Which camera to buy?

L

Lairdy

Messages
7
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, I wanting to buy my first dslr camera soon. I have up to around £500 to spend on one. I have had a couple of ideas in the Sony a33 and the nikon d3100 I think. Anyone know if these are good choices, or any other camera s that would be good. I'm mainly going to be using the camera for landscapes but may want to do a few sporting photos.

Thanks in advance
Lairdy
 
Have you had a play with any of those? If not head off to jessops/lce/jacobs and have a play with them. See what feels right to you and then check the prices here. Remember your buying into a system not just a camera.
 
The first thing you need to do is go into a store and try them all in your hands. The different manufacturers are slightly different in size and layout, and they have different menu's so find which camera's feel the most comfortable in your hands and work from there. There is no point spending £500 on a camera that you then find uncomfortable to hold as you'd never use it.
Next step in my opinion would be to look at what different models are available by that brand, and if you don't mind used, look in the classifieds on sites like this and AV Forums to see if you can get more for your money.
Don't forget to factor in lenses to your budget. They often cost more than the camera body itself and are very important to the results you'll produce.
 
I've handled a lot of cameras...never found one yet that was so ergonomically awkward that it would have kept me from taking pictures. I think that common advice about "handling them" is OK...just not as important as most people make it out to be. What is important, however, is the firmware that comes with the camera, the ease with which you understand it, and the layout of the buttons to make use of it.

The only way you can get a sense of how Nikon firmware differs from Sony which differs from Canon, etc. is to look at them. If you have a friend who is reasonably knowledgeable, take him/her along to the store because it's always hit or miss getting a sales clerk who (1) knows what they are talking about and (2) will listen to you.

As noted above, the lens you buy is more important than the camera. No matter how good the camera, if you put a bad lens on it, you'll get lousy pictures.

You can read a thousand online reviews of equipment, and ultimately be left numb and unable to make a decision, since so much of this will ultimately come down to how you actually use the camera and lens.

Again...this is where a friend or two can really help you make sense out of what you want to do.

Good luck! It's a great hobby.
 
Thanks for the quick replys, I have had a feel of quite a few in jessops and like the feel and setup of the Sony more.
I understand the bit about the lenses and have got money for them ontop of the camera itself, are there differences in the quality of the lenses made for the nikon than the Sony lenses for example, or is it more of a case if you get what you pay for?
Lairdy
 
Another thing to consider does a friend or family member have a DSLR if so what make? It might make sense to go with the same brand then you could borrow lens or flash etc.

Just a thought.

I would also consider the 2nd hand route as you can get a really nice spec body for your budget.
 
Lairdy said:
Thanks for the quick replys, I have had a feel of quite a few in jessops and like the feel and setup of the Sony more.
I understand the bit about the lenses and have got money for them ontop of the camera itself, are there differences in the quality of the lenses made for the nikon than the Sony lenses for example, or is it more of a case if you get what you pay for?
Lairdy
Click to expand...

I use Sony, so I'll tell you about what I'm familiar with. Taking the third party manufacturers first (Tamron, Sigma etc), they make most of their lenses available in all of the major mounts so there's no difference between them apart from the mount on the back of the lens. So (for example) a Sigma 10-20 in Nikon mount should be no better or worse than one in alpha (Sony/Minolta) mount. When a 3rd party lens is fitted to a Sony body, if they have in lens stabilisation this will not work as the body stabilisation will take effect. Note that with Sonys the body stabilisation means that even 25 year old Minolta AF lenses will be stabilised.

With the body manufacturers "own brand" lenses, again they all make some very good lenses. What you get with Canon and Nikon is more choice, especially beyond 300mm focal length, as apart from the 500mm mirror Sony don't make any longer primes (500/4 is coming), so the only options are 3rd party or s/h Minolta. At the wide end all the manufacturers have it covered. I use an old Minolta 17-35/3.5 which is lovely, nowadays Sony do a 16-35/2.8 Zeiss autofocus lens - puddleduck on here has one and his pictures with it are super (those are both full frame lenses), but there are cheaper options from 3rd parties and second hand as well which are still good.

Basically you can get really great lenses in all the main mounts, but for the top ones expect to pay ;). There is no shortage of economical and second hand options either (some people forget that Minolta AF lenses made since 1985 fit Sonys, as Sony bought the DSLR business from Minolta, and wrongly assume that the s/h choice is poor :nono: )
 
Right I'm pretty sure I'm going to go for the Sony a33. Does anyone else have or had this body, and what are your thoughts on it over a similar price nikkon or cannon?
Thanks
 
hunter20ga said:
I've handled a lot of cameras...never found one yet that was so ergonomically awkward that it would have kept me from taking pictures.
Click to expand...

I have, and I've only handled three - my father's, mine and one I tried in Jessops whilst waiting for a friend to pay for something. Father's stretched my hands (it's the maximum size I could go), the one in Jessops actually wouldn't fit (I couldn't hold it and reach some of the buttons) and mine is good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top