help!

[tameblackbirds]

I want to buy my first DSLR Haven't a clue!

I Use a Fuji finepix at the moment mainly macro setting. I am aware I will need to buy a macro lens too with an SLR

My camera is simple but I feel that I am limited and ready to develop in my photography skills.

Please any advice welcome.

Price range will look at all advice and so not so concerned.

My first camera was a Richco with lenses including a macro

[shenk1]

Look out for the Canon v Nikon arguments (with Jim standing up for Olympus).

Best advice I could give is go to a camera shop after looking for what matches your "wants" and buy the one that feels right when you hold it that way it helps you get used to it quicker.(I have a Sony330 and its great-I'm just after some better lenses now,thats something else to argue about)

[tameblackbirds]

Thanks good advice, just a little nervous of pressure from the salesman. Does this happen? I haven't a clue what I need.

[Red Squirrel]

My best advice on this matter would be to read all the reviews you can. That way you will learn from others experience. Lots of advice on this forum too. Plenty of good photographers also.

[tameblackbirds]

thanks will do

[Jim Ford]

There are many photographers that use good 'bridge' cameras on this site that produce results pretty near indistinguishable from those taken with DSLRs, particularly when viewed on screen. I expect you'll get responses to this thread from some of them.

One thing that you may not have considered as you take a lot of macros, is that macro with a DSLR is _much_ more difficult than with a small sensor bridge camera which usually uses short focal length lenses. The difficulty lies in achieving a good depth of field and you may be initially dismayed with your results. This also applies to a lesser extent to general wildlife photography. Unless you're striving for an artistic effect, you want more than just an eye in focus and the rest blurred - you want the whole subject in focus. Have a look at some dragonfly images in the Gallery. Many of them have the eyes in sharp focus, but the wing tips and tip of the tail out of focus. Wildlife images are technical images, and the subject must be sharp above everything else in order to show its distinguishing features properly.

Jim

[tameblackbirds]

Thanks Jim, my old lense on the Ricoh was challenging think I will have a play with that again and get used to the feel. do love my bridge camera and it's macro lens as it is so simple to use. Been thinking about changing for too long and now I am unsure what the best for me is. Perhaps a more superior bridge camera?

[squishy]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

There are many photographers that use good 'bridge' cameras on this site that produce results pretty near indistinguishable from those taken with DSLRs, particularly when viewed on screen. I expect you'll get responses to this thread from some of them.

One thing that you may not have considered as you take a lot of macros, is that macro with a DSLR is _much_ more difficult than with a small sensor bridge camera which usually uses short focal length lenses. The difficulty lies in achieving a good depth of field and you may be initially dismayed with your results. This also applies to a lesser extent to general wildlife photography. Unless you're striving for an artistic effect, you want more than just an eye in focus and the rest blurred - you want the whole subject in focus. Have a look at some dragonfly images in the Gallery. Many of them have the eyes in sharp focus, but the wing tips and tip of the tail out of focus. Wildlife images are technical images, and the subject must be sharp above everything else in order to show its distinguishing features properly.

Jim

When I'm not using the raynox lens, I often find the large DoF to be a hindrance. The raynox makes the DoF much slimmer, to the point where it's not really any different to a DSLR (at 1:1ish mag the DoF is only 3-5mm at f/8).

My point is that for technical wildlife photos, a bridge camera with no attachment should be better in some circumstances (like dragonflies). But if you're trying to take pictures for the 'pretty picture' side of wildlife photography, then being able to drop backgrounds with more ease is a valuable ability.

[DaiTheDragon]

Forget the technical side of Macro photography for now, you will learn as you get more practice.
It would help if you could give us a rough amount of money that you are willing to spend. Besides the DSLR and dedicated Macro lens you will probably need a flash and either a tripod or monopod.
At the moment I use a Canon 50D, Canon 100mm or Sigma 180mm Macro lens, either my Sigma ring flash or my Canon 580EX mark ll and a Manfroto monopod.
So give us your budget and I can give you some suggestions.

Dai

[tameblackbirds]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

Forget the technical side of Macro photography for now, you will learn as you get more practice.
It would help if you could give us a rough amount of money that you are willing to spend. Besides the DSLR and dedicated Macro lens you will probably need a flash and either a tripod or monopod.
At the moment I use a Canon 50D, Canon 100mm or Sigma 180mm Macro lens, either my Sigma ring flash or my Canon 580EX mark ll and a Manfroto monopod.
So give us your budget and I can give you some suggestions.

Dai

I have a budget of £500/ £700