Camera Labs

Hi there,

i´m looking to buy my first DSLR and could use a little help.
The camera will be used mostly outdoors, a part of the time in bad lighting, dusk and dawn (wildlife) for instance.
Unfortunatly, as most people, i´m tied with a budget, i dont want to go much above 1000 €. That´s including lenses.
I´ve been reading the reviews and this forum for about a week now, but i am still not sure which camera i should go for or which feature i really need and which i can ignore.
As a beginner, i imagine taking fotos in low light situations needs a camera that has relatively low noise levels at higher ISO. I know i cant expect wonders with my budget but thats just something i think i should take into account, or am i completley wrong?
I could also see that some form of shake reuduction would be useful as well.
Lenses: i think i will be using the normal kit lense which seem to generaly be a 18-55mm. That means i would also need to buy something in the 55-200mm or 70-200mm range to start with.
The cameras i´m thinking of are:

Nikon D40/D40x.. i think the D80 would be over my budget.
Canon EOS 400D....kit 747€...which lenses have integrated IS? is it the USM? Because i´ve seen a 75-300mm III USM for 269€
Pentax K10D....This is the one i´m little unsure about (after looking at the reviews). Although, that said, i could get this camera with a 2 lense kit DA 18-55mm and DA50-200mm for 949€ + P+P. I´m just not sure if it is the right one for me as a beginner, i am willing to learn though and intend to.
Then there are also the, Olympus E-510 and the Sony A100, not sure here about the noise level´s at higher ISO.
I should also say, all prices are internet prices from one site , but i do intend to buy if possible at the local dealer.

I am going to a dealer tomorrow, so that i can maybe get my hand´s on some of the cameras and see how they feel, unfortunatly i don´t think he will have all models.
Hopefuly i haven´t asked too many stupid questions, any help and ideas would be much appreciated.

Sorry this has turned out to be such a long post

Ian

Hello Ian, and welcome to the friendly Camera Labs forum!
No post is long enough to put us off, and we feel with you in your quest to invest your hard earned cash wisely!
Good high ISO noise and IS (=image stab.) is the thing to go for you. And no: USM is not IS on Canon lenses! You have to look for... IS on a Canon lens, VR on a Nikkkor, VC on a Tamron and OS on a Sigma to get what you want!

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses

@ Tombomba2

thanks for youre friendly welcome....it´s a really great site here......lot´s of friendly people and loads of information, not to forget the great reviews.

Ian

Hi Ian, we've compared the features of most of the camras you've mentioned in the verdict of our E-510 review, here:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olymp ... dict.shtml

Let us know which feels best to you after you've visited the dealer!

Thats a good link Gordon, thanks.

Where would the Pentax 10 D fit in there as a comparison?

I´ll post how things went tomorrow evening.

Ian

Welcome!

For Canon lenses, the USM acronym stands for Ultra Sonic Motor, which means the lens has a motor that is both faster and quieter than those found on non-USM lenses. For Nikkor (made by Nikon) lenses, AF-S means the same thing. Nikon calls it Silent Wave Motor.

Most camera bodies have a motor. However, if a motor is also present in the lens, that one it will be used instead of the one on the camera. Of course, if both the camera and the lens lack a motor, you won't get auto-focus. For Nikon, the D40 and D40X lack a motor. I'm not sure if any of Canon's current models also lacks one.

Make sure you read Gordon's comparison of some Nikkor lenses. Also the buyer's guide for budget DSLRs. And I guess you could also find some information at Nikon's lenses page and Canon's equivalent, then come back to Cameralabs and look for a review on a lens that meets your criteria.

I've been using a D40 for a while and it does what I need. If you are like me (beginner/amateur) and have a limited budget, maybe a good way to start would be to get that camera and a nice lens.

_________________
Nikon D90 + MB-D80 + SB-600 + AF-S VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 + AF-S 35mm f/1.8 + AF 85mm f/1.8 | My photos on Flickr.

Ian
You might want to consider a flash for low light situation where the in-body flash may not be sufficient.
There is a grading system for the flash, I think its Guide Number.
The higher the number to stronger it is, and will have more reach in distance.

_________________
Nikon D7000 and a bunch of Nikkors

Hi again,

thanks @ luis and DavidL for your advice.
I went to the dealer this morning and had a good look at some cameras.
The ones i could get hold of were, Nikon D40/D40x, D80
Canon EOS 400D and an Olympus 410.
The Nikon D80 felt really good, but i also very much liked the D40, the Canon and the Olympus felt ok too.
However if i leave the D80 out of it, i think i would have to say that the D40 is my choice.
I asked the salesman what he thought about the 6 MP compared to the 10MP on the D40x. (bit of a test question really after reading the reviews here ) He advised me to take the D40 as it would be more than enough for normal use and would still bring enlargments up to a size of about 50cm x 70cm, on good clear shots maybe even larger. After this answer i thought i could trust him, he also showed me some fotos as proof of what he was talking about.
My thinking is, (as luis also said) the money i save on the body i could put into some good lenses.
So, then we got down to talking about lenses. He offerd me the D40 with the 18mm-55mm kit lens and a 70mm-200mm for 749 €.
The 70-200 had no VR though.
I had been looking at the showcase behind him, and there stood a Nikkor 70mm-300mm with VR: http://nikonimaging.com/global/products ... /index.htm
The end offer on this was 1100€ for the D40 with the 18mm-55mm plus the 70mm-300mm VR and also a UV filter, which he said i should always use to protect the lens.
1100€ breaks my budget a bit, still got to buy the memory card and a bag, but it seems like a good deal to me. What do you guys think?

edit: O.K, after reading and watching the full review and video review from Gordon on the Nikkor 70mm-300mm VR, i decided to go for it.
I just phoned the dealer and tomorrow morning i´ll be picking up the Nikon D40 + kit lens 18mm-55mm also the 70mm-300mm VR and the UV filter.
Thanks everyone for all your help.

Nice, Ian, that you came to a well-informed decision so fast!
The only afterthought from my side would be:
- Yes, well done, not to buy a tele-zoom without VR (=IS)
- but you could be very happy with the Nikon VR 55-200mm too, which is a little lighter, smaller, cheaper (you may save almost 150EUR on the lens)
So if you still like to stay within budget, think about it.
Both sets will be great value for you

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses

@tombomba2

you are right, the Nikon VR 55-200mm is a very good lens and much lighter. (and cheaper )
The main reason i decided to spend more and accept the extra weight, is wildlife, i think (and hope) that the 70-300mm will give me that little extra reach. I also think it´s a lens that i can use for years and years. Even if i decide to buy a different Nikon body in the distant future.

edit PS. the "informed decision" was thanks to you guys and this very good site.

Yup Ian, you're right: The VR 70-300mm is FF (aka FX) and the extra reach will make you even happier than with the 55-200mm
And, although the IQ of the little sister 55-200 is quite good, the 70-300mm tops it easily.
So part with all that cash and be(come) a very happy man!

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses