Most Bang For The Buck?

[Matt518]

Looking for input on a DSLR. I tried searching, but there's so many options for so many different skill levels and types of photography. As soon as I think I've found something that fits my needs, I see something else.

A little about me and my skills. I took a class in high school (circa 1990-91) where I learned the basics. During this class I used, and still have, a manual 35mm SLR, and have shot with it quite a bit over the years, building upon those fundamentals. I also had a P&S that I used quite a bit before it died. I took a Photoshop class a few years ago, and have forgotton most of what I learned, but I'm constantly being reminded (and learning new things) as I sift through the various threads here.

Let's say you have a total of $600 to spend. What's the best overall setup, either new or used? The camera will be used mostly for amateur/part time photojournalism, general picture taking as well as salable prints (up to 24x36) - people/street photography, landscapes, and some adventure/off road sports. I'd also be looking into making calenders and selling some photos as stock. Most, if not all, of the photos will be shot in raw and processed in Lightroom and/or an older version of Photoshop (until I can upgrade). I'm not interested in shooting portraits or weddings - they're just not my thing.

What say you? What's the most bang for the buck, and why? (No Nikon v. Canon v. Pentax v. Whoever debates please.)

[Tee Why]

I think unless you buy a very used set up, getting a camera that can do all that you ask seriously would cost much more than that.

If you want a general camera that can print 24x36 good enough for sales, my first recommendation would be a 5D which is about twice or more of your current budget used. Another option is a Canon 12MP XSi which would cost just under $650 with a kit lens but I'd not consider that for heavy photojournalist use.

Another option is a used 40D but I think these are going for over $600. If you are serious about working as a photog, I'd probably pick a Canon or a Nikon as they pretty much dominate the working pro market and they have the biggest system of lenses/accessories.

I'm sure some Nikon folks can jump in as well with some Nikon bodies to recommend.

If it was me, I'd start with a Canon XS with a kit lens for about $475 and use the rest for needed accessories and go from there.

Good luck.

[Art Scott]

For a DSLR I would be venturing into ebay land and see what they have....your money is not goingto get you a new cam + lens.....you may want to be looking into one of the PROSumer p/s with a good super zoom....like a fuji s100....with its 28-400 [35mm equiv] lens it will run a bit more than $600 but it should do everything you want......or you may want to save a bit and go for a Konica Minolta A2....its lens is about 28-200 and supertack sharp ( iahve sold large images[30x40 inch....i did use GF4 to do final uprez at 300dpi for 8x10 quality ar 30x40"] made with mine..........you will be very hard pressed to anything DSLR wise even used for your money amount especially with a lens of any type..........it will not be impossibel to do what you want with a PROSUMER p/s.................

[Robinivich]

Let's say you have a total of $600 to spend. What's the best overall setup, either new or used? The camera will be used mostly for amateur/part time photojournalism, general picture taking as well as salable prints (up to 24x36) - people/street photography, landscapes, and some adventure/off road sports. I'd also be looking into making calenders and selling some photos as stock. Most, if not all, of the photos will be shot in raw and processed in Lightroom and/or an older version of Photoshop (until I can upgrade). I'm not interested in shooting portraits or weddings - they're just not my thing.
The difficulty here is that for your listed applications (street, sports, landscapes) an SLR would require a particular, respectable quality lens, particularly for prints up to 2' by 3' poster size. Any new lens meeting requirements would likely blow your entire budget, and you wouldn't even have a camera to mount it to.

Shooting Canon, I would say your minimum quality body would be a used rebel XT (sub $300 range), but you're more likely to want the build and responsiveness of say a 20D, which goes for $350-400 used. As for minimal lens requirements, a sigma or tamron 70-200 2.8 (these specs are pretty much required to call something a sports lens) will run you around $600. You could make do with an 18-55 type kit lens for general purpose photography, these are cheap and plentiful, usually under $100. A better choice would be something like the tamron 17-50 2.8, which would run $400 or so. More serious landscapers would want a wider angle lens, and for dependable quality this would cost not much less than $600 for a 10-22mm or similar range lens. Nikon provides similarly priced combinations, the only problem being that their recent consumer DSLRs that fall in your price range, aren't able to autofocus with the older (therefore cheaper) lenses in the Nikon lineup.

From what little I know about it, stock photography would likely be difficult with these kinds of setups, since a lot of stock (no pun intended :D) is put on file sizes, how many megabytes your processed tiffs are, and the 8 or 10 megapixel DSLRs that fit your budget simply wouldn't compete very well with the pro's running around with 21-24 megapixels at 14 bits. This doesn't necessarily mean you can't take very good pictures, but that they will be harder to sell in the current market.

I hate to be a splash of cold water here, but $600 just doesn't take you very far in DSLR land. I'm a few years and several thousand dollars in, and I still wouldn't call my setup particularly "pro." This is a hobby, or profession, that always finds new ways to spend your money for you.

I would have a good look at some of the cameras Art mentioned, since they have more "capabilities per $" than any DSLR kit could. Also check out the Panasonic FZ-30 and FZ-50, I've always liked the look of these, and if you're lucky you can track down a used one.

[swintonphoto]

OLYMPUS!!!!!
I have been an avid Olympus user for years. I started using their DSLRs because they are the most bang for the buck. I would get the E-520 if I were you. It has as many features as cameras more than twice its price, and the lenses it comes with are much sharper than the lenses that come with other cameras in its price range. You can get the E-520 with 2 great lenses for just over $600:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/580755-REG/Olympus__E_520_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

I use its predecessors (E-510 and E-500) to run my professional studio. They work great and are amazingly priced. The E-520 comes with great features such as in-body image stabilization, dust-reduction that keeps dust off the sensor, live view, etc.
If you really compare the specs you will see there is not a more bang for the buck option than this. This is a NEW DSLR. No need to by used.

Check out my sites below for samples with the E-510 and E-500. The E-520 will do even better.

[swintonphoto]

I think unless you buy a very used set up, getting a camera that can do all that you ask seriously would cost much more than that.

I disagree. See previous post.

[Grainbelt]

OLYMPUS!!!!!

PENTAX!!!!

:lol3

On a very thin budget, it is hard to beat Olympus and Pentax, IMO. Pentax has the advantage of backwards compatibility with almost all their lenses since the 70's. You can pick up an autofocus lens for minimal cash that will perform wonderfully. check pentaxforums.com for additional information on that front. :thumb

[sherijohnson]

This is in no way saying this is the only option, but you can get a brand new Sony alpha - a300 right at $600, matter of fact I bought one as a gift that someone will be getting in 2 days and it was a package with TWO lenses from B&H, I think it had an instant $200 rebate.

Let me tell you, these cameras are feature rich and I would say you definitely get a lot for your money.

[Cygnus Studios]

As soon as I think I've found something that fits my needs, I see something else.

This will never change. My current setup includes a pair of D3's and a variety of lenses from 17 through 500mm. I still have a serious wantlist and darn if Nikon doesn't continue to make bigger and better things to temp me.

[Matt518]

Wow, I didn't expect to get this many responses in such a short amount of time. Alot of good info to sift through.

A few additional points to consider:

1. I'm not looking at initially doing alot of heavy PJ work. As stated, it will be amateur/part time, at least for the time being (i.e. more of a hobby, with an occasional sale). As such, I can't justify jumping into a pro DSLR. If it's something I am good at, I may consider doing it on a more regular basis and I'll look into camera upgrades at that time (with this camera being downgraded as a backup).

2. My interest lies mainly in Photojournalism, as opposed to selling stock, so that takes precedence in the camera I'm looking for. Selling stock will just be something to provide a little "extra" here and there. Any camera will be sufficient for general picture taking (friends, family, etc.)

3. Although I haven't narrowed down what aspect of PJ I will mostly be doing, initially it will encompass people/street and adventure/off road sports photography. It could also include news/current events and humanitarian stories. Basically, whatever entices me to write a story. As I get more into it and doing it on a more regular basis, I can focus on a particular area to specialize in. Landscapes, general pictures and the like will be available as stock.

4. As far as prints, I realize there is enlarging software such as Genuine Fractals that enable larger prints sans a loss in quality. It may or may not be an option, depending on the proprietary file type being recognizable by print services. Most prints will probably not be 24X36, but having that option will allow for "special" prints to made, either as gifts or to be sold. Majority of prints will likely be in the 16X20 range. My research indicates that 10mp would be sufficient for prints this size.

Since there have been several responses with several different reccomendations, I will try to address each response a little later.

[Telecorder]

Matt--
Given your circumstances and, most especially, your stated budget, the above recommendation for a Prosumer bridge camera such as the Pany FZ30 or FZ50 makes the most sense to start out with, IMHO.

While you state that you have some film experience, digital imaging has come a long way. Your varied interests covers a wide range of both camera and lens alternatives. There are those that will argue to start out with a basic Canon or Nikon or Pentax or Sony or whatever dSLR, the fact remains your budget will only get you so far and you'll wind up with an entry dSLR and kit lenses. While this is not bad, in and of itself, I'd argue you may be better off dipping your toes into the digital side with a bridge camera.

Once you've gained experience and have become accomplished using a bridge camera, you'll have a much better sense of the body and lenses that you'll be best served by.

My personal bias is to consider a used FZ30 or a FZ50. My FZ5 and FZ30 served me well to get to the point where I had sufficient experience of digital imaging and knowledge of the best dSLR/lens combos that fit my imaging styles.

As an example of how the FZ30 can compare to a dSLR, the following article might be of some interest...
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/panasonic_lumix_dmc-fz30_canon_eos-20d_camera_shootout/

The FZ30/FZ50 have a lot of features including Leica glass, large range of lens' focal lengths, flip out LCD screen, RAW file, 'Live view', in-camera image stabilization, movie capability et al that you'll be paying a lot more to include in a dSLR system down the road. Once you've had some time to become accomplished in these features, you'll be in a much better position to evaluate which features/capabilities are important and valuable.

[Art Scott]

OLYMPUS!!!!!
I have been an avid Olympus user for years. I started using their DSLRs because they are the most bang for the buck. I would get the E-520 if I were you. It has as many features as cameras more than twice its price, and the lenses it comes with are much sharper than the lenses that come with other cameras in its price range. You can get the E-520 with 2 great lenses for just over $600:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/580755-REG/Olympus__E_520_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

I use its predecessors (E-510 and E-500) to run my professional studio. They work great and are amazingly priced. The E-520 comes with great features such as in-body image stabilization, dust-reduction that keeps dust off the sensor, live view, etc.
If you really compare the specs you will see there is not a more bang for the buck option than this. This is a NEW DSLR. No need to by used.

Check out my sites below for samples with the E-510 and E-500. The E-520 will do even better.

there is even a $50 INSTANT REBATE at BH right now....but it is also out of stock for now.....with rebate it is just $40 over your budget.....now bad for a brand new DSLR...............


As for image uprezing software diminishing your image quality......I have found that to be totally untrue of GF....which i have been using since GF3.0.......my clients have been perfectly happpy with the enlargements they have received.....I do give a lot of KUDOS to my local pro lab....Douglas Photographic Imaging (http://www.douglasphoto.com) ..... who has the ability for uploaded files thru FTP..............

[20DNoob]

Well checking your profile I might suggest an old D2H. I know I know it's only 4MP, but it's the same 4MP as my 1D and I've printed out 11x14 at home only using PS2 to uprez and had great results. I'm sure if I used a program specifically designed for the upsizing I could do a lot better.

The best reason alone aside from the frame rate for the off road stuff is the sealing. It's a godsend to not have to worry about weather or dust and I figure I'd rather focus on the shots than be concerned about the prior. The seals have twice saved my butt, once at an event where it rained out for the entire 4 hours I was there. All the paid shooters(newspapers) were running for cover under the tents 30+ feet away while I sat at the barrier looking like a soaked to the bone idiot. An idiot I may be, but I'm the only idiot that didn't have the crowd in any of my shots. And the second was at a rodeo at a bull riding competition. I had sat ringside for the entire event and at the I was covered head to toe in dust. A PWC came down to me and started laughing when they saw the aftermath and made some snide comment about how smart they were sitting in the back with their entry level and kit lens. You should have seen the look of horror on his face when without saying a word I took my bottle of water and hosed down the whole set up.:rofl

Well that's my take on it, good luck with whatever you choose.:thumb

[Matt518]

Thanks guys, my head just exploded. :huh

I'm still researching the recommendations...

[Matt518]

I think unless you buy a very used set up, getting a camera that can do all that you ask seriously would cost much more than that.

If you want a general camera that can print 24x36 good enough for sales, my first recommendation would be a 5D which is about twice or more of your current budget used. Another option is a Canon 12MP XSi which would cost just under $650 with a kit lens but I'd not consider that for heavy photojournalist use.

Another option is a used 40D but I think these are going for over $600. If you are serious about working as a photog, I'd probably pick a Canon or a Nikon as they pretty much dominate the working pro market and they have the biggest system of lenses/accessories.

I'm sure some Nikon folks can jump in as well with some Nikon bodies to recommend.

If it was me, I'd start with a Canon XS with a kit lens for about $475 and use the rest for needed accessories and go from there.

Good luck.

The 40Ds that I've seen are slightly out of budget, at least when you factor in a lens ($699+). I might be able to increase the budget a little, but it's an unknown factor at this time. The Canon XS might be a viable option. I'm looking at an XS package - XS Body, Tamron 28-80 f/3.5-5.6, Tamron 75-300 f/4.0-5.6, Wide Angle and Telephot Lenses (both fit over another lens), 3 filters, carrying case, tripod, hard case and memory card for $640.

[Matt518]

For a DSLR I would be venturing into ebay land and see what they have....your money is not goingto get you a new cam + lens.....you may want to be looking into one of the PROSumer p/s with a good super zoom....like a fuji s100....with its 28-400 [35mm equiv] lens it will run a bit more than $600 but it should do everything you want......or you may want to save a bit and go for a Konica Minolta A2....its lens is about 28-200 and supertack sharp ( iahve sold large images[30x40 inch....i did use GF4 to do final uprez at 300dpi for 8x10 quality ar 30x40"] made with mine..........you will be very hard pressed to anything DSLR wise even used for your money amount especially with a lens of any type..........it will not be impossibel to do what you want with a PROSUMER p/s.................

The only problem is knowing what I'm looking for, hence why I asked for camera recommendations. I know enough to know that ultimately I will need various lenses for varying circumstances, so a P&S is not something I'm looking into.

[Telecorder]

The 40Ds that I've seen are slightly out of budget, at least when you factor in a lens ($699+). I might be able to increase the budget a little, but it's an unknown factor at this time. The Canon XS might be a viable option. I'm looking at an XS package - XS Body, Tamron 28-80 f/3.5-5.6, Tamron 75-300 f/4.0-5.6, Wide Angle and Telephot Lenses (both fit over another lens), 3 filters, carrying case, tripod, hard case and memory card for $640.

Matt--
Make sure you do your due diligence and check out any web e-tailers before purchasing. Great priced packages are usually a scam....

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14677

[Matt518]

The difficulty here is that for your listed applications (street, sports, landscapes) an SLR would require a particular, respectable quality lens, particularly for prints up to 2' by 3' poster size. Any new lens meeting requirements would likely blow your entire budget, and you wouldn't even have a camera to mount it to.

Shooting Canon, I would say your minimum quality body would be a used rebel XT (sub $300 range), but you're more likely to want the build and responsiveness of say a 20D, which goes for $350-400 used. As for minimal lens requirements, a sigma or tamron 70-200 2.8 (these specs are pretty much required to call something a sports lens) will run you around $600. You could make do with an 18-55 type kit lens for general purpose photography, these are cheap and plentiful, usually under $100. A better choice would be something like the tamron 17-50 2.8, which would run $400 or so. More serious landscapers would want a wider angle lens, and for dependable quality this would cost not much less than $600 for a 10-22mm or similar range lens. Nikon provides similarly priced combinations, the only problem being that their recent consumer DSLRs that fall in your price range, aren't able to autofocus with the older (therefore cheaper) lenses in the Nikon lineup.

From what little I know about it, stock photography would likely be difficult with these kinds of setups, since a lot of stock (no pun intended :D) is put on file sizes, how many megabytes your processed tiffs are, and the 8 or 10 megapixel DSLRs that fit your budget simply wouldn't compete very well with the pro's running around with 21-24 megapixels at 14 bits. This doesn't necessarily mean you can't take very good pictures, but that they will be harder to sell in the current market.

I hate to be a splash of cold water here, but $600 just doesn't take you very far in DSLR land. I'm a few years and several thousand dollars in, and I still wouldn't call my setup particularly "pro." This is a hobby, or profession, that always finds new ways to spend your money for you.

I would have a good look at some of the cameras Art mentioned, since they have more "capabilities per $" than any DSLR kit could. Also check out the Panasonic FZ-30 and FZ-50, I've always liked the look of these, and if you're lucky you can track down a used one.

I realize my budget doesn't allow for much. I'm only looking for something to get started with. If doing this type of photography is something that works for me, I can look at upgrading to better bodies and glass to fit my needs. I'm looking into both the Rebel XT and the Rebel XS. If my pictures don't sell as stock, I won't be too upset, as long as I have something to write about and photograph.

[Matt518]

OLYMPUS!!!!!
I have been an avid Olympus user for years. I started using their DSLRs because they are the most bang for the buck. I would get the E-520 if I were you. It has as many features as cameras more than twice its price, and the lenses it comes with are much sharper than the lenses that come with other cameras in its price range. You can get the E-520 with 2 great lenses for just over $600:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/580755-REG/Olympus__E_520_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

I use its predecessors (E-510 and E-500) to run my professional studio. They work great and are amazingly priced. The E-520 comes with great features such as in-body image stabilization, dust-reduction that keeps dust off the sensor, live view, etc.
If you really compare the specs you will see there is not a more bang for the buck option than this. This is a NEW DSLR. No need to by used.

Check out my sites below for samples with the E-510 and E-500. The E-520 will do even better.

Is there any logical reason(s) why Olympus has cameras with all the features of higher priced competing units, but at a fraction of the cost? How is the lens/accessory support?

[Matt518]

This is in no way saying this is the only option, but you can get a brand new Sony alpha - a300 right at $600, matter of fact I bought one as a gift that someone will be getting in 2 days and it was a package with TWO lenses from B&H, I think it had an instant $200 rebate.

Let me tell you, these cameras are feature rich and I would say you definitely get a lot for your money.

The Sony looks like a great deal...although I haven't been impressed with their quality as of late. I used to be an advocate for Sony products, but every Sony product I've owned in the last 5-10 years has let me down. In my opinion, their quality just isn't what it used to be and as such, I'm hesitant to purchase anything from their line-up.

[Matt518]

Matt--
Given your circumstances and, most especially, your stated budget, the above recommendation for a Prosumer bridge camera such as the Pany FZ30 or FZ50 makes the most sense to start out with, IMHO.

While you state that you have some film experience, digital imaging has come a long way. Your varied interests covers a wide range of both camera and lens alternatives. There are those that will argue to start out with a basic Canon or Nikon or Pentax or Sony or whatever dSLR, the fact remains your budget will only get you so far and you'll wind up with an entry dSLR and kit lenses. While this is not bad, in and of itself, I'd argue you may be better off dipping your toes into the digital side with a bridge camera.

Once you've gained experience and have become accomplished using a bridge camera, you'll have a much better sense of the body and lenses that you'll be best served by.

My personal bias is to consider a used FZ30 or a FZ50. My FZ5 and FZ30 served me well to get to the point where I had sufficient experience of digital imaging and knowledge of the best dSLR/lens combos that fit my imaging styles.

As an example of how the FZ30 can compare to a dSLR, the following article might be of some interest...
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/panasonic_lumix_dmc-fz30_canon_eos-20d_camera_shootout/

The FZ30/FZ50 have a lot of features including Leica glass, large range of lens' focal lengths, flip out LCD screen, RAW file, 'Live view', in-camera image stabilization, movie capability et al that you'll be paying a lot more to include in a dSLR system down the road. Once you've had some time to become accomplished in these features, you'll be in a much better position to evaluate which features/capabilities are important and valuable.

I understand your logic, but I'm just not feeling that is the best option. I realize there are multiple areas of photography that I'm looking at, each requiring its' own specialized lenses. There is nothing here that I'm looking at doing professionally/full-time, at least in the foreseeable future. As stated earlier, my primary interest is in amateur/part time PJ work, so that's where I plan on focusing. If I need to add lenses in the future for other types of photography, I'd like to have that option without having to sell the camera.

[Matt518]

there is even a $50 INSTANT REBATE at BH right now....but it is also out of stock for now.....with rebate it is just $40 over your budget.....now bad for a brand new DSLR...............


As for image uprezing software diminishing your image quality......I have found that to be totally untrue of GF....which i have been using since GF3.0.......my clients have been perfectly happpy with the enlargements they have received.....I do give a lot of KUDOS to my local pro lab....Douglas Photographic Imaging (http://www.douglasphoto.com) ..... who has the ability for uploaded files thru FTP.............. (ftp://ftp..............)

If you're comment regarding GF refers to me, I (don't think) I stated that resizing software diminishes quality. My only concern with it is whether the print service will recognize the file type.

[Matt518]

Well checking your profile I might suggest an old D2H. I know I know it's only 4MP, but it's the same 4MP as my 1D and I've printed out 11x14 at home only using PS2 to uprez and had great results. I'm sure if I used a program specifically designed for the upsizing I could do a lot better.

The best reason alone aside from the frame rate for the off road stuff is the sealing. It's a godsend to not have to worry about weather or dust and I figure I'd rather focus on the shots than be concerned about the prior. The seals have twice saved my butt, once at an event where it rained out for the entire 4 hours I was there. All the paid shooters(newspapers) were running for cover under the tents 30+ feet away while I sat at the barrier looking like a soaked to the bone idiot. An idiot I may be, but I'm the only idiot that didn't have the crowd in any of my shots. And the second was at a rodeo at a bull riding competition. I had sat ringside for the entire event and at the I was covered head to toe in dust. A PWC came down to me and started laughing when they saw the aftermath and made some snide comment about how smart they were sitting in the back with their entry level and kit lens. You should have seen the look of horror on his face when without saying a word I took my bottle of water and hosed down the whole set up.:rofl

Well that's my take on it, good luck with whatever you choose.:thumb

This is a good idea. I realize the D2H is/was a professional grade camera, so it's built rugged for pro work. While it might have been high end in it's day, the resolution is holding it back from serious contention. I can't see paying $400-500 for a 4.1mp camera, when I can get something with higher resolution for the same price. The fact that it was a pro camera doesn't quite make up for it's low resolution, in my opinion.

[Robinivich]

The only problem is knowing what I'm looking for, hence why I asked for camera recommendations. I know enough to know that ultimately I will need various lenses for varying circumstances, so a P&S is not something I'm looking into.Fair enough! In that case a kit like the one you mentioned with the XS may be a good place to start, but instead of the 28-80 try and get something starting around 17-18mm and going to at least 50mm. 28-80 used to be a beginner's kit lens on film SLRs, on small sensor digitals, it's more like a weird telephoto (acts like 50-130mm) and wouldn't be wide enough for a lot of uses. The days of the 28-80s are really over (at least until full frame cameras lose a couple more grand off the price tag).

Here's a go at putting a package together for you:

Refurb Canon XTi http://www.adorama.com/ICADRXTIBR.html $300

Canon EF-S 18-55 IS http://www.adorama.com/CA1855AFUR.html $120

Canon EF-S 55-250 IS http://www.adorama.com/CA55250AFSR.html $200

There are cheaper lenses around that cover more or less the same range, the same retailer also offers a kit of a sigma 18-50 and 55-200 for $280, but you lose a lot for $40 saved, these two canons are stabilized, and have image quality way above average for the price. There are deals on memory going for only $10 or $20 dollars right now (check out the flea market forum for more info) and once you have a card in the camera you'll be able to shoot without purchasing anything else. Then you'll be able to address other needs as you notice them (and start sinking down the money hole like the rest of us :D)

[Matt518]

Ok, so while I was out doing some (as always) last minute holiday shopping, I put my mitts on a few cameras. Let me start off by saying that I have a friend who has a Digital Rebel (either XSi or XTi, I forget). I've taken a few shots with it, but not enough to form any kind of opinion - I was mostly just talking to some friends while "holding it" for her while she was ice skating. It felt like a well-balanced camera. It was comfortable.

Yesterday, I checked out a Nikon D40. It was too small. It felt like a toy. It was too small. I didn't feel like I ever had a good grip on it. It felt awkward. It was just...too small. I also checked out a Nikon D60. It's much more "normal" sized than the D40. The D60 felt comfortable. I could get a firm grip on it, but it didn't feel too heavy in my hands. I also felt up the Rebels and a Sony that was recommended earlier, but was only able to do so briefly before other shoppers began to navigate their shopping carts into my ankles (I think I might have also received an elbow in the back for being in someone's way). Needless to say at that point I was ready to leave.

What I'm thinking is that I'll get an entry level DSLR to get things started, either a Nikon or a Canon. With the low start up costs and the variety of lenses and accessories available, it just makes the most sense. As funds allow, I can add lenses as I go for different purposes, and if/when the time comes that something better or more 'pro' is required, I can look at what is available at that time. I know, I know...I'm not really any further than I was in post #1.

[Matt518]

Matt--
Make sure you do your due diligence and check out any web e-tailers before purchasing. Great priced packages are usually a scam....

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14677

yeah, I'm reluctant to buy anything off the web, especially places like eBay. I'd prefer to buy something local, where I can look at it before purchasing, or at the very least purchase through a reputable online merchant - B&H Photo seems to get a lot of recommendations here.

[Matt518]

Fair enough! In that case a kit like the one you mentioned with the XS may be a good place to start, but instead of the 28-80 try and get something starting around 17-18mm and going to at least 50mm. 28-80 used to be a beginner's kit lens on film SLRs, on small sensor digitals, it's more like a weird telephoto (acts like 50-130mm) and wouldn't be wide enough for a lot of uses. The days of the 28-80s are really over (at least until full frame cameras lose a couple more grand off the price tag).

Here's a go at putting a package together for you:

Refurb Canon XTi http://www.adorama.com/ICADRXTIBR.html $300

Canon EF-S 18-55 IS http://www.adorama.com/CA1855AFUR.html $120

Canon EF-S 55-250 IS http://www.adorama.com/CA55250AFSR.html $200

There are cheaper lenses around that cover more or less the same range, the same retailer also offers a kit of a sigma 18-50 and 55-200 for $280, but you lose a lot for $40 saved, these two canons are stabilized, and have image quality way above average for the price. There are deals on memory going for only $10 or $20 dollars right now (check out the flea market forum for more info) and once you have a card in the camera you'll be able to shoot without purchasing anything else. Then you'll be able to address other needs as you notice them (and start sinking down the money hole like the rest of us :D)

This brings up an interesting question. Has anyone had any issues with refurbished equipment?

[Robinivich]

This brings up an interesting question. Has anyone had any issues with refurbished equipment?http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=109695&highlight=refurbished is a nice little discussion, I've also read recommendations from at least one reviewer http://www.the-digital-picture.com

[Internaut]

Don't forget, your first DSLR system isn't necessarily your only system. Any of the entry level DSLRs will let you dip your toe in the water and take great pictures (even with the kit lenses in many cases). It's not really until you've done time with your first DSLR that you'll start to work out what works for you longer term. That's when they game gets costly :D.

[sherijohnson]

The Sony looks like a great deal...although I haven't been impressed with their quality as of late. I used to be an advocate for Sony products, but every Sony product I've owned in the last 5-10 years has let me down. In my opinion, their quality just isn't what it used to be and as such, I'm hesitant to purchase anything from their line-up.

Very interesting about the Sony. In the past I only had one sony dig cam and that was 11 yrs ago. When I found out that Sony took over the Minolta technology I realized there were some things to consider. For me it was a smart choice to give it a try because all of my Minolta Maxxum lenses and such work with the Sony alpha and they do so very well as long as they are not 3rd party items.

I think you could also do very well with some consumer level Canon gear.

[Matt518]

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=109695&highlight=refurbished is a nice little discussion, I've also read recommendations from at least one reviewer http://www.the-digital-picture.com

I think Scott's post in that first link hits the nail on the head in regards to refurbished merchandise - even though the units are inspected, any replaced parts may be new or used, as well as the fact that the unit may have never even been opened. It's a crapshoot really. I think more research is needed to see if at least some information is provided with the unit detailing why it was refurbished, if any parts were replaced and whether those parts were new or used.

[Matt518]

Don't forget, your first DSLR system isn't necessarily your only system. Any of the entry level DSLRs will let you dip your toe in the water and take great pictures (even with the kit lenses in many cases). It's not really until you've done time with your first DSLR that you'll start to work out what works for you longer term. That's when they game gets costly :D.

Good point. As stated before, whatever I end up getting will likely become downgraded to back up duty in favor of what I upgrade to, provided that becomes necessary.

[Matt518]

Very interesting about the Sony. In the past I only had one sony dig cam and that was 11 yrs ago. When I found out that Sony took over the Minolta technology I realized there were some things to consider. For me it was a smart choice to give it a try because all of my Minolta Maxxum lenses and such work with the Sony alpha and they do so very well as long as they are not 3rd party items.

I think you could also do very well with some consumer level Canon gear.

In that respect it makes sense to stick with something (or give it a try at least) for the compatibility. Unfortunately, that's not the case in my situation. I'd love to give Sony another chance, but for the money there's already proven products available in the same pricing bracket.

I keep seeing these sayings around Dgrin and elsewhere, that it's not the camera, but the photographer & the camera is a tool - the photographer needs the skill to use it (something about Indians & arrows), etc. Those are philosophies that I'm not overlooking. I think I can be just as effective at this stage with consumer grade equipment than with pro-sumer or even pro.

[sherijohnson]

I most certainly agree with you. Your results can be the same regardless of what camera system you choose. I wouldn't recommend anything that I haven't fully tested myself.

[NikonsandVstroms]

Is there any logical reason(s) why Olympus has cameras with all the features of higher priced competing units, but at a fraction of the cost? How is the lens/accessory support?

When most people go looking for their first DSLR they ask for either Nikon or Canon, so brands like Olympus and Pentax offer more features at the same price level as their way of competing.

As for Olympus, they're a bunch of advantages. With the E520 it has in body stabilization so your lenses are even lighter (the Olympus 40-150mm telephoto kit lens (80-300mm equivalent) is smaller and lighter than the Nikon standard kit zoom 18-55mm VR (27-82.5mm equivalent))

The dust reduction on Olympus cameras is reported to be the best, which takes away a huge pain in maintenance

This next one is a positive and a negative, the Olympus lenses that are out there basically all are really high quality, even the "standard grade" lenses provide great results. So when choosing lenses it's really simple, and they are well priced, the issue is that the system doesn't have a huge amount of lenses for it, but if you need something like a wide-angle zoom for photojournalism, the 11 to 22 (22-44mm equivalent) is a great choice and starts out at F2 .8,

My suggestion would be picking up a 14 to 54 F2.8 to 3.5 (28-108mm) which is a very sharp lens, fast, relatively wide, and most importantly it's cheap at $370 as a first lens to move into.

With Olympus cameras you can also use many other systems lenses, unlike say a Nikon where none of the cameras until you get into the D300 and up will meter with a non-AF Nikon lens, if you put a lens on an Olympus it will meter fine. Not only that there are many adapters on eBay for all sorts of lenses. Personally I use many Nikon lenses with my E420

Now for image quality, the 520 has the same sensor as my camera, which at low ISO provides very similar quality to their flagship model the E3, while not sure about enlargements to the size you mentioned, I've made 16 x 20 prints no problem.

The big advantage with the Olympus system is in its JPEG engine, their cameras along with Fuji's produce some of the best out of camera JPEG's so if you don't want to shoot raw it's a good option, and if you shoot RAW+JPEG then sometimes the JPEG is more than enough. Tying into this is the color reproduction of the sensor which is amazing, and another help to keep you away from lots of postprocessing.

The issue with Olympus is high ISO noise, and basically your one stop behind the Canon and Nikon cameras, but compared to the crop cameras its not a huge difference (just when compared to full frame models like the 5d mkII & D700 which are better than all of the crop sensors)

And another thing to think about is what you want to do as a path for advancement. If you're thinking about Canon or Nikon and sticking with the system because you want to go onto a high level cameras, those are quickly becoming the full frame models, which won't work properly with many lenses for the lower cameras (the shoot with reduced resolution) and if you wanted lenses that would work from crop to full frame they wont be that wide for the crop nikon and canon models.

Any other questions feel free to ask

[Matt518]

When most people go looking for their first DSLR they ask for either Nikon or Canon, so brands like Olympus and Pentax offer more features at the same price level as their way of competing.

As for Olympus, they're a bunch of advantages. With the E520 it has in body stabilization so your lenses are even lighter (the Olympus 40-150mm telephoto kit lens (80-300mm equivalent) is smaller and lighter than the Nikon standard kit zoom 18-55mm VR (27-82.5mm equivalent))

The dust reduction on Olympus cameras is reported to be the best, which takes away a huge pain in maintenance

This next one is a positive and a negative, the Olympus lenses that are out there basically all are really high quality, even the "standard grade" lenses provide great results. So when choosing lenses it's really simple, and they are well priced, the issue is that the system doesn't have a huge amount of lenses for it, but if you need something like a wide-angle zoom for photojournalism, the 11 to 22 (22-44mm equivalent) is a great choice and starts out at F2 .8,

My suggestion would be picking up a 14 to 54 F2.8 to 3.5 (28-108mm) which is a very sharp lens, fast, relatively wide, and most importantly it's cheap at $370 as a first lens to move into.

With Olympus cameras you can also use many other systems lenses, unlike say a Nikon where none of the cameras until you get into the D300 and up will meter with a non-AF Nikon lens, if you put a lens on an Olympus it will meter fine. Not only that there are many adapters on eBay for all sorts of lenses. Personally I use many Nikon lenses with my E420

Now for image quality, the 520 has the same sensor as my camera, which at low ISO provides very similar quality to their flagship model the E3, while not sure about enlargements to the size you mentioned, I've made 16 x 20 prints no problem.

The big advantage with the Olympus system is in its JPEG engine, their cameras along with Fuji's produce some of the best out of camera JPEG's so if you don't want to shoot raw it's a good option, and if you shoot RAW+JPEG then sometimes the JPEG is more than enough. Tying into this is the color reproduction of the sensor which is amazing, and another help to keep you away from lots of postprocessing.

The issue with Olympus is high ISO noise, and basically your one stop behind the Canon and Nikon cameras, but compared to the crop cameras its not a huge difference (just when compared to full frame models like the 5d mkII & D700 which are better than all of the crop sensors)

And another thing to think about is what you want to do as a path for advancement. If you're thinking about Canon or Nikon and sticking with the system because you want to go onto a high level cameras, those are quickly becoming the full frame models, which won't work properly with many lenses for the lower cameras (the shoot with reduced resolution) and if you wanted lenses that would work from crop to full frame they wont be that wide for the crop nikon and canon models.

Any other questions feel free to ask

Thanks N&V, I'll look into the Olympus line a little more.

[chrisjohnson]

600$ and photojournalism? Some knowledge of photoshop?

Go for a really good compact that can shoot RAW and brush up your photoshop skills.

600$ will not buy you a decent DSLR lens, never mind the body.

[Matt518]

So I bought a new Nikon D60, with the 18-55 VR. I must have been mistaken in my earlier post; the D60 and the D40 are the same size, although the D60 still feels a little heavier. I guess I picked up a D90 thinking it was the D60.

Anyway, after extensive research, I think this platform will work well for my needs and get me started. I'm planning on adding a tripod, battery grip, a few extra batteries and a hand strap to the arsenal. I'm stoked that the flash off my old 35mm works with the D60, but I'll be looking into a speedlight later down the line.

I've read throught the manual, and played with the camera a bit. I still need to figure out how to do some things in manual mode (after all, that's why we buy dSLR's over P&S's, right?). I'm really liking it so far, but it keeps giving me dirty looks - I guess I need to start taking pictures...

[ziggy53]

... I'm stoked that the flash off my old 35mm works with the D60, but I'll be looking into a speedlight later down the line.

...

Be careful about that as some older flash units have a very high trigger voltage that can damage a modern dSLR:

http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html

[Matt518]

Thanks for the info and link, ziggy. I hadn't considered the variance in voltage. My flash isn't listed on the site you linked, and I can't find any voltage info listed in the documentation for the flash. I guess I'll not use it until I know for sure.

[Art Scott]

Thanks for the info and link, ziggy. I hadn't considered the variance in voltage. My flash isn't listed on the site you linked, and I can't find any voltage info listed in the documentation for the flash. I guess I'll not use it until I know for sure.

purchase a safe sync by Wein......they run between $30 / 50.....will allow you to use your flash in manual mode ..... and will save your camera.

BTW...what flash are we talking about???

[Matt518]

It's a Kako 225.

[JustinThyme]

Seeing posts like this on multiple sites always yeilds the same results.

Everyone has chapagne dreams on a beer budget.

Firstly whether or not you do this full time, part time, hobbyist etc has no bearing on it. IQ that a body and lens produces does not care how ofen you do it. While this may be your justification for budget limiting, images do not care what your budget is.

If you are looking into DSLR I would stick with the forerunners, Canon and Nikon. There is a reason they are where they are in the market. You can start off small and work your way up. Investment in a lens is usually a good one. good glass will retain its value and you can move up by selling off what you have to the next in line beginner.

I have to agree with other posters that a $600 budget is a very tight one and getting what you stated you expected for that price is a very slim proposition. Best advice I can offer is to look around on buy and sell boards. There are many to be found, here, FM, POTN, photo.net among others. I would avoid fleabay like the plague. This way you can see what is selling for what price and research each piece of equipment to see if it will suit your needs. You may get lucky and find someone selling off quickly for lower prices. You could start off with something like a Canon Xti and a 28-135 IS lens that would most likely be a little over your budget but not by much and move up from there. While it is true that having the "eye" is extremly important having the "right stuff" is equally important. I started off with an XT and a kit lens and no matter what I did I just could not get the results I wanted. Thought I just was not getting something right on my part. Then I borrowed a 70-200 2.8L IS and the difference was astounding and immidiate, enough so that I bought one the next day. This was definitely a much better position but when comparing my images to others I was still lacking in IQ. UP to a 40D I went. Again the difference was instantly noticed but my images while shooting sports were less than what I wanted. Out of 500 shots I might have 20 keepers, mostly due to OOF or bad exposures. Up to a MKIIN I went. I went from culling by OOF and bad exposure to culling by whether or not I liked the composition.

[Matt518]

Welcome to Dgrin, Justin. While I appreciate your response, this wasn't a question, nor an issue of "champagne dreams on a beer budget". It was just a general inquiry for input to establish a starting point. Since I'm not looking to do any of this as a career, at least not right now, the budget was a concern and a deciding factor. If I end up doing this on a more full-time basis, where I will be anticipating a significant return on my investment, then I will look at upgrading.

As I stated earlier, I went with the Nikon D60. The features and price were consistent with what I was looking for and what I want to do with it. As the budget allows, I will look into investing into a wider range of lenses.

[Nikolai]

I disagree. See previous post.
It all depends.
You can occasionally snap some beautiful pictures with $200 P&S and even get some decent 8x10 prints out of those. The most expensive pro level gear will not replace a great eye, an ability to look and see and/or the patience/attitude needed to get a good light, neat pose, awesome expression, etc.
Having said all that, I must also admit that good gear helps. It broadens your capabilities of taking a particular picture how you want it, where you want it and how you want it. Just like you can be an excellent driver, but you'd have a hard time competing with the Prius on the Daytona track.
The trick is to understand what you're going into and where exactly you wanna go. Pretty much any car will get you from point A to point B. The question is - how fast it can do that, and how many oil changes or tranny work it would require.
I think I own about $25K worth of photo related goodies, and only $2,500 of those are the camera bodies.
Is it all necessary? It depends. But does it help? Hell, yeah!