All in the lens choice?... Need to pick a camera first!

[lynseya]

Hi,

Super site and forum everyone! So much information and absolutley fantastic pictures in the Gallery!

Got a question/dilemma that i was wondering if you could help me solve...

Currently use a oly sp590uz and getting so infuriated at the softness/fringing at full zoom! Also the speed (or lack there of.....) is driving me up the wall!

Im going to go for a dslr - been looking at around a million sites and reviews!

I have around 1k to invest in the beginnings of a new system at the mo - but am happy to keep saving to get good quality lenses. The 1k has to include a decent quality lens to get me started!

Would like to sort myself out to camera level at the moment!

In the runnings are Nikon D5000 and D90, or Canon 40d or 50d (although 50d is pushing the budget a bit if i want to get a reasonable lens at the mo!)

I have resigned myself that i will have to save more for a long lens for bird photography!

But which camera?! All have their advantages it seems and as i have no experience with dslr's im not sure which is most important. All types of nature/wildlife photography and also travel photography too!

D5000 - smallest (female with small hands), great spec on paper, video, swivel screen would be very handy for macro work, 4fps, cheapest!
D90 - aimed at more 'pro' market, more robust, 4.5fps, video, internal focus , great reviews.
40d - can pick up second hand for good prices, people love it!, faster shutter speed available than the nikons, great 6.5fps, but pretty big and heavy.
50d - 15MP, great reviews, super quality, 6.3fps. poss a bit expensive!

What shall i do! Guidance please!

Thanks,
Lynsey.

[Boddie]

40D do it

[Ollie]

Hi Lynsey.

If I were in your position I would go with the 40D. It's a great camera capable of great photos. I used a 40D before upgrading to the 7D and still have the 40D as a back up body. It may seem a little heavy for small hands for a start but can be an advantage in stability

This should leave you with enough of your budget to get a decent lens as the lens is more important as far as picture quality is concerned than the body.

[marvin]

hi

if you go for nikon the d90 has an internal focus motor so will give you a wider choice of lenses than the d5000 in the long run. its also about to be replaced by the d7000 (so rumour has it) so you may be able to pick up a bargain soon. you can already get them for £550 new. also if you want to spend even less on the camera and save more for the lens a second hand d80 would be a great option (£250-300 on auction sites).

good luck
tim

[Badllarma]

Another vote for the 40D here Then go with a Sigma zoom that can do 500mm and that will give you a nice start.

[squishy]

Another vote for 40D. I got a used one a few weeks ago and I'm loving it. It's very fast. You certainly wouldn't be disappointed with a 40D

I would also look into the D90. Personally, I prefer the feel and features of the 40D, but the D90 is also an excellent camera, and the price should drop soon when the next model is released. Go try out a 40D and a D90 somewhere (they might not have a 40D, but if you try a 50D, the controls and body are almost identical), and see which one feels better in your hands. They'll both produce excellent pictures, as will nearly any DSLR body, but if one just feels better to you, go for that one. Unless there are any brand specific lenses you would want, pretty much any brand of camera is good.

It's also perhaps worth looking into pentax or sony or olympus, as you might find a camera from one of those brands suits you better. Just bare in mind that none of them offer the same massive selection of lenses that Canon or Nikon offer (though they certainly compete in quality! Olympus zuiko lenses are exceptionally good). The other brands also offer some advantages like in body stabilisation that Canon/Nikon don't do.

[StuMack]

Hi there

I'm new to dslr and went for the canon 450d which I'm really happy with however the kit lenses that came with the package, despite being canon, are not brilliant, so i'm about to invest in a 500mm. Aside from that the camera is great

Stu

[snackdahl]

Just to throw a spanner in the works I'm using a Sony A500 at the mo and its fab! I was always a Canon man (although I did dabble with Nikon once) but like previous posters have said, there is very little between the bodies and a good lens is very important. I would get yourself down to a good camera shop and try the various models for yourself, I'm sure you'll find one that just "feels" right. The Sony is like that for me, almost instinctive where I never have to look at the controls while shooting.

[Geoff F]

Like others have said, try a few and see which feels right for you.

The 40/50D are a stronger build than the 500D and most people prefer the easier to use controls on the 40/50D but it is a bit 'chunkier' and some people find the extra weight a bit too much after carrying it around all day, especially with a heavy zoom attached.

As I use a Canon, I'm not really that familiar with the current Nikon range so I will leave them to the 'Nikon team' to advise you.

Recently, I was talking to the photographer for my local paper and he said that he had just been asked to choose his next work camera. And he wanted another 40D which he actually rated above the 50D.

Don't let your head get turned by excessive pixel numbers which are meaningless for most people; and you might even find that you need to upgrade your computer in order to cope with them.

The same goes for the shooting frame rate. This can be useful occasionally for birds in flight, etc, but I rarely use it and the variation between those various cameras won't make any difference to the average user.

Whatever you decide, my advice would be to ignore those special camera plus lens deals which usually include a cheap poor quality lens. Decide on the camera model and purchase it as body only then add the lenses which you really need.

And finally, do ask again here before choosing the lens. I have lost count of the questions which start with 'I have just purchased XX lens but can't get good quality photos'. And the answer, if we are being honest, is 'What can you expect from that lens, you have wasted your money'.

ps. Remember that dslr photography can become addictive and expensive!

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by lynseya

I have around 1k to invest in the beginnings of a new system at the mo - but am happy to keep saving to get good quality lenses. The 1k has to include a decent quality lens to get me started!

As you acknowledge that lens performance is one of the keys to obtaining good images, I'm surprised that you haven't even mentioned Olympus. The highly regarded dpreview site said in the conclusion to their review of the 12-60mm Zuiko:

"Olympus appear mainly to have taken advantage of the Four Thirds sensor to deliver lenses which, for any given size, weight and cost, simply perform to a higher and more consistent standard than those optimized for larger formats, with the 12-60mm being a prime example."

If you're prepared to spend a lot of money on a lens, then Kirk Tuck, a professional photographer said this to say about the 14-35mm f2.0 Zuiko:

"... a lens that is crisp wide open in a way that Canon’s primes in that range and most of the Nikons in that range can't really emulate until they are stopped down two or three stops. I’ll get all mystical on you. This lens gives me the kind of look and feel I used to get with my Leica M glass."

And note that he's comparing a Olympus zoom with Canon and Nikon primes!

I used to fret over whether my lenses were good enough when I owned film SLRs. With Olympus lenses you don't need to fret - you know that you have some of the very best available.

Jim