First DSLR

M

mushinskyy

Member
so I've been shooting film for the past few months, and a crap cam before that. I have a real lame compact ATM. I wanna get a dslr because I really love photography and my love for photography grows with every snap of a shutter. Shooting film, while good for learning and some might say everything else too, is too expensive for me although I love it. The mess that follows medium cameras is getting too much for me. I have about 600$ to spend, and since I never Buy new I'm gonna get second hand. The only thing left to decide is what camera to get. I won't get anything that's not nikon or canon anyway, so it's a matter of choosing between them. I was thinking either 450d or d80. What do u guys think?

I also have the 40d by canon in mind.


Thanks, Jake.
 
Register to hide this ad
mushinskyy said:
so I've been shooting film for the past few months, and a crap cam before that. I have a real lame compact ATM. I wanna get a dslr because I really love photography and my love for photography grows with every snap of a shutter. Shooting film, while good for learning and some might say everything else too, is too expensive for me although I love it. The mess that follows medium cameras is getting too much for me. I have about 600$ to spend, and since I never Buy new I'm gonna get second hand. The only thing left to decide is what camera to get. I won't get anything that's not nikon or canon anyway, so it's a matter of choosing between them. I was thinking either 450d or d80. What do u guys think?

I also have the 40d by canon in mind.


Thanks, Jake.
Click to expand...
.....Jake, I'd suggest not wondering about which camera body to consider, and decide who's lenses you really want to shoot with....
 
Hi
if Nikon, I'd get me an used D200. I bought my second (like new) Body last week for 550€, a bit more than your limit, but worth it in this condition. You will have to overthink your pricerange, a used good zoom-lens will be more.
What you really need to calculate is, the camera is the most worthless and replaceble in an equipment. My lens I paid used 'bout 2500€ for, two D200 Bodies 1200€.
The lens will stay till I have a fullformat sensor dslr and as long I stay with nikon.

I'd always buy only excellent lens, and in case of need to choose, choose the cheaper cam. I can replace it when I have the chance or the Money. I started with a D70s which I kicked when I had the chance to get a D200 for reasonable money.

Decide for a System, and when you done this, get only good lens and take a cam u can efford now. You can replace the cam in a while...

I have only lens with F=1:2.8 or better as
AF-Nikkor 2.8/80-200ED
AF-Nikkor 2.8/35-70ED
AF-Nikkor 2.8/20
AF-Nikkor 1.8/85
Sigma 2.8-4/17-35
Tokina Macro 2.8/100

A used SB800 and SB29 completes it. Complete with bag(s) and Pods (Tri and Uni) I am close to 3.800€ now. All bought used over a time range of 2 years, started with a D70s-Kit :)

I didn't like about the D70s at once: 200ASA lowest possible, no X-Contakt... after 2 weeks I knew I need another one :) and 2 month later I found the lens I've been looking for in combination with a D200... THE chance, I got both together much cheaper then I'd have paid separate.

With the D200 i'll be satisfied til the D700 is effordable.



Helge
 
Last edited:
I'd suggest not getting hung up on it needing to be Nikon. There are some really nice competitors out there making some really good kit glass. Also, for the difference in price by not paying for the name you can buy new. I went through the whole eval process a couple of years ago when thinking of a DSLR as a replacment /supplement for my medium format and found the Olympus to be the better dslr on a cost/result basis with the idea that I'd not go beyond the kit lenses.

I did move up from a 500 to the 520 and the only thing I am critical about is the lack of iso below 100. However with the limits on the f/stops on almost all zooms whether Olympus or others going below 100 is not a deal killer.
 
The lenses are what count. You can get a darn fine body for not a lot of money right now. You'll no doubt spend more bucks on the lenses.

There is an issue of reverse compatibility that may matter to you: Which brands will support the older lenses from the film days. A population of great lenses at a bargain price. I went Pentax for that reason and have a drawer full of great lenses for not a lot of money.
 
Dynacophil's advice is excellent - buy the best lenses you can afford and then pick a body to go with them. All the major brands make some very fine lenses. Conversely, some of their "kit" lenses aren't the best so make sure you try these out first should you decide to buy.

Don't rule out the Pentax. Their newest models are getting very good reviews and they have the advantage of being compatible with most of the K-mount lenses from the past 30-years.

There's also the factor of 'feel' and handling. If a camera body does not feel good in your hand (if it's too small or too big or if the controls are difficult for you) then it won't get used and you'll have wasted your money.

I wish someone would market a DSLR the same size and shape as the original Canon EOS Elan, one of the best handling SLRs I've ever had the pleasure to use. Also, a DSLR on the order of a Pentax LX /Nikon FM2/Olympus OM1/Minolta X700 would be nice. You know, a more traditional very high quality old-school manual focus SLR but digital instead of film. I'd be first in line at the store!
 
I have a Pentax Point & Shoot. Takes very nice pictures. I am flirting with getting me a Pentax DSLR so I can use those good old Takumar lenses on it. Those lenses are superb and make very nice images and are bargains. Don't rule out a Pentax in my book, they're sleepers for sure. And that's coming from a diehard Nikon man!
 
From what I have seen, you can get a clean Pentax K100D or K100D Super for about $250.00. That is a crazy value. Build quality and availability of old "A" lenses are tops for the price. I used to have one. Nice camera. 6.0 MPixels is plenty for taking some nice photos.

Old "Takumars" are mostly screw mounts, they need an adapter. I have a couple of K-mount Takumars that were marketed as a step-below product to the proper "SMC's". They seem to work fine, though are worth only a fraction to collectors.

Other thread... I found a massive 1000mm f8 Takumar on Craigslist a while back, the largest lens they ever made. Once in a lifetime find for only $200.00. Crazy.
 
Thanks for pointing that out. Nice idea and that old SMC manual focus glass is superb quality all the way. Also nice that if I feel weird, that screwmount lenses are even usable on that camera. Vintage and modern meet up and learn from each other! :tresbon:
 
jocko nc has a point.

Pentax is known for their great reverse compatibility in lenses.
Even the very old M42 lenses can be used with adapter.

Point of focus is 3 dimensionally adjustable on the K20D.
Every old lens might need this adjustment.

Further more, with Pentax you don't have to pay for shake reduction every time you buy a lens. It's simply build into the camera.
This makes your glass faster by 2-4 aperture stops.

Pentax comes cheap even when weather sealed. This feature you'll have to pay a mortgage for on Canon/Nikon.

Look on ebay and check prices on quality glass for the different brands of cameras and you will end up with pentax.

"dolph"
 
I recently went through the M42 screw mount / K adapters (again)...

There are two types: One has a shoulder flange that covers the K mount face, the other is fully recessed into the mount. The flange is handy and neat, but you will lose infinity focus. (I had one of these briefly but never noticed the problem). The recessed type does not have the problem. The focus depth for the M42 and K mounts are the same, there is no allowance for a flange. There is no way to make a 0.00mm depth flange. Consensus is to avoid the aftermarket adapters you see all over Ebay. Get the real deal from Pentax direct. $30.00.

I found the screw mounts tedious. With all the M and A series Pentax glass out there, there is not really a reason to use M42. Unless you come across something particularly rare and compelling. All the old Russian (and German?) stuff is M42 as well.

The 1000mm F8 I bought came with a Nikon adapter. Apparently the owner had been a Nikon guy with a really big Takumar.
 
Some of my Keepers, all SMC M-series or early A-series glass in great condition:

28mm / 2.8
28mm / 3.5
50mm / 1.4
50mm / 1.7
50mm / 2.0
35-105 / 3.5 (A)
75-150 / 4.0
135mm / 3.5
200mm / 4.0
80-200mm / 4.5

They made good stuff back then. Not a lot of money now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom