What SLR do I need

[VaughnA]

Pentax K7!!

Uses ANY Pentax 35MM lens ever made.

Ducks for cover from the Canikon Crowd;-)

 

[BlueMac]

Just remember, you buy a DSLR, well, actually any SLR for that matter, purely for the lens. Not for the body. The D90 will do everything you need. And it is relatively cheap compared to the D300. You can, therefore, buy better glass. Yes, better, not more. Be honest, I'd take a D40 with a very good lens over a D3 with a cheap lens.



Oh and:

Ducks for cover from the Canikon Crowd;-)

Fail.

 

[Phototini]

Just remember, you buy a DSLR, well, actually any SLR for that matter, purely for the lens. Not for the body. The D90 will do everything you need. And it is relatively cheap compared to the D300. You can, therefore, buy better glass. Yes, better, not more. Be honest, I'd take a D40 with a very good lens over a D3 with a cheap lens.



Oh and:



Fail.

Oh yeah...Fail

I bought my D700 because I shoot a lot of low light images, hence needing the higher useable ISO settings that other bodies in that price range at the time could not even come close to. All the big camera companies have great lens' when you get up into the pro lens'. You buy a camera SYSTEM to suit your individual style and comfort.

I don't want to sound like a jerk but I can't stand when people try to make others feel like an idiot when they themselves have no clue what they are talking about.

 

[CameraMike]

VaughnA

Pentax K7!! Uses ANY Pentax 35MM lens ever made.
Ducks for cover from the Canikon Crowd;-)

Ooooww that's a good point. Also, the new Sony's DSLRs use old Minolta lenses I think, which are pretty crispy and cheap as well, not sure though.

Blue Mac
Really? I'll take a D3 with a cheap lens. Da camera kicks booty dat much and I got alotta glass already.

The D90 is a good camera too that was kinda left out of the discussion but you could have brought it up with slight bit more class. "Fail"? Dude what's that !?

Photoini
+1 on that.

 

[VaughnA]

VaughnA

Ooooww that's a good point. Also, the new Sony's DSLRs use old Minolta lenses I think, which are pretty crispy and cheap as well, not sure though.

Blue Mac
Really? I'll take a D3 with a cheap lens. Da camera kicks booty dat much and I got alotta glass already.

The D90 is a good camera too that was kinda left out of the discussion but you could have brought it up with slight bit more class. "Fail"? Dude what's that !?

Photoini
+1 on that.

Wow I wasn't knocked for the Pentax comment. Someone has actually heard of pentax;-) Every youngster I talk to seems to think they are new to the game. I've got a new K10D, two kit lenses and a like new 50mm F2 prime. Total investment less than 600 bucks. And IMHO the pentax kit lenses are the best in the business. And the primes are some of the best and available at a great price if you can shoot manual.

Composition, light & glass are what make the big difference... Not the body, not the megapixels (above 6 is fine) and not FF or APS-C.

 

[Village Idiot]

Wow I wasn't knocked for the Pentax comment. Someone has actually heard of pentax;-) Every youngster I talk to seems to think they are new to the game. I've got a new K10D, two kit lenses and a like new 50mm F2 prime. Total investment less than 600 bucks. And IMHO the pentax kit lenses are the best in the business. And the primes are some of the best and available at a great price if you can shoot manual.

Composition, light & glass are what make the big difference... Not the body, not the megapixels (above 6 is fine) and not FF or APS-C.

It's all part of the equation. If not, your reasoning would have professional photographers using 6mp Canon 300D cameras and not Hasselblad HD-50 medium format digital cameras.

Even a FF camera will generally have better IQ than an APS-C sensor camera.

 

[CMPOB]

That all sounds like good advice up there. My 2 cents is that the Nikon system still supports all those old lenses back to 30 years ago. The D700/300 are fantastic and are both full frame. It sounds like you are coming back to a hobby you left some time ago and so have missed the earlier 'cropped' format where manufacturers made smaller more affordable sensors meaning that a lenses focal length effectively increased as the sensor took a smaller grab of the image circle.

If possible, go back to full frame with the 300/700 or 5D (which is a fantastic camera and the Mk1 can probably be picked up for very good value) I would'nt get bogged down in the video capabilities of some of the newer stills cameras although this is very interesting - but if on a budget then the above recommendations are the pick of the bunch.

Now, where is my old AE-1 with that lovely 135mm FD manual lump of metal and glass.......

 

[CMPOB]

This may tickle your fancy - its a stop motion grab using a 5D and a shift lens (for that toy soldier effect) Quite beautiful.

The Japanese Tradition -SUMO- on Vimeo

 

[VaughnA]

It's all part of the equation. If not, your reasoning would have professional photographers using 6mp Canon 300D cameras and not Hasselblad HD-50 medium format digital cameras.

Even a FF camera will generally have better IQ than an APS-C sensor camera.

Agreed, but my point is that for us 'normals' the Canon vs Nikon vs Others debate doesn't make as much of a difference as the idiot behind the viewfinder and how he/she uses the light available. I know of quite a few great photographers getting excellent shots with a decent 6mp camera and great glass.

My pictures didn't magically improve when I got my DSLR. If I had bought a D3X I'd still have a crappy picture, it would just take up more room on my hard drive.

 

[Nethfel]

Just some food for thought...

Some magazines and stock photo places have min resolution/file size submission requirements. Some cameras may require upsizing to meet those minimums. I'd say look into where you are submitting to and find out what those might be before you jump and purchase.

For more info on crop and magnification theory (although I realize Phototini already described it well) there is a good article here with pictures that show the different crop ratios:

DSLR Magnification

And although VaughnA has a certain point about the body/megapixels/etc. - there are some important things to consider - some bodies/sensors do not perform well in certain situations which may affect you depending on what you shoot. Some cameras have better low light performance that has nothing to do with the lens, but rather the capabilities of the body and sensor. Some bodies clip highlights. Some bodies tend to degrade the pictures so bad at higher ISOs (ie: smearing for noise reduction, or just so much noise that it looks terrible, or stuck pixels (I had a Fuji before that would tend to get stuck pixels at higher ISOs (S5 Pro) and a Fuji that tended to have a green cast (S1Pro)) that they are just unusable. In terms of subject and ability to visualize your photo and capture your visualization - as long as you're within the capabilities of the body - is all you, light and glass, and there VaughnA is 100% correct.

I would recommend you to go to Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ and look at the camera reviews for the various models you're considering, see what kind of performance they have under various conditions and consider that against what you will be doing with the camera. Perhaps you'll always be in awesome lighting situations where you might want to consider a foveon based sensor camera (captures all three colors in a single pixel area by a form of filtering (beautiful pictures, terrible low light performance or long exposure performance) - normally digital cameras (canon, nikon, sony, etc.) use a bayer pattern where it will interpolate the color for a given pixel based upon the surrounding pixels which really does work well).

Other things to consider - if you're going to buy used, be sure to check on problems of various body models, some have banding issues, some have failure issues that you'll want to investigate before spending your money.

I've used canon, nikon, kodak (kodak used to have a pro line body set that used a nikon or canon film body attached to the kodak back), fuji (uses a nikon body with fuji circuitry) - all have been good and bad cameras; all have had their quirks.

Realize that your big investment will be your glass. It's easy to drop $1-$6K on a camera when you consider the glass - depending on the style and quantity of lenses you get can run ~$1K-$30k (there used to be a $100K lens from canon, but I think it's been discontinued. This price range assuming you look at higher end lenses and ignore the low end consumer lenses) so choose your manufacturer carefully as it's quite expensive if you decide later to switch.

You may want to see if there are any places that will rent you cameras from Nikon or Canon that way you can get a real feel to see which style fits you better.

Just my $0.02

 

[Philscbx]

With full frame, you do have the menu options to use RAW & Jpeg at the same time and also pick the amount of megapixel of in-camera processed Jpegs.

I'm currently using Canon gear, but I may add Sony's FF, and Nikon.
I was looking at Nikon's D90 I believe. It also has movie mode.
Nikon search- Flickr: Search Flickr: Camera Finder: Nikon: D90

This is what's cool with Flickr.
You can explore any model of camera and see the magic full screen.

With the results of search, I'll specify night scenes to see the lens used.
This gives me the best options overall.

 

[VaughnA]

With full frame, you do have the menu options to use RAW & Jpeg at the same time and also pick the amount of megapixel of in-camera processed Jpegs.

That has nothing to do with full frame, just the options in your camera.

I may be the lone dissenter but IMHO a decent APS-C DSLR camera of 10 MP or more will do just fine for the requirements of the OP. It's nice to talk specs but sometimes we go overboard in suggesting what is cool instead of what is right for the situation.

 

[Philscbx]

" That has nothing to do with full frame, just the options in your camera. "
Didn't I just say that?
The intent is you don't need all 21 MP from a previous post.
You have the best of options with full frame.

He's already beyond amateur camera gear.

 

[Phototini]

Hmmm I seem to be a bit lost in this conversation now. What exactly are the better options of a full frame sensor body over a crop frame body?

My D300 is a tad shorter in height and a little bit lighter than my D700. The 300 also is a 12.3mp sensor where the 700 is only a 12.1mp sensor. On the D300 I get more focal length out of my lens' than I do on the D700. The 700 is what I use in low light as I can go up to a very usable ISO 6400.

The menu systems are almost identical, the features are almost identical. So I'm not sure what the major advantage of the D700 is over the 300 except the ISO handling capabilities and the advantage of using lens' at their true focal lengths.

And just to point out, the D90 is not a full frame body. Just wanted to point that out as you listed it in the post you were arguing the need of a full frame body.

 

[Philscbx]

The 700 is what I use in low light as I can go up to a very usable ISO 6400.
The menu systems are almost identical, the features are almost identical.

And just to point out, the D90 is not a full frame body.

I'm not a Nikon user (Yet).
Being I have invested & tested much of Canon's best,
it might be time Nikon had a turn.
I could care less what's in the bag, as long as it works.

With the mention of the 5D2, it did take off like wild fire months before release. Not sure how many are 100% satisfied.
There was much whining from the older punks of the added video.

The 700 is probably equal of the FF 5D? No idea actually.
Low light noise control is preferred.
You also stated that's why it's better at it.

I think much of the average user in the $3k + range of spare change falls into this category of available light or are working on it.

Granted, crop sensor cameras do take advantage of FF lenses sweet spot.
I do it as well. The glass to do so in the F2.0 to F2.8 range is going to triple the cost and weight of what's in the bag from medium kit lenses if your really into low light action.

Needing a wheel chair at the end of the day might be the deciding factor.
Super Bike is next week.
We'll see how far off trail the 1DsMkII & 300 f2.8 gets me in mountain goat mode.

The D90 was simply on my list to try when it appeared.
I did the 30D when it came out.
If the D90 was ready the same time, it would have been a lighter load w/o video camera and support on tour to Europe instead.

So far, the single feature that has the highest priority is spot on focus.
I can easily deal with exposure glitch, but if the focus is off, it's garbage to start with.
If Nikon pulls this off at a higher rate then I'll add it to the pile or move on.

Cheers