Recommendations for first-time SLR?

[deductress]

Hello all,

Long story short, photography has been a passion of mine since i was a little kid, i've read a lot about it, studied it in my own time, and follow many photographers' work, both international and local.

For the past few years i've had a Lumix FZ38, a good camera and has served me well, but obviously, it's amateur. I'm wanting to start pushing into professional levels of photography now, and am wanting to buy an SLR. However, i'm not entirely sure which way to go, i've heard either Canon or Nikon are best for a choice of equipment/lenses to match, but obviously there's so many many models of each brand, and i don't know quite where to start.

So basically, could people please recommend SLR cameras for me to buy? At the moment, price isn't a big deal as long as it's not ridiculously high, if it's something quite costly i'll just search for it second hand, or i could ask some local photographers i know for advice where to buy it.

There was one local photographer who was going to sell me his Canon D600 i think it was? But unfortunately he got very sick, and that's fallen through.

Any recommendations gladly taken - if you need to more specific details or anything, please ask. I'd appreciate any advice at all.

Thank you~

 

[PJ S]

Basics first:
Type of photography being persued and realistic upper budget level?
Is the budget purely for the camera or does it cover bag, tripod, filters, etc?

 

[Deleted member 34016]

Lenses are as important as a DSLR body - depends what you intend to photograph- will help decide what equipment you need :shrug:


Nikon/Canon are just two of the brands out there, dont be shy about the others - I use Sony and find the Camera's & lenses etc to be excellent

I have a few lenses 2 Tripods mono pod and 2 bodies all in all around £4,500

But I photograph anything I can


Les

 

[heidfirst]

Have you been to a store & handled the Canon & Nikons (& Sonys & Pentax)?
If not go & do so (I realise that might not be easy in Perth).
There is no bad current production DSLR in terms of imaging, what more money buys you is more buttons & dials, a few more features & better build quality.
They do however vary in their handling & probably 1 out of them will just feel more natural to you (albeit you can train yourself to use anything).

 

[munkee]

My own personal choice in similar circumstances would be the Nikon D7000. Or hang on a few weeks and you'll be able to buy its replacement the D7100.

 

[munkee]

My own personal choice in similar circumstances would be the Nikon D7000. Or hang on a few weeks and you'll be able to buy its replacement the D7100.

Just to qualify that. This camera is fully backwards compatible with 30+ years worth of Nikon lenses. It has all of the important manual controls. It's capable of taking beautiful pictures. The only person who could conceivably be disappointed with one of these would be a pro downgrading from something with even more buttons.

 

[deductress]

Basics first:
Type of photography being persued and realistic upper budget level?
Is the budget purely for the camera or does it cover bag, tripod, filters, etc?

Thank you for replying.
Type of photography is landscape, i specialise in historical architecture and botanical images. So high detail is of most importance to me.

Realistically... £1000? I realise this might not be much, but i am hoping to get second hand if possible.
Budget doesn't need to cover bag or tripod, etc, but it would help if filters/lenses could be within.

 

[deductress]

Lenses are as important as a DSLR body - depends what you intend to photograph- will help decide what equipment you need :shrug:


Nikon/Canon are just two of the brands out there, dont be shy about the others - I use Sony and find the Camera's & lenses etc to be excellent

I have a few lenses 2 Tripods mono pod and 2 bodies all in all around £4,500

But I photograph anything I can


Les

Thank you for replying.
I do landscape, but i specialise in historical architecture and botanical images, so high detail is of most importance to me.

I'm open to use of any brand, but i've read canon/nikon seem to be the best to stick with if you want a wider range of filters/lenses. I said what i specialise in, but i don't want to limit myself, i do a lot of countryside/forest landscape photography too, and i don't wanna buy a camera and be limited to one style of photography, if that makes sense?

And are all of those things brand new or any bought second hand? I admit that is a high price range for me, but it makes sense if all was new when bought.

 

[gadgeteer]

Personally I'd say as your first camera and for landscapes and architecture that something like a Nikon D3200 would be more than fine. You should be able to get that for £400ish and then I'd recommend getting a decent wide angle lens. A friend who does similar as yourself recently purchased the Tamron 10-24 lens and he says it's never left his camera since. That's about £350ish so you still have change!

 

[deductress]

Have you been to a store & handled the Canon & Nikons (& Sonys & Pentax)?
If not go & do so (I realise that might not be easy in Perth).
There is no bad current production DSLR in terms of imaging, what more money buys you is more buttons & dials, a few more features & better build quality.
They do however vary in their handling & probably 1 out of them will just feel more natural to you (albeit you can train yourself to use anything).

Thank you for replying.

I'll admit i haven't, but as you stated it's Perth. XD My best choice is Currys, or there is a small photography store called JRS, but they only do second hand and the cameras are all a bit random. I'd have to go further a field to try that.

But that's really interesting, i never considered the 'feel' of a camera before... I'm really keen to try that now.

Yes, i am fairly amateur when it comes to the extra 'features' and stuff, hence why i'm asking best first-time SLR. I mean, i've taken and sold photography from my current camera, it's doesn't have any special features or dials or anything, but people like the quality. So for me, quality and detail is most important, more than all the extra buttons. Though i admit colour is something i love to play about with, but then i guess that would be lens based more than camera... I'm ranting now. XD (Plus you can probably tell how amateur i am from my ranting.)

Thank you for the advice.

 

[deductress]

Just to qualify that. This camera is fully backwards compatible with 30+ years worth of Nikon lenses. It has all of the important manual controls. It's capable of taking beautiful pictures. The only person who could conceivably be disappointed with one of these would be a pro downgrading from something with even more buttons.

Thank you very much for the recommendation, i'll get looking into that now. I'm guessing the 7100 will be way out of my price range, but the original should be attainable second hand i'd hope. Thank you!

 

[deductress]

Personally I'd say as your first camera and for landscapes and architecture that something like a Nikon D3200 would be more than fine. You should be able to get that for £400ish and then I'd recommend getting a decent wide angle lens. A friend who does similar as yourself recently purchased the Tamron 10-24 lens and he says it's never left his camera since. That's about £350ish so you still have change!

Oh wow, that actually sounds totally ideal. And very reasonably priced. I'll get looking into that asap, thank you very much for the recommendation, very much appreciated!

 

[heidfirst]

TThough i admit colour is something i love to play about with, but then i guess that would be lens based more than camera...

It's a bit of both although you can play about with in-camera settings & in post-processing. Canons tend to have a straight out of camera default colour that a lot of people seem to like albeit or because they are probably less accurate colours than other camera brands default colours.

P.S. I'm surprised to read above that the Tamron 10-24 does well on the D3200 as the Tamron isn't noted for being brilliant - they traded a wider focal range for some image quality - & the D3200 has a 24MP sensor which should show up such deficiencies. If you are doing small prints though then printing is probably the limiting factor (or maybe we are just pickier than the general public ).

Oh, & both Pentax & Sony have more than enough lenses etc. available for you - it's only when you get to the really esoteric stuff that is usually multi- thousands of £s that they start to struggle.
Nikon has the best flash system though.

 

[deductress]

Oh, & both Pentax & Sony have more than enough lenses etc. available for you - it's only when you get to the really esoteric stuff that is usually multi- thousands of £s that they start to struggle.
Nikon has the best flash system though.

I was originally set on getting some kind of Canon, but from what everyone's said, i'm pretty positive i wanna try a Nikon now. As i mentioned earlier, detail/high def is the most important aspect to me so if the Tamron sp af is lacking in that, is it a good idea for me to get it? Any other lenses people might recommend that would work with Nikon?

 

[heidfirst]

"historical architecture & botanical images" - what do you mean by botanical images (macro?)?
It's quite possible that you may need 2 different lenses to do these different aims well & 2 lenses & a body maybe pushing your £1k limit. You may have/want to consider s/h.

 

[Sidney]

I can not talk on the Nikon front, but I can give a few words of advice with canon.

The general line of succession seems to be (XXXD XXD XD). For instance, I started off with the 500D, then when I outgrew it, I moved to the 60D, and in around 2/3 years time (if doing paid work), I will move to the 6D.

Because you're new to the DSLR world, I would very strongly recommend you get a XXXD. Last time I checked the best XXXD was the 650D, and the lowest/cheapest was the 1100D (though four digits, still really in XXXD category). Whatever end of the scale you wish to enter is up to you, but make sure if is a Canon it's a XXXD. Do not let ANYONE tell you otherwise.

Personally, I would get the 1100D 18-55mm kit and with left over cash get a 50mm 1.8 lens, and maybe a 55-250mm lens also.

Hope I helped.

Sid.

 

[pete.rush]

As you see from your post and if you do a search on TP this question has been asked many time with similar answers to what you're getting on this thread and that is, everyone has their own personal choice and Nikon seems to be the camera system ahead in the playing stakes at the moment at the entry level.

But I'm with heidfirst, at the entry level there ain't a great deal of difference between Canon, Sony, Pentax, Nikon........, but it's very much a personal choice (would you let someone pick your car or house).

Your best bet is to go and try out some camera bodies and curry's is just as good as most camera shops for the entry level cameras and find which one you feel comfortable using. Also remember that its the lens that makes the images so you'll need to invest in a decent lens rather than go with the kit lenses offered as part of the package they would try and sell you and leave your money at home.

 

[deductress]

"historical architecture & botanical images" - what do you mean by botanical images (macro?)?
It's quite possible that you may need 2 different lenses to do these different aims well & 2 lenses & a body maybe pushing your £1k limit. You may have/want to consider s/h.

Botanical as in detailed images of individual flowers.

Excuse my ignorance, "s/h"?

 

[deductress]

Personally, I would get the 1100D 18-55mm kit and with left over cash get a 50mm 1.8 lens, and maybe a 55-250mm lens also.

Hope I helped.

Sid.

Yes, i knew a professional photographer who was going to let me trial his Canon D500 or D600 (i can't remember) and he said the exact same thing, start with three digits, go down to two and then one is the best. That's why i'm a little confused with Nikon, because it seems to be the opposite?

Thank you for the recommendation, i'll look it up and see costs and such like. Thanks!

 

[deductress]

Your best bet is to go and try out some camera bodies and curry's is just as good as most camera shops for the entry level cameras and find which one you feel comfortable using. Also remember that its the lens that makes the images so you'll need to invest in a decent lens rather than go with the kit lenses offered as part of the package they would try and sell you and leave your money at home.

Thank you for the advice. I am actually hoping today to go by a few local electronics/camera stores and have a look at what they have. It does seem Nikon is the best, but as you say, most brands seem to be on a fairly same level. So i shall check out the ones available instore and see what i'm most drawn to. Thank you!

 

[Croatoan]

Spend as much you can on the lens(es). Do lots of reading as to the type of lens that best suits your needs. Primes will almost always have the edge over zooms in image quality. Price them up then see what you have left over for a body and other accessories. Nothing wrong with second hand - if bought wisely. Lots of photographers are serious equipment freaks and are always selling off barely used and/or well looked after gear to upgrade to newer stuff.

 

[OldCarlos]

tbh, it's the lenses that are more important than the camera body.
Sounds like you may want a couple of lenses to start with. eg a 35mm F1.8G afs & a `macro` (the 105mm is a great lens) These are Nikon btw, but other brands have equivalents.

It really is important that you actually hold/try out in store, to see which feels more comfortable.

There should be no problems buying used lenses, providing you get them from a trusted/reputable source & preferably with a guarantee.

 

[Gr8Shot]

Thank you for the recommendation but as i'm a newbie i don't have access to the classified forums yet, so no buying from this website for a few months yet for me.

its on eBay as well now, my username on eBay is top_lad_71.

 

[heidfirst]

Botanical as in detailed images of individual flowers.

OK, this does sound like you need a true macro lens (one that shoots at life size or 1:1 as it's known). Sony do an inexpensive 35mm macro (as well as longer macro lenses), not sure about Nikon etc. Generally most people use slightly longer macro lenses (say 50-100mm) which gives you a bit further working distance (true macro lenses only do 1:1 with subjects very close to them).

Excuse my ignorance, "s/h"?

second hand

 

[deductress]

Spend as much you can on the lens(es). Do lots of reading as to the type of lens that best suits your needs. Primes will almost always have the edge over zooms in image quality. Price them up then see what you have left over for a body and other accessories. Nothing wrong with second hand - if bought wisely. Lots of photographers are serious equipment freaks and are always selling off barely used and/or well looked after gear to upgrade to newer stuff.

Thank you for the advice, muchly appreciated!

 

[deductress]

tbh, it's the lenses that are more important than the camera body.
Sounds like you may want a couple of lenses to start with. eg a 35mm F1.8G afs & a `macro` (the 105mm is a great lens) These are Nikon btw, but other brands have equivalents.

It really is important that you actually hold/try out in store, to see which feels more comfortable.

There should be no problems buying used lenses, providing you get them from a trusted/reputable source & preferably with a guarantee.

I actually went to a "Currys" yesterday and they have a few cameras, but the ones i was checking out was a Canon 600D and a Nikon D3200. Instantly i knew i preferred the Nikon when i held it, the Canon just felt weird and clunky, but the Nikon was brilliant. So it looks like that is decided at least. XD

Thank you for the recommendation on the lenses, i'll note this down.

 

[deductress]

OK, this does sound like you need a true macro lens (one that shoots at life size or 1:1 as it's known). Sony do an inexpensive 35mm macro (as well as longer macro lenses), not sure about Nikon etc. Generally most people use slightly longer macro lenses (say 50-100mm) which gives you a bit further working distance (true macro lenses only do 1:1 with subjects very close to them).

second hand

Okay that's awesome. I think i've definitley decided on buying a Nikon now, so i'll get looking into available macro lenses for Nikons.
And yeah i could worked out the s/h if i'd thought about it, but obviously i didn't... XD
Thank you!

 

[deductress]

I was in "Currys" yesterday and i tried holding a Canon 600D and a Nikon D3200, and instantly i knew the Nikon was much more suited to me - the canon felt heavy and clunky. Currys are currently selling a Nikon D3200 (which a couple of people have recommended in this thread) with an 18-55mm lens for £399. Would people say this is good value, or should i just go for second hand and concentrate my money more on lenses? Or should i buy the lenses first and buy the body after?

I'm very grateful for all the advice everyone has been kind enough to give me, it's actually incredibly helpful and i've actually been really quite educated over the past week thanks to you all - it's amazing how much i've learnt and how much i consider now. So thank you!

 

[heidfirst]

Currys are currently selling a Nikon D3200 (which a couple of people have recommended in this thread) with an 18-55mm lens for £399. Would people say this is good value, or should i just go for second hand and concentrate my money more on lenses?

That's £399 after cashback.
£361 on Amazon after cashback or under £300 body only on Amazon after cashback.
I do think that is good value but bodies are the parts that devalue fastest as they are replaced more often by the manufacturers than lenses.

When you are looking for lenses for the D3200 make sure that they have in-lens focus motors (AF-S in Nikon terminology).
& remember to include a memory card & a bag in your budget. I also recommend a rocket blower & lenspen for cleaning.
& you may well want to get a tripod at some point.

 

[pete.rush]

Well you found the camera body you like. You can use the link below to get the best UK price, as Heidfirst said Amazon has the best price for the camera body @ £335 (with Nikon cash back £40) just under £300 for the camera body.

http://www.camerapricebuster.com/cat_Nikon_Digital_SLRs.html

The kit lens will get you started, but like most people you'll soon want more and most upgrade their kit lens, so personally I would look at buying a decent lens now, but that's you to you.

As for a macro lens, the sigma 105mm or tamron 90mm macro lenses are top notch or you could look at the Nikon 105 version. A cheaper way of achieving macro is to use extension tubes on a prime lens like a 50mm but check out the minimum focusing distance for the lens.

 

[gadgeteer]

With your earlier stated budget of £1000 and the fact you like the D3200 (cracking value) then I'd suggest the following:

D3200 with kit lens £360 (after cashback)
Tamron 10-24 £349 (to give you wide angle for your landscape/architecture shots)
Nikon 40mm f2.8 macro £185 (for macro shots. Will give you 60mm effective)
Yongnuo 565 flash £100 (Pick it up from ebay)

Total £994

You might as well get the kit lens for normal day to day use. The flash seems well respected for the price but personally I've not used it.

You could swap the Nikon 40mm out for a used Tamron 90mm f2.8 but personally I think the 40mm is a good starter macro. That said I don't do much macro photography.

 

[deductress]

Thank you for all the help/advice!

Have noted down what everyone has recommended, and i'm currently waiting for my next wages to come in so i can decide on what lens to go for first. I've also started asking around local photographers to see if they have any s/h Nikon lenses or equipment.

And, time for me to show my stupid again, the whole cashback thing? Does that mean the camera body is say £300, and i have £40 cashback, and that cashback must be spent on something Nikon? Or am i misunderstanding this?

 

[pete.rush]

Thank you for all the help/advice!
And, time for me to show my stupid again, the whole cashback thing? Does that mean the camera body is say £300, and i have £40 cashback, and that cashback must be spent on something Nikon? Or am i misunderstanding this?

Basically you buy the camera gear at the standard price, then register it with Nikon, Canon etc they should have a claim form on their website which you fill in with all your details, where you bought the camera, serial number etc then Nikon will send you a cheque for £40.

 

[ernesto]

The cashback thing is offered on the hope that people will not bother filling in the form/following the process to get the cashback meaning the camera co. gets the full price for the camera.
Can't remember the stats but the number of people who don't bother claiming cashback on these type of offers is surprisingly high.

 

[deductress]

Okay, awesome, once again, thanks to all who have replied, i really appreciate the advice!

 

[pugbug]

The only way I could afford my camera was by claiming the cash back. It is amazing that so many people don't bother to claim.