What digital SLR?

[jezlee]

A very good morning to all my fellow WAB members!

I'm sure somebody will have asked this question before, so please be gentle with me ...

My main photographic interest has gradually evolved into a passion for photographing the weirdly wonderful world of insects ....

My first digital was a little point and shoot Fuji, then I bought the Canon Digital Ixus 400 (which is a great little compact and is ideal for slipping in your bag or pocket, and yet still can take amazing pictures of larger insects), then I bought my Fuji S7000 which was a step in the right direction, and I was quite happy with to start with, but now I am seeing more and more amazing images of smaller insects appearing on sites like this, which I just can't achieve with my Fuji. So I have made the decision (I think!!) to go D-SLR ....

Budget? Ah, the perennial question .... limited .... (my wife isn't terribly enthusiastic about my hobby and hates the thought of me spending lots of money on it ....), so I think I would probably have to be looking at entry-level (Canon 350D, Nikon D50??) and I would really appreciate it if anyone has any experience of these or any thoughts on the subject as a whole?

Would I be better trying to buy body only and buying a different lens considering my main area of interest?

Many thanks in anticipation of your help in this ....

[Alan]

If insects are your thing. There are a few members on here that will give good advice.

To be honest with you it’s not so much the camera choice you need to consider, but the lens needed for the job.

Any of the entry DSLR’s will do a good job, it’s just a matter of preference on handling etc, on each given camera.

The D50 is very popular and is one of the best to use ‘straight out the box’. I haven’t exerience of the canon 350d but again seems to get good reviews.

You could opt for the Olympus E range of cameras, these are probably the best ‘bargain buys’ at the moment.

Your best bet would be to handle a few of them first to see which one feels best for you.

The current ‘lens of the moment’ seems to be the Sigma 150mm macro. But this will probably set you back more than the price of an entry DSLR body. The Sigma 105mm macro is also a good lens, and at a much reduced cost compared to the 150mm. The Tamron 90mm macro has been around for a few years and is also a reliable lens.

Again, the other members with give you further advice. Hope this helps.

ps: there are quite few threads already on this subject so maybe best to look through these also!

[Tamworth Weather]

The D350 from Canon has become the defacto standard all other cameras are compared against. Very close runner with the D50 from Nikon. To choose between them would be to split hairs. It will be down to 2 things....

a) do you have any lenses already from either manufacturer.
b) personal preference with the handling and controls.

Do bear in mind that the black bodied canons wont show scratches like the silver bodied canons may. I think that as you are used to the Ixus you may well pick the Canon - we will wait and see though.

[glsammy]

The real advantage of the Sigma 150mm is the 1:1 ratio at 15"; you don't have to get too close to the subject to get good Macro. The price is a bit steep, but it's the one lens I've got that I wouldn't sell or swap for anything else, and to me it was worth it.

[jezlee]

Originally Posted by glsammy

The real advantage of the Sigma 150mm is the 1:1 ratio at 15"; you don't have to get too close to the subject to get good Macro. The price is a bit steep, but it's the one lens I've got that I wouldn't sell or swap for anything else, and to me it was worth it.

Yes, I've seen the price, Graham - I nearly fell out of my chair!!

Know any good divorce lawyers?


Seriously, I think that will be out of the question (at the moment!) ... any other ideas?

[chunnkymonkey]

Sigma 85-300 APO with macro setting - it is ~£180 and is good for most macro work.

Here are some damselfly shots taken with a 350D and the sigma lens above mildmonkey.co.uk
Alternatvley buy a set of macro rings from jessops for £70 and use with a lens that suits your budget.

[John]

Originally Posted by glsammy

The real advantage of the Sigma 150mm is the 1:1 ratio at 15"; you don't have to get too close to the subject to get good Macro. The price is a bit steep, but it's the one lens I've got that I wouldn't sell or swap for anything else, and to me it was worth it.

Graham

Wasn't it Steve (Fourwings) that had a Fuji that he swore by for good insect photography. I can't recall which model but wouldn't that suffice. It was certainly at the right price if my memory serves me right.

John

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by John

Graham

Wasn't it Steve (Fourwings) that had a Fuji that he swore by for good insect photography. I can't recall which model but wouldn't that suffice. It was certainly at the right price if my memory serves me right.

John

Yes John.
Steve gets great results from his Fuji S7000. In fact, I think it's a match for any DSLR, provided you can get close enough to the subject.
He also wouldn't be without the 150mm Macro either!

[carlj]

Not sure that the 350D is quite the standard that others are compared to - more the highly promoted, available at every shop model

I found it small, uncomfortable and not at all what I'd want to use. The D50 was a little better, the Minolta 5D felt perfect. Just try finding one out there now though! The Sony A100 could be a little belter, if the price is right!

[matt_xyz]

I use a Panasonic FZ30 with a 4 dioptre close-up lens (£35) and have been very happy with the results (see my Gallery below if you want examples). However, I've just spent a couple of hours photographing insects at a local nature reserve and found it a touch frustrating, mainly because I have to get within 6 inches of the insect in order to focus. I imagine this is similar with the Fuji. This rules out all but the most docile butterflies and it seems impossible to get dragonflies! The Sigma 150mm therefore sounds very attractive. Mind you, I couldn't get within 6 feet of any dragonflies today even thougth there were dozens of them there, so I'm not sure any macro lens would have helped!

Matt