Some interest in a DSLR camera

[luvtwotrvl]

I have some interest in a DSLR camera. I am a novice at taking photos. I have eyed the Canon T1i or the T2i which I am not sure is worth the extra price. I do like the T1i since I already have my memory cards and do not want to switch from another type. I got two of Canon cameras and really love them so you can say, I am a Canon guy. Would be willing to check out other DSLR cameras in that line that takes same type of cards as the Canon T1i does.

But really, I do not know if I will want to spend that kind of money on a DSLR. The price of the camera does not bother me that much but the lenses does. I have read a lot on these boards and know that you need to get deceit lenses for the camera.

We have a land trip to Alaska for 11 days and I am trying to decide if I upgrade to a DSLR is worth the extra expense. I love taking pictures of the scenery and animals of Alaska.

Now, I need some info from the experts. What kind of lense or lenses would I need to purchase for the Alaskan trip?

I have noticed that most DSLR cameras come with the 18-55mm lense. I am justing that is just a normal lense for everyday use.

I have noticed the limits of my PS cameras many of times.

 

Any info would be appreciated,

David

[trophy_23]

The T1i is a great camera, I too ama Canon guy and have the xsi. My friend has the t1i and it takes wonderful pictures. The did come out with the t2i not long after and it does sound quite improved. The 18-55 IS kit lens is great lens and should be enough for most people, especially if you combo it with a 50-250 or a 70-300 range lens. I would reccommend getting a lens with IS if you can affors it, will help out a lot!

[luvtwotrvl]

The T1i is a great camera, I too ama Canon guy and have the xsi. My friend has the t1i and it takes wonderful pictures. The did come out with the t2i not long after and it does sound quite improved. The 18-55 IS kit lens is great lens and should be enough for most people, especially if you combo it with a 50-250 or a 70-300 range lens. I would reccommend getting a lens with IS if you can affors it, will help out a lot!

 

 

Yes, I did check out the T2i but it is pricey. Not sure if worth the extra price. How does the person like the video on T1i??

 

David

[ScotWithOne_t]

You seem already decided on a Canon, but take a moment to look at Sony's DSLR's. They are kind of a sleeper in the DSLR arms race between Canon and Nikon.

 

I have the Sony Alpha 200, which came with an 18-70mm zoom lens, so right out of the box I have more range than either Canon or Nikon's entry level offerings. The thing that's great about the Sony, is that Sony purchased Minolta years ago, and all the new Sony cameras are compatible with old Minolta autofocus lenses. Therefore, there is a good market for cheap (but good quality), used leses. For under $200, you can get a VERY good 70-210mm telephoto lens (lookup "beercan" lens) that I would call "near professional" level quality (pro-glass is going to run into the four-figure price range, regardless of brand).

 

All of the popular 3rd party lenses (like Sigma and Tamron) are available for the Sony mount, and since Sony's image stabilization happens in the body of the camera instead of in the lens, the lenses tend to be a bit cheaper in cost. Also, the ergonomics of the Sony are better than the Canon Rebel series cameras, IMO. The grip is a little meatier, and the camera body overall feels a little big more "in-between" the entry level, and big-boy pro bodies from Canon.

[pierces]

Have to second the "take a look at Sony" post. The Sony A550 posts some pretty impressive stats and has the fastest live-view focusing on the market.

 

Review: http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/sony/dslr-a550/steves-conclusion-43.html

 

I shoot a Sony A700 and could not be more pleased with the handling and performance. They have leveraged the Minolta technology well by including the sensor-based stabilization that was introduced to DSLRs in 2004 with the Minolta 7D. As ScotWithOne_t said, the Sony not only has a fine collection of their own lenses (including the world-class Carl Zeiss and G-Series pro glass) but will also accept any of the 35 million Minolta A-mount lenses made since 1985. Because the stabilization occurs inside the body, all of those lenses are stabilized by default.

 

Sony has also bowed to the market and uses SD/SDHC memory as well as MS Pro Duo, so you wouldn't have to change out your memory cards.

 

Bottom line is that there really aren't any bad DSLRs out there. You should go somewhere and handle as many as you can and pick the one YOU like, not the one the sales droid was told is good by his girlfriend's cousin or the one he's getting the biggest commission on that week.

 

My 2¢....

 

Dave

[chipmaster]

As a novice feel comfortable getting the T1i. Don't get hung up on the storage format. A card is just so cheap these days you are talking 20-30 dollars, less than 3 or 4 rolls of film from the golden kodak days.

 

DSLRs from any of the manufactures from the past few years are all stellar cameras. The difference between the two canon models is a fine example of the blurring line between marketing and need. More pixels.. at this level of camera the difference between 15 and 18 Meg with a consumer lense viewed at even 8x10 will be minimal.

 

Video differences are all FPS and resolution. Manufacturs are trying to differentiate themselves based on 1080 versus 720 and also whether they are at 24, 30, or 50 FPS. The reality is that video on a DSLR has a long way to go before the quality differences of frame rate matter or resolution is the make or break for IQ. Other things like focus, exposure compensation are more important and here there is little to seperate the two cameras. Really want easy video get a camcorder or a flipvideo.

 

As others suggested if you want the most "spec'd " camera for the money its Sony. If there is a bell and whistler for the dollar winner its Sony. Not dishing the camera company, they have so many models sandwiched with so many slightly different features its totally confusing to me what they are trying to achieve.

 

Go to a store and find what feels best in your hands and is easy to change menus etc. The fastest xyz or most pixels or FPS won't matter if you can't handle the camera or if it doesn't have the right lenses for the right price.

 

If you like canon P&S you can't go wrong sticking with Canon. Canon has a huge line of lenses that are fairly priced and they are so large you can expect them to be in business 10 years from now. IMHO there is no wrong camera just be sure you are buying what you need and not the marketing koolaid. Any DSLR in the hands of a knowledgable user will take a superior picture to any P&S and a P&S in a knowledgable users hand can take a superior picture to DSLR in incapable hands :D

 

Lenses are where you can really spend some serious $ and here it can make a difference. Just be sure that if you spend the money you know you need and want to carry that load around. Fast 2.8 lenses are both expensive and heavy and in many situations may not materially change your IQ. For your standard kit lense a 18-55 is bare minimum, a better lense would be the 18-200 or 18-135 for either of those two cameras. For alaska a 70-300 is the minimum thing you should have and a 400mm ( 100-400L zoom ) of some sort is highly desirable if you want to have the right equipment for wildlife.

 

Get out and have fun shooting.

 

I have some interest in a DSLR camera. I am a novice at taking photos. I have eyed the Canon T1i or the T2i which I am not sure is worth the extra price. I do like the T1i since I already have my memory cards and do not want to switch from another type. I got two of Canon cameras and really love them so you can say, I am a Canon guy. Would be willing to check out other DSLR cameras in that line that takes same type of cards as the Canon T1i does.

But really, I do not know if I will want to spend that kind of money on a DSLR. The price of the camera does not bother me that much but the lenses does. I have read a lot on these boards and know that you need to get deceit lenses for the camera.

We have a land trip to Alaska for 11 days and I am trying to decide if I upgrade to a DSLR is worth the extra expense. I love taking pictures of the scenery and animals of Alaska.

Now, I need some info from the experts. What kind of lense or lenses would I need to purchase for the Alaskan trip?

I have noticed that most DSLR cameras come with the 18-55mm lense. I am justing that is just a normal lense for everyday use.

I have noticed the limits of my PS cameras many of times.

 

Any info would be appreciated,

David

[luvtwotrvl]

Thank you guys for opening up my options. I am now looking into one of Sony's DSLR cameras. Very nice indeed.

 

Again thanks,

David

 

Now, just have to get the Mrs Boss to agree on buying a DSLR.

[ACobra289]

Thank you guys for opening up my options. I am now looking into one of Sony's DSLR cameras. Very nice indeed.

 

Again thanks,

David

 

Now, just have to get the Mrs Boss to agree on buying a DSLR.

 

Not sure how you feel about Pentax, but you may also want to consider the K-x. It's a great little camera for the money. I paid $749 for the 2 lens kit. (18-55 and 55-300) If you get lucky and catch a sell at Amazon, you can get it for even less than that. One thing nice about Pentax is the stabilization is in the body, not the lens. So every lens you use will have it. Granted, the in-body stabilization is probably not quite as effective as the lens based, but it helps. If high ISO performance is important to you, the K-x is amazing in that department.

 

Good luck with your search.

[picsboy]

For alaska a 70-300 is the minimum thing you should have and a 400mm ( 100-400L zoom ) of some sort is highly desirable if you want to have the right equipment for wildlife.

 

I agree with chipmaster. At the very least, you should get the Canon 70-300mm lens (link to B&H Photo) for about $550.

 

Even better, as chipmaster mentioned, would be the Canon 100-400mm lens. However, it costs $1600 (link to B&H). The other option would be to rent this lens for $131 for 2 weeks! (link to LensRentals.com)

 

Of course, these are Canon-specific recommendations. If you end up going with a different brand, you'll have to look for the equivalent lenses for that brand. :)

[tdelliott]

I too, after reading many reviews, bought the Pentax K-X. I have always had canon cameras but loved the features on the K-X.

 

I have had it for a month now and I LOVE IT!!!!

 

Be sure and check it out.

 

Tamara in Texas

[pierces]

...Granted, the in-body stabilization is probably not quite as effective as the lens based, but it helps...

 

Current cameras with in-body stabilization will give you a claimed 3-4 stops improvement. This is similar to the levels claimed by lens-based stabilization but in practice the lens-based does a hair better than the in-body. The difference is actually very slight and giving up marginally better stabilization on the 600mm lens that I will never own for stabilized 50mm or 20mm prime lenses that I do own is perfectly acceptable to me! :D

 

Dave

[trophy_23]

I agree with chipmaster. At the very least, you should get the Canon 70-300mm lens (link to B&H Photo) for about $550.

 

Even better, as chipmaster mentioned, would be the Canon 100-400mm lens. However, it costs $1600 (link to B&H). The other option would be to rent this lens for $131 for 2 weeks! (link to LensRentals.com)

 

Of course, these are Canon-specific recommendations. If you end up going with a different brand, you'll have to look for the equivalent lenses for that brand. :)

 

I agree, I actually owned that 70-300 IS lens for a few years and it is great! I recently sold it to a friend and got a 70-200 IS 'L' lens which is amazing! I have used the 100-400 and didnt like it, I prefer the 300 and 400 primes for sharpness, but obviously you lose the flexibility.

[luvtwotrvl]

WOW.............The Sony A550 DSLR is very nice indeed!!!

Some many cameras out there that are good.......decisions!

Would love to go to the local store and feel each one in my hand first to see what the differences are that way.

 

Thanks,

David