JVegas wrote:
What's the difference in lens systems? I haven't found a really good resource on that. I know there are differences with Nikon and Canon, as Nikon has a line of lenses which have the focusing motor in them whereas Canon's lenses do not
Between Canon and Nikon, IMO it's not so much about the difference between the systems, as a whole, but the more subtle, specific differences for your particular situation (which again gets back to why I think you should hold off on choosing until you have a better idea of what your particular needs are).
But for the sake of discussion, if we artificially limit your choice to either a Canon or Nikon DSLR to shoot indoor candids for under $800--both brands have 50mm f1.8 lenses that you could squeeze into that budget with an entry level (crop sensor) body. However, on a crop sensor, you may find the 35mm equivalent focal length of 75-80mm too long for some shots. (Side note: on the wide end, the RX100 has a 35mm equiv. focal length of 28mm.) To go wider, both brands also have 28mm f1.8 lenses, but the Canon will run you around $500 and the Nikon around $700. (And another side note: crop factor will still apply, so both lenses still won't be as wide as the RX100.) So with a bit of good shopping, you may be able to find a Canon T3 body only and 28mm f1.8 lens within your budget, but I don't think you'll be able to do the same for a Nikon D3100 body and 28mm f1.8 lens. So in this particular (artificially limited) situation, Canon would be the better choice. (And a third side note: versus a Canon T3 + 28mm f1.8, I think the RX100 is a better buy.)
Quote:
why do DSLR owners upgrade the body every few years? Is it because technology was evolving so fast and cameras continued to get vastly better, or is it because people just want a newer camera? I was under the impression that DSLRs are more like the film camera I watched my mother use growing up - you buy a good one, get good lenses, and it lasts you a long time.
Yes, at the risk of stating the obvious, the biggest difference between a DSLR and a film camera is that a DSLR doesn't use film. It's a digital device, so Moore's Law applies. To use your situation as an example again, what version of the iPhone did you have before you upgraded to the 5? Even if it was a 3GS, it was still less than 3 years old. Or, to use a DSLR as an example, the Canon 5D Mark II is less than 4 years old, but I know several owners who will be upgrading their cameras as soon as finances allow. And keep in mind that the 5DII was a top end body, not an entry level, so if anything, the upgrade cycle should be longer than it would be for an entry level body.
Having said that,
something else I've said several times before--if your current camera does everything you want satisfactorily, there's no reason for you to upgrade.
Mark