Digital SLR cameras

Arthur Jackson;

This is a good web-site for camera reviews and information.

A digital SLR is of course pretty much essential if you want aperture/shutter priority, but I am staggered by the quality of image one can get from the current crop of compact digital cameras around the £200 mark.

John.

This site is extremely useful;
dpreview

Group tests as well as individual assesments carried.

Entry level DSLRs are excellent. See the comparisms for Canon 350D and Nikon D50/D70.

regards
Richard S

Although I have not yet purchased one, but will probably do so in the near future, the Pentax DSLR is garnering a few good reviews and is worth considering over the standard sony/nikon/canon range. Review (by an old forum member, Vuk) on photo.net is: http://www.photo.net/equipment/pentax/istds/, or the link:

Pentax IST DS Review

If you search this forum, you will find quite a few discussions on this topic.

Rgds,
Tim

I second the previous URL's mentioned - both very good sites for camera reviews.

Having recently upgraded from a fairly good point+shoot to a DSLR I can say it was well worth the expense in terms of the photographic quality gains.

I'll stay out of the "which camera should I buy" argument as it tends to get fairly religious and frankly doesn't matter as much as you'd think; I've seen excellent photos from all of the leading brands

My advice would be to get yourself down to your local camera shop and get the various models in your hands - the best feature set in the world isn't any use if you can't get comfortable with it!

I guess I should also echo John's sentiments that the quality modern point+shoot cameras can achieve is quite amazing. The advantages a DSLR will bring are interchangable lenses, more artistic control over settings and an instant response time (essential for sports/fast moving subjects).

FWIW the camera I settled on is a Canon 350D, as it offered the best balance of price, features and quality for me at the time I bought. If you want some real world examples of this camera (albit with a fairly expensive lens) have a look at the last few links on my homepage:

www.sugarmonster.net

The "otter and owl" photos were taken with a compact superzoom lens which is OK but not stunning, and the shots in the last 3 links were taken with an image stabilised telephoto costing slightly more than the body did! This of course is the downside to DSLR shooting - it very rapidly gets quite expensive

My personal feeling is that Canon and Nikon are the two front runners in the DSLR race and both have a huge variety of lenses available. The others (Minolta, Olympus, Pentax) have very nice bodies which in some ways are more sophisticated than the Canon/Nikon range but suffer from a more restricted choice of glass.

Marc, it sounds as if you are totally new the the SLR world, if so how have you found the switch? I've been reading up on some SLR's and I'll try and get to the local camera shop where I bought my digital compact camera next week (they seemed very good there when I went for the compact and let me try out plenty of models).

It looks like all the DSLR models I've seen offer a fully auto mode, but I'd like to try and start doing it more manually, but I'm totally lost when it comes to talking of shutter speeds, apeture settings. From A-level physics and common sense I know what they are talking about, but except for basics I have no idea how to set these and how they would affect the photo in great detail (fast shutter speed for daylight, long shutter speed for night is about as much as I know). Have you tried doing any of this yourself manually and did you find any good books/tutorials on this stuff?

The switch was interesting - My Sony 707 had lots of manual settings but it still tried pretty hard to stop you choosing really silly ones. The SLR just does what you tell it, for better or worse!

I found initially that I was taking quite poor photos - apart from the settings issue you also have to learn the "character" of your kit. This was an eye-opener to me but different lenses really do have different characteristics in terms of how aperture affects sharpness, what they do in bright light etc and it takes some time to figure them out.

I started a response to the whole manual settings question, then I realised it was getting rather long! It's a complicated subject so to sum it up - yes I do use the aperture and shutter priority modes almost exclusively and I very rarely need to use full manual except for shooting the moon (which seems to be a set of rules all unto itself)

How do I know what to use? Practice, practice and more practice! I've thrown away more photos than I can count but I've found that over time I'm building up a mental database of various settings and situations, so that I can look at a scene and start thinking about what I'd need to do to capture it - which isn't to say I'm good at it! In my "big cat" gallery I took about 200 photos to get those 20 or so for show...

The key to a lot of photos is depth of field, and this is all controlled by the aperture of the lens. Go here, ignore the scary formulas and look at the photos!
Wikipedia - depth of field

I picked up some good hints from lurking on the forums at www.dpreview.com and I also like the writing and photography on luminous landscape

There's some fairly handy info here - it has some film info too but the basic technique articles are applicable to both
http://www.silverlight.co.uk/tutorials/toc.html

I could go on all day but I think everyone else will be getting bored by now! If you want some more info on settings etc feel free to PM me.

Cheers,

Marc.

quote:

Originally posted by J.N.:
A digital SLR is of course pretty much essential if you want aperture/shutter priority

John,

if the S60 is anything like my S50, then it has several auto modes, but also aperture priority mode, shutter priority mode, fully manual mode (ie specify aperture & shutter speed manually), manual focus, flash output adjustment, etc, etc.

Together with RAW (non-JPG) image capture, it seems to go some way towards the controllability of an SLR, but the small lens does make things difficult unless the light is good.

DPReview also commented that by default the S50 applies less sharpening than most compacts, which apparently is good if you're going to post-process with Photoshop.

As I said, though, the lens can be frustrating. Is that what you meant, TS?

cheers, Martin

Just get a Nikon D70(s).

Agree - the Nikon D70(s) is a great piece of kit. Go for the older D70 if you don't need a cable release and a larger LCD screen. The D70 is available at discount prices as it's being phased out, and the firmware can be upgraded to D70s spec for free via Nikon UK. I bought one as a back up camera and it's paid for itself several times over.

Don't forget the Fuji S2 or S3 - the picture quality is outstanding, particularly for portraits/weddings (which is where I use it most). They're not a very fast camera though, so don't expect 5 frames-per-sec-machine-gun paparazzi shots. Oh, and they take all Nikon lenses too, which is a big bonus. I have 30 yr old lenses that can be used on both the D70 & S2 - they're outstanding.

The Canon range is also very good - they seem to bring out new cameras every few months, and in megapixel terms they're always a bit in front of the other major players. Just don't get caught up in the 'pixel count is everything' argument - far better to get a camera that allows you to use a good range of quality lenses & accessories. Have a look at http://www.fmount.com for free & unbiased advice from Canon/Nikon/Fuji users.

Maisiemouse,
I am quite taken by the S2/S3 and after looking through a couple of reviews the S3 has all that I might need even thought I'd still have to purchase Nikon glass but so what. As bit of an aside I have started to read of the Adobe DNG file format being touted as a common output format (sort of opensource?) and that can only be good, can't it?

Roy

Nikon lenses are very expensive if you buy new. However there are literally thousands of used Nikon lenses around, and they will all work with the S2 & S3. Don't forget the other manufacturers either - Sigma, Tamron & Tokina make Nikon compatible lenses at about half the price of Nikon glass. Sigma in particular make some amazing lenses.

The Adobe DNG format is an attempt to clear up the clutter of various RAW formats that manufacturers use on their DSLR's. RAW files are unprocessed images straight from the cameras sensor, that have to be 'developed' using software before they can be used. They contain a lot more information than JPEG files and invariably offer a higher quality output. A great idea, but all camera makers insist on using their own proprietary file type (to make sure you buy their own expensive conversion software). The DNG format does away with that, and converts all RAW files to a standard file type. Yes - it's a good thing.

Quite right, my thinking is that camera bodies do date rather quickly but most lenses don't and that a new body purchased now with all the bells and whistles you could ever want will still have them in a couple of years time but it just won't be the flagship model anymore. No problem at all with secondhang glass.

Maisiemouse,
Quite right, my thinking is that camera bodies do date rather quickly but most lenses don't and that a new body purchased now with all the bells and whistles you could ever want will still have them in a couple of years time but it just won't be the flagship model anymore. No problem at all with secondhand glass.

Roy

Digital cameras date very quickly - particularly if you're an 'early adopter' or just a plain old gadget freak. Film cameras don't age at all, unless the manufacturer no longer supports servicing & spares (and all the decent ones do).

Just make sure that you can use older lenses on the camera (whichever model you go for). Nikon DSLR's can use old lenses, but I don't think Canon can. Pentax make a DSLR called the *ist (daft name) that can use any 42mm screw thread lenses. This makes them a good buy, as the lenses are almost give-away prices, and very good quality.

I bought a Canon EOS 20D a few weeks ago as my first digital SLR. If buying one of these, and maybe any digi SLR, I would suggest serious consideration be given to using a 'super zoom' lens (or 2). This might avoid too much lens changing, which then encourages dust to find its way onto the sensor. The dust can be removed by the user, if he's very careful, but it apparently invalidates the warranty on Canons.
The ingress of dust can be minimised by leaving the camera switched off for at least 30 seconds before changing lenses.

Tony

ps. I will never go back to film!

Dust on DSLR sensors is a problem, but if you're careful you can change lenses in most conditions.

1) Make sure the camera is switched off (due to possible static build up on the sensor)

2) Point the camera at the ground before removing the lens to avoid getting anything inside (greenfly tend to smear a bit when you wipe them)

3) If possible, make use of your camera bag to shield the camera from the elements while changing lenses.

I've managed to swap lenses on a windy Norfolk beach without getting dust/sand/buckets & spades inside the camera, but it's a bit of a twitchy moment bearing in mind that a new sensor can cost £££££'s.

I use sensor swabs on my cameras (about £45 for a set of swabs & fluid). Fuji UK charge about £90 for a general clean up including a sensor clean, which usually takes 2 swabs. You can work out the cost savings easily, but you'll also need to invest in a pair of surgical gloves & a few pairs of clean underpants before attempting to clean the sensor.

I do not expect to get dust on the sensor as a result of changing lenses on my DSLR, as after the camera is switched on transparent cover in front of the sensor is vibrated rather quickly so that the dust falls onto a sticky pad that collects the dirt.

Oh doesn't all DSLRs have this feature??? Shame

Also with my DSLR I can get a focal range (35mm equivalent) of 28 to 400mm with only two lenses.

Coupled with the weatherproof body and lenses that allow me to use the camera in quite heavy rain - ie I get give up before the camera would need to.

Derek,

you forgot to mention which camera this is...

Cheers

Don

quote:

Also with my DSLR I can get a focal range (35mm equivalent) of 28 to 400mm with only two lenses.

With my dslr, I currently go from 45-480mm (35mm equiv) and my next lens will give me 16-35mm (35mm equiv).
Is the transparent screen infront of the sensor, or on the front of the sensor?

Tony

thanks for all the info so far. As a response to Martin, the S60 has a manual, shutter priority and apeture priority mode which I'm trying to experiment more with. Currently my main reason for getting an SLR is more choice of lenses, being able to get more than a 3x zoom is one thing that I would really want.

The local camera shop is open late tomorrow so I'll try and get down there after work and I'm going to try really hard to just look and try a couple and not make a hasty decision and come home with a camera!

Don - I did not mention the name of the camera to avoid information blindness by the readers

It is the Olympus E1 and I think the E300 also hjas the sensor cleaner

quote:

Originally posted by Two-Sheds:
Currently my main reason for getting an SLR is more choice of lenses, being able to get more than a 3x zoom is one thing that I would really want.

I'd agree with both of those comments.

cheers, Martin

I dithered for ages before buying a D-SLR. I've had a variety of Canon bodies and lenses for a while but was waiting for the multiplier effect to come down. At the moment it's 1.6 but after two years of hanging on I don't see full sized devices coming to the pro-sumer market for a while.

In the interim I stuck with Canon and bought a G3 which had a lot of the features I was used to in my SLR's plus some digital trickery.

When I bit the bullet a few months ago, I traded in all my lenses for two new ones plus a EOS 20D body. The key difference that made me grin again was the ability to point, focus and shoot without the bloody shutter lag that most digital compacts seem to have.

Add to that the 70-200 f4 I bought, which may have needed extending on my film cameras, works as a 112-360, and that means that I don't need to carry extenders around. And my basic 17-85 IS does most of my normal shooting.

The one thing I do notice is picking up my first camera. A 26 year old Pentax ME Super still going strong. The difference in viewfinder size/brightness is astounding. Makes the Canon look like perring through a peephole.

Maybe one day D-SLR's will get there for a non-professional price but I'm happy with what I've got. And having changeable lenses means I use this rig much more than I ever used my old G3. And even more than film as the cost is only upfront.

Just bit the bullet and do it!

Duncan

quote:

Originally posted by Martin D:
Wow !

FYI, that link is broken for me.

cheers, Martin