Here we go again... which camera/lens combo? :-)

[Tucson T4R]

I'm not a pro, nor am I very expereinced. Take everything below with a big grain of salt. Also, I don't know the Nikon lineup very well, but the earlier models were reputed to have very noisy high ISO (low light) issues, but the new ones are supposed to be fantastic.

In the Canon lineup, a fairly inexpensive 50D or the much more expensive 5D will do what you need. The 50D has the benefit of being able to mount the inexpensive but fabulous 10-22mm non-fisheye wide angle. Both bodies can handle high ISO well, and mounted to a 70-200mm F2.8 L lens, which is widely regarded as Canon's best lens (and that's saying something!), you will have the equipment neccessary to capture what your eye imagines.

I have an older 20D, and shooting indoor sports really maxed it out. I definately pushed the limits of what the camera can do. Frame rate, shutter speed, and useful ISO limitations were laid bare before me. For that reason, I don't reccommend going with cheaper cameras like the D60, D40, etc...They are great dSLR's, but they won't do what you need well enough to consistently get you the shot you are looking for. I wrote a short write-up on my expereince: http://blog.nextstepdesigns.com/?p=54...............

The Cannon 50D with that glass does look like a great set up. Seems like now I compare this and the Nikon D90 with similar quality Nikon glass. It looks like both set ups will fall into a similar expense range.

Now I better go finish my taxes so I really know what my budget is. :elkgrin:

Thanks for the input.

 

[tdesanto]

The Cannon 50D with that glass does look like a great set up. Seems like now I compare this and the Nikon D90 with similar quality Nikon glass. It looks like both set ups will fall into a similar expense range.

Now I better go finish my taxes so I really know what my budget is. :elkgrin:

Thanks for the input.

Seriously, Brad, consider getting the D200 over the D90. That $600 price is excellent. If I weren't saving up for a D700, I'd go get another one as a second body for the bag.

 

[Rob O]

The Cannon 50D with that glass does look like a great set up. Seems like now I compare this and the Nikon D90 with similar quality Nikon glass. It looks like both set ups will fall into a similar expense range.

Now I better go finish my taxes so I really know what my budget is. :elkgrin:

Thanks for the input.

If you're interested in a mint condition pre-owned body, I'll likely be upgrading to a 5D Mk II in mid to late March and will then be selling my 50D and Tokina 12-24 f/4 (an outstanding lens and great value, but won't work on FF bodies). Going rate for used 50Ds right now is around $1,000 and the Tokina $350-$400. I bought mine new (US model) in October and it would ship as new (original box and all its contents, including blank warranty card).

This was taken last night with that combo (granted it's a 6-exposure HDR, so not straight from the camera ;-)).

 

[nwoods]

Wow Rob, that photo looks like my project!
http://www.mve-architects.com/media/videos/The-Pier-at-Town-Lake

 

[Ryanmb21]

I use a D60, the kit came with a18-55VR and a 55-200VR lens. Overall the quality is top-notch. I just added a 30mm 1.4 Sigma HSM but haven't really gotten to test it yet.

Here are a couple of my favs:

more here.

 

[Gunnywag]

Canon

I'm a Canon guy. If you are looking for a deal, get a used Canon 20D for $400+ and a 28-135 lens. Camera has ISO speeds up to 3200, and Canon images are better than Nikon at the higher speeds IMO.

 

[Tucson T4R]

OK, you guys are all officialy dangerous. :drool:

Rob, let me see which camp I land between the Cannon and Nikon options. If I go with Cannon, we may line up nicley on your D50 upgrade.

That Nikon D200's price is pulling hard. :sombrero:

 

[Lost Canadian]

I'd start with one body of you're choice, it really doesn't matter, and one prime lens, something in the 30-50mm range. Start there and shoot. If at a later time you feel your needs would lean towards wanting more length, pick up a good prime tele, if wide is what you find yourself lusting, go that way. Personally, having been there, I'd avoid the all in one zoom. They make you lazy, they slow the learning process tremendously, and optically they are inferior to any prime.

That D200, a 50mm 1.8 or the 35mm 2, and a good tripod would be a great place to start IMO.

 

[Rob O]

OK, you guys are all officialy dangerous. :drool:

Rob, let me see which camp I land between the Cannon and Nikon options. If I go with Cannon, we may line up nicley on your D50 upgrade.

That Nikon D200's price is pulling hard. :sombrero:

You can't go wrong either way ... and the body is less a factor (relatively speaking) than optics. So which camp you chose needs should really consider which lens system you want to be tied to longer term, 'cause that's where you'll spend future monies in upgrades. :bike_rider:

And if you want to go even cheaper, I've a Canon 30D (excellent condition) that acts as backup or for when I want to have both long and wide lenses at the same time that is available for $425. It's not the latest in greatest but IQ is outstanding and it offers a great platform to get started from. :smiley_drive:

 

[Tucson T4R]

Seriously, Brad, consider getting the D200 over the D90. That $600 price is excellent. If I weren't saving up for a D700, I'd go get another one as a second body for the bag.

I have been reading reviews until my eyes are falling out today.:Wow1: It's hard to get reality in the wide range of owner reviews. Like anything on the internet, lots of differing opinions. I did see a few D200 owners complaining about the noise level in low light conditions. Since that is something that is important to me it caught my eye. I am willing to spend a little more to get crisp shots in low light or night time conditions.

Since you own a D200, how do you feel the low light noise levels are?

 

[nwoods]

I find DPReview.com helpful. Not so much in their reccommendations, but in their samples and photometric testing.

Here is the link to the D200 test:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond200/

And the 50D:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/

On page 17 of the 50D test, they compare the 50D to the Nikon D300. I think the D300 blows the 50D away in low noise, high ISO, but unfortunately, there is no direct comparison of the D200 to the 50D. THey tested the D200 to the Canon 5D, which to no surprise, the far more modern 5D wins handily.

I think the manufacturers leapfrog each other, for years, up to and include the 5D, Canon was on top in terms of noise, now Nikon's newer stuff D300, D90, etc... are much cleaner. I'm sure the next gen Canons will raise the bar, and so forth and so on....

The key here is that the slightly older Canon's will be cheaper than a newer Nikon, but its already 2 generations older if that matters to you. It doesn't to me, as my 5 or 6 generations old 20D does what I need it to, and I love it.

 

[Tucson T4R]

Nwoods, Thanks for the links and your insight. I appreciate your input. I'll check it out. I spent the day doing major research and now I plan to let it simmer a bit while I finish my taxes. As of tonight, am stuck in the 50/50 camp between Canon and Nikon. They both have great options and I have no idea where I'll land.

My 92 year old Dad is a big Nikon fan. I cracked up when talking to him today about this and he recommended B&H Photo when so many other current photographers have also recommended them. It just goes to show you that experience counts. :sombrero:

 

[DiploStrat]

Some thotz

I shot Pentax cameras and lenses (film) for years until they were stolen. I am still amazed at the resolution that I can pull out of an ancient slide.

Then shot Sony digital. (DSC-707) Was a wonderful camera and I got some of my best images with it.

Now shoot a Nikon D200, as much because DPReview liked the ergonomics and the 18-200 VR is a worldbeater if you can only carry one lens, as for any other reason.

I have Canon printers and most pros use Canon; so I am not a particularly rabid Nikon phanboi.

So here is some free, non-brand specific advice:

-- You invest in lenses and expense camera bodies. Sooo, consider the lenses you want first. Canon and Nikon have the widest range here.

-- Size matters. The larger the sensor, the lower the noise, etc., so basically any DSLR will be better than any smaller format camera. Size, not megapixels are the issue.

-- That said, within the DSLR world, many like the compact 4/3 system and cropped sensors (DX in Nikon talk) are good if you shoot critters and a bit of a pain if you are a wide angle freak.

-- Try to borrow a camera, or at least hold one for a while in the store. Ergonomics matter.

At the end of the day, there are very few bad cameras out there and I certainly can't tell what brand was used when I see a picture posted. Your own eye is way more important than your camera, so don't sweat the small stuff.

 

[Von Petrol]

A camera is a tool. It is only going to be as good as you. Buy what ever brand you like.

The most important part to any camera is the lens. Buy the best you can from the manufacture. Does not mean it needs to be pro glass. Pro level lens are very heavy. Because of that, Galen Rowell proffered lighter lens. He was a good photographer.

Buy glass filters like B+W.

Use a tripod instead of pushing higher ISO. It will slow you down and make you think about the shot.

Do as much as you can with the camera not with software.

Colen

 

[bajasurf]

A Helpful Tool For Choosing A Camera

Luminous Landscape recently posted an article to choosing a new camera via a metric system. Good Luck as this can be somewhat confusing. Link below:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/camera-metrics.shtml