Digital SLR suggestions wanted

[hikingmaineac]

We've been saving up for some time to buy a digital SLR and now that we're close I'm going to allow myself to start shopping.

For those of you who shoot with digital SLRs: what do you use, and what is it that you love/hate about your cameras?

I'm looking for a package deal in the $400-$700 range that will let me take pictures of far-away birds, mammals and mountains, as well as close-ups of flowers, bugs and herps. I'm not a professional, but wouldn't mind being able to frame and sell any of my photos that might end up worthy - and I would prefer to not have to buy another "better" camera any time soon.

Are any brands known to be more resilient than others when used while hiking - especially in the winter?

I'm willing to adapt to the extra weight of a camera and lenses, but is this something that varies greatly from one brand to another?

If you have any good websites besides dpreview.com to suggest that I check out, I'd welcome those as well.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Brien]

As someone who teaches photography classes, I'll tell you what I tell students. The best SLR, is the one that feels great in your hands. It should be the one where the controls and menu's work for you - that you understand and communicate with. Don't let name brand pressure you into a model. Canon and Nikon are the two biggies and make great bodies but see how they feel. Pentax, Sony, Olympus make superb bodies as well and might actually work for you better once you see how it feels and operates in your hands.

Some will say that one brand offers more lenses but for folks who want to grab and go with a quality image and will from time to time, slow down and really create a "fine art" type image, all the brands make enough lens choices. Plus, you probably aren't looking for a bag full of lenses to haul around on a hike anyway.

I personally shoot Sony and though Sony can't compete in lens selection with Nikon or Canon, they still offer all the focal lengths that I need and more than enough aperture choices on the wide end. Two other bodies I have enjoyed are Nikons and Pentax.

All the names sell gear in your budget. get to a camera store and ask the person there to show you all the bodies that fall in your price range - have them walk through the bodies with you. And don't worry about time or feeling like you are getting in their way and such - you are making an investment and a choice about something that you want to use, bring you joy and satisfaction and create memories. Don't make a hasty one because some clerk might get annoyed or you don't want to put them out. Make a choice you will smile about - that's what the images and the process should be about.

 

[DougPaul]

You might join the photography forum--there are a number of threads on the topic of camera hardware there.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/ is another source of camera reviews.

You might also look at http://www.luminous-landscape.com/, http://www.kenrockwell.com/, http://www.fredmiranda.com/, http://ronbigelow.com/, http://www.normankoren.com/, etc for a variety of reviews and tutorials.

FWIW, the Canon Digital Rebel series is reasonably priced and might meet your desires. It is fairly popular among Views photographers.

It is easy to focus on the camera bodies (new bodies come out fairly often), but lenses last (and are on the market) a lot longer and are often more critical.

Doug

 

[nartreb]

Are any brands known to be more resilient than others when used while hiking - especially in the winter?

I wouldn't worry about it. If it can survive use by paperazzi, it can survive a hike. Seriously, you could pay a huge premium for stuff that advertises itself as shock-resistant and weather-resistant, but for any conditions except pouring rain you'll be fine with whatever you get. Just don't drop it off a cliff.

I'm willing to adapt to the extra weight of a camera and lenses, but is this something that varies greatly from one brand to another?

Yes. For example, within the Canon line, the digital Rebel (body only) weighs 510g, (553g with battery); the 1D Mark III is 1,205g (1,385g with battery). Lens weight varies a lot too.

There are tradeoffs - a smaller, lighter body will be less comfortable to grip, will have a smaller sensor, and will take a smaller battery. With lenses the tradeoffs are even more obvious - smaller, lighter lenses are usually "slower".

 

[David Metsky]

A good big telephoto lens will probably put you outside your budget (get used the concept of going beyond your budget). You can get big lenses for relatively cheap but they won't be fast so you'll only really be able to use them in very good light. But you can get a good medium zoom lens for not too much money and expand your set of lenses later on.

 

[Taconic]

I think Brien hit it on the head.

As someone who teaches photography classes, I'll tell you what I tell students. The best SLR, is the one that feels great in your hands.

This is the best advice that you can get.

Like he said, go check out a few at a store and see which feels best and gives you the features that you want. Also, keep in mind that your body will be a temporary investment, but your lenses will stick with you for a very long time. That's definitely something to keep in mind if, say, you decide to pick up a crop body now but plan to get a full-frame one in the future--make sure that you don't drop $700 on a lens that will lose its utility on a full-frame sensor.

If you need to budget, I'd opt for a better lens over a better body since you can upgrade that cheaply(ish) down the line.


Personally, I shoot Canon.
But as Brien said, you really can't go wrong with any of the big brands in terms of bodies. As far as lenses go... I really only know Nikon and Canon, and you really can't go wrong with either.


Another good source for reviews is fredmiranda.com
It's a rough crowd there and if they say something is good, it's really good.

 

[blaze]

some additional considerations:

- resolution. do you want to make poster sized prints? if not, then getting an older slr (6-8 megapixels) will save you some money.

- the lens choice is as important as the body. many slr kits come with rather basic lenses. for best results you may want to upgrade. the ability of lenses to take close up (macro) shots varies widely. there are good slr lens reviews at slrgear.com. I use a 17-70mm zoom lens, reasonably sharp. Wide angle capability is as important for outdoor photography, IMO, as is zoom capability.

- image stabilization is nice if you plan to do any low light shooting. also relevant to low light shooting is the amount of "noise" you see at higher ISO (light sensitivity) settings. IS can be built into the body or the lens.

- save some money for filters. UV (ultraviolet) and CPL (circular polarizer) are good ones to start with. they protect your lens surface and help produce better photogaphs.

- save some money for extra batteries and for image processing software. I use Photoshop Elements, version 5 (current version is 7). Very capable and reasonably priced.

Happy shooting!

 

[Woody]

Brien and DougPaul both offered good advice. Get a camera that feels good in your hands and good lenses will last a lifetime. Dave Metsky also made a good point about getting used to going over your budget. That is soooo true, at least for me.

I shoot with a Canon Rebel XSi. I have a battery grip on it because it fits my hands better that way. I will sometimes take the grip off to take it hiking and reduce my load. I also have several lenses. My widest lens is the EFS 18-55 "kit lens". It has pretty good image quality and is light, but I want to get something wider for landscapes. I'm considering the EFS 10-22 for that purpose. There goes my budget again! I also have a couple of Canon "L" series lenses. I haven't taken them on a hike yet because they are very heavy.

 

[woodsxc]

I haven't shot much with D-SLRs, but I've done a lot with film SLRs. As far as the lenses go, I was fine with a prime lens and a 1:1.5 (mighta been 1:1.7) macro lens. I'd check but right now a friend is borrowing it.

Shop around a lot. Go to Target and scope stuff out. Don't buy from Target, but do play around with their cameras to get a sense of what will work best for you.

 

[forestgnome]

Buy the extended waranty! My shutter died on my Canon 300D just after the one year mark. They fixed it.

My shutter is now dying on my Canon XSi. I bought a 5 year waranty for an extra $60.00 Good thing.

Digital camera body life is determined by use, not age. I shoot a lot.

Your dealer is more important than saving money. B&H has always served me well. If you have a problem, this will make a difference.

You don't need an extra battery on certain models. With my Canon XSi, I shot 260 frames, each were 30second exposures. It was early January, at night (think cold). The battery never came close to dying.

You cannot get it all. You must make choices. I won't fight anyone over my choices, but here are a few...

Choose size over speed if you want to shoot wildlife (unless you have big bucks). You'd be surprised how close you have to be to a bird to get a nice pic with a 300mm lens. If you go with a smaller lens because it's faster for less money, I doubt you'll be happy. If you shoot at a large aperature(fast) with a large lens, the depth of feild is really shallow. There are variables to this, such as how far away you are focusing. If you focus on a moose eyes, you might have a blurry nose, and blurry antlers. Personally, I hate shallow DOF. At 300mm, the fastest my lens gets is f/5.6 and 99% of the time I hate using that aperature and I try to get it smaller, so I'd rarely use a faster aperature even if I had it.

To get a large fast lens, you'll have to spend huge $, and they are massive and heavy. it's all about choices.

Try to sell some work. It's easier than you may think. It will justify the expense and make most of these choices and issues much easier.

 

[blaze]

Here are some additional sites -

Digital Camera Resource Page (dcresource.com)

Steves Digicams (steves-digicams.com)

The Luminous Landscape (luminous-landscape.com) - more of a general photography site, not just camera reviews. Includes some excellent primers and tutorials on shooting and post processing techniques.

If you're considering a used camera, keep an eye on Craigslist postings. There are some good deals out there!

And before you purchase an SLR, you might want to consider what it is, specifically, that an SLR offers, that you cannot get from a less complicated (and less expensive) camera. If you are not sure, then a high-end fixed lens camera might work just as well or better for you.

Many of these offer excellent photo quality, powerful image stabilized zoom lenses that also take great close-up shots, as well as the ability to shoot video - which is still not available on most SLRs. Many allow you to use filters or add on lenses (wide angle or telephoto). You might find, for example, a 6mp Canon Powershot S3 IS for $150-$200.

That is not to say there aren't good reasons for getting an SLR.

For any camera you're considering, you can find thousands of sample images online... that's a great way of seeing what a camera is capable of.

blaze
Pentax K100D, Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4.5 DC Macro
Canon Powershot G3

 

[The Hikers]

I miss my SLR when I am on site taking the picture, but I DON'T miss carrying all that weight.My Olympus C-60 fits right in my pocket and is handy on the spur of the moment as we hike.So , for me , it's a trade off...... Years ago I carried all the lenses and filters, now I carry water.

 

[hikingmaineac]

Thank you, everyone for your suggestions so far. I've been busy and haven't had a lot of time to process all this yet, but will have more questions.

 

[forestgnome]

Keep your eye on older versions of camera models. I shoot with Canon Digital Rebels. Each time a newer version arrives, the older ones get cheaper. The T1i is about to arrive and there are many previous models ones on the shelves.

I would try to get a previous body, and a Sigma 18-200mm lens for around $350.00.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/used/542177/Canon_2756B001_EOS_Rebel_XSi_Digital.html


If exteneded warrenty is available for this, I'd highly recommend this body and a Sigma 18-200mm lens and a polarizor filter.

Try this if you cannot get extended coverage on the useed body...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/571144-REG/Canon_2762B003_EOS_Rebel_XS_a_k_a_.html

I would add a 70-300mm lens to this, and not worry about speed. Any 70-300mm lens with f/4.0 to f/5.6 will allow you so much shooting pleasure.

good luck

 

[Barkingcat]

The T1i is about to arrive and there are many previous models ones on the shelves.

The T1i is already available and, as you predicted, Forestgnome, previous Canon models are already dropping in price.

 

[forestgnome]

Oops! FWIW, the shutter is not dying on my XSi; the problem is with the lens.

My workhorse since 2003, a Sigma 24mm-70mm f/2.8, has been retired. I dropped it recently and it hit a rock. It's taken many blows over the years but that was the last one. I liked it so much that I'm replacing it with another one.

 

[arghman]

I am ogling the Panasonic DMC-G1 or DMC-GH1... not truly an SLR since they got rid of the pentaprism and are using an electronic eyepiece display (w/ 1.4 megapixels!!!).

I currently have a 4-yr-old Panasonic FZ20 (not an SLR but it is a "prosumer" super-zoom with a 12:1 range) which has been great, I really like Panasonic's UI and image quality. (I also have a pocket camera DMC-FX35 that I got for a wide-angle pocket camera. It's 4yrs newer than the FZ20 and the color/image processing is better.) The things that I wish were better are:

• can't use fstops higher than 8 (for better depth of field)
• electronic viewfinder display is only 114000 pixels, very difficult to achieve focus
• zoom is manual rather than via a more natural rotary dial
• ISO 400 is too noisy, I usually shoot at ISO 200

Some of the newer FZ cameras (FZ50, FZ28, FZ18) have improved some of these features but I haven't tried them out.

I haven't got an SLR yet for three reasons: (1) am nervous about carrying around a $1000 piece of equipment on the trail (price has come down so that's less of an issue for the more entry level SLRs), (2) am nervous about changing lenses -- right now I have a Nikon closeup lens that I stick on front of the FZ20 for macro work, it's gotten a few scratches but it didn't cost much; I don't dare subject either an expensive lens or the CCD sensor to my clumsiness (3) the bulk/size/weight is too much.

Whether you go with an SLR or a "prosumer" camera, the superzoom is reallllly worth it. Can't tell you how many times I've gotten closeups + then immediately zoomed out for a landscape shot, something I'd never have the patience to do if I had to change lenses. Plus if you aren't using the full megapixel count (my camera is 5MP, most new ones seem to be in the 10-12MP range, but I usually just take 3MP shots unless it's a stunning photo op) then with some of the newer cameras, you can essentially get extra pseudo-optical zoom for free by just capturing the pixels at the center of the photo. (vs. digital zoom which is similar but goes further until the # of pixels produced in the picture file exceeds the # of pixels used from the camera so the quality suffers.)

edit: forestgnome is right, you can't have it all. The thing I give up is low light + high depth of field; I have to use my flash, but that's OK by me if I can save the weight and thereby extend my hiking range/stamina.