Advice needed

[anniegran]

I am trying to decide between a Nikon D80, Canon 400D or Sony Alpha 100. The Sony appeals because of the anti-shake but it does not seem very popular. I am getting bogged down - am completely new to all this. I am not very strong so weight and anti-shake are important. Also getting confused about lenses but thought of getting a 70-300 to start with, plus a 18-50mm. Probably Tamron or Sigma. I know this is all a bit vague but any advice would be great. Are lenses with anti-shake very expensive and heavy as if I understand things correctly that would be another option. Meant to be my Christmas present but at this rate it will be for 2007. Thanks.
Anniegran

[carlj]

Anniegram,

yes there are many here using Canon's and Nikon's, but that doesn't mean the A100 is unpopular - just a little late to the party so to speak. I own a KonicaMinolta 5D, or the precursor to the A100 and at times feel a little lonely in here. I can comment on much of the A100's features, however.

Anti-shake can be a godsend, as can IS or VR, from the others. But it's not a guarantee against poor technique, or pushing a shot to the limit. I have shot at 1/13th of a second, at 300mm - technically impossible, maybe not the sharpest shot I've taken but printable. I would prefer to shoot at 1/500th where possible, but the AS is a boon. Biggest benefit with Sony's approach is the fact that EVERY lens you attach to the camera is therefore stabilised. Saves a stack of money. As for choice of lenses, well, using the Minolta A mount, there are 20 years of lenses out there for you to use. I've a 100mm macro lens that cost £80 brand new - will be upgrading to a faster lens soon, but it's been a good performer and stabilised too.

The 70-300mm offers a good starting length, with the Tamrom macro mode in reviews coming out better than the Sigma, but both good budget buys. The 18-50 is covered by the kit lens at 18-70mm and whilst not as good as a £250 lens, isn't as bad as some kit lenses out there.

Now the C&N boys will be on soon to praise their cameras, but my best advice would be to get into Jessops and handle the cameras. The A100 is heavier and larger than many and that could be important. Then again, the size may ensure you're able to hold it better and therefore get less shake problems anyway!

Carl

[Mrs Marley]

Originally Posted by carlj

Anniegram,

yes there are many here using Canon's and Nikon's, but that doesn't mean the A100 is unpopular - just a little late to the party so to speak. I own a KonicaMinolta 5D, or the precursor to the A100 and at times feel a little lonely in here. I can comment on much of the A100's features, however.

Anti-shake can be a godsend, as can IS or VR, from the others. But it's not a guarantee against poor technique, or pushing a shot to the limit. I have shot at 1/13th of a second, at 300mm - technically impossible, maybe not the sharpest shot I've taken but printable. I would prefer to shoot at 1/500th where possible, but the AS is a boon. Biggest benefit with Sony's approach is the fact that EVERY lens you attach to the camera is therefore stabilised. Saves a stack of money. As for choice of lenses, well, using the Minolta A mount, there are 20 years of lenses out there for you to use. I've a 100mm macro lens that cost £80 brand new - will be upgrading to a faster lens soon, but it's been a good performer and stabilised too.

The 70-300mm offers a good starting length, with the Tamrom macro mode in reviews coming out better than the Sigma, but both good budget buys. The 18-50 is covered by the kit lens at 18-70mm and whilst not as good as a £250 lens, isn't as bad as some kit lenses out there.

Now the C&N boys will be on soon to praise their cameras, but my best advice would be to get into Jessops and handle the cameras. The A100 is heavier and larger than many and that could be important. Then again, the size may ensure you're able to hold it better and therefore get less shake problems anyway!

Carl

Young Carl is making a good point here, the new Pentax dslrs also use built in image stabilisation. Go to the shop and handle all the different makes of camera and find out which one feels right for you and also remember that you handling the camera properly is the first and most important part of image stabilisation, what you gain from image stabilisation will add on to that and no matter what the claims it will seldom give a worthwhile benefit from poor handling of the camera.

[anniegran]

Thanks for the advice. I will go to Jessops tomorrow and get back to you if I have any further questions.

[eeyore]

each to there own and all that - but I disagree , I borrowed an alpha from a freindly shop keeper for a field trial tother day and I did not like it at all, the build quality felt cheap and while the optical performance and noise control etc was okay it was not startingly good - and the antishake did nothing for meb- it is no where near as good as the canon IS system (which is built into lenses rather than the bodies)

Pentax wise I dont rate the IST DL or the K100D particularly highly either, the K10D is a nice pice of kit but it costs quite a bit more ... on par with the canon 30D or Nikon D80

For my money the only reason to get either of these makes is if you already have a stack of KM or Pentax lenses.

If you are starting from scratch IMO it makes more sense to go with either the Nikon D40 or Canon 400D either of which have a huge choice of lenses , good technical support services, a lot of third party lenses available for them, and significantly more money invested in R+D which should give you a system you can grow with. I dont know much about the D40 which has only just come out but lots of people here are very happy with the 400D.

[speckled wood]

Originally Posted by eeyore

each to there own and all that - but I disagree , I borrowed an alpha from a freindly shop keeper for a field trial tother day and I did not like it at all, the build quality felt cheap and while the optical performance and noise control etc was okay it was not startingly good - and the antishake did nothing for meb- it is no where near as good as the canon IS system (which is built into lenses rather than the bodies)

Pentax wise I dont rate the IST DL or the K100D particularly highly either, the K10D is a nice pice of kit but it costs quite a bit more ... on par with the canon 30D or Nikon D80

For my money the only reason to get either of these makes is if you already have a stack of KM or Pentax lenses.

If you are starting from scratch IMO it makes more sense to go with either the Nikon D40 or Canon 400D either of which have a huge choice of lenses , good technical support services, a lot of third party lenses available for them, and significantly more money invested in R+D which should give you a system you can grow with. I dont know much about the D40 which has only just come out but lots of people here are very happy with the 400D.

What load of nonsense, One person I know has got a Pentax IST DL and manages to take excellent pictures, other people have Sony alphas and take excellent pictures with them, the truth is that it is the the person behind the camera and the lens that is important. Both Pentax and Sony have huge resources invested in R & D and of course Pentax has been a front runner in the SLR field for 40 years. Whilst Sony is a relative newcomer it has taken over the Minolta base and will doubtless develop the format and aim to be a front runner and make no mistake they will probably succeed. As for technical support again both Pentax and Sony have long established and good technical suppoert services. As I said I have Canon, it was down to one simple factor at the time I went DSLR in 2004 ..... I could afford a Canon 300D but I could not afford the then lower end Nikon, had I had the money I would have bought Nikon. As it is I am happy with both my Canon 300D and my 400D, but then others are happy with other makes of camera.

As to IS it is a desirable enhancement but not essential it is simply something that impoves your chances of getting a better shot. As to whether it is better in the camera or the lens the likelyhood is that one method will suit some whereas the other method will suit others but ultimately it is likely that the winner in the market place will be the in camera system. simply down to cost and the potential to make every lens "IS".

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by speckled wood

What load of nonsense, One person I know has got a Pentax IST DL and manages to take excellent pictures, other people have Sony alphas and take excellent pictures with them, the truth is that it is the the person behind the camera and the lens that is important. Both Pentax and Sony have huge resources invested in R & D and of course Pentax has been a front runner in the SLR field for 40 years. Whilst Sony is a relative newcomer it has taken over the Minolta base and will doubtless develop the format and aim to be a front runner and make no mistake they will probably succeed. As for technical support again both Pentax and Sony have long established and good technical suppoert services. As I said I have Canon, it was down to one simple factor at the time I went DSLR in 2004 ..... I could afford a Canon 300D but I could not afford the then lower end Nikon, had I had the money I would have bought Nikon. As it is I am happy with both my Canon 300D and my 400D, but then others are happy with other makes of camera.

As to IS it is a desirable enhancement but not essential it is simply something that impoves your chances of getting a better shot. As to whether it is better in the camera or the lens the likelyhood is that one method will suit some whereas the other method will suit others but ultimately it is likely that the winner in the market place will be the in camera system. simply down to cost and the potential to make every lens "IS".

As I said each to their own , i have no doubt that many pentax and km owners enjoy their kit, however if I was advising someone who had not bought anything yet i would not advise them to go with either

if you look in the back of any camera mag you will see a disparity - for instance warehouse express are advertising over 30 lenses for canon from canon, over 30 from nikon for nikon, around 30 or so from sigma for each of these makes , a fair few for olympus , about 10 for pentax (all pentax's own) and erm none for the alpha. Digital depot ditto, jessops ditto , camtech ditto, mifsuds ditto .... see a pattern developing here.

also look at what the pros use for their 35mm option- Rouse, Canon ; Benvie, Nikon; Macintryre , Canon; Prior, Canon. etc etc I could be wrong but I cant think of a single well known pro who uses either pentax or km/sony ( except in medium format Rouse breifly used the Pentax 6x7 prior to going digital)

And while pentax have been the market leader for a long time historically with the K mount system their position was badly shaken by the launch of the EOS system and totally destroyed by the advent of the DSLR - they were two years behind the field when they launched the original IST D which was rubbish anyway and are only just catching up with nikon , fuji, sigma, and canon now - the K10D being just about able to compete in todays market

As to the anti shake if it really had the potential to make every lens an IS lense you would have a point - but in fact it works nowhere near as well as the Canon IS system (nor the Nikon VR system , or indeed the Sigma OS). In fact I couldnt tell any difference from a normal non stabilised shot

you may not agree with my view point, as is your right, but this does not make it nonsense especially as I am speaking from experience both as a semi prophotographer (and therefore someone who can both recognise a good shot and appreciate what it took to make it) and as someone who has actually tested both the alpha and pentax DSLRs in the field.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by anniegran

Thanks for the advice. I will go to Jessops tomorrow and get back to you if I have any further questions.

also check out our review section, we have reviews of a fair number of cameras and tech specs for every current model of DSLR in there.

i'd agree with the others that the only way to tell for sure what you like is to handle them, however remember that handling them in jessops or where ever isnt quite the same thing as using them in the field.

there are some cracking deals to be had at the mo , I was at jessops this a.m and they currently have the nikon D40 at under 400 notes with the kit lens. with the D50 which it is replacing even cheaper.

they also have some very keen prices on the olympus E system which may also be worth considering particularly if you are after small light bodies.

[Boddie]

Go Canon or Nikon. Everyone else is bobbins, especially Sony. Horrible camera. Have tried it. Did not like it one bit.

[bob hastie]

As someone who upgraded to DSLR earlier in the year, I have recently had to make the same decisions as you, so I thought I would let you know my thought process that led me to buy my canon 30d.
First of all I read lots of forums like this one to get some idea of other peoples opinions, and just like this thread everyone seemed to have a different opinion.
Secondly I went along to several different camera shops and tried the cameras, the ones that I didn't like the feel of (the smaller ones in my case) I discounted from my list of potentials.
Thirdly I looked to see what lenses were available for which camera and how many people seemed to be using them, my thinking being that if people are buying lenes today then in 5 years time some of those lenses will be on the secondhand market and be available for me to buy.
Please be clear that I am not recomending that you buy the canon nor that you don't buy one, this is just an explanation of how I made my desision.
Bob
Bob and Bert's Photos