# What DSLR camera should I get?



## mmccarthy781

Hey, I know alot of people on this forum are into photography so I thought that I should get some peoples opinion. I've got a canon s95 point and shoot, but want a DSLR for X-mas. What are some good models which are good for beginers, and on the cheaper side?


----------



## speedie408

If you got a bit more cash to burn and want a NICE prosumer camera, go with the Canon 60D!

If you're trying to save a buck but want a decent prosumer camera, go with the Canon t2i or the t3i. 

You now have the choice of getting them with the "kit" lense or opting out and getting the body only. If you choose to go body only, you have a few bucks saved to get a nicer lense off the bat. Depends on what type of shooting you plan on doing really. Options are endless.


----------



## Wasserpest

What's your budget? I was in a similar situation, and decided my budget was $700 (I sold my old DSLR, lenses and a flash for about that). So I looked around for about 3 months, initially at the T3i, but found an excellent offer for a 60D and two lenses.

Regarding lenses, keep in mind that the current "kit" lens (EFS 18-55) is actually very good for what it costs. Very nice image quality, great macro capabilities, image stabilization and it is very light. After thoroughly looking for the "best" lens I admit I went ahead and bought the kit lens. To get a slightly better one you have to spend over 3x as much, it will be much heavier and larger and only give you a very slight edge IQ-wise.

Just to put it into perspective - I was also closely looking at the EFS 15-85 which costs north of $700. There wasn't clear evidence that the IQ is superior to the kit lens...

You will often find raving reviews from folks who spend thousands in "glass". In reality, the differences are relatively small. Definitely check out POTN, dpreview, fredmiranda, photozone and other places that are full of information.


----------



## mmccarthy781

So canon 60D seems to be the popular choice


----------



## tetra73

mmccarthy781 said:


> So canon 60D seems to be the popular choice



If you are planning to stick with Canon, yes. Nikon and Pentax and Olympus have their own entry level lineups.


----------



## mmccarthy781

i don't really care about brand, just quality and price


----------



## shinycard255

Honestly, coming from an advertising photographer, it's not about the camera body. It's *more about the lenses you use* and *how big the sensor is* in your camera. More megapixels doesn't mean it's a better camera either. You can have a point and shoot that is 15MP with a sensor the size of a dime, where as you can get a decent DSLR that is 15MP with a sensor the size of a quarter. You're going to get a crisper, cleaner image from the DSLR than you would with a point and shoot.

Also, when it comes to purchasing lenses, stick with the manufacturer lenses. Don't be getting any 3rd party like Sigma, Quataray, etc. Yes they are cheaper, but you are getting what you pay for. If you get a Canon, stick with a Canon lenses. If Nikon, stick with Nikkor lenses. And so on...

Canon and Nikon both have beginner cameras and I would say start with one of those and then if you really like the manufacturer's camera, then think about getting a better one in about 5-6 years.


----------



## Eden Marel

Canon T2i, too bad you missed the sale on Amazon! I missed it too... ughh. It was $699 for the T2i 18-55mm kit lens AND 55-250mm lens. For something so expensive, it's probably better to start small/cheap and see if you really like it before spending a ton on the equipment, cuz once you buy it you'll never get the same amount back and end up with buyer's remorse.

If you're thinking about Canon this is a good site, chumlee referred me to the site: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/index.php


----------



## Nubster

I'm a Nikon fan. Honestly what you need to do is figure out a budget then go out and handle cameras that are in your price range. See what feels best. Don't play in to the brand game. Nikon, Canon, Sony, they all have pros and cons. As far as third party lenses not being good, that's a crap statement. Yeah, maybe if your livelihood depends on your photos then you will want/need the best lenses you can get and that usually means Nikkor or Cannon or Sony or whatever. But for a hobbyist photographer, third party lenses are absolutely fine. I'd put some of my third party lens macro shots up again a Nikkor macro lens shot any day of the week.


----------



## Eldachleich

Brand name really isnt what is important.
Though brand wise I really like my Hasselblads... Or I did till I lost the charger. Now they are very expensive paper weights. 
Other than that I like Canons... Never really clicked with Nikon though.
After you get one try entering a bunch of online amateur photo contests. I cannot tell you how many lenses I won for free that way.


----------



## shinycard255

Nubster said:


> As far as third party lenses not being good, that's a crap statement.


This coming from the hobbyist photographer...

From *MY* personal experience, the 3rd party lenses are a lot cheaper made and aren't as sharp as the manufacturer's lenses. If you're on a budget or this is your first DSLR, that's understandable, but don't be telling the person who does this for a living that they don't know what they are talking about.

I'm not saying you have to go out and buy the $1400 Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens. The OP can get good pictures from the $200 Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II (which usually comes in a kit with most Canon camera bodies anyway)


----------



## zenche

blanket statements are just dangerous. for the most part, i concur the at the price/quality balance favors the big names - canon, nikon, sony, when it comes to glass. but there are quite a few lenses made by third party makers like tamron and sigma that can hang.

two that come to mind are the tamron 17-50 2.8 and the sigma 10-20 lenses. just make sure you do your homework. 

i do agree with nubster that brands matter less - go see what feels right for you ergonomically.


----------



## DiabolicPiggies

speedie408 said:


> If you got a bit more cash to burn and want a NICE prosumer camera, go with the Canon 60D!
> 
> If you're trying to save a buck but want a decent prosumer camera, go with the Canon t2i or the t3i.
> 
> You now have the choice of getting them with the "kit" lense or opting out and getting the body only. If you choose to go body only, you have a few bucks saved to get a nicer lense off the bat. Depends on what type of shooting you plan on doing really. Options are endless.


Unfortunately neither the 60d nor the t3i is a prosumer camera. Prosumer would be the 7d. Depending on what you need, I would recommend the t3i over the 60d. There isn't much of a difference between the iq on them, actually, there is no difference. Only get the 7d if you plan on taking advantage of the 8fps and more advanced af system.


----------



## Nate McFin

I shoot a canon xti and xsi. If I had the choice (and the cash) I would head straight for the Canon 5D markii with a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS L ,Canon 100 MM Macro, and a Canon 10-20
a canon 24-70 F 2.8


----------



## Nubster

shinycard255 said:


> This coming from the hobbyist photographer...
> 
> From *MY* personal experience, the 3rd party lenses are a lot cheaper made and aren't as sharp as the manufacturer's lenses. If you're on a budget or this is your first DSLR, that's understandable, but don't be telling the person who does this for a living that they don't know what they are talking about.
> 
> I'm not saying you have to go out and buy the $1400 Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens. The OP can get good pictures from the $200 Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II (which usually comes in a kit with most Canon camera bodies anyway)


Yes, I am and that's exactly my point incase you didn't read my entire post. I stated very plainly that unless you make your living taking photos, third party lenses can be totally acceptable and in the hands of the right person...as good or better than a shot made with a Canon or Nikkor lens. I own lenses made by Tamron, Sigma, and Nikkor. I bet you couldn't tell me which lens made which shot if I posted a picture taken with each lens.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Like everyone else said, you cant go wrong with the big two, Nikon and Canon!...and no, I do not consider Sony to be anywhere close to Nikon/Canon (commence hate posts in 3...2...1...lol)

The best way is to just go to a store, be it Best Buy or a camera store, and hold some Canon cameras and some Nikons in your hand. Pick whatever feels best in your hand, that's what I did and Nikon was definitely the best for me. I've noticed Canon cameras tend to be bigger in size whether its the lower models or the higher end models (excluding the rebels) while Nikons tend to feel smaller in the lower end bodies and get much bigger and denser in the prosumer and pro models. 

Also, Canon cameras and lenses tend to be cheaper than Nikons ( You get what you pay for! Hardy har har! Nikon's #1, Nikon's #1!) But really it has more to do with Canon producing many more cameras and lenses per year than Nikon does, so they can sell them for less $ since they have more to sell...

Personally, I have a D700 (its in my sig) and it's definitely the best camera I've ever owned, and I've owned a lot of cameras! And I agree that Nikon/Canon lenses are the best you can get, but it really depends on how much you're willing to spend. Once again, you get what you pay for, and hobbyists have different needs than pros....

If you want to see some shots taken with a Nikon, go to either of my tank journals (especially the 40B) and work backwards from the last pages for some really cool pics!


----------



## zenche

Nate McFin said:


> I shoot a canon xti and xsi. If I had the choice (and the cash) I would head straight for the Canon 5D markii with a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS L ,Canon 100 MM Macro, and a Canon 10-20
> a canon 24-70 F 2.8


no duh? if cash wasn't a problem, who wouldn't?



TickleMyElmo said:


> Like everyone else said, you cant go wrong with the big two, Nikon and Canon!...and no, I do not consider Sony to be anywhere close to Nikon/Canon (commence hate posts in 3...2...1...lol)
> 
> And I agree that Nikon/Canon lenses are the best you can get


Why the hate on Sony? I'm curious. From my POV, unless you're a pro (and maybe prosumer), I really don't see much difference between the three. From a pro's pov, canikon provides pro-service. meaning rentals and replacement support being much more extensive. Their top of the line bodies are better than the Sony a900, and with video (but i don't really care about video anyway in a camera). Beyond that, I don't see that much difference. As far as glass, Sony's CZ lineup rivals any canikon equivalent.


----------



## MCHRKiller

Im also a Nikon person, Canons just seem to have a poor layout and feel to be cheaply made. I have a D7000 and a D60...the D60 is a great and cheap camera body, really beginner friendly with some room to grow. I have seen them sell for under $200 on ebay for lightly used ones. The D7000 will set you back around $1200 body only.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

zenche said:


> no duh? if cash wasn't a problem, who wouldn't?
> 
> 
> 
> Why the hate on Sony? I'm curious. From my POV, unless you're a pro (and maybe prosumer), I really don't see much difference between the three. From a pro's pov, canikon provides pro-service. meaning rentals and replacement support being much more extensive. Their top of the line bodies are better than the Sony a900, and with video (but i don't really care about video anyway in a camera). Beyond that, I don't see that much difference. As far as glass, Sony's CZ lineup rivals any canikon equivalent.


Oh man, you got me started! lol....

I dont know, I've always seen Sony as more of a tail following the body (Nikon and Canon) They always seem to copy and leech off of Nikon and Canons innovations, but never spend the money on R&D like the big two do....and then to top it off they undercut their prices to be more attractive to consumers. That's great and all, but it just makes them look desperate, or third rate. Sony has almost always been a follower, not an innovator as Canon and Nikon have proven themselves to be time and time again. Sony's only "innovation" is their use of translucent mirrors, which as I explain below V, is actually a huge fault with their whole design....

My biggest gripe with Sony though is their use of translucent mirrors. They claim all these great benefits, but in actuality it is one of the greatest hindrances of their brand. The vast majority of people dont realize it, but by using translucent mirrors the light transmission to the lens is reduced, and although slight, nullifies the point of fast glass. For example, a f/2.8 Sony lens is actually a f/3.2 lens, due to the light loss caused by the translucent mirror. To me, that is a MAJOR issue that effectively kills any chance Sony had of being a a major player. With Nikon and Canon, a 2.8 lens is a 2.8 lens. Though most consumers cannot tell the difference with the slow lenses they typically use, the issue becomes an even greater issue with f/1.4 lenses, where the whole point of buying them is their fast speed and narrow depth of field. 

Also, the firmware issues and layout of Sony design cameras are absolutely horrid compared to the big two. I know this can be a matter of personal taste, and that its not a major issue at all for consumers, these ergonomic and layout functions absolutely kills its pro appeal. An example of ergonomic issues would be Sony's battery grip design for nearly all of its cameras. It's insets and "finger molded" form factor is one of the greatest butcheries of camera design I've ever held. It may be comfortable sometimes, but generally is only one way, as in you have to hold it they way they designed it to be held, or else it just doesn't work where as Nikon and Canons flat square design allows you to hold it ay many angles, heights, etc...As far as firmware issues, for example, in the newer Sony bodies the use of electronic switches results is horrible delay. For example, spin the aperture wheel on the camera, and it takes a good two seconds for the aperture number to change. Sony released a firmware issue to fix this, however the delay is still their, albeit shorter (1 second) despite Sony's effort....again, this reaks of third rate....

Another big negative of the Sony system is the lack of availability of lenses and accessories. There is simply very little out there as far as items on both the new and used market. There's not many Sony camera dealers, making availability limited. On the used market, there A LOT less Sony lenses and accessories available.

As you mentioned, Nikon and Canon also have a much larger support and repair system in place than Sony. 

Besides all that, Canon and Nikon are camera companies through and through (Nikon more than Canon admittedly, Canon makes printers, copiers etc, but still they're Photography centric) while Sony is an electronics in general company. I don't trust a camera from a Company that makes everything from TV's to to game consoles and just happens to make cameras too, mostly just to have an entry in the market.....

I could go on, but I'll leave it at that lol...


----------



## zenche

while i too am not a fan of their translucent mirror technology at all, but i think your personal distaste prevents you from giving sony their fair shake 

i agree sony can and should spend more on R&D, and i'm sure they don't because they have other fish to fry (Bravia, Playstation, Vaio, etc), but that's not to say they don't spend. Not to mention, unless things have changed, Sony continues to produce sensors for Nikon's full frame bodies, no?

ergonomics is purely a subjective thing. i personally have no issues with the a700 or a900. this is likely largely due to the fact that I was a Minolta shooter (and Sony bought Minolta and carried on much of its designs). If you accept that Sony owns Minolta's heritage, than Sony has a deep history of innovation in cameracraft as well. C'mon! In-body stabilization? That's a great point of differentiation. 

As for availability, i think this is a hit or miss thing, depending on what part of the country you're in, from a US perspective. It's pretty easy to get in the big cities. And there's always Amazon anyway, where I buy the vast majority of my electronics and consumer products. Prime FTW! Also, outside the US, particularly in Asia, Sony distribution is much more developed too. What lens or accessory can you get from canikon that you can't get from Sony?

The way I kind of see it is like this. Canon = Mercedes. Nikon = BMW. Sony ain't quite Audi...more like a Lexus still at this point I guess. But it aint like they're a Toyota either


----------



## TickleMyElmo

zenche said:


> while i too am not a fan of their translucent mirror technology at all, but i think your personal distaste prevents you from giving sony their fair shake
> 
> i agree sony can and should spend more on R&D, and i'm sure they don't because they have other fish to fry (Bravia, Playstation, Vaio, etc), but that's not to say they don't spend. Not to mention, unless things have changed, *Sony continues to produce sensors for Nikon's full frame bodies, no?*
> 
> ergonomics is purely a subjective thing. i personally have no issues with the a700 or a900. this is *likely largely due to the fact that I was a Minolta shooter (and Sony bought Minolta and carried on much of its designs)*. If you accept that Sony owns Minolta's heritage, than Sony has a deep history of innovation in cameracraft as well. *C'mon! In-body stabilization? That's a great point of differentiation. *
> 
> As for availability, i think this is a hit or miss thing, depending on what part of the country you're in, from a US perspective. It's pretty easy to get in the big cities. And there's always Amazon anyway, where I buy the vast majority of my electronics and consumer products. Prime FTW! Also, outside the US, particularly in Asia, Sony distribution is much more developed too. What lens or accessory can you get from canikon that you can't get from Sony?
> 
> The way I kind of see it is like this. Canon = Mercedes. Nikon = BMW. Sony ain't quite Audi...more like a Lexus still at this point I guess. But it aint like they're a Toyota either


-Yeah, they do, and they should probably stick with what they're good at! (hehe, snicker snicker :hihi

-My first camera ever was a Minolta, back when I was 11 years old, which was 10 years ago....seemed okay, but I was 11, and anything would have been gravy to me lol....

-In body stabilization is actually worse than in lens stabilization if you ask me, and Nikon! Allow them to offer their point of view  https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com...sion/L3RpbWUvMTMxMDM4MzY2Mi9zaWQvUlV6Y3ZJeWs=


----------



## DiabolicPiggies

MCHRKiller said:


> Im also a Nikon person, Canons just seem to have a poor layout and feel to be cheaply made. I have a D7000 and a D60...the D60 is a great and cheap camera body, really beginner friendly with some room to grow. I have seen them sell for under $200 on ebay for lightly used ones. The D7000 will set you back around $1200 body only.


Moving from Canon to Nikon, you feel the layout is poor as well. It's just a simple matter of what you are familiar with. Between a 60D and a D7000, I'd go with the D7000, even though I'm a Canon shooter. D7000 has spectacular image quality for APS-C.


----------



## MCHRKiller

Ive seen good pics come out of a Canon or Sony or Pentax as well...none of them are necessarily bad cameras. To me if you get a solid body with a quality sensor, the rest of image quality is up to the skill of the shooter and the lense. Both of which can be improved upon...

I am just not comfortable with other cameras, Nikon has always been my go to brand and I have yet to see anything really bad come from their lineup.


----------



## GraphicGr8s

TickleMyElmo said:


> Like everyone else said, you cant go wrong with the big two, Nikon and Canon!...and no, I do not consider Sony to be anywhere close to Nikon/Canon (commence hate posts in 3...2...1...lol)


Not really a hate post per se. But saying that Canon and Nikon are the best is like saying McDonalds and Burger King are the best fast foods. (It took a lot for me to put Mikkie D and Burger King in with the word food) They are the biggest but most assuredly not the best.
However it's a little different with Canon and Nikon. Both are really good systems. So is my favorite brand. Pentax. I'd put the IQ up with Canon and Nikon. Well, I would if you buy the same quality lenses. Pentax lenses are right up there with C & N. And the high end lenses I think are actually a little better while being a little less $$$. I also find the Pentax cameras to be better laid out than the competitors.

Now if you really want a top camera look at the 645D. The other 2 have nothing to compare. 40 MP camera.

Do pros shoot Pentax anymore? Yep. I know of many. Myself included.


----------



## speedie408

Can't we all just, get along? lmao

You guys crack me up. Seems like every "photography" thread gets this way on the interweb. 

Oh, I have a new thread idea...
Why don't we post pictures to see what camera make/model/photographer can produce the BEST photos!?!?  We all know pictures speak a thousand words.


----------



## Nubster

hmmm....let me see if I can scrounge up $10k from my couch cushions...if I can maybe I'll grab myself a 645D.

Just kidding...I'm sure Pentax has good stuff. I am totally unfamiliar with it though and as it was pointed out by one of our resident pro shooters, I am just a hobbyist so I really don't know what I am talking about most of the time. The Pentax stuff does look interesting though. It might be worth considering when the time comes for me to replace my D300. And since most of my lenses are third party junk, I won't be out much by switching kits.

And I prefer Tacobell.


----------



## Nubster

speedie408 said:


> Can't we all just, get along? lmao
> 
> You guys crack me up. Seems like every "photography" thread gets this way on the interweb.
> 
> Oh, I have a new thread idea...
> Why don't we post pictures to see what camera make/model/photographer can produce the BEST photos!?!?  We all know pictures speak a thousand words.


I'd be up for that. I'd like to put my third party crap lenses up against some of the pros here. Perhaps it will show they are junk afterall, maybe I'll be eating crow for dinner...only one way to find out. Maybe a thread to post pics according to a topic...new photos only? Not something dug out of your hard drive from 3 years ago.


----------



## speedie408

Nubster said:


> I'd be up for that. I'd like to put my third party crap lenses up against some of the pros here. Perhaps it will show they are junk afterall, maybe I'll be eating crow for dinner...only one way to find out. Maybe a thread to post pics according to a topic...new photos only? Not something dug out of your hard drive from 3 years ago.


Toss it up Nubster! I'll only participate if shrimp n fish pictures count lol. Otherwise, you guys can hash it out yourselves. :icon_twis


----------



## Nubster

haha...I think you have proven yourself in aquarium photography for sure.


----------



## speedie408

Nubster said:


> haha...I think you have proven yourself in aquarium photography for sure.


:wink: thx


----------



## GraphicGr8s

MCHRKiller said:


> *Ive seen good pics come out of a Canon or Sony or Pentax as well.*..none of them are necessarily bad cameras. To me if you get a solid body with a quality sensor, the rest of image quality is up to the skill of the shooter and the lense. Both of which can be improved upon...
> 
> I am just not comfortable with other cameras, Nikon has always been my go to brand and I have yet to see anything really bad come from their lineup.


I've seen bad pictures out of them too!! 
But the Pentax does it with style.


----------



## Eden Marel

speedie408 said:


> Can't we all just, get along? lmao
> 
> You guys crack me up. Seems like every "photography" thread gets this way on the interweb.
> 
> Oh, I have a new thread idea...
> Why don't we post pictures to see what camera make/model/photographer can produce the BEST photos!?!?  We all know pictures speak a thousand words.





Nubster said:


> I'd be up for that. I'd like to put my third party crap lenses up against some of the pros here. Perhaps it will show they are junk afterall, maybe I'll be eating crow for dinner...only one way to find out. Maybe a thread to post pics according to a topic...new photos only? Not something dug out of your hard drive from 3 years ago.



I think if people are going to post pictures, people should mention if they have any sort of training like from classes from school or other photography education, or if they are self-learning on their own. And how long they've been using "equipment a" and "lens a" etcetera...

Because it's obvious not fair to compare a newb's photo to an aged professionals who both may be using the same brand's body and same brand lens. :icon_lol:

I don't know how skilled the OP is, but if people show all professional photos and don't mention the above so that he can gauge a similar amount of skill from someone, it may give him false immediate expectations on the body and lenses.


----------



## Nubster

Eden Marel said:


> Because it's obvious not fair to compare a newb's photo to an aged professionals who both may be using the same brand's body and same brand lens. :icon_lol:


:hihi:


----------



## mmccarthy781

Some of these cameras people are mentioning are really expensive. Is a $1500+ camera considered introductory?


----------



## speedie408

mmccarthy781 said:


> Some of these cameras people are mentioning are really expensive. Is a $1500+ camera considered introductory?


Stick to the t2i w/ kit lense and you'll be perfectly where you want to be. Don't listen to those "pros"


----------



## Eden Marel

Hehe, well I'll get this started. Well I consider myself a newb especially to DSLR; had experience with point and shoots... no formal photography or art education, just a few reads here and there on the internet. Took this pic immediately after taking the camera and lens outta the box. 

You may do this too depending on how long you've yearned for this (or am I just special?), but because I was so excited to get started, I set my camera on Manual and forgot to set the shutter speed, aperture, etc. even though it was right there in front of my face, and just started shooting the squirrels outside. Had to start shooting to get it out of my system you know? 

Anyways, a lot of them came out over-exposed. But here is one that looks somewhat okay, probably could've been better if I messed with the setting before shooting and wasn't so freakin excited. :icon_lol:

Will take more pics tomorrow, gonna go to nature area and look for things to shoot. It's Winter time, snow and ice... I like to shoot animals and plants mostly... 



Canon T2i [body only] ($579) with Canon 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II lens ($199)


----------



## Nubster

You can get an excellent used camera for a few hundred bucks. Something like a Nikon D80 or D200. I say Nikon because that's what I know. I am sure there are Canon equivalents. When these cameras were new they were close or over $1000. Even though they are older, they are still fantastic platforms to learn on. They might have older technology, not be able to shoot ISO 50 by candle light, have 200 mega pixel sensors, ect...but they still get the job done. Maybe I'm exaggerating a little but you get my drift. If you are interested in learning about photography it might even be beneficial to get a camera that isn't so easy to use, that way you are forced to learn some fundamentals.

Right now I am seeing these cameras (bodies w/battery, no lens) in LN condition for:

D70 $245
D80 $415
D100 $205
D200 $465
D3000 $286
D5000 $386

Just trying to point out that there are good deals out there.


----------



## Nate McFin

speedie408 said:


> Stick to the t2i w/ kit lense and you'll be perfectly where you want to be. Don't listen to those "pros"


 I agree. Nothing wrong with the kit lens.... Until your hooked and you get the glass addiction.
Which WILL happen.


----------



## Kworker

for my girlfriends birthday last year i got her a canon XS package before the video ones came out.. IMO its perfect for someone not looking to spend TOO much and its shoots nice pictures but than again im not a big picture taker but just giving you some input! goodluck with your search




Nubster said:


> You can get an excellent used camera for a few hundred bucks. Something like a Nikon D80 or D200. I say Nikon because that's what I know. I am sure there are Canon equivalents. When these cameras were new they were close or over $1000. Even though they are older, they are still fantastic platforms to learn on. They might have older technology, not be able to shoot ISO 50 by candle light, have 200 mega pixel sensors, ect...but they still get the job done. Maybe I'm exaggerating a little but you get my drift. If you are interested in learning about photography it might even be beneficial to get a camera that isn't so easy to use, that way you are forced to learn some fundamentals.
> 
> Right now I am seeing these cameras (bodies w/battery, no lens) in LN condition for:
> 
> D70 $245
> D80 $415
> D100 $205
> D200 $465
> D3000 $286
> D5000 $386
> 
> Just trying to point out that there are good deals out there.


yeah definitely look for a used camera if you can.. i found a canon XSI for my girlfriends sister that cost her 250/300 and the thing was like new


----------



## tetra73

mmccarthy781 said:


> Some of these cameras people are mentioning are really expensive. Is a $1500+ camera considered introductory?



No...


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Nate McFin said:


> I agree. Nothing wrong with the kit lens.... Until your hooked and you get the glass addiction.
> Which WILL happen.


You can't get the glass addiction. There is no such thing. 50+ lenses is just being an avid photographer. After all you do NEED 5 50mm lenses. 

LBA is easy to control.


----------



## shinycard255

You really don't need more than 1 lens per category (unless you got multiple camera bodies you carry with you). All you really need is a 24-70, 70-200, 17-40, and a 100 macro and you are set for anything, as long as the lens opens up to a fairly decent f/stop (2.8 or lower is my standard). 

I don't think there is such a thing as glass addiction as long as you buy the best glass that you can afford

(Let the flaming commence as it happened earlier in this post) :hihi:


----------



## speedie408

shinycard255 said:


> You really don't need more than 1 lens per category (unless you got multiple camera bodies you carry with you). All you really need is a 24-70, 70-200, 17-40, and a 100 macro and you are set for anything, as long as the lens opens up to a fairly decent f/stop (2.8 or lower is my standard).
> 
> I don't think there is such a thing as glass addiction as long as you buy the best glass that you can afford
> 
> (Let the flaming commence as it happened earlier in this post) :hihi:


You Sir, are a smart man. roud: 

My way of thinking as well.


----------



## Eden Marel

You missed a sale on Amazon few hours ago, they did a sale on the T2i combo again but it is $729 for the T2i, 18-55 and 55-250. T3i 18-55 kit for 689.

If you're thinking about Canon you can also use Canon Price Watch to see the pricing trends,.

http://www.canonpricewatch.com/


----------



## mmccarthy781

Eden Marel said:


> You missed a sale on Amazon few hours ago, they did a sale on the T2i combo again but it is $729 for the T2i, 18-55 and 55-250. T3i 18-55 kit for 689.
> 
> If you're thinking about Canon you can also use Canon Price Watch to see the pricing trends,.
> 
> http://www.canonpricewatch.com/


really? :frown:
well, at least now I know about the price watch. thanks


----------



## Eden Marel

If you have Facebook and/or Twitter you might want to subscribe to @amazontechdeals on Twitter, https://www.facebook.com/amazoncamera on facebook. I don't check back on their site often, but those are where I heard about the deals. 

I'm not sure if they are going to run anymore deals on Canon since they've done them like 3x around Thanksgiving, Black Friday, and yesterday, but still good to keep an eye out.


----------



## tetra73

Get it while you can. 

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_29252


----------



## GraphicGr8s

shinycard255 said:


> You really don't need more than 1 lens per category (unless you got multiple camera bodies you carry with you). All you really need is a 24-70, 70-200, 17-40, and a 100 macro and you are set for anything, as long as the lens opens up to a fairly decent f/stop (2.8 or lower is my standard).
> 
> I don't think there is such a thing as glass addiction as long as you buy the best glass that you can afford
> 
> (Let the flaming commence as it happened earlier in this post) :hihi:


Not a "flame" per se but I don't think you fully understand lenses. The "best" glass is a highly subjective term. I've got 5 or 6 50mm lenses from my film days I still use. Why so many? because each one has characteristics that are a bit different and each works best for a certain shot I want. Each lens has differing bokeh qualities. My six bladed lenses are way different than the 5 bladed ones. Most of the people out there with DSLRS would do just as well with a decent camera phone. They'd get about the same type of shot anyway for a lot less.

Photography is just about like fish and plants. Why are there so many filters out there? Why not just three price ranges and in 2 sizes? One for 55 and below and 1 for above 55. (Rhetorical question)


----------



## Eden Marel

Yea Canon is or was having 15% off sale on their refurbished cameras in their own site's store, so if you looking for as cheap as possible...

Amazon has the 55-250mm lens for $144!!! I got mine for $199. Why do they ALWAYs have to do these sales when I already bought them and lost hope that they'd go one sale AGAIN so quickly. Ugh. >:[

Now I see the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II for $98 in my Gold Box, guess I should've gotten it when it was $90.


----------



## mmccarthy781

hey everyone, sorry for bringing back an old thread but im about ready to make my camera purchase and Amazon has a sale for the Canon EOS Rebel T3i with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens all for $708.95. I'm pretty sure that this is a good body. But ive been hearing mixed reviews about the lens. Anyone have any imput?
Thanks


----------



## tetra73

mmccarthy781 said:


> hey everyone, sorry for bringing back an old thread but im about ready to make my camera purchase and Amazon has a sale for the Canon EOS Rebel T3i with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens all for $708.95. I'm pretty sure that this is a good body. But ive been hearing mixed reviews about the lens. Anyone have any imput?
> Thanks



About the lens? It is a kit lens. It does the job. Shoot with it for a while and if you have the money later, get a better lens.


----------



## Jaggedfury

How about a Pentax 645D? lol I was reading a Maxim Magazine and it shows the DSLR camera, thought I suggest it to you.


----------



## Eden Marel

mmccarthy781 said:


> hey everyone, sorry for bringing back an old thread but im about ready to make my camera purchase and Amazon has a sale for the Canon EOS Rebel T3i with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens all for $708.95. I'm pretty sure that this is a good body. But ive been hearing mixed reviews about the lens. Anyone have any imput?
> Thanks



Look thru this thread and take the examples with your experience level in mind there are some big differences in some of the people's example: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=445986

It has pics posted by people who used that lens.


----------



## HypnoticAquatic

anyone have or have used the canon d60 ? was thinking of gettin just a body so i can spend more or a kit saw a upto 350 rebate for canons dslr's that would take a nice bit out of the total, but want to see peoples thoughts on it..


----------



## speedie408

HypnoticAquatic said:


> anyone have or have used the canon d60 ? was thinking of gettin just a body so i can spend more or a kit saw a upto 350 rebate for canons dslr's that would take a nice bit out of the total, but want to see peoples thoughts on it..


I think you meant Canon 60D. 

It's a great prosumer cam and perfect for intermediate level folks.


----------



## Rich Conley

GraphicGr8s said:


> most of the people out there with DSLRS would do just as well with a decent camera phone. They'd get about the same type of shot anyway for a lot less.


 This is an absolutely absurd statement. Camera phone's have shutter delays that make them unsuitable for taking photos of pretty much anything moving.

Who doesn't use their DLSR to take photos of things that move?


And while yes, all lenses are different, the vast majority of people don't really have any interest in having several redundant lenses because they have different bokeh. Bokeh is something that photography nerds love, but most people don't care about, unless its terribly bad.


----------



## Rich Conley

mmccarthy781 said:


> hey everyone, sorry for bringing back an old thread but im about ready to make my camera purchase and Amazon has a sale for the Canon EOS Rebel T3i with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens all for $708.95. I'm pretty sure that this is a good body. But ive been hearing mixed reviews about the lens. Anyone have any imput?
> Thanks


 
If you have a fixed-ish budget, you're better off buying an older/cheaper body, and more lenses.


----------



## mmccarthy781

I just wanted to inform anyone who cares that I ended up getting the Canon EOS REBELT3i, and I couldn't be more happy with it! It is just what I needed, and hopefully when I get a macro lens for it, I'll be able to put up a whole bunch of pictures of little shrimp . Thank-you again to all of you for your input, and I hope that everyone had a very merry Christmas!


----------



## Eden Marel

Woot, congrats! It's exciting isn't it? I got the Canon 100mm macro for $449, new. I've been tinkering around with my macro and trying to take pics of fish, but I don't have a flash yet so everything keeps coming out dark and blurred due to the lack of light. You can go 3rd party for both the lens and flash.

If you join that site that I keep linking they also have a fairly similar "Swap n Shop" type thing there too and you might find some good deals on used items.


----------

