Which Camera?

[Fashionista007]

I'm getting married in September and we finally decided to drop our old P&S and invest in a DSLR. I received a Target gift card and we want to use it to help pay for the camera. We're looking for something for beginners and a bit antiquated because we can only afford about $500 total. I found a few that I'm interested in and I'd be happy to hear some people's thoughts, like I said, I'm a total DSLR newbie!

Nikon D3000 $470

Fujifilm T200 Bundle $319.99

Olympus PEN E-P1 Bundle $499

My photography aspirations include dark rides, fireworks, and (most importantly) the safari. We have never gotten good pictures of the animals on the safari and we're big animal lovers. On our last safari the lion got up and roared and I'm so sad we couldn't get a picture or video Any help is much appreciated!

 

[NowInc]

I'd say nay on the D3000 and see if you can maybe get a D3100 (obviously a little more), or the now discontinued D5000 (getting cheaper now that the D5100 is out).

Dark right photography really requires a much better sensor than most lower model DSLRs offer, but you can "make do" if you get some fast glass.

 

[Fashionista007]

I'd say nay on the D3000 and see if you can maybe get a D3100 (obviously a little more), or the now discontinued D5000 (getting cheaper now that the D5100 is out).

Dark right photography really requires a much better sensor than most lower model DSLRs offer, but you can "make do" if you get some fast glass.

Thanks for your input, a photography enthusiast friend of mine also said D3000 or similar.

As for the night shots, I believe anything will be better than my less than stellar P&S. I think it's a Nikon CoolPix and it's fine for portraits and landscapes during the day but we have never been able to take good moving pictures or pictures at night. At any rate, this first DSLR purchase will be a learning experience for us so we don't want to go with anything high end until we know what we're doing

 

[ddbowdoin]

Thanks for your input, a photography enthusiast friend of mine also said D3000 or similar.

As for the night shots, I believe anything will be better than my less than stellar P&S. I think it's a Nikon CoolPix and it's fine for portraits and landscapes during the day but we have never been able to take good moving pictures or pictures at night. At any rate, this first DSLR purchase will be a learning experience for us so we don't want to go with anything high end until we know what we're doing

not really... you obviously have manual control of your shutter but without adequate light or fast glass you won't be able to hand hold. A tripod is a must.

lower end models also have weak ISO performance. Even my D7000 gets pretty grainy over 1000 ISO.

 

[CP_alum08]

not really... you obviously have manual control of your shutter but without adequate light or fast glass you won't be able to hand hold. A tripod is a must.

lower end models also have weak ISO performance. Even my D7000 gets pretty grainy over 1000 ISO.

He's right. The D3000 is a nice step up from your Coolpix, but don't expect it to work miracles. I would still go for the Nikon though for one reason; more third party companies make products for Nikon. You will have a much bigger selection of lenses by getting the Nikon.

Also, I would skip any kind of bundles like that from target. The tripods you get with those kits aren't worth the packaging they put it in.

Also, also, consider buying the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 for your dark ride aspirations. It's is a very nice lens for the money and is fast enough to at least give you a fighting chance on those rides!!!!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html

 

[Fashionista007]

Thanks for all your input, it really helps! We bought a gorillapod for our P&S on our last trip but I was still underwhelmed by our evening shots (although they were very much improved from the blurry mess we used to get). I think we will pick up a "regular" tripod as well for this trip, any suggestions? We always carry a CamelBak backpack with us so we have room for a larger tripod.

Also, any suggestions for beginner photography reading? Something akin to "DSLR Photography for Dummies"? LOL

 

[flynnibus]

Your budget really isn't sufficient for what your requirements are for a new camera.

Recognize your P&S has a much higher zoom then most lens.. and you won't get a lens with a very wide focal length that is also fast unless you spend $$$$$.

For dark rides you will need a VERY fast wide angle lens or shoot with very high ISO settings and still need a good fast lens. You can buy a prime lens (no zoom) as a trade-off to get a faster lens (wider opening aperture) without paying huge money. But even that can be up to $200 for a simple 50mm lens.

For safari type lens.. you'd ideally want a telephoto.. but you could use the kit lens, but you won't get zoom anywhere near what you are used to with your P&S. Those often have equivalent like 300+mm zooms. The kit lens on the Nikon is only 55mm!

Using a DSLR is not a cheap tool because you will very quickly find you will want 1-3 lens, a tripod, etc. You really need more like $800+ to get a entry level DSLR setup worth the $ which would be a body, a short focal length lens, a telephoto, bag, etc.

If your budget isn't flexible.. you may be better off with the tier of cameras below the DSLRs... they have more pro-am features, better performance, better image quality, and still have pretty good telephoto abilities all in a fixed body.

Examples like the Powershot SX30, or the Sony DSC-HX100V, etc. Those types of cameras will get you great shots compared to your P&S, but won't drag you into the complex world of true interchangable lens cameras.

A good basic DSLR setup would be a D3100 kit + the 55-300mm VR telephoto.. but that would cost you $810 from amazon and you still need to buy a memory card and other small things.

 

[ddbowdoin]

not to burst your bubble... but here is my current set up and I still need oh so much more...

NIKON D7000 ($1300)
NIKON D80 (BACKUP $800 (NEW IN 2003))
NIKON SB900 FLASH ($500)
GARY FONG CLOUD DIFFUSER ($50)
BASIC MANFROTTO TRIPOD ($125)
CIRCULAR POL. FILTER ($50)
MBD11 BODY GRIP ($300)
ADDITIONAL BATTERY ($70)
MEMORY CARDS (3 X 8 GB UH1 SPEED SD CARDS = $150)
BAGS - CRUMPLER AND LOWEPRO BAGS (ROUGHLY 200)

LENSES:
NIKKOR 50MM F1.8 ($125)
TOKINA 11-16MM F2.8 ($600)

NEEDED:

TELEPHOTO - NIKKOR 300MM F2.8 (2k PLUS)
NIKKOR 105MM F2.8 MICRO ($1k)

its a disgustingly expensive hobby / profession.

I work for money, but the many portraits I do do not add up to what I have invested in. I have yet to crack the wedding game, which is where the real money is.

 

[anc33]

The D3100 is actually about $600 at Amazon right now. Probably worth the extra $150 to upgrade from the D3000. Keep in mind though that neither of those cameras have an internal focus motor so you may have to end up purchasing slightly more expensive lenses unless you are OK with manually focusing all the time. I bought a D5000 but I could have paid for the upgrade to a D90 with the price difference between the 50MM F1.4G lens I purchased and the cheaper 50MM F1.8D lens was available at the time (now they have a reasonable F1.8G). I have my eye on the D7000 but I am going to keep honing my skills on the D5000 a little longer.

As others have said, this can get quite expensive. I am still wincing a little from the price tag on the macro lens I just got (oh and the bigger bag I needed to hold all of my stuff)!

 

[flynnibus]

all the modern lens from Nikon will autofocus with the cameras with no AF motor in the camera. AF in the camera on Nikon's is only useful for working with old lenses.. which unless you have a collection, you're likely not to care. The modern SVM motors, VR, etc will pull you to most modern lens anyways.

There is no 'cost' penalty for no AF motor in the camera.. that's just Nikon's design. AF is in the camera for higher end cameras just for backwards compatibility.

Canon puts AF motor in the camera - yet their lens aren't necessarily cheaper.

In short.. it's a non-factor unless you want to work with old lenses

 

[lilclerk]

If your budget isn't flexible.. you may be better off with the tier of cameras below the DSLRs... they have more pro-am features, better performance, better image quality, and still have pretty good telephoto abilities all in a fixed body.

Examples like the Powershot SX30, or the Sony DSC-HX100V, etc. Those types of cameras will get you great shots compared to your P&S, but won't drag you into the complex world of true interchangable lens cameras.

I'm going to jump in and say that I'm totally in love with my Panasonic DMC-FZ35. I wasn't financially ready to make the leap to a DSLR a few years ago, but I did want an upgrade and have been extremely happy with my choice. I've used it to learn about manual settings on a camera so when I finally do move to an SLR, I won't feel like a complete novice who wasted thousands of dollars. If I could get a remote shutter release for this camera, I would consider sticking with it instead of moving up :lol:

I haven't shot fireworks with it, but I have gotten some decent shots of the MSEP with it. And a few basic dark ride shots like this one. You're not going to get shots of Pirates or anything, but I personally don't care about taking photos on rides. I only carry a small tabletop tripod through the parks that I set up on trash cans/tables, but if you carry a large backpack anyway I'd recommend bringing a standard sized tripod for it.

Are the shots practically perfect like the shots taken with all that expensive equipment? No. But I also don't do much of any post-processing because I'm too lazy to properly learn how.

 

[anc33]

all the modern lens from Nikon will autofocus with the cameras with no AF motor in the camera. AF in the camera on Nikon's is only useful for working with old lenses.. which unless you have a collection, you're likely not to care. The modern SVM motors, VR, etc will pull you to most modern lens anyways.

There is no 'cost' penalty for no AF motor in the camera.. that's just Nikon's design. AF is in the camera for higher end cameras just for backwards compatibility.

Canon puts AF motor in the camera - yet their lens aren't necessarily cheaper.

In short.. it's a non-factor unless you want to work with old lenses

Yes, most Nikkors have IF but they are also very expensive. However some don't and, to use my example, the price difference between the 50MM 1.8 D and G is about $70. Having researched and purchased several third party lenses there are definitely options without IF and they are less expensive. They also don't have VR or some other bells and whistles and they wouldn't be my top choice but it sounds like the OP is working on a limited budget.

 

[KeithVH]

OK. I'm going to provide a slightly different viewpoint. Yes, a DSLR is a nice tool. But, as pointed out, besides the serious opt-in cost you will have to spend some serious time learning the tool. On vacation, you won't have time to think about some shots. Using the more advanced system requires it be second nature. Not a lot of people want to deal with that mess when they're trying to have a good time. Are you going to the World to take pictures or have a good time? And wait till you have a nice warm day and you're doing a long day in the parks and you have to schlep around something that weighs 2-3x as much as a decent P&S.

And you can screw up shots just as easily with a $600+ camera as you can with a cheaper one. Many times, w/o good technique, a DSLR is no better than a P&S. What a DSLR gets you is (a) the flexibility of multiple lens choices <yet more money> and (b) most importantly, a big sensor. Image quality, all other things being equal, is a direct function of the size of the sensor that captures the image. But you do pay for that. You really would do a lot better to REALLY understand light. That sounds really trite but it's NOT about the equipment, it's your ability to envision how light, coming through the lens of any camera, is going to be recorded by your device.

All this being said, with a pretty hard $ limit, I'm going to suggest one of the newer P&S units or a DSLR-like unit. As far as you are concerned, unless you plan on doing a lot of 16X20s, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the right P&S will satisfy your photo needs as well as a DSLR. Based on several factors, largely reliability and features relative to cost, I would focus on either Canon or Panasonic. Although your selection of the Olympus isn't a bad choice either (but more like $450 street). I think, from Canon, you want to look at:

• Canon SX30IS
• Canon Powershot S90 or S95
• Canon G11/12

All 3 have image stabilization and is a must have nowadays. And the Canon G series are serious photographic tools whose output can rival some DSLRs.

For Panasonic, you have almost too many choices but look at these first:

• Fz47/48
• LX5
• FZ100
• DMC-G2 (may push your budget)

Spend as little bit of time on DPReview.com and you'll be able to find out more than you want to know about any of these.

Good luck!

 

[The_CEO]

OK. I'm going to provide a slightly different viewpoint. Yes, a DSLR is a nice tool. But, as pointed out, besides the serious opt-in cost you will have to spend some serious time learning the tool. On vacation, you won't have time to think about some shots. Using the more advanced system requires it be second nature. Not a lot of people want to deal with that mess when they're trying to have a good time. Are you going to the World to take pictures or have a good time? And wait till you have a nice warm day and you're doing a long day in the parks and you have to schlep around something that weighs 2-3x as much as a decent P&S.

And you can screw up shots just as easily with a $600+ camera as you can with a cheaper one. Many times, w/o good technique, a DSLR is no better than a P&S. What a DSLR gets you is (a) the flexibility of multiple lens choices <yet more money> and (b) most importantly, a big sensor. Image quality, all other things being equal, is a direct function of the size of the sensor that captures the image. But you do pay for that. You really would do a lot better to REALLY understand light. That sounds really trite but it's NOT about the equipment, it's your ability to envision how light, coming through the lens of any camera, is going to be recorded by your device.

All this being said, with a pretty hard $ limit, I'm going to suggest one of the newer P&S units or a DSLR-like unit. As far as you are concerned, unless you plan on doing a lot of 16X20s, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the right P&S will satisfy your photo needs as well as a DSLR. Based on several factors, largely reliability and features relative to cost, I would focus on either Canon or Panasonic. Although your selection of the Olympus isn't a bad choice either (but more like $450 street). I think, from Canon, you want to look at:

• Canon SX30IS
• Canon Powershot S90 or S95
• Canon G11/12

All 3 have image stabilization and is a must have nowadays. And the Canon G series are serious photographic tools whose output can rival some DSLRs.

For Panasonic, you have almost too many choices but look at these first:

• Fz47/48
• LX5
• FZ100
• DMC-G2 (may push your budget)

Spend as little bit of time on DPReview.com and you'll be able to find out more than you want to know about any of these.

Good luck!

You bring up some very valid points! Nobody really wants to learn how to use their DSLR on vacation! I would reccomend the following as well. Being an owner of a Canon 7D with a plethora of a wide variety of lenses; I can contest thast with the budget listed above, it would be hard to really collect the lenses required to really deliver on the safari, and other dark rides. I own a Sigma 10-20mm and on the other spectrum a 50mm f/1.8 which performs miracles in dark rides! My suggestions would be follow the ones above and go from their! PM me if you have any questions!

 

[mickeysshoes]

Where were you all when I asked about this??? :lol: Great info thanks very much!!

 

[KeithVH]

Oops. Forgot to touch on the question of books. Ones that I can highly recommend are the National Geographic Field Guides. The Digital and Travel ones are really nice.

 

[WDWFigment]

All of my reviews (cameras, lenses, books, etc.) can be found here: http://www.disneytouristblog.com/photography-camera-reviews-disney/

 

[Laura]

My photography aspirations include dark rides, fireworks, and (most importantly) the safari. We have never gotten good pictures of the animals on the safari and we're big animal lovers. On our last safari the lion got up and roared and I'm so sad we couldn't get a picture or video Any help is much appreciated!

Like everyone is saying, when you use a DSLR, you end up having to use different lenses for different situations. The simple goals you listed would require lugging a camera, at least 3 different lenses, and a full size tripod around. I used to do that back in the day, and it was exhausting and kinda ruined the fun of my vacation.

Now I just bring my camera and the basic lens it came with and don't even attempt the pictures that my lens won't take. The lens that came with the camera works great for snapshots, scenery, and night photos (if I have a railing/trash can for stabilization). I know I won't be able to zoom in on anything, and I know I won't be able to get fireworks shots, and I know I won't be able to take pictures on rides if the lighting isn't great...and that's ok with me.

I've spent many fireworks shows with my face behind a camera and I've found I have a much better time WITHOUT the camera. And something like dark ride photography...yeah, you lug all these lenses around and you come home and you have like 2-3 pictures from the dark rides and it's like "so what?" Was it really worth all the hassle of carrying the equipment for those couple of pictures?

As far as the safari and animals...you'd definitely need a telephoto and if you get a budget telephoto lens like I have, the jerkiness of the ride often makes getting the photos a pain in the neck. It can be done, but again....do you want to carry a heavy telephoto lens around for a day to end up with 4-5 decent animal photos? Honestly, your best bet is to hit a local zoo with the telephoto lens. Same animals, more stability, much better pictures.

So like it's been said, you'd need at least 3 lenses and a tripod. If you are really serious about it, something you can do is devote ONE day of your trip to photography. Lug your equipment around to the parks that one day and get all your specialty shots. Then the rest of the trip just enjoy your vacation, and use the standard lens that came with the camera for your snapshots.

 

[CP_alum08]

Like everyone is saying, when you use a DSLR, you end up having to use different lenses for different situations. The simple goals you listed would require lugging a camera, at least 3 different lenses, and a full size tripod around. I used to do that back in the day, and it was exhausting and kinda ruined the fun of my vacation.

Now I just bring my camera and the basic lens it came with and don't even attempt the pictures that my lens won't take. The lens that came with the camera works great for snapshots, scenery, and night photos (if I have a railing/trash can for stabilization). I know I won't be able to zoom in on anything, and I know I won't be able to get fireworks shots, and I know I won't be able to take pictures on rides if the lighting isn't great...and that's ok with me.

I've spent many fireworks shows with my face behind a camera and I've found I have a much better time WITHOUT the camera. And something like dark ride photography...yeah, you lug all these lenses around and you come home and you have like 2-3 pictures from the dark rides and it's like "so what?" Was it really worth all the hassle of carrying the equipment for those couple of pictures?

As far as the safari and animals...you'd definitely need a telephoto and if you get a budget telephoto lens like I have, the jerkiness of the ride often makes getting the photos a pain in the neck. It can be done, but again....do you want to carry a heavy telephoto lens around for a day to end up with 4-5 decent animal photos? Honestly, your best bet is to hit a local zoo with the telephoto lens. Same animals, more stability, much better pictures.

So like it's been said, you'd need at least 3 lenses and a tripod. If you are really serious about it, something you can do is devote ONE day of your trip to photography. Lug your equipment around to the parks that one day and get all your specialty shots. Then the rest of the trip just enjoy your vacation, and use the standard lens that came with the camera for your snapshots.

All of this is relative to how serious photography is to the person. Those 2-3 good shots can definitely be worth the 'agony' of carrying around the gear.

This is an on-going debate within the Disney Photography-Flickr community; how much gear should you carry. In the past couple months some people have stopped lugging around the gear and just take one super zoom lens and call it good. To each his own. I sill cary multiple lenses with me and probably wont stop until it becomes too much of a hassle or some drastic physical limitation kicks in and I am no longer capable of carrying 10lbs on my back!