Camera recommendation

[Little Dragon]

Any good sales on beginner SLRs, DSLRs?

Looking to get more involved in photography and would like to get something decent that will last a while.

[dragonone]

http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/04/n...or-1080p-vide/

this looks to be an interesting price point if it's the same sensor as D7000. i went with the 550D when it came out because it shared a similar sensor as a 7D. and now the 60D and T3i too.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Little Dragon
Any good sales on beginner SLRs, DSLRs?

Looking to get more involved in photography and would like to get something decent that will last a while.

Pick up a Nikon D90 while you still can for $679. Overall it's the best bang for the buck body if you want it to never hold you back (as long as you don't get into anything too crazy). Full lens compatibility, several higher end features, etc. The D5100 was just announced too for almost the same price, it's better in some areas but it's a bit less of an "all rounder". Not sure what your budget is but that is pretty much the sweet spot right now assuming you don't have a huge budget.

No actual "big sales" or anything on right now that I am aware of though.

[Little Dragon]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Pick up a Nikon D90 while you still can for $679. Overall it's the best bang for the buck body if you want it to never hold you back (as long as you don't get into anything too crazy). Full lens compatibility, several higher end features, etc. The D5100 was just announced too for almost the same price, it's better in some areas but it's a bit less of an "all rounder". Not sure what your budget is but that is pretty much the sweet spot right now assuming you don't have a huge budget.

No actual "big sales" or anything on right now that I am aware of though.

Thank you.
I am still looking around but the D90 looks good. Also looking into the T2i.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Little Dragon


Thank you.
I am still looking around but the D90 looks good. Also looking into the T2i.

They are pretty close in price but a few points to consider for comparison. You can judge for yourself how important they are to you.

Rebel T2i
- Better video recording capabilities
- Better live view implementation with better AF while in live view
- More megapixels (18 vs 12) but slightly worse high ISO performance as a result

Nikon D90
- Better AF
- Better viewfinder (glass pentaprism vs pentamirror)
- Shorter viewfinder blackout time and shorter shutter lag
- Wireless flash control without buying an expensive accessory
- AF assist light does not require raising the built-in flash
- More durable shutter (rated to higher actuations)
- Faster continuous shooting with a larger buffer (4.5fps/11RAW vs 3.7fps/6RAW on the T2i)
- Has a top LCD to display settings (HUGE advantage IMO - I will not buy a camera without this)
- Double the battery life of the T2i

Anyways IMO the D90 is clearly superior as a photographic tool, but if video is of the utmost importance to you the T2i deserves a close look.

Also remember camera bodies get replaced every year or two so it's always easy to upgrade or have the latest and greatest. Lenses, flashes, etc. do not get updated nearly as often so it's important to consider the entire system when buying. Make sure you look into lenses you may want in the future, etc. and see which company offers the ones that appeal to you most.

[dirtsniffer]

Hey I've been super happy with my D90.One thing I noticed that the t2i feels like a dinky toy in comparison.
On the D90 you can pretty much change any setting without having to access the menu. like ISO, file format, continuous shooting, metering and focus type. All this info is also always displayed on the top mount lcd. It also has primary and secondary wheels for easier shutter and aperature adjustments in manual mode.
In body auto focus is a huge advantage too, it allows you to buy much cheaper used lenses. I bought a 50mm lense for 100 bucks off kijiji, to get one with in lense AF, it would have been 300.
I'm sure the cannon has its perks too, but im completely satisfied with the d90. and ive seen some on kijiji from 600

[Little Dragon]

Thanks for the information guys.
Video is pretty important to me, so I am leaning towards the T2i at this point in time.
D90 definetely looks like it is great for everything else though. Maybe I should take a look at how it's video quality is. If it's not much worse than the T2i then I might get it instead.

I will continue my research.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Little Dragon
Thanks for the information guys.
Video is pretty important to me, so I am leaning towards the T2i at this point in time.
D90 definetely looks like it is great for everything else though. Maybe I should take a look at how it's video quality is. If it's not much worse than the T2i then I might get it instead.

I will continue my research.

The difference is the D90 will shoot 720p/24 and the T2i will shoot 1080p/24/25/30. Nothing wrong at all with the D90's video, the T2i is just better. Neither AF during video.

You might also consider the brand new Nikon D5100. It matches the T2i's video capabilities (resolutions and frame rates) and pairs them with the best sensor currently available in the APS-C market. The D5100 will also AF while shooting video, and will accept an external mic to avoid any AF noise entering the video. It's contrast detect AF though, and it's not as good as the phase detect AF it uses for regular picture taking.

If you are THAT serious about video maybe you should also be looking at true video cameras.

[Little Dragon]

^
Thanks for the suggestion, I never looked at the D5100 before. That definitely would be what I want. Swivel LCD screen is bonus for filming.

Is the D5100 better than the T3i in your opinion?

I am into mostly video, but I also enjoy photography so that is why I am looking to get a DSLR. Seems they can take both great photos as well as great HD videos. Camcorders on the other hand just take great videos, not very good for great photos.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Little Dragon
^
Thanks for the suggestion, I never looked at the D5100 before. That definitely would be what I want. Swivel LCD screen is bonus for filming.

Is the D5100 better than the T3i in your opinion?

I am into mostly video, but I also enjoy photography so that is why I am looking to get a DSLR. Seems they can take both great photos as well as great HD videos. Camcorders on the other hand just take great videos, not very good for great photos.

Well if you are now looking at the T3i ($880) you put yourself into an interesting price bracket. There is nothing else in that price bracket at all, so you need to go slightly up or slightly down to look for competition.

Looking up, you've got the Nikon D7000 at $1099. Quite possibly the best APS-C camera on the market right now. It has absolutely no competition near it's price bracket, and competes with more expensive cameras. This is the ticket right now if it fits your budget. For $200 more than a T3i you are getting WAY more than $200 more camera. You get 1080p/24 video but it does not have a swivel screen. The T3i will shoot 1080p/30 video, which is the only area in which it bests the D7000. The D7000 is better in literally every other way including build, ergonomics, AF, etc. etc.

A quick note on the Canon 60D, it is almost exactly the same price as the D7000 and is once again bested in every way except video, which it shares with the T3i. So, it's kind of a strange camera. If you just want the video, you can save money and buy the T3i. If you want the much better *camera* you just buy the D7000. The T3i and 60D are almost identical, and within $100 of each other. I have no idea what Canon's plan with that was, but the T3i shouldn't exist and the 60D should be well under $1000 IMO. That would balance their lineup and make it more competitive.

Looking down a price bracket you have the Nikon D5100 and Nikon D90 which we've already talked about. The T3i compares most closely with the D5100, however the D5100 is better in almost every way I can see so far. It has a much better sensor, faster continuous shooting, better battery life, better AF, and AF during video. It does all that for $200 less than a T3i. Neither have top LCD's. Keep in mind with the D5100 it will not auto focus with screw drive (AF-D) lenses - this isn't really a problem though as there are incredibly few lenses left that have no AF-S alternative.

T3i compared with the D90 - the T3i will have 1080p/24/30 video vs the D90's 720p/24 video. The difference there mainly being the D90 is 2 years old, so what you are seeing is the progression in video technology in DSLRs over the last couple years. As a camera, the D90 is still better no question. The D90 does not have a swivel LCD. The T3i also feels like a toy in comparison to the D90 which is built much better (as dirtsniffer also mentioned above).

You may want to have a quick look at the Panasonic GH2...it has some of the best implemented video features of any DSLR but falls short in most other photographic areas. It's worth mentioning, but I also think the better overall compromise is a APS-C sized sensor DSLR with good video.

To put it more simply:

Best bang for the buck DSLR with good video (1080p/24/25/30) - Nikon D5100

Best Bang for the buck DSLR for taking pictures - Nikon D90

Best Bang for the buck DSLR, period - Nikon D7000

You mentioned video was very important to you, but what I don't know is how much you are willing to compromise on that front in order to get a better camera for picture taking. If you absolutely must have 1080p/30 your only choices near this price range are the T2i, T3i, 60D and D5100. If you are ok with 1080/24p frame rates and/or 720p, you have a lot more choices and will also get a much better camera for picture taking.

Canon has kind of been relying on their superior video implementation lately as their competitive advantage, but now the D5100 seems to match it in that area so it will be interesting to see what happens.

Anyways that's how I see it - I encourage you to also do your own research, go out and handle these cameras to see what feels best in your hand, and look at each company's lens/accessory lineup to see if there are any glaring omissions based on your requirements or future requirements.

[gogreen]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
If you are THAT serious about video maybe you should also be looking at true video cameras.

The Canon 5D Mark II seems to be a popular choice among pro videographers, so it's not absolutely necessary to abandon photography in favour of video. Going with the T2i and investing in good glass would definitely offer a nice full-frame upgrade path.

The specs on the D7000 and D5100 are impressive though. Definitely a lot of bang for the buck there. The nearest competition in a Pentax would be the K-5, currently at $1498 (16.3 Mp sensor plus 1080p video at 25 fps, plus full weather sealing).

[msommers]

If photography isn't the main focus, I'd suggest something cheaper. Sure it wont' have all the bells and whistles but it won't suck or hinder your abilities. Hell, even getting a used D90 won't be that much these days and will be more than enough for someone just getting it. Even for experienced users, it's a fantastic camera.

I'm with Mark on this one, get a dedicated video camera if the primary use is for video. Canon, Lumix, Panasonic all make fantastic video cameras in that price range.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by gogreen
The nearest competition in a Pentax would be the K-5, currently at $1498 (16.3 Mp sensor plus 1080p video at 25 fps, plus full weather sealing).

Yeah the K5 is pretty good but it has 3 major flaws in my opinion.

1) It's overpriced at $400 more than a D7000. The D7000 is better in many areas, but the K5 is built better and can shoot 1fps faster (but worse buffer). It's not worth $400 more at all IMO.

2) The Pentax system as a whole (lenses, flashes, etc.) is very lacking when compared to Nikon or Canon.

3) They have implemented a very noticeable amount of high ISO noise reduction to their RAW files, meaning you cannot disable that. This is how it gets artificially high ratings on websites like DXO that measure noise compared to the D7000 that uses the same sensor. Having unwanted noise reduction with no way to turn it off at higher ISO's would be a deal breaker for me, anyways.

[Ashkente]

Something to consider, for Canon video shooters:
http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ

Runs like CHDK. Looks interesting!

[Little Dragon]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


You mentioned video was very important to you, but what I don't know is how much you are willing to compromise on that front in order to get a better camera for picture taking. If you absolutely must have 1080p/30 your only choices near this price range are the T2i, T3i, 60D and D5100. If you are ok with 1080/24p frame rates and/or 720p, you have a lot more choices and will also get a much better camera for picture taking.

Video is quite important to me so I'd rather not sacrifice the frame rate.

Right now I am tight on cash so looks like the T3i is out for sure.
D5100 looks to be the winner at this point in time. Great features for less money. Can't seem to find one used anywhere though.
T2i is my second choice if I find a really great deal on one.

I will have to go out and play around with these cameras soon though.
What're the best camera stores in Calgary?

Thank you for all your help!

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Little Dragon


Video is quite important to me so I'd rather not sacrifice the frame rate.

Right now I am tight on cash so looks like the T3i is out for sure.
D5100 looks to be the winner at this point in time. Great features for less money. Can't seem to find one used anywhere though.
T2i is my second choice if I find a really great deal on one.

I will have to go out and play around with these cameras soon though.
What're the best camera stores in Calgary?

Thank you for all your help!

The D5100 isn't even out yet, it should be in Canada by the end of the month though - that's why you can't find a used one. It was only announced last Tuesday. It certainly appears to offer a ton of bang for the buck.

The T2i is not built as well, and has a worse sensor than the D5100. Comparing the two, I really don't see any reason a person would take a T2i over a D5100, especially with the D5100 being the same price. It wouldn't be worth it to take a used T2i just to save $100 over a D5100 in my opinion.

Definitely check them out in person as something might jump out to you as being a deal breaker for one of your choices. Also look at the entire system. Nikon has a much better flash system in general, but make sure you also look at lenses currently offered and make sure you are covered for what you think you will need now and also down the road. Both companies have a pretty huge selection though, I don't imagine you would find any issues. Nikon has a lot more "entry level" and "budget" choices, though. Their lens lineups mach up more closely as you get into the more expensive stuff.

As for stores, The Camera Store and Memory Express probably offer the best prices. I would avoid Blacks and especially Seneal. Vistek is good if you get them to match or beat prices, as they always list things at full MSRP. Vistek always seems to have stock though, so it's not bad if you get them to match a price. I'd also not recommend not making a decision based solely on anything the salesperson says, and make your own decision. I've heard some pretty outlandish statements listening to various sales people at various camera stores. Also if anyone tries to sell me a UV filter for a digital camera I instantly assume they are just trying to make the most money possible off of me and don't care what I buy.

Lastly, if you end up buying something, do not buy UV filters. Every camera shop in town tries to sell them to you because they make good margin on them. Digital SLRs have absolutely no need for a UV filter as all modern lenses and even the sensor have UV coatings on them. UV coatings on filters are designed for film cameras and can cast unpleasant hues on your digital images. If you want protective filters buy specific protective filters like Nikon NC filters or similar. They are designed specifically to have absolutely no effect on the image.

[gogreen]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Yeah the K5 is pretty good but it has 3 major flaws in my opinion.

1) It's overpriced at $400 more than a D7000. The D7000 is better in many areas, but the K5 is built better and can shoot 1fps faster (but worse buffer). It's not worth $400 more at all IMO.

2) The Pentax system as a whole (lenses, flashes, etc.) is very lacking when compared to Nikon or Canon.

3) They have implemented a very noticeable amount of high ISO noise reduction to their RAW files, meaning you cannot disable that. This is how it gets artificially high ratings on websites like DXO that measure noise compared to the D7000 that uses the same sensor. Having unwanted noise reduction with no way to turn it off at higher ISO's would be a deal breaker for me, anyways.

You're certainly up on your specs!

1) I agree that the price advantage definitely goes to Nikon at the moment. It should be interesting to see if Pentax drops the price of the K-5 in response, although they're more likely marketing it as an upgrade for current Pentax users.

2) Canon and Nikon definitely have advantages in their flash and autofocus systems. I'm going to agree to disagree with you on the lens selection though because I think it's a bit subjective. Nikon offers more focal length ranges in their zooms, but Pentax covers the range from 16-135 with two 2.8 zooms that have excellent IQ and cost considerably less than similar offerings from Canon or Nikon. So I think it definitely depends on what you're shooting.

3) Good info, I wasn't aware of that. Although I thought the two sensors were similar but different. At any rate, I agree that may be an issue for someone who regularly shoots at ISO 3200 or higher.

I agree 100% with you on your advice to check everything out in person, and also recommend The Camera Store.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by gogreen


You're certainly up on your specs!

2) Canon and Nikon definitely have advantages in their flash and autofocus systems. I'm going to agree to disagree with you on the lens selection though because I think it's a bit subjective. Nikon offers more focal length ranges in their zooms, but Pentax covers the range from 16-135 with two 2.8 zooms that have excellent IQ and cost considerably less than similar offerings from Canon or Nikon. So I think it definitely depends on what you're shooting.

It's kind of subjective, but kind of not . It's a fact that Nikon and Canon make far more lenses that cover a far broader range overall. Their systems as a whole are simply more complete. If you don't need anything that Pentax doesn't offer, then I agree it has no effect on the consumer, but they are missing some very key lenses, and particularly past 200mm.

Pentax's 16-50/2.8 zoom is $1028 n Canada. Nikon's 17-55/2.8 is $1299 and Canon's 17-55/2.8 IS is $1199. Before Japan's Tsunami, the Nikon and Canon versions were both $1099. Not a big price difference, even post-tsunami. Optical performance is good on all 3, but the Nikon is fully weather sealed, and made of magnesium. The Canon and Pentax versions are made of plastic. The Canon version has IS, however it is very prone to failure on that particular lens. The lens was annonced more than 5 years ago and Canon hasn't bothered to fix the issue yet. LensRentals.com publishes their failure rates as they deal with a ton of different lenses, and Canon's 17-55 IS happens to have the second highest failure rate of any lens they rent at ~29%, citing "IS failure" and "AF electronics" as the reasons. That lens is very poorly built. I do wish Nikon added VR II to their 17-55 lens though. It's been out since 2003 and I'd buy it in a heartbeat if they updated it with a 17-55/2.8 VRII N version. It's due for a refresh too, but has no common issues or problems.

Pentax's 50-135/2.8 zoom is indeed something that nobody else makes, so I can't really compare it with anything. I don't know what it costs considerably less than in the Nikon or Canon lineups, because neither company makes a lens covering a similar range. Sigma makes a 50-150/2.8 which is probably the closest thing. A 50-135 falls well short of Nikon & Canon's latest 70-200/2.8's in both performance and build quality, as it should as it's half the price. What Pentax doesn't make, however is a 70-200/2.8 lens of their own. That is the bread & butter lens of a huge number of working professionals, wedding photographers, hobbyists, etc. IMO that is a glaring omission in the Pentax lens lineup. Pentax also doesn't offer a single lens beyond 300mm, and nothing beyond 200mm that is faster than f2.8. Those particular omissions ignore many sports photographers, bird/wildlife photographers, etc. Pentax also doesn't play the full frame game, however they are into medium format.

As for the stabilization side of things, in-lens stabilization is definitely superior to in-camera stabilization from a technical standpoint. Not only is it simply more effective, but it also stabilizes the viewfinder which is a huge bonus. The trade off, of course, is that in-body stabilization also works on very old lenses and primes which do not have stabilization. So, if you had a huge collection of old primes or something the in-body stabilization may be very attractive.

Anyways, I don't really see a single thing in the Pentax lens lineup that there isn't a similarly priced alternative for in the Nikon/Canon lineups except the 50-135/2.8. I personally find that range to be far to narrow but I certainly don't speak for everyone! I just don't think they have the company size or budget to compete with the big two.

Again, nothing wrong with Pentax at all, but if you want to invest in that system you had better take a close look at the lenses, consider your current as well as possible future needs, and see if you're covered. That goes for any of the manufactures.

Originally posted by gogreen

3) Good info, I wasn't aware of that. Although I thought the two sensors were similar but different. At any rate, I agree that may be an issue for someone who regularly shoots at ISO 3200 or higher.

I agree 100% with you on your advice to check everything out in person, and also recommend The Camera Store.

Yes unfortunately Pentax applies high ISO NR to their RAW images that cannot be changed by the user. In some situations this may be an advantage, but overall it is far better to have the option to control NR and remove it with a dedicated noise reduction program in post processing rather than be stuck with it when you don't want it. This is only really at the higher ISO's though. I personally still view this as a fairly significant disadvantage, but to some users it will make absolutely no difference whatsoever.

You are right in that the 2 sensors are very similar, but different. Sony makes the sensor for both companies, then each company puts their own personal touch on it with processing, the AA filter, etc. Sony and Nikon share a few sensors too and they end up having quite different performance after each company adds their personal touches.

[Dj_DLX]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Pentax's 50-135/2.8 zoom is indeed something that nobody else makes, so I can't really compare it with anything. I don't know what it costs considerably less than in the Nikon or Canon lineups, because neither company makes a lens covering a similar range. Sigma makes a 50-150/2.8 which is probably the closest thing. A 50-135 falls well short of Nikon & Canon's latest 70-200/2.8's in both performance and build quality, as it should as it's half the price. What Pentax doesn't make, however is a 70-200/2.8 lens of their own. That is the bread & butter lens of a huge number of working professionals, wedding photographers, hobbyists, etc. IMO that is a glaring omission in the Pentax lens lineup. Pentax also doesn't offer a single lens beyond 300mm, and nothing beyond 200mm that is faster than f2.8. Those particular omissions ignore many sports photographers, bird/wildlife photographers, etc. Pentax also doesn't play the full frame game, however they are into medium format.

Isn't the 70-200 range the bread and butter for professionals using full frame cameras moreso than ones using crop sensor cameras? So for a comparison of two crop sensor cameras, shouldn't the 50-135 range be more optimal, since that is equivalent to 70-200 on a full frame camera? I rarely hear full frame camera users complain about the 70-200 range on their cameras, so it seems like Pentax is catering their lens selection to crop sensor users more than Nikon is. This makes sense since Pentax doesn't offer a full frame camera as you mentioned and medium format lenses are not interchangeable with slr lenses. I frequently use a 70-200/2.8 lens with a crop sensor camera but I find the range a tad long when taking indoor pictures, so I find myself changing lenses more often I would prefer. This wouldn't be an issue if I had a full frame camera, but since that's beyond my budget I would definitely purchase a 50-135/2.8 if my camera system offered one.

[Xtrema]

Correct me if I'm wrong, I find continuous AF on DSLR to be crappy for videos. So if your video is on fixed AF, you're ok. Otherwise, any $500 camcorder can do WAY better job.