luvtravelin

Hi - I have a passion for admiring and taking photographs. I have always looked at peoples photos on this board and been mesmerized by how beautiful some of these captured shots are! I have a canonS500 which is by no means a fancy camera - just a regular point and shoot digital. My photos with it have been great - but I would like to kick it up a notch!

I would like to get a nice SLR Digital camera - under $1000 for future trips but am not sure what brands, what features to look for. Any thoughts or recommendations?

mairseydotes

We took a safari in Tanzania last summer and bought a Nikon 50 SLR just for that trip. We got the 300MM lens and the photos were spectacular. Downside: it's big and heavy with all the attachments, extra lithium battery and lenses.

I'm not a camera expert, but the settings on the Nikon 50 made taking great photos a snap. I used "auto" 90% of the time and got amazing results. Of course, we bought it 15 months ago, so there is surely newer technology that might be lighter and better, but also more expensive, maybe.

Kristina

I'm also considering a DSLR for my next camera.
I like the Nikon 40x. It's the smallest and lightest DSLR on the market right now.
I went to a camera store over the weekend, and while it still seemed so big to me compared to my P&S, it really was small compared to the Pentax with similar specs. The Pentax felt HUGE in my hands.

G_Hopper

Here's a good resource for researching cameras (and a whole lot more about photography):
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm

I've been looking into getting my first digital SLR as well and am leaning towards the Nikon D40 kit with the 18-55mm lens and adding the Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR Zoom Nikkor Lens. This set up would cost less than $750 through amazon.com

But go to a camera shop and see how different models operate and feel to you before buying online (or anywhere).

kathleen

I've always used Nikon cameras and think they're great--top notch. That said, I've switched and now use a Canon Digital SLR. I did a thorough comparison (main difference is the sensor) and came to believe that Canon has the edge. (IMHO)

Here's a good website for camera discussions-- digital review. I've split the link below to keep it short enough for Fodor's site (I don't know how to do the tiny url)


http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/
NikonD70SversusRebelXT.shtml

ira

Hi Luv,

A digital SLR and its associated paraphernalia can be quite heavy and bulky.

Take a look at the New Canon S5IS. It's reviewed at http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_...anon_s5is.html

I love my S3.

jadu

I, too, have found great results with the Nikon D50 camera. I have the standard 18-55 lens and a 55-200, which I use to get people pictures. It's true that the camera and the extras are a bit weighty, but the results I get are worth it. On a two-week trip to France, I took 1200 shots. Italy is next. Good luck.

kathleen

I second the recommendation from ira for the Canon S5IS. It's lightweight, full of control choices, and made well. (Some of my students have an earlier version of this camera) It would be a very good bridge between a full DSLR and a point and shoot-- not too cumbersome, but with DSLR quality.

rkkwan

Are you just trying to buy a camera, or are you trying to buy into a dSLR system? If you think you'll get further into the photography hobby with various lens for various situations, then you need to look into the whole system - what lens, flashes and other accessories are available, and at what price. If that's the case, then I'll suggest you only look into Canon and Nikon.

But if the $1,000 is it, and basically only for travel, then you have more brands to choose from.

First thing is what focal length you are trying to cover with your $1,000. Your S500 has a 3x optical zoom, which is equivalent to about 35-105mm in old-fashioned 35mm photography talk. Most of the entry-level dSLRs can be ordered as a kit with usually a 18-55 lens, which is equivalent to 28-90mm (35mm equivalent). So, it already gives you a significantly wider coverage and gives up little on the telephoto end.

Is that enough for you? Your budget won't be enough to get an ultra-wideangle, but if you want more telephoto range, then you have two choices. You can get an extra lens, like those 55-200 ones. Or you can order just the camera body and then get a "super-zoom" like the 18-250 Tamron or the 18-200 Sigma with optical stablization. Still within your budget, but with just one lens that will do it all.

<b>Only after</b> you decide on the type of lens you want to buy and carry, then you should think about which brand of camera, in my humble opinion.

For example, if you want to go the 2-lens strategy, then the Nikon D40 18-55 kit and the 55-200 VR lens is an excellent package at a fantastic price.

But if you want to get the amazing Sigma 18-200 OS, then that lens is only available for Canon right now. Then I'll buy that with a Digital Rebel XT or XTi body.

ShelliDawn

If you want a dSLR for travelling, you might consider the Olympus E-510. I bought one this spring with the two lens kit for about $1000.00.

I took it on my trip to Europe in July and really like it. The body is smaller than others in its class and because its lenses are &quot;designed for digital&quot;, they are considerably smaller and lighter than the equivalent focal length lenses for other systems. This made it easier to pack/carry.

It has all the features you need in a dSLR plus live view (you can use the LCD to frame your shots instead of the viewfinder), a great dust reduction system and in-body image stabilization (versus in-lens).

These are some good websites for researching cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/ (the forums on this site are very active and helpful)
http://www.steves-digicams.com/
http://www.dcresource.com/

loislane17

In my non-digital days, I was totally a Nikon person and their digitals are great.
But when you say kick it up--what do you mean? Are you truly ready to heft the equipment you'll need to in order to cover your bases? If so-check out the Canons and Nikons of the lighter side-they're great.
If you want a more advanced Point &amp; shoot, with a large range and high resolution, you could consider the Olympus SP-550 UZ. It's one of their Ultra-zooms and is an amazing flexible camera. I see that there's now a Sp-560 UZ now as well. But it has an 18x OPTICAL zoom (from 28mm-486mm equivalency); is lighter weight and all the lenses you need are built in.
Check it out on the Olympus site (I would buy it at J&amp;R Music World or something like that). The 550 price has dropped $100 down to $399 and will probably drop further now that the 560 is out. http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_se...p?product=1316

So if you want to take ababy step, you might want to consider this camera. You can use it manually quite well. But if you're ready for the big guns and can commit to the weight, you will get more flexibilty with an SLR.

luvtravelin

you all have given me a lot to think about.

No the camera wouldn't be only for travelling. I am the type of person that takes photos of every thing and every occaision. So I know I would get good usage out of it.

As for lugging it around while travelling - yeah I dont know if I am so fond of that idea. I guess a medium size/weight without having to to carry around many different lenses is ideal for me...I guess I want to have the results of a really good SLR without having all the equipment to carry around.

I really haven't thought about what lenses I would want to invest in. But I gather from this post that Nikon and Canon are the way to go. I have always been a huge fan of canon - I've had their regular film cameras as well as their digital and loved the results. I will have to go to the sites mentioned and do more research to figure out what best fits my needs.

I guess overall what draws me to the SLRs is the clarity of the photos, the sharpness, the colors - I like taking artistic shots focusing on close ups with blurry backgrounds - but my canon doesnt do that too well. I also have seen portraits, every day candid shots with the SLRs and love them! Those are the effects I am going for - without getting an over the top super professional camera. Not sure if all that makes sense.

But thank you - and I'll keep researching!

sshephard

Try looking at the Canon Digital Rebel XTi. A friend of mine has one and I am very impressed. Canon has been the leader in the digital dslr field for several years, though I wouldn't argue with the good advice of the Nikon folks. I think that in the consumer market, its kind of a Ford/Chevy debate. So no doubt the Rebel XTi has a worthy competitor.

I do like the compactness of the Rebel and I think the sensor cleaning technology built in is revolutionary. And dust on the sensor is a big problem. Check out the reviews. www.DPReview.com is a great resource.

For what its worth, I have owned a Canon 1D, a 1DII and now own a Canon 5D, which is Canon's pro-sumer full-frame camera. It is an amazing camera but I think it might be out of your price range.

My suggestion is that you get a good body and then splurge on getting a great lens. When I travel, I shoot almost exclusively with the Canon 24-105 IS 4.0L. I have a photo I took hand held in St. Peter's cathedral at 800 iso 1/15 second hand held that is amazingly sharp and clean.

I also travel with a 50mm 1.2L. But I leave the other big, heavy lenses I own at home.

Good luck.

Robespierre

&quot;I like taking artistic shots focusing on close ups with blurry backgrounds - but my canon doesnt do that too well.&quot;

That's funny - what's your lens's depth of focus at the f-stop you use in various light conditions?

hausfrau

I am another Canon dSLR fan. I have the European version of the XTi, which is called the 400D. I love this camera. Easy to use, reasonably light-weight, fabulous pictures. You can't beat the price given the quality you get. I also have a Canon 70-300 zoom with image stabilization (one step below their &quot;professional&quot; line) and it is fantastic.

rkkwan

sshephard's 24-105/4L costs about $1,000. I use the EF-S 18-55/2.8, which costs about the same, for the XTi. [Well, I've sold that camera, and will get the 40D.] These lens are quite a bit out of the OP's budget, but it shows how your SLR system can grow (as long as you have the money).

For those shots with narrow depth-of-field and nice blurry background (bokeh), one need a prime (i.e. non-zoom) lens with a large aperture and with lots of shutter blades. Few zoom lens have large aperture, and those that do are very expensive. That's why people continue to buy prime lens.

For example, this is a shot of my cat with my new Canon 50/1.4 shot wide open at f1.4.

rkkwan.zenfolio.com/p502300981/?photo=551302160

That lens cost about $280, but if you're on a budget, the Canon 50/1.8 is under $80. A must have if you decide to go with Canon and wants a budget lens with narrow depth of field. Here's my cousin at a wedding:

rkkwan.zenfolio.com/p850031632/?photo=989266635

elburr

bookmarking

irishface

Several have mentioned the Canon IS 5S For years I thought I would never give up shooting slides on my film SLR, but fell in love with this camera. I found I was willing to always have it with me as opposed to the SLR. When I was hiking or at the end of a long day, I tended to leave the camera in the room and that was always when I saw a &quot;must take&quot;. But this I am always willing to take.

whatever you choose, have fun and then share your pictures with us.

sshephard

rkwan is right about my travel lens - it is pricey. The Canon efs lenses are excellent choices, though they won't work with all Canon cameras.

Another great lens is the IS version of the 28-105mm Canon zoom. And it is fairly reasonably priced.

Just don't compromise your body with a cheap kit lens.

rkwan talks about the 50mm 1.4 and he is right - it's a great lens. In fact that is the lens that I used for interior shots before I got the 24-105. I still use a 50mm 1.2 for indoor things.

rkkwan

Like many <b>fine things</b> in life, prices go exponentially higher when you move upscale.

These three Canon 50mms are great lens for their prices. The 1.8 at $80, the 1.4 at $280 and the 1.2L at about $1,350. But you can see how the prices go up...

Yes, the 17-55/2.8 IS I have is only for the Digital Rebels and the 10D-40D series only. It's more or less equivalent to the 24-105 for the 1D/5D, but with larger aperture but worse build quality.

One lens that's been highly overlooked is the 28-135IS. It's generally considered too &quot;long&quot; as a walk around lens for the Digital Rebels and 10-40D, but if paired with the amazing 10-22mm ultra-wideangle, it can definitely work. It is less than $400 - one of the cheapest IS lens out there, and now you may find a lot of people who get the 40D kit to sell theirs for even lower.

I am considering doing the same. Buying the 40D kit and sell that lens for about $350.