1 camera, 1 lens, £1000 - What would you get?

intel86 said:
So, would a D90 be a better camera to buy than a Canon 50D?
Click to expand...

Difficult to say as it depends on what you want and what prices you get, I guess technically the equivalent Nikon would be the D300 but to be honest I'd rather a D90 over a D300 so that throws that comparison out of the water.

Much of a muchness really by if you value fast FPS and a mag-alloy body then the 50D is the way to go. If you really can't decide after having handled both then look at the lenses and see which system suits your needs.
 
Fozzybear said:
I've only looked on DxOMark and it has the 40d on 703pts and the 50d on 696pts. The DPReview 50d review also says it has lower high ISO performance than the 40d. I've seen a 40d 2nd hand at £399. Seems a bit steep.

The Nikon d5100 get a high ISO rating of 1183pts! Some people say it's not important but it is to me if I want to get really fast shutter speeds whilst shooting horses running at 40mph.
Click to expand...

Just a quick point: that rating system also gives the 20D an ISO score of 721, and I somehow doubt that it has better high ISO performance than the 40/50D. There's something very wrong with their comparisons..
 
DoctorBob said:
Just a quick point: that rating system also gives the 20D an ISO score of 721, and I somehow doubt that it has better high ISO performance than the 40/50D. There's something very wrong with their comparisons..
Click to expand...

No there isn't. You just have to be aware of what they represent. Their high iso score is the projected (because cameras don't generally set ISO1183) value at which any one of three conditions are no longer satisfied: a mid grey SNR of 30dB, 9 stops of DR and 18 bit colour depth. It's more of a 'what ISO can I use with impunity' score than a 'highest usable ISO' score. Also, as it cuts off where any one of the criteria no longer hold, it can underestimate performance for your needs if say, you don't need huge colour depth or you're shooting a low contrast scene and the score that tripped on the sensor was that score.
 
can I suggest my recent purchase of Canon 550d (I know you loose the articulated screen) and Canon EFS 18 - 135. With lens hood £950 new
 
K5 + 18-135.

ISO performance is said to be one of the best out there.

K5 18-135 WR ISO 3200 indoors in dull light:

6347809479_e26edc277b_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
Used 5d mk1, and a 50 1.4, with change left to go out on a photo trip :)
 
ausemmao said:
No there isn't. You just have to be aware of what they represent. Their high iso score is the projected (because cameras don't generally set ISO1183) value at which any one of three conditions are no longer satisfied: a mid grey SNR of 30dB, 9 stops of DR and 18 bit colour depth. It's more of a 'what ISO can I use with impunity' score than a 'highest usable ISO' score. Also, as it cuts off where any one of the criteria no longer hold, it can underestimate performance for your needs if say, you don't need huge colour depth or you're shooting a low contrast scene and the score that tripped on the sensor was that score.
Click to expand...

Good point. In that case I'll just say that it's not necessarily representative of how good a sensor is in low light.
 
Thought I may as well update this thread!

After months (and months) of having to put my purchase off (bills bills bills), I finally got a Nikon D7000 and Tamron 70-300 VC USD last week thanks to a nice win on the geegees! :)

I've not used it much in 'anger' yet. On first use I suspected the lens wasn't behaving. There have been reports of underexposure problems with it. I'll hopefully get chance to try it properly on Wednesday at Uttoxeter races.

I was actually very close to buying a 2nd hand 40D or 50D and a 70-200L F4 as suggested by some on here. I decided the 2 year and 5 year warranties on the D7000 and lens were the best way to go in the end.

Cheers for the advice.
 
Last edited:
secondhand D90 and a 17-55 DX f/2.8
 
@ OP first posting :)

Was gonna say a 50-500 sigma and what ever body you prefer on the back of it (both used) if you can find it.

Alternatively something like the nikon v1/j1 and a longer zoom via an adapter?
Or a micro 4/3rds camera (lots of choice there).

I think you'll be limited on the zoom range though.

Possibly have a look at a bridge camera with 20x or 30x zoom? (if they exist). They should be light and still zoom well.

Or better still, find a largeish camera store and handle all the brands, fiddle with them and when the sales person bugs you/comes over, state you want a big zoom and a decent camera... Listen to the waffle, ask them to note the models they recommend (especially in your budget) and say you'll come back to them (especially if they've been helpful and not pushy).

Come back here and state your preferred choices... :)

good hunting


EDIT: Congrats on the d7k !! :)
 
If your looking for new with stellar high ISO performance then have a look at the EOS 650D as looking at a comparison test last night for high ISO it even beat the EOS 60D.

If you want a fast prime then the canon 85mm F1.8 is a gem of a lens, if you want zoom then the tamron SP70-300 VC as the vibration control on it will let you shoot sharp static subjects down to 1/15th of a second hand held, obviously as with all moving targets you have to use a high enough shutter speed to freeze the movement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top