Seriously considering........

extremenovice

extremenovice

Messages
253
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
.....splashing out on a dslr, I've had a fair old look at the EOS 550d with an 18-55mm kit lens and the Nikon D90 with 18-105 kit lens. I've also had a good feel of them too but I'm really struggling to decide one way or the other :thinking:
....then......came the Sony a55 for similar money too :bonk::bonk::bonk:

Please folks.....ANY/ALL advice is massively appreciated, cos I'm just sending myself :cuckoo::help::nuts:
 
Look at lenses mate and the cost of them as that can make it easy for you it did for me and I went canon
 
Depends on what you will be using the camera for Steve.

Are you after an all rounder? Or something specific to a certain subject such as portrait/landscape/street.

I'm Canon through and through, and if you went with Canon I would highly recommend ditching the 550D and going for the older 40D. Unless you are bothered about video that is.
 
Thanks for the replies guys :thumbs:

I suppose it will be mainly general use, family stuff, out and about on walks etc, I also produce annual squad and team photos for a local junior football team, so it would be a good mix of indoor and outdoor shots.

Are the lenses generally cheaper for Canon then? or is it just a case of shopping around?

I hate decisions :lol: (can you tell)!!!!
 
There's a bigger range of lenses for the Canon mount, especially in comparison to the Sony system.
 
Just to add a bit of balance here.:lol: The D90 is a fine camera and how many lenses do you want? There is certainly more lenses than I'd ever be able to afford or need.
 
odd jim said:
There's a bigger range of lenses for the Canon mount, especially in comparison to the Sony system.
Click to expand...

While true, it is also potentially misleading.

The lenses 'missing' from the Sony line up are, in the main, the more specialist (and expensive) ones.
The two main gaps are Tilt-Shift lenses - which are specialist architectural lenses, and Super Telephotos - 500mm+ (though a 500 f/4 was shown recently, and is expected to be released soon) with price tags of £3000+

If you think you are likely to be wanting either, then Canon or Nikon is your only option (currently). If, on the other hand, you are more modest in your expectations, then Sony (or Pentax, etc.) is unlikely to hold you back in terms of what is available.

Note that with the Sony system you might want to look at the A580.
 
Agree with grum, second hand is a very good place to look at. Photographers tend to look after their stuff very well (a generalisation of course) so there are lots of second hand bargains to be had.

Also consider if any of your friends or family have a DSLR... its always useful to borrow a lens. Ive a friend with 3 L lenses which I can use so Canon was already more favourable.
 
to be honest I'm a little cautious about the 2nd hand market, don't want my hard earned to bite back if you know what I mean?

will the kit lenses that come with the offers be ok? i.e. can I expect decent results for the general photos that I mentioned earlier or will I quickly be feeling the need to splash out further?

Its all questions I know but its a lot of money to lay out and I want to be as sure as I can before spending. Thanks for your input, I really do appreciate it :)
 
Which ever system you go for I would say buy a body only and not bother with a kit lens. I now wish that was what I'd done. I'm having to save to replace what I've already paid for when buying as a kit and got the problem of getting rid of two cheap lenses that most people don't want.
 
extremenovice said:
Is this really a cheap/poor quality lens?

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/75350/show.html

I'm presuming that the above lens is the one included in the following kit?

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/75332/show.html
Click to expand...

Yep, same lens and very good for the money.

Nikon kit lenses are pretty damn good, as are the modern Sony ones (the older 18-70 wasn't...) and I think the Canon ones are pretty decent nowdays too. For a large proportion of people the kit lens is all they'll ever need, especially it they go to 100mm or more.

There is a chance that you will want to get more into it and spend a lot of money on lenses but until you understand SLRs and photography better you'll not be in a position to know what lenses you'll want so IMO a kit lens makes a good deal of sense if it your first foray into SLRs ownership.

I bought the D90 kit you've shown and have no regrets at all (didn't like the feel of Canon) but given you don't mind the feel of either I would look at the lenses on offer and in this respect I think Canon have the edge in terms of affordable high quality glass (like a cheap 'pro' 300mm f/4).
 
extremenovice said:
to be honest I'm a little cautious about the 2nd hand market, don't want my hard earned to bite back if you know what I mean?

will the kit lenses that come with the offers be ok? i.e. can I expect decent results for the general photos that I mentioned earlier or will I quickly be feeling the need to splash out further?

Its all questions I know but its a lot of money to lay out and I want to be as sure as I can before spending. Thanks for your input, I really do appreciate it :)
Click to expand...

Lots of people on here decry various lenses - the Canon 18-55mm kit lens and the 50mm f1.8 in particular - without any justification whatsoever.

Both are excellent lenses when used properly.

But IMO the best lens for a novice is the Canon EF 28-135mm IS USM lens.

When I used a 450D crop camera this lens was used most of the time for general shots and was excellent.

But if you are a novice to photography - especially DSLR photography - my advice is that the 18-55mm IS kit lens is the one to start with.

Don't forget it's the person behind the camera that makes a good photograph not the equipment.

.
 
Thanks folks, these replies are brilliant :thumbs: however my head is still in a spin :bonk::thinking::nuts:

Just suppose we ignore lenses for a minute and just concentrate on the body.............

What will the D90 do for me that the 550d/40d won't or vice versa? What will the Sony A580 do in comparison?

Is there 'really' a difference between them or does it really just come down to personal preference?

Once again, thank you all for your input and advice :) Heeeeeeeeellllllllppppppp :D
 
The higher up cameras don't really give better image quality per-se but they increase your chances of getting the shot you're after, they can do this in a number of ways:

1. quicker access to the controls and settings you want, more money = more buttons = quicker/better control

2. Better AF systems, these will focus better in low light, cover more area and track moving objects better. All of these things increase your chances (but don't guaranty) your camera hitting and tracking the focus when you point it at something. For static subjects this is less of an issue.

3. Better ISO performance, this can allow you to shoot in lower light which gives you two things. 1, you can shoot still scenes in low light without a tripod and 2, you can use faster shutter speeds that will stop action in dwindling light.

Now, any older but 'higher range' camera will give you the benefits in point 1 but newer technology (separated by 2 generations or so) will (possibly) be better in points 2 and 3 and probably give you better movie mode too.

What you go for will depend on the type of shooting you do.

Personally, out of the models you list I'd go for the D90 as I don't care about movie mode and I want quick access to as many controls as possible, not sure about ISO performance but I'd hazard they are similar, 12mp is plenty for me and the 18-105 lens does for 99% of everyday shooting which the shorter Canon wouldn't.
 
Last edited:
Big Andy said:
Which ever system you go for I would say buy a body only and not bother with a kit lens. I now wish that was what I'd done. I'm having to save to replace what I've already paid for when buying as a kit and got the problem of getting rid of two cheap lenses that most people don't want.
Click to expand...

Yep I sold my 18-70 kit lens pretty pronto when I figured it was pretty useless in low light situations.

Got a 35/2 prime to replace it (I had a DX body) but I'd have saved for a 17-55/2.8 if I was set on getting a zoom (FX did not exist back then).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top