New to photography

MarcusFenix

Hey guys I'm serioously thinking of getting into photography, I think i've got an eye for it and I took some serious pics with a point n shoot jobbie but want to step it up.
I checked online and my "ideal" cemera is the nikon 30ds I think!?! Anyways I'm still working on winning the lotto so I'll have to get something more affordable.
I want to take action shots so I suppose that's about it as far as criteria goes. Anyone have any advice on where to get a good starter pack? Or any camera & lens combos that would be suitable!?
Thanks inadvance guys!

Thecageyone

What's your budget? If you mean 300s[?] that is a nice choice if you have the funds. My dream can is the Nikon D3x ... *drool*

For starting off, something like the Nikon D3000 with the kit lens and maybe look for a used 50mm f/1.8 on adverts. Decent starter dslr. Good luck

ZANKOU

hey, I got a nikon D60 package about a year ago and it came with a 35-50mm lens a 70-300mm sigma lens and a bag it is ideal for action shots. you could pick 1 up very handy now because as far as i know the nikon d3000 has taken the place of the d60.

Thecageyone

D60 are very popular on used sites. They're pretty much an old D3000 with less AF points [maybe more?] - But the D60 had the eye level sensor, don't think the D3000 does? But the D3000 isn't very expensive either and gets great reviews.

MarcusFenix

K so I'll do some digging on a d60. Any particularly good sites or would eBay be as good as any?
Thanks again lads

Thecageyone

Adverts, link very top of this very page I've bought a few things through there to date.

pete4130

Thecageyone wrote: »

What's your budget? If you mean 300s[?] that is a nice choice if you have the funds. My dream can is the Nikon D3x ... *drool*

For starting off, something like the Nikon D3000 with the kit lens and maybe look for a used 50mm f/1.8 on adverts. Decent starter dslr. Good luck

D3s is a far superior camera in my opinion. If I could have either one for free I'd go for the D3s everytime. It suits my needs way more than the D3x.

For me the D3x is slow with massive files and poor low light/high ISO capabilities for such a high price tag.

I've been shooting Nikon for years now, from way back with F100's and F90x's. Nikon entry level camera (the D3000 and D5000) are crap in my opinion.

I see the D90 as the best value Nikon Camera on the market at the minute. Cheaper than a D300s, I've shot with on on ISO 6400 and it was acceptable/fine, its got video if you want it, its a good size, good fps and comes with a pretty good kit lens for the price.

Any of the Canon 300/350/400/450D cameras are really good value and good cameras for the price. I've shot with Canon 40D's in the past and they are a generation behind at this stage I think. If you can get a 30D cheap I say go for it.

There is little difference between Canon and Nikon. They both do their job equally. Some people like one over the other.

Thecageyone

D90 is the camera I've been eying up for ages, just can't afford it atm. Maybe next year ... But, since i'm wanting, may as well go further and want their more expensive models. I wouldn't say no to any of them

I think it's unfair to say the lower end dslrs are crap, they get great reviews. the IQ is absolutely fine, they're more accessible and beginner friendly. I'd not say no to a D5000 either. I'm using an A200 Sony right now, which has a broken SSS and mis-aligned sensor .. If I can get good shots with that, I can get good shots with anything

pete4130

D90 is seriously good camera for the money TCO. Save and get it. I think its a banger camera. Nikon entry level don't do anything for me. They just seem lacking. Sparse, not AF motor or top LCD. GRanted I'm coming from the other end of the spectrum I agree.

anyone thats asked me about entry level cams the past 3 years I've steered em towards Canon 400D and 450D's for value for money, just with the lens compatability issues concerning Nikons lack of AF motors and not all lesnes working on them.

Ideally I'd love a D700 for its size, a D3s for its performance and if I could afford it a D3x for its detail. I don't have €12-€15k disposable income though

I just recommended a D90 to someone this week and played around with in Jessops. It's the modern day D70s to me. Great size, great performance and great price too!!!!

Thecageyone

I've wanted a D90 since I bought my old fuji bridge. It's the next step for me really. No point moving sideways to another entry level, I don' want to have to do that - but, my current dslr is a bit feckered after a fall if it gets any worse or can't be repaired, I may have to go for something on the same level, like a D60/450D

MarcusFenix

Thecageyone wrote: »

Adverts, link very top of this very page I've bought a few things through there to date.

sorry can't see a link, whats the name of the site??:rolleyes:

PCPhoto

www.adverts.ie

theres also, buyandsell, donedeal, gumtree, ebay ....and prob some more.

(Google is your friend :P)

MarcusFenix

cheers!!!

magicbastarder

herself has a D40 and it's a cracking little camera.

DaireQuinlan

pete4130 wrote: »

anyone thats asked me about entry level cams the past 3 years I've steered em towards Canon 400D and 450D's for value for money, just with the lens compatability issues concerning Nikons lack of AF motors and not all lesnes working on them.

I'm not sure why people keep on giving out about this. Nikon is apparently committed to producing AFS lenses from here on in anyway, the AFD interface has gone the way of the dodo. There WAS a gap originally in that there was no small cheap fast prime for the entry level cameras, but that's been fixed up by the introduction of that 35mm DX, which by all accounts is a cracker of a lens. I mean, honestly, anyone buying an entry level body is unlikely to buy more than one or two other lenses anyway, and there are a pile of cheap AFS zooms at the bottom end.
I actually think it's more annoying that lack of metering in the entry and mid level cameras unless you have a chipped lens mounted.

I'm also constantly puzzled by this endless discussion about the merits of the various entry level bodies, particularly for people just getting into the area. Any one of these cameras are vastly more sophisticated picture taking machines than anything that anyone has had for the last 100 years or so. It really doesn't make a blind bit of difference which one they pick, there's nothing of significance to diffrentiate them in real terms. I often think we should just have an automated answering agent for these things that just picks out whatever camera the OP mentions and replies with a

Automated_Answering_Agent wrote:

BUY IT ! JUST BUY IT ! BUY IT IMMEDIATELY ! Otherwise you'll spend FRUITLESS AND WASTED MONTHS here on boards with everyone giving you COMPLETELY CONTRADICTORY ADVICE. JUST BUY THE CAMERA ALREADY, and go TAKE PICTURES.

And then locks the thread

pete4130 wrote:

Ideally I'd love a D700 for its size, a D3s for its performance and if I could afford it a D3x for its detail. I don't have €12-€15k disposable income though

Yeah, I think the D700 is probably the nicest digital body Nikon has made. I've once or twice considered it. When it comes down to a reasonable price I may actually just jump the shark and buy my first digital body :-)

Thecageyone

MarcusFenix wrote: »

sorry can't see a link, whats the name of the site??:rolleyes:

Sorry, I thought saying Adverts, and that it's at the top of the page was enough. Should have put adverts.ie.

I've just had a flick through adverts for the likes of the D60 ... forget it. Better off buying a brand new D3000 kit, you'll get it cheaper and you'll get a warranty. There's people trying to sell basic D60 kits for more than a new D3000, even going into D5000 territory.

magicbastarder

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

but that's been fixed up by the introduction of that 35mm DX, which by all accounts is a cracker of a lens.

agreed - i have the 35mm f1.8 (which has no focus problems on cheaper nikon DSLRs) and the 50mm f1.8, and i much prefer the 35mm - the 50mm is a bit too long for a general workhorse standard prime for me.

MarcusFenix

I'm also constantly puzzled by this endless discussion about the merits of the various entry level bodies, particularly for people just getting into the area. Any one of these cameras are vastly more sophisticated picture taking machines than anything that anyone has had for the last 100 years or so. It really doesn't make a blind bit of difference which one they pick, there's nothing of significance to diffrentiate them in real terms. I often think we should just have an automated answering agent for these things that just picks out whatever camera the OP mentions and replies with a

So what your saying is......I need more info before I make a purchase???

MarcusFenix

Thanks guys...i'll save up and maybe my next post will have a pic attached! probably not though cos i'll probably post some jibberish in the mean time....

dakar

MarcusFenix wrote: »

So what your saying is......I need more info before I make a purchase???

It's more the case that there are no crap DSLR's on the market, from any of the major manufacturers, from entry level up. Any camera you buy will have capabilities which will satisfy (and indeed outstrip) the needs of the beginner. Strike that, most entry level cameras these days will outstrip the needs of pretty much anyone except specialist sports/nature/whatever photographers (not that any enthusiastic amateur would dare admit that to themselves, let alone anyone else! )

The big two give you more options in the second hand market for lenses and accessories, but the best advice is handle the various options, see how they feel to you in your hand, and whichever you go for, you have a tool which is capable of producing great images. The rest is up to you.

For the record, my camera of choice these days is my iPhone (really )

MarcusFenix

I was takin the mick!!;)
Well what I was hoping for when I started the thread was for some experienced advice as im clueless (even post google-athon) with all the terms like AFS etc. These things will baffle me and I understand whatever I choose will be way more than I need but still I might be just paying that little bit extra for features in one camera which are useless to me, or not i don't know ya see!:)

Thanks anyway I think your all pointing me in the right direction anyway....nikon....from all the reading ive done this seems to be what im looking for, and my friend has a d3000 which he let me hold(:eek:) and it felt quite.....ergonomic....thats enough reason as any to make a purchase I presume?

dakar

MarcusFenix wrote: »

anyway....nikon....from all the reading ive done this seems to be what im looking for, and my friend has a d3000 which he let me hold(:eek:) and it felt quite.....ergonomic....thats enough reason as any to make a purchase I presume?

It was a good enough reason for me anyway! Nikons still sit better in my hand 15 odd years later, whenever I put down my iPhone