25 replies to this topic

[pabosher]

Sup thumbs,

I would like a proper nice DSLR camera for a reasonable price. I know next to nothing about cameras, nor even what a DSLR is. Any help?

[Patters]

Budget? Though if you don't know what SLR is then you don't need one.

[Nappi]

Budget? Though if you don't know what SLR is then you don't need one.

To be fair, SLR is not the most descriptive term for the type of camera it refers to.

[Patters]

To be fair, SLR is not the most descriptive term for the type of camera it refers to.

Yes it is

• Camera lens
• Reflex mirror
• Focal-plane shutter
• Image sensor
• Matte focusing screen
• Condenser lens
• Pentaprism/pentamirror
• Viewfinder eyepiece

Stolen from wikipedia.

[shammack]

I agree that if you don't know the difference, an SLR is probably more than you need, unless you're planning on learning about photography or something. Otherwise you're most likely just going to set everything to "auto" all the time and get basically the same results as you would with a cheap point-and-shoot camera.

That said, if you really have your heart set on a DSLR, you can probably pick up a used Nikon D70 or D40 (or whatever the Canon equivalent is) for relatively cheap (Google says around $200 with no lens). The newer DSLRs can shoot video, but if you don't care about that, an older model should be more than adequate. I have a D70 and I'm quite happy with it, but even though I sort of know what I'm doing, I haven't ended up needing most of its features very often, and in the end I think I probably would have got more use out of a cheap camera that I could fit in my pocket.

First of all, why do you want a camera?

I pretty much agree with everything everyone said. In my experience, people too quickly assume they want/need a DSLR camera, when all they need is a good digital camera. There are great compact cameras that will give you just as good pictures as a DSLR, and if you're not interested in learning about photography you'll just be dragging around heavier, more expensive gear than you need.

BEWARE OF PHOTOGRAPHY EQUIPMENT FETISHISM. It's real, and it's ugly.

That said, at this point you basically can't go wrong with any current DSLR. I know Canon, Nikon and Sony (and others here can probably vouch for many more) make great DSLRs, and if you end up going for one, you'll find that the camera itself ends up being among the least costly thing you buy (you end up spending way more on lenses, which will last you multiple camera generations. Lenses are the monitors of personal computers.) If you know people with accessories like lenses and flashes of a particular brand that you could borrow, that might be a good reason to chose that brand.

But, for great image quality, inexpensiveness and portability (which I think is more important than people realise) you can't beat a good compact camera.

If you tell us a little more, you'll get much better answers.

[Squid Division]

I've got a Canon EOS Rebel XS (looks like the Canon 1100D in the UK is a slightly better version of what I have) or whatever order those words go in. It's the most basic Canon DSLR and I like it a lot. But I agree, you only move up to an DSLR when you're being limited by your point and shoot. I recommend getting a good point and shoot and learning basic composition, aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc. on it. The problem is that only a few point and shoots allow you to adjust these settings, but the ones that do are pretty good. This is the one that I got for my brother, but unfortunately it doesn't look like they sell it in the UK.

DO NOT go chasing megapixels - they don't really matter all that much. The quality of your photo comes from the aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and above all composition, not from how large your photo is.
Find a good point and shoot first that lets you adjust those settings. Unless of course the prices are about the same (amazon.co.uk seems to have just taken the American prices and converted the dollars to pounds, which is a bit ridiculous)

While it's kind of random, someone made a couple PDFs to teach his fellow motorcyclists on how to take pictures - however, it's a SUPERB tutorial on all this stuff so I heartily recommend it. They're pretty cheap too, only $10. Tutorials like these are the most important part of any of this.

[Nappi]

I've been happy with my Canon S95 for some time now. I have no need for a system camera even though I'm quite active in taking photos.

Yes it is

I know where the term comes from, but the 'compact digital camera' vs 'digital single-lens reflex lens camera' comparisons etc. still boggle the mind. Plus, many people probably consider the micro four thirds cameras to be DSLR as well.

[Thrik]

Not going to get into this too much because I'm far from an expert, but when I was researching cameras I wanted around the end of last year I settled upon the Sony DSC-HX9V because it had the picture-taking quality I was looking for (supposedly excellent image stabilisation) along with really good video capabilities (1080p @ 50FPS, not many others did that at the time), for a surprisingly good price.

The problem I saw with many of the higher-end cameras is they presume a lot more from you as a photographer, kind of like jumping straight into full-blown Photoshop when all you really need is a bit of Elements. This camera on the other hand had a more user-friendly approach and just generally seemed great for someone who's never owned a properly good camera before.

I was also pretty blown away by some of the videos people put on Vimeo while testing it (taking its affordability into serious consideration)

A Day at the Beach
The Harbour

The market's probably changed a bit by now though (although that only likely means an already excellent camera is even cheaper), and I never ended up buying it because I conveniently got made redundant literally weeks after selecting it and getting ready to buy it.

Edit: Looks like the DSC-HX20V is its main 2012 replacement, upping the zoom from 16X to 20X (pretty much ridiculous for such a compact cam, ignore the top pic though as that's digital zoom). There's a DSC-HX10V too, but that's actually not quite as good as the 9 based on a quick scan of a review as it loses the 1080p and uses 1080i instead.

[brkl]

Saving up for my first digital camera made me quit photography for years. This was back when consumer digital cameras weren't great (I got a Canon S45), but it wasn't the technical quality that bothered me. If you want to enjoy photography you need good ergonomics (I don't just mean how the camera fits in your hand) and control over how the camera chooses the settings relevant to the photo.

Whether you need an eye-level viewfinder or not is a personal preference. I do, others don't. If you don't, this will probably be excellent for you: http://www.amazon.co...ords=sony rx100
It'll also be small enough to carry with you every minute of your life.

If you really feel like you need an SLR, this one will most likely have excellent ergonomics and more features for your money than similar cameras from other manufacturers: http://www.amazon.co...rds=pentax k30d

Or you can just buy anything by Canon or Nikon that fits your budget, they'll be all right.

[Wikipedia Brown]

I almost lost my mind and went for one of those newfangled mirrorless compact system cameras, but then I saw the RX100 and chose that instead.

It's exactly what I need in a camera… the balance between portability and image quality seems pretty ridiculous. I should have it today; I'm excited to try it out. My last camera was a point-and-shoot which turned out to be so shitty that it wasn't worth using over my phone. I have a feeling the RX100 will be a bit different.

Someone very close to me just had a baby, which is what got me thinking about a new camera… I imagine babies account for a pretty significant number of camera purchases! Of course, that was my excuse. It'll probably end up taking more cat pictures than baby pictures.

That thing is going with me everywhere.

edit: Does anyone have an opinion on what is the least worst photo sharing site? (Like your Flickrs and what have you.)

[Thrik]

I almost lost my mind and went for one of those newfangled mirrorless compact system cameras, but then I saw the RX100 and chose that instead.

It's exactly what I need in a camera… the balance between portability and image quality seems pretty ridiculous. I should have it today; I'm excited to try it out. My last camera was a point-and-shoot which turned out to be so shitty that it wasn't worth using over my phone. I have a feeling the RX100 will be a bit different.

Someone very close to me just had a baby, which is what got me thinking about a new camera… I imagine babies account for a pretty significant number of camera purchases! Of course, that was my excuse. It'll probably end up taking more cat pictures than baby pictures.

That thing is going with me everywhere.

edit: Does anyone have an opinion on what is the least worst photo sharing site? (Like your Flickrs and what have you.)

Good choice. I was torn between that and the HX20V myself, and opted for the latter because although it's not quite got the same picture quality (although still leaps and bounds ahead of most other portable cameras and definitely phones) it does of course have the zoom which I find very useful for the kind of photos I tend to take. It's been performing very well, and if you're inclined towards post-processing its photos can look downright splendid.

For sharing, I think it's really all about Flickr and Facebook nowadays. Facebook obviously gives you that direct personal sharing with people you care about so they actually see all these lovely photos you're taking, and Flickr is good for tapping into the wider anonymous audience of the web and maybe even getting feedback if you take good photos.

If you take videos too (considering the unbelievable quality of these cameras' video output you'd be mad not to) Vimeo is a great place for it. YouTube is good too, but the audience is colder and harder to penetrate — Vimeo seems to have a really good community of hipster types who love home-made videos and stuff. Shame the site doesn't do photos too, really.

[mikemariano]

[brkl]

The RX100 will probably be excellent. I wouldn't mind letting go of one of my two more expensive cameras for that one.

[JonCole]

I almost lost my mind and went for one of those newfangled mirrorless compact system cameras, but then I saw the RX100 and chose that instead.

It's exactly what I need in a camera… the balance between portability and image quality seems pretty ridiculous. I should have it today; I'm excited to try it out. My last camera was a point-and-shoot which turned out to be so shitty that it wasn't worth using over my phone. I have a feeling the RX100 will be a bit different.

Someone very close to me just had a baby, which is what got me thinking about a new camera… I imagine babies account for a pretty significant number of camera purchases! Of course, that was my excuse. It'll probably end up taking more cat pictures than baby pictures.

That thing is going with me everywhere.

edit: Does anyone have an opinion on what is the least worst photo sharing site? (Like your Flickrs and what have you.)

Flickr is still probably one of the best places to host your pictures, although I'd also give 500px and Picasa a look. Like most things Google, Picasa is definitely worth it if you're already invested in Google services like Drive and Plus.

[Thrik]

I've been putting some of my photos online somewhere other than Facebook for a change, and I've noticed that unless you actually know a lot of people on Flickr you might as well just stick them in a folder on your hard drive somewhere because you'll get no views and no comments. Then I put the same photos on Deviant Art and I literally had a handful of comments and people favouriting my photos within ten minutes.

So if your motivation for putting them online is getting feedback or simply just giving someone a nice photo to discover, Deviant Art seems to get results.

[Bernbaum]

Despite the OP not specifying much, I recommend they give Canon's 1100D or Nikon's D3100 a look. Both are entry-level DSLR cameras and provide more functionality than most people need. The basics are simple to understand but take much longer to master and either of those cameras will make it easy to learn how to shoot better photos.

Otherwise, after you've checked wikipedia for 'DSLR photography' a decent point-and-shoot should keep you happy if you don't think an SLR is for you.

[tabacco]

If you have friends or family who own cameras, I suggest going with the brand that'll let you share lenses with them (assuming they're fine with that). It's surprisingly handy.

[JonCole]

If you have friends or family who own cameras, I suggest going with the brand that'll let you share lenses with them (assuming they're fine with that). It's surprisingly handy.

Oh yeah, great tip. I wasted a whole lot of money getting a Canon while my mom had a handful of fairly solid Nikon lenses gathering dust.

[Wikipedia Brown]

My main requirement for hosting is just something easy to use with an interface that doesn't look like it was designed by aliens.

I tried signing up for Flickr, but the authentication bugged out and sent me around in circles, so I closed my account within 2 minutes of opening it. 500px looks like shit unless it's in a huge window. Picasa/Google+ would be great, but album organization is nonexistent. Like, I can't find a way to add an already uploaded picture to another album.

Facebook is handy because of its integration with iPhoto (and the fact that most of the people I want to see my crap are already there). I feel like a scrub using it, but I guess it's the way to go! Luckily, I'm not interested in discovery by strangers. I just want to make my friends look at cat pictures. (Like so: http://500px.com/jd_cohen/sets/cats )

Back on the camera talk, I'm loving the hell out of the RX100.

Have some more images! http://500px.com/jd_cohen/sets/rx

I'm sure they'll get better as I figure out what I'm doing. It's been years since I've used anything more advanced than an iPhone camera. I'm pleased with the output so far.