr body - there are lots of great pre-owned deals to be had on them, including ones with low shutter actuations. A used Nikon D700 might be around your price range now. I picked one up last year for $1600 - I'm sure they've come down. Not to mention, they're amazing for anything remotely wide angle.

I agree... I was a bit skeptical about FF cameras... until I picked up my 5Dmk2... the difference between that and a crop camera was incredible... no going back now...

[conrail]

Originally Posted by S52

I agree... I was a bit skeptical about FF cameras... until I picked up my 5Dmk2... the difference between that and a crop camera was incredible... no going back now...

Yup! And besides fitting so much more into the frame, the full-frame cameras are generally better build quality as they are seen as "pro" models - thus including more pro features and options, including image sensors. Again, "generally."

[apeogre]

Originally Posted by conrail

If you're going to use old full-frame lenses you might consider investing in a full-frame dslr body - there are lots of great pre-owned deals to be had on them, including ones with low shutter actuations. A used Nikon D700 might be around your price range now. I picked one up last year for $1600 - I'm sure they've come down. Not to mention, they're amazing for anything remotely wide angle.

Lets me honest, the guy is probably going to just be taking pictures of his baby. Any DSLR will accommodate that. Even some prosumer point and shoots take amazing photos, Canon's s100 is ridiculous considering it's just a point and shoot.

Sure, a full frame is very nice, but unless you're venturing away from the little green square to Tv or M or Av, just about anything will do and make you more than happy. That is, at least for the average user. Just my 2 pennies.

[james1787]

Originally Posted by apeogre

Lets me honest, the guy is probably going to just be taking pictures of his baby. Any DSLR will accommodate that. Even some prosumer point and shoots take amazing photos

Nope, the baby was just the excuse to get back into SLR photography. Back in the 35mm days I had a few SLR cameras and lenses and took them everywhere. I used to enjoy shooting a lot of landscape, macro, long night exposure, and black and white. To a young 20something the cost of film development started getting costly.. Digital cameras arrived and I found myself with point and shoots for a while. It was just easy to throw your images you want printed on a disk discarding the others you dont want. I still love going out and taking pictures. In some of my travels I wish I had a dslr as I missed the versatility of a SLR and their lenses to get exactly the photo I want. I've been considering a DSLR for a while now, just needed something to push me I into getting one. Is the D700 overkill for someone getting back into the hobby? Probably.. but I hope to be able to take advantage of what a full frame camera has to offer. So yes, baby photos will be part of what I'll be shooting, but I will be fully enjoying my photography hobby once again

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by james1787

Is the D700 overkill for someone getting back into the hobby?

The answer to that is a resounding, "No!"

If you can afford to go full-frame, there simply is no reason not to.

[teqp]

Originally Posted by conrail

The Nikkor 50mm f1.4 or f1.8 lens is AMAZING - especially for pics of people, or the like. Produces stunning bokeh. I have the 1.8 as its a helluva lot cheaper and I think the 1.4 is overkill unless you're shooting in the dark.

I totally agree that the 50mm produce awesome bokeh. I have the 1.4 and is nice when doing some underwater photography off the SoCal coast where the water can be murky.

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

As much as I like Nikon, it does seem that Canon does have the best point and shoot cameras in the market today, though I wouldn't rule out Nikon.

All my SLR lenses are Nikon and I agree that Canon is hands down better than Nikon for point n shoot.

You made a nice choice with the D700...enjoy it.

[james1787]

I did a little reading up on full-frame vs APS-C DSLR's. I had assumed everything was full-frame up until now (I didn't even know ASP-C existed)

The lens or lenses I have aren't really anything special, so I would not be opposed to getting new lenses better suited to a new camera. That being said, I would be able to use my lenses only they would be cropped a bit on an APS-C camera body.

I'm not necessarily opposed to a full frame camera, but it's definitely climbing out of the budget I wanted to spend. Aside from re-using my old lenses to their full capacity, is it really worth it?

Another question, I used to love taking long exposures at night on a tripod with a shudder release cable? What's the equivalent these days?

[conrail]

Originally Posted by james1787

I did a little reading up on full-frame vs APS-C DSLR's. I had assumed everything was full-frame up until now (I didn't even know ASP-C existed)

The lens or lenses I have aren't really anything special, so I would not be opposed to getting new lenses better suited to a new camera. That being said, I would be able to use my lenses only they would be cropped a bit on an APS-C camera body.

I'm not necessarily opposed to a full frame camera, but it's definitely climbing out of the budget I wanted to spend. Aside from re-using my old lenses to their full capacity, is it really worth it?

I think so, yes. But particularly so if you will have any type of wide angle lens. Those extra mms make a huge difference in what you can put in your view

Another question, I used to love taking long exposures at night on a tripod with a shudder release cable? What's the equivalent these days?

A tripod with a shutter release cable is still needed these days :)

[esm]

So, the main reason to get a DSLR is because you have a first child on the way - if so, can I suggest a "better" point and shoot, that can be taken with you easily and compact enough to go into the change bag or under the pram....

The last thing you want to do is to carry a bulky DSLR when you have a LO to take dare of..... Well, that's me speaking of experience (my daughter is now almost 19 months)

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by esm

So, the main reason to get a DSLR is because you have a first child on the way - if so, can I suggest a "better" point and shoot, that can be taken with you easily and compact enough to go into the change bag or under the pram....

The last thing you want to do is to carry a bulky DSLR when you have a LO to take dare of..... Well, that's me speaking of experience (my daughter is now almost 19 months)

Well it's good to have both, a nice Panasonic lumix with a Leica lense....nice compliment to a dslr.

[AAP8]

Originally Posted by esm

So, the main reason to get a DSLR is because you have a first child on the way - if so, can I suggest a "better" point and shoot, that can be taken with you easily and compact enough to go into the change bag or under the pram....

The last thing you want to do is to carry a bulky DSLR when you have a LO to take dare of..... Well, that's me speaking of experience (my daughter is now almost 19 months)

In this scenario, 99% of my friends just use their phones or as you suggest a point and shoot.

[james1787]

Well, it's an excuse to get back into it.. I've been wanting to get a DSLR for a while now. We have a point and shoot that takes some great pics, but as I used to be into SLR's, I miss the versatility of an SLR, lenses, filters, flashes, etc. The point and shoot will always stick with me for those candid unexpected shots but I'd like to jump back into the SLR world with a DSLR.

[Kingair]

I was always running around with all these heavy stuff camera's . . . . and last year I just both a Nikon J1 . . . pics are ok . . not what my EOS 1 Mark iV did . . . but still . . . it's light . . . the fastest autofocus I ever seen . . .

Next one will be a Leica . . just 1 lens 35 mm f 1.4 . . . and probably the M Monochrome . . . just back to B & W . . .


HAGOne

[tinger]

Originally Posted by Kingair

I was always running around with all these heavy stuff camera's . . . . and last year I just both a Nikon J1 . . . pics are ok . . not what my EOS 1 Mark iV did . . . but still . . . it's light . . . the fastest autofocus I ever seen . . .

Next one will be a Leica . . just 1 lens 35 mm f 1.4 . . . and probably the M Monochrome . . . just back to B & W . . .


HAGOne

Great Combo Marc!
However, I'll take the s'cron @ $2K less along with its much smaller size /weight. Would love to see them come out with a low light FX sensor.

[AAP8]

Get the Canon T4i, kit, it takes video and pictures ... and it might be the only DSLR (i think) that does continuous auto focus in video mode.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by AAP8

Get the Canon T4i, kit, it takes video and pictures ... and it might be the only DSLR (i think) that does continuous auto focus in video mode.

This is completely false.

[AAP8]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

This is completely false.

Example? Most lenses for dSLR's are not designed with continuous focus motors and therefore suck at continuous auto focus in video mode. Canon's new STM lenses use a motor designed for this. Does Nikon have this problem solved already?

I shoot Canon, so I really don't keep up with Nikon tech.