First DSLR advice...

godaz

godaz

Messages
482
Name
Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone,

Im about to buy my first DSLR in the next couple of weeks and just thought I would ask for some advice.

Im torn between four cameras. The Canon 350d, 400d 1000d and the Nikon D60.

I have read reviews on all cameras and Im leaning towards the 400d but would like to know what users of each of the cameras think.

Finally, are there any differences between the UK models and Rebel models of the Canon cameras?

cheers
 
Hello! :wave:

The 'Rebel' series are exactly the same bodies, just with different badges (and a stupid name in my humble opinion ;) )!

Seriously, go and try a few out. They're all excellent camera, all capable of taking great shots, but if it doesn't feel right in your hand, then there's no point!

Edit: Just re-read the list, and the 350D and the 450D are discontinued, so you probably won't be able to actually try one in a shop, but the 1000D and 450D are the same size, and pretty much the same shape, so see how they feel in your hand.
 
Thanks, I agree with the badges I dont see why they did it :confused:


I have had a go with the 400D and 1000d, The 400D felt good in my hand so maybe thats what Im leaning towards.

I will be the camera used I would think, what sort of price should I be looking at for say the camera kit and body only?


cheers!
 
Hi,

I've never used Nikon, so can't comment there.

I have used the 350D and 400D and I've had a quick play with the 1000D.
Personally I would go for the 400D. The 350D is an older model, much smaller LCD and only 8MP. Although the 1000D probably has a few more feature it feels very plasticky and cheap.
 
Thanks Ecoleman, I read the 350D reviews and it was very highly thought of. From what I gather the 400d is the "upgrade" of it so It looks the best to go for.

I think Im leaning towards a camera with a good build quality than loads of features that I may not use straight away.

Would it be best to get the body then lenses after wards or just get the whole kit?
 
godaz said:
Thanks Ecoleman, I read the 350D reviews and it was very highly thought of. From what I gather the 400d is the "upgrade" of it so It looks the best to go for.

I think Im leaning towards a camera with a good build quality than loads of features that I may not use straight away.

Would it be best to get the body then lenses after wards or just get the whole kit?
Click to expand...

The 350D is quite old now, which means it'll be missing a few features, but you can get them verrrry cheaply now! I'd say go for the lens kit to start with, it's a good lens for very little cash, and it'll get you up and running. When you've been playing (and saving up) for a bit, you can see where your limitations are, and upgrade or buy a new lens to suit.
 
Ive seen the 400D kit for around £300 mark on eBay so I think I'll look to go down the route.

thanks everyone.
 
It would depend on your budget.
Good lenses are expensive.

I started with the 350D and kit lens, then upgraded to the 400D and now to the 40D.

To be honest, you don't really get a bad camera these days, but you can get some horrendous lenses.

If you are on a budget I would look for a good second hand 400D and get yourself a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 for around £240. This is a far superior lens to the kit 18-55mm that canon usually supply with. I've just bought one myself and am extremely happy with it.
 
yet another interesting post for me as i've recently purchased my first 2nd hand outfit that included a 400D with a grip, and i must admit in the limited time i've owned it i love it and i am even considering purchasing another as a spare, in my short time on here and various other comments i've heard and read, the 400D seems to stand up very well in the many canon digital models.............unless of course anyone has any other negative views !!!
 
Without wishing to muddy the clear waters, have you looked at the Sony A200/230. Its a whole lot of camera and can be snapped up for about £260 including a 18-75mm kit lens which is good for the beginner. I personally moved to the A200 from the 400D and for me it was the better camera. Good luck with your search and whatever you get, you will be so pleased with it. Happy times ahead.
 
My only advise would be to look at the glass first and then the body after.
Bodies are disposable, glass is for forever (as long as you don't drop it ;))

You're looking between Canon and Nikon, so it depends on what you want it for and how far you want to take your photography (hobby or (semi)Pro)

Canon are normally about 20% more expensive than Nikon and so if (ongoing) budget is a factor then something worth considering.

Canon tend to launch new gear ahead of Nikon, so if you want the latest asap then Canon's probably more the ticket.

I think Nikon has a wider lens choice, but that tends to affect either specialists or pros.

Either way they're both great manufacturers and I'd have a play with some in your local camera store to see which fits your hands better and how you find the buttons and controls.
 
Thanks for the replies.

I have been looking at the Nikon d70s today and seems to have good reviews...

Can anyone comment on this camera?

cheers
 
I've recently bought a refurbished 350D for just over 200 quid from ebay. It's basically a brand new camera. It was from these guys and I recommend them highly.
 
I have a nikon D60, and i have to say it is a fabulous camera. Feels great in the hands, will work with new and old nikon lenses, great user interface. There is a lot to say about it so if you want any specific details just drop me a PM
 
Thanks.

With regards to the 350D would I see any major differences between the 350D and 400D?
 
Go handle the cameras you are interested in. Don't fixate on brands, buy waht feels comfortable in your hands and has an intuitive(to you) control layout.

Reviews and opinions of others are helpful but only you can decide which is best for you.
 
callumw said:
My only advise would be to look at the glass first and then the body after.
Bodies are disposable, glass is for forever (as long as you don't drop it ;))

You're looking between Canon and Nikon, so it depends on what you want it for and how far you want to take your photography (hobby or (semi)Pro)

Canon are normally about 20% more expensive than Nikon and so if (ongoing) budget is a factor then something worth considering.

Canon tend to launch new gear ahead of Nikon, so if you want the latest asap then Canon's probably more the ticket.

I think Nikon has a wider lens choice, but that tends to affect either specialists or pros.

Either way they're both great manufacturers and I'd have a play with some in your local camera store to see which fits your hands better and how you find the buttons and controls.
Click to expand...

1. Completely agree re the glass, only thing I'd add is if you are new to it all just get the kit lens it costs virtually nothing and once you've had a play you can decide what you are missing nad purchase another lens on that basis.

2. Are Canon 20% more expensive? Do you mean re bodies \ lenses? I don't look at Nikon lenses to compare but my impression was that it was much of a muchness, with Canon actually more options in some areas.

3. I had the 400D and upgraded to a 40D. I did it because the camera felt a bit small in my hands, I wanted more FPS and better ISO however I loved my 400D and optically it was great.

I'd go for the 400d, it's not new without being too old, you'll save some money and as Callum says you'll then have some extra money for lenses.

Enjoy!
 
callumw said:
My only advise would be to look at the glass first and then the body after.
Bodies are disposable, glass is for forever (as long as you don't drop it ;))
Click to expand...
:plus1:

callumw said:
Canon are normally about 20% more expensive than Nikon and so if (ongoing) budget is a factor then something worth considering.
Click to expand...
In my experience (>250 lenses bought in the last 18 months!) Nikon tend to be a tad more expensive, like-for-like. But I wouldn't say it's consistent, and there's not a lot in it.

callumw said:
Canon tend to launch new gear ahead of Nikon, so if you want the latest asap then Canon's probably more the ticket.
Click to expand...
A year ago I would have agreed with you - Canon were the first to introduce full-frame DSLRs, Image Stablisation, Live View, etc. But I think Nikon have upped their game recently - first DSLR with HD video, first DSLR with fold-out screen, etc. They're forever playing leapfrog and trying to outdo one another, and you can't go too far wrong whichever one you choose.

callumw said:
I think Nikon has a wider lens choice, but that tends to affect either specialists or pros.
Click to expand...
Canon has a wider range actually, and there are some areas where Canon's range is significantly better than Nikon's. But Callum's right in that they're generally fairly specialsed, and if you're not thinking of spending £700+ on a lens then you won't really see much of a difference.

callumw said:
Either way they're both great manufacturers and I'd have a play with some in your local camera store to see which fits your hands better and how you find the buttons and controls.
Click to expand...
:plus1:
That's the botom line, really.
 
I've had a go with a friends 400D on my dinner break and was quite impressed with it, it felt good in my hands and felt comfortable when taking shots.

I've decided to buy the 400D body and get a lens separately after being advised that the kit lens isn't that great and I'll soon be looking to upgrade.

So I'm just looking for what Lenses everyone would recommend?

Sorry for all the questions!
 
godaz said:
I've had a go with a friends 400D on my dinner break and was quite impressed with it, it felt good in my hands and felt comfortable when taking shots.

I've decided to buy the 400D body and get a lens separately after being advised that the kit lens isn't that great and I'll soon be looking to upgrade.

So I'm just looking for what Lenses everyone would recommend?

Sorry for all the questions!
Click to expand...

Depends on what you are interested in shooting: Landscapes, Portraits, Wildlife, Close-ups?

As I mentioned in a previous post. The Sigma 17-70mm is a good all round lens to start with: 17mm for Landscapes, 50-70mm for Portraits and the lens has an extremely close focus distance if you want to try your had at macro (although this is not a proper macro lens).

Alternately, for a larger focus range have a look at a Sigma or Canon 18-200mm. I had the Sigma 18-200mm (Image Stabilized). Although you will find that image quality will suffer with these long range lenses.
 
Abit of everything to start with really.

I've been told the 50mm F1.8 is a must?
 
godaz said:
Abit of everything to start with really.

I've been told the 50mm F1.8 is a must?
Click to expand...

Depends what you want to photograph.
 
StewartR said:
A year ago I would have agreed with you - Canon were the first to introduce full-frame DSLRs, Image Stablisation, Live View, etc. But I think Nikon have upped their game recently - first DSLR with HD video, first DSLR with fold-out screen, etc. They're forever playing leapfrog and trying to outdo one another, and you can't go too far wrong whichever one you choose.
Click to expand...

There's an old saying
"Canon do it first. Nikon do it right" (y)
Which isn't quite fair, but Canon do have a reputation for rushing it's kit out then having to racall half of it for upgrades or releasing emergency firmware updates

ecoleman said:
Agreed, Very fast, very sharp and only around £80.00. I've got one and they're great for portraits.
Click to expand...

Yea. 50mm f/1.8 is a great disposable lens. Cameras used to come with them as their kit lens, but then a zoom the standard kit lens. Less quality than the 'nifty fifty', but more day to day practicalilty with a zoom.

Great to stick on and run about with. If you drop or scratch it then it's no hassle (virtually disposable)
I have the 50mm 1.4 and 1.8. I only use the 1.4 when working, but will happily use the 1.8 on hols.
 
It's just a saying ;)
In the same way there's competition between Ford and Vauxhall and Subaru and Mitsubishi..... Nikon and Canon users have the same deal.

I like them both, but for my use, Nikon ticks more boxes

I'd love to have a Hasselblad or a Leaf, but don't think that belongs in a "my first dslr" thread :LOL:
 
For what it's worth, I've got a D60 and have just got an A200 as well. I much prefer the D60 but a lot of that could simply be down to me being used to it but I do prefer the smaller size of it too.

The kit lens on the Nikon is better than the Sony but then you have to buy AFS lenses for the Nikon which are generally quite pricey for anything a good step up. With the Sony there are loads of old Minolta lenses you can pick up for peanuts and have a play with.

That said, given the choice again, I'd go with the Nikon.
 
Well looks like I have sorted out the 400D body, just need to get hold of a couple of lenses to get me started now!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top