[WillowFae]

I currently have a basic point and click Kodak camera but I'm not happy with it. I love the size because it can fit in my bag and I always have it with me when I'm out with the kids, but I also hate the size because it is very hard to hold still enough. The sharpness of the images is not great either.

So I'm considering saving up for a nice SLR camera. I can't afford to spend £1000s or anything, but can probably afford more than a basic one.

So, if you have an SLR what is it, and would you recommend it? Or are there any others that you would recommend?

[Errodiel]

The canon EOS range are the dog's nuts - any of them will see you very happy, IMO

[xflare]

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/index.html

Canon, Nikon and Olympus all have cashback offers available at the moment too.

[magnetictiger]

I've got a Canon EOS 400D and I'm very pleased with it. I'm still really new to photography, and this is simple enough for me to use, but with lots of thingies that I can learn as I improve, if you know what I mean!

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Prod...400D/index.asp

I suffer with wobbly hands, but as the resolution of the pictures is good with this camera, it cancels it out a bit! I've bought a tripod now, and am getting some amazing shots.

Just to give you an idea, here is one of the first photos I took with it the day I got it:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...e/IMG_0081.jpg

[Sigurd]

WillowFae, have a look at the digital SLRs on this page:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html

Click on the camera names there for reviews.

[Keefy-boy]

Originally Posted by magnetictiger

I've got a Canon EOS 400D and I'm very pleased with it. I'm still really new to photography, and this is simple enough for me to use, but with lots of thingies that I can learn as I improve, if you know what I mean!

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Prod...400D/index.asp

I suffer with wobbly hands, but as the resolution of the pictures is good with this camera, it cancels it out a bit! I've bought a tripod now, and am getting some amazing shots.

Just to give you an idea, here is one of the first photos I took with it the day I got it:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...e/IMG_0081.jpg

i have the same camera but i found the standard lens that came with it (28-80mm) quite restrictive and ended up having to buy another lens (75-300) for anything that isn't immediately in front of your nose! if you are going to buy this camera i suggest look for some of the packaged deals that are around with an extra lens. also i find the pictures on full auto mode rather dark and end up having to brighten a lot in photoshop.

[magnetictiger]

Originally Posted by Keefy-boy

i have the same camera but i found the standard lens that came with it (28-80mm) quite restrictive and ended up having to buy another lens (75-300) for anything that isn't immediately in front of your nose! if you are going to buy this camera i suggest look for some of the packaged deals that are around with an extra lens. also i find the pictures on full auto mode rather dark and end up having to brighten a lot in photoshop.

I don't understand the lense numbers, but mine came with 18-55mm and a 50-200mm one. What do the numbers mean?

[Keefy-boy]

Originally Posted by magnetictiger

I don't understand the lense numbers, but mine came with 18-55mm and a 50-200mm one. What do the numbers mean?

i don't really understand them either, and no doubt somebody smart will contribute. i think it's to do with the focal length of the lens and the bigger the number the better for further-away subjects, a smaller number means better ability to focus on nearer objects. the bigger the range the longer the lens!

I would certainly recommend the Canon 400D, I've been using it for a year, and while I mainly use it for my Urban Exploration, it has been brilliant for portraits and other scenes.

I tend to stick to the standard 18-55mm that came with it, because I can't be arsed to carry around more than one lens. I can't hold the 75-300mm still, and I'm not going to carry around a 6' tripod just so that I can use it. The 18 - 300mm (or close to that) is almost a £1000, and I'd like that, but we have to make sure we don't have anything more pressing to buy before we commit to it.

Any suggestion about lenses would be, do not buy Sigma. The picture quality is quite poor. Every penny spent on a Canon lens is definately worth it.

Once you learn the 400D, there is a huge amount you can do with it. One of my favourite features is the abilty to shoot in different colour modes, such as hues, or simply black and white, or Sepia, without any need to post-process the images.

[kiss_me_now9]

I have a 350D which is perfect for me Some people seem to think it's a bit small in their hands, not sure how the 400 compares in dimensions? If you think it's a bit small then the 5D might suit you better. Pop along to your local Jessops and ask to hold both, and see what they're like and how you feel.

Originally Posted by kiss_me_now9

I have a 350D which is perfect for me Some people seem to think it's a bit small in their hands, not sure how the 400 compares in dimensions? If you think it's a bit small then the 5D might suit you better. Pop along to your local Jessops and ask to hold both, and see what they're like and how you feel.

I previously had a 300D, and the 400D is quite considerably smaller and lighter.

That can only be a good thing. The bigger the camera gets, the harder it is to hold and carry. As much as I yearn for a 1D, I'm never going to have one because it is far too heavy for my very dainty hands.

I'm not sure, but the 400D may be ever so slightly smaller and lighter than the 350D, otherwise they are very similar.

[Oldhippy]

I have a Nikon D70s which I aim to be replacing in the new year with the new Nikon D300.

The Nikon D80 is a superb camera though I would also recommend that you look at the D40x too,

What ever you go for look for something that is between 10 and 12 megappixels and that should keep you happy for a longtime.

Add some of the better quality memory from someone like mymemory.co.uk who are cheap and quick.

look at the Lexar and sandisk pro cards as they are faster than cheap and awful Jessops jobs.

I had been taking 20-30,000 shots a year though the last year has seen less time for photography for me.

The Canon cameras in this price range are very good, but the layout of the controls on the cam just do not make sense for fast shooting for example:

The power switch on the Nikon is where your index finger rests next to the shutter release, the Cannon has this on the back of the camera.

The Fuji S5 has superb colours and comes in Nikon and Cannon mounts.

My main lens is 500mm though I also have an 18-70mm and 70-300mm

Do not forget that a DSLR will also have a 1.5 or 1.6 crop factor giving advantage on long lens but can be problematic on wide angle as your lens may have half of it's focal length added, ie: a 500mm may be in effect a 750mm lens

If you want to take close ups of flowers and insects you will also need a Macro lens.

There are many superb cameras out there and there are some poor ones too.

The Pelican that is on my home page was taken with a Nikon D70s and Sigma 50-500mm

www.sounds-and-images.co.uk

Originally Posted by Oldhippy

The power switch on the Nikon is where your index finger rests next to the shutter release, the Cannon has this on the back of the camera.

The Canon power switch is on top of the camera, just behind the shutter...

[Sigurd]

Some explanation of the numbers on lenses here:

http://www.frogprints.co.nz/help/focal.cfm

A lens with 50mm focal length is the standard one, and it used to be that many cameras would be sold with just that. Anything with a focal length less than that (e.g. 28mm) gives a wider angle view, but things appear smaller. Anything more than 50mm is a telephoto of some sort, either a very mild one (say 100mm) or something more powerful that brings distant objects much nearer (e.g. 300mm or more).

More on focal length here:

http://www.photoaxe.com/understandin...-and-aperture/

Probably the majority of lenses nowadays are zoom lenses: their focal length can be varied, so that you can change the angle of view or the power of the telephoto.

Extreme telephoto lens (500mm, I think);

Wide-angle lens (24mm);

Extreme zoom telephoto lens (200 to 500mm) Quite how you manage to cart the thing around to take a picture with it I don't know!

[Oldhippy]

Originally Posted by Oinster

The Canon power switch is on top of the camera, just behind the shutter...

It hasn't been on the Cannons that I have used... Oh well I need to look at new kit so I will make sure I get myself updated with cannon too...

Thanks for the info.

[Oldhippy]

Originally Posted by Sigurd

Some explanation of the numbers on lenses here:

http://www.frogprints.co.nz/help/focal.cfm

A lens with 50mm focal length is the standard one, and it used to be that many cameras would be sold with just that. Anything with a focal length less than that (e.g. 28mm) gives a wider angle view, but things appear smaller. Anything more than 50mm is a telephoto of some sort, either a very mild one (say 100mm) or something more powerful that brings distant objects much nearer (e.g. 300mm or more).

More on focal length here:

http://www.photoaxe.com/understandin...-and-aperture/

Probably the majority of lenses nowadays are zoom lenses: their focal length can be varied, so that you can change the angle of view or the power of the telephoto.

Extreme telephoto lens (500mm, I think);

Wide-angle lens (24mm);

Extreme zoom telephoto lens (200 to 500mm) Quite how you manage to cart the thing around to take a picture with it I don't know!

HEHE I like that big lens though I think you will find that is a prime lens and would cost about £3,000 or more ...

Originally Posted by Oldhippy

It hasn't been on the Cannons that I have used... Oh well I need to look at new kit so I will make sure I get myself updated with cannon too...

Thanks for the info.

It seems to be virtually impossible to get a top down picture of a 400D. I only have the one camera, so, heh, I can't take a picture of it!

Here's the closest I could get:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/images...400D3quart.jpg

The on/off switch is on the right side of the dial and is very quick and easy to flick. Our 300D was like that too.

Using DSLRs has taught me that Auto-Focus can be a helpful but also bad thing, especially if the light seems to go below a magic level.

[BeethovensPiano]

Originally Posted by Oinster

Any suggestion about lenses would be, do not buy Sigma. The picture quality is quite poor. Every penny spent on a Canon lens is definately worth it.

That certainly isn't true. In fact the Canon kit lens that comes with the 400D is probably the poorest of all DSLR kit lenses by far. canon just releaed a new Image Stabilised version that is optically much improved.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...56is/index.htm

There are lots of reviews of the 400D about, with images of the camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...ew/index.shtml
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/XTI/XTIA.HTM

Don't forget to look at other brands too. Have you considered the Olympus E410? it's the smallest and by far the lightest DSLR out.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse410/

[Bad Juju]

The Pentax K10d is a very good camera, an enthusiast level camera for the price of entry level, it's very nice and has had excellent reviews.

[Sigurd]

Originally Posted by Oinster

It seems to be virtually impossible to get a top down picture of a 400D.

Is this any good?

http://www.digitaldingus.com/news/20.../08242006c.jpg

Originally Posted by BeethovensPiano

That certainly isn't true. In fact the Canon kit lens that comes with the 400D is probably the poorest of all DSLR kit lenses by far. canon just releaed a new Image Stabilised version that is optically much improved.

Having used Sigma lenses with both Film and DSLR cameras, they just didn't cut it. At times, I get better image quality out of my cameraphone.

It all depends what you want it for though. Some people would not be bothered by it if they were just wanting a good camera that took pictures, even more so if they did not take many. However, I strive for the fine details in buildings, and the image quality with Canon lenses really did it for me.

Originally Posted by Sigurd

Is this any good?

http://www.digitaldingus.com/news/20.../08242006c.jpg

That is a good one.
Thank you very much

[Oldhippy]

You might like to have a browse of this site

http://www.dpreview.com/

also at www.photosig.com you can browse the images by camera or lens

[dmp]

I have one of the original Canon 350d's, still a great piece of kit, added to the lenses with a Sigma 28 - 300, fast enough to use at a motor race, light enough for a day's wild life photo shoot, very pleased with both.
Dave

[BeethovensPiano]

Originally Posted by Oinster

Having used Sigma lenses with both Film and DSLR cameras, they just didn't cut it. At times, I get better image quality out of my cameraphone.

Sorry, but I don't believe that one bit.

And to the original poster, don't forget to look at cameras by Nikon, Olympus, Pentax etc.

[iDan]

I've got a Nikon D40 and it's an absolutely fantastic camera.