What DSLR?
I know this is asked quite a lot in here and I could find old threads but I am after some up to date advice. 
I want to upgrade from a Bridge camera to a DSLR. I am flexible with my budget but if I could get something decent for £500 including a lens that would be good. I quite fancy one that has a remote control. Beyond that I really don't know, it will be my first SLR so will be learning as I go. Something that I can get to grips with but also some decent features that will keep me satisfied.
Anyone got any good recommendations? I will have a read on a few camera review sites but to see what people think would be good.
If you need to know what I will be photographing, a bit of everything, people, wildlife, scenery. The usual
edit: also, jewellery! As I like to photograph pieces that I make.
I want to upgrade from a Bridge camera to a DSLR. I am flexible with my budget but if I could get something decent for £500 including a lens that would be good. I quite fancy one that has a remote control. Beyond that I really don't know, it will be my first SLR so will be learning as I go. Something that I can get to grips with but also some decent features that will keep me satisfied.
Anyone got any good recommendations? I will have a read on a few camera review sites but to see what people think would be good.
If you need to know what I will be photographing, a bit of everything, people, wildlife, scenery. The usual
edit: also, jewellery! As I like to photograph pieces that I make.
0
Comments
My understanding is that if you are just starting out with a DSLR, then have a look at the Canon EOS 1100D
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-1100D-Digital-Camera-3-5-5-6/dp/B004MPQXZA/ref=pd_ts_zgc_ce_14335821_1?_encoding=UTF8&s=electronics&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-right-4&pf_rd_r=0EX74468WJHXBAG7VTKX&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=428021747&pf_rd_i=14335821
or the Nikon D3100
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-Digital-Camera-18-55mm-14-2MP/dp/B00403MA4M/ref=pd_ts_zgc_ce_14335821_2?_encoding=UTF8&s=electronics&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-right-4&pf_rd_r=0EX74468WJHXBAG7VTKX&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=428021747&pf_rd_i=14335821
If you were interested in a little bit of astrophotography, then the Canon cameras tend to be the favoured ones.
I'm only a beginner, so I cannot offer you much more advice on lenses, only to say, make sure that you get a decent lens (but you probably already know that!)
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundups/camera/539892/1/best-mid-range-dslrs-of-2014.html
Nikon has better spec, Canon has better control layout IMO
reason I recommend sticking with Canon/Nikon is that you can pick up reasonable second hand lenses on ebay when the kit lense's limitations become obvious
I wouldn't go for anything below these price wise as it probably won't be a significant step up from your existing kit
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-50mm-Macro-Lens-Canon/dp/B0002P19PS
Don't waste any money buying camera magazines to help decide- look at talkphotography.co.uk (always people there asking same question)
Larger Currys and PC World stores tend to have a good range of cameras on display (especially in your budget range) and many are working for you to have a play with. I wouldn't necessarily advocate buying from them but you could certainly have a look as it might save you a longer journey to Jessops if you get an idea of what you like there and then buy online.
I'm on the Canon side of the great divide but as others have said, have a look at them both and have a play and see which feels better to use for you and which gives you the best bang for buck in your budget range. Also have a look at lenses for each camera to get a feel for how much it will cost when you inevitably decide to expand your range of glass
You certainly don't need to use a DSLR to get excellent photographs of jewellery and if it wasn't for an occasional need to use wide angle down to 10mm, I would probably get better shots with the Panny, if only because of its sheer flexibility and avoiding the need to change lenses all the time – not a good idea in the open air when there's a lot of dust of pollen around. The 30x optical zoom on the Panasonic seems far better than it has any right to be.
One thing my photography tutor said which has proved to be true - buy the best quality lenses you can possibly afford. My own experience backs this up - I went for a non-Canon lens on my old camera, picking up a Sigma lens and always found that the colours were washed out. We tried the lens on my husband's camera and found the same thing. When I bought the equivalent Canon lens, the difference in the colours was night and day.
Visit John Lewis and try a few camera's and then buy online and save hundreds
There is very little between them, so as has already been suggested, go and pick one up to see which feels better in your hands and which layout you think you will be most comfortable with.
while that is good advice, it doesn't necessarily translate into canon/nikon good sigma/tamron bad
there are some real dogs in the canon range, and I expect the same can be said for nikon
on the other hand my sigma 10-20mm is better than the canon equivalent IMHO
mind you neither of them are cheap
that said, the rest of my lenses are canon, but then I use them for work so I need to spend a bit more than I otherwise might.
Having used Canons for the last 15 years (the earlier ones stored images on a narrow strip of plasticky material with only enough memory for 2-3 dozen images) I'm probably biased, but i do find the layout of their controls to be more intuitive. And maybe it's just me, but I find the Nikon mount where you turn the lens clockwise to remove it a little strange.
I picked up my camera last year to try to pick up it up again but something is wrong with it and its not working, dont know whats wrong.
I wouldnt mind getting back into it, but am completely confused at the digital thing, Im not even in possession of a fancy phone or anything.
So along with what DSLR for the OP,, what for a sort of beginner, who hasnt used digital photography before. How do you get the photos off it? Would I manage to get a good second hand one? Or should I stick to my current one if I can get it fixed?
I've no idea how much it costs to get a camera fixed these days, but in 1993 it was around the £100. I can well imagine that the present-day cost would go a long way toward financing a replacement.
Downloading the pictures - there are two possibilities. Either connect the camera directly to the computer with (typically) a USB cable, or remove the memory card from the camera and plug it into a card reader (some computers / external hard drives have then built in, otherwise separate card readers are fairly cheap).
When I first got a digital camera, I intended to keep using the film camera in parallel. I never did.
ETA: For an idea of what might be available second-hand, take a look here - or at your local camera shop if you're lucky enough to have one.
I bought it in quite a well known independent camera shop in Eltham I dont even know if its still there. I think it cost me £50 in 1997, it was second hand, its a pentax mzn or something like that.
I would advise you to go into a camera shop and handle some DSLRs and get a feel for what seems right for you - the action of the lens being one important factor, also the size of the body and the way it sits in your hands.
Canon lenses produce excellent results and offer amazing value for money.
Personally, I prefer Pentax lenses - they tend to be fractionally less acute than canon lenses, but for portraiture they are superb, and produce an outstanding colour balance.
If I was updating I would go for the K-500; or the K-50 if weather proofing was an issue.
http://www.johnlewis.com/electricals/cameras-camcorders/cameras/all-cameras/pentax=brand/c800004002
The lens fitting is backward compatible with a host of excellent older lenses – and there are a wide range of older lenses going for a song on ebay. Some may not enable the same level of automation, but if you are interested in photography that shouldn’t be a problem.
If you like the look and the feel of the Pentax, you can probably get JL to drop the price through a price match.
Park Cameras for example have the K-500 on at 329, which would leave you with 170 odd to spend on lenses.
Your best bet is to go to somewhere like Park Cameras, or a camera shop where the assistants know something about cameras (so not Currys) and handle a few cameras and see how they feel to you - ask questions about the in's and out's of each brand.
Pentax have a thoroughbred feel that Canon don't have, and it shows in the mechanical smoothness of their lenses. Canons are also quite plasticky.
I have a Canon SLR and a Pentax, the Pentax is much nicer to use - it oozes quality.
If you will be out and about in bad weather with the camera, the K-5 is excellent in performance and durability, having been sealed up to withstand poor conditions.
Nikon has a good pedigree, but you do pay extra for the name.
When Samsung decided they wanted to get into DSLRs, they chose Pentax and stuck a Samsung badge on. Says something about how they wanted to impress when starting out, and what they chose.
Don't be too swayed by magazine reviews, they rely on advertising the stuff they review for revenue. Canon spend a lot of money on advertising.
Take a look here...
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_7D-vs-Pentax_K-5
Agreed, which is why I didn't say, only buy the lens brand of the camera you have. It's always worth reading up on a range of reviews of a lens on a photography website (along with the comments). That will usually highlight if it's worth buying. Generally (but not always the case), the more you spend, the better quality you'll get - hence "buy the best you can afford".
What's wrong with it, exactly?