Nikon D40x dSLR

Y_Shun SG

photography ish too expensive for me Crying or Very sad

beavan SG

get a lousy cam first, then if you get any good at it or find that u still have interest, upgrade it.

PointBlue SG

www.dpreview.com

The D40x is a good camera.
like all Nikons. Embarassed

Y_Shun SG

but a lousy cam oso quite ex...

how much is a lousy DSLR camera??

Gedanken SG

Why jump straight to a DSLR? Get a decent prosumer camera first, say something like the PowerShot S5IS. It gives you decent zoom, image stabilisation and all the whiz-bang goodies, but at the same time you get manual override for all of the settings, so that you can get a hang of the finer points of photography. Once you get a handle of taking decent photos, you’re ready to move up to DSLRs where the learning curve gets steeper.

DarthBart SG

If he's interested in photography, might as well jump straight into a dSLR... Get a second-hand if one cannot afford a first-hand (like me Embarassed ). If I'm not wrong, a second-hand 350D is about 850 quids (Gotta check clubsnap)

The Canon Powershot S-series is already quite steep in the learning curve IMO, almost on-par with a dSLR. In fact, I find it to be just like a dSLR, only that you can't change the lens and there's still some restriction in settings.

It was actually quite hard to convince my mum why I want a dSLR...
"Why do you need another camera? You already got one, don't you? What's the difference?"
Confused

Gedanken SG

Bart, IMHO you’ve left out the key advantage of a prosumer. When I was getting my head around photography, I found the preview feature particularly handy because I got to play around and see how changes in the shutter speed and aperture size could affect the photo before I took it. That, combined with the S1’s capability, made photography particularly satisfying such that I eventually moved up to DSLR. I’d go as far as to say that had I started with a 400D, I would probably have lost interest in photography at an early stage.

Y_Shun SG

Thats the thing...although I still newbie...maybe rather jump into a dSLR then slowly learn...cause changing of cameras cost more $$$$$$$.

If not, I don't go into photography liao. Its a too-expensive hobby liao.

DarthBart SG

Got any friends into photography also?

If got ah, get the same brand of equipment, then the rest ah, no need I teach liao Razz

(Wah! You got the XX-XXmm lens ah? Can lend? Can lend?)

Anyway, for the preview thingy. Its not as bad as during the film era and when dSLR are out of the reach of us mere mortals. The startup cost and running cost of film was really the thing that puts my interest in photography on hold. You need to develop the film before you can see the result and basically for a poor student like me, not quite possible.

Its no argument that the Powershot S1 to 5 is a very good camera, the super-macro is damn cool. (But dang... They only intro-ed the hotshoe in S5...) The downside is, if you're a fast-learner, you can grow out of it pretty soon. (15 seconds max shutter? No bulb?) And for people without much spare cash, not really a wise move to get a compact then a dSLR. I myself took quite a leap of faith to get my dSLR, albeit a second-hand one. (Not to mention persuading my mum)

Gedanken SG

Ehh, I suppose it depends where you sit on the technology adoption scale as well as cash flow. I tend to approach things a but more slowly and I didn't decide to switch from the S1 to the 400D until I decided that I actually liked photography enough.

In any case, my next step is underwater photography, and the S1's underwater case is a helluva lot cheaper than one for the 400D, although after three months I still haven't tried it out. Mr. Green

sermodabian SG

What about the Pentax K10D? Quite good raves too.

Gedanken SG

Hmm. I like the idea of having IS built into the body instead of the lens, but that being the case I'd go for the Sony Alpha rather than the Pentax on terms of value for cost. At the end of the day, I'd go for a fast lens instead of IS, so it's no big deal IMHO.

A few people have said that the K10 is noisier at above ISO 800, compared to the 400D, much less the 30D which the K10 seems to be aimed at.

curryman SG

go skyscrapercity.com under singapore forums ..ask for advice from profesionals there.

dahliamorie SG

I'm trying to get my hands on S5 IS. Tried a DSLR (Nikon D40) today. My first time using one. Used a 18mm-70mm lens. I really didn't like the way DSLR works. It's quite confusing. Still prefer a prosumer.

IMO, if you're a beginner or you're good at it already but lack a decent camera and you want to have more control over your settings, I'd say get a prosumer first.

Gedanken SG

The S5 does look like a nice bit of kit. I got my S1 about three years ago and apart from the lack of macro it had a great set of features. Adding macro and cranking up the megapixels has made a great package even better.

iaintmad SG

what would ya'll recommend for a rookie photographer
0-$1000 range
Sony / Canon / Nikon

latenightmonster SG

Those lower-end DSLRs are all comparable to each other, so there isnt really such a thing as one being better than the other. Each has its own pros and cons, and at the end of the day its the user that matters more than the equipment.

Canon or Nikon, they are so popular, do you think you will go wrong with either of them?

iaintmad SG

hrmmmm,
the lower end DSLRs dont have the sensor dust thing right?
how impt is that to capture good pictures?
and my primary shots will be on cars
so i need something with quick start up and anti shake
how about the 3-point focus capability
9 point is better for this instance right?

DarthBart SG

For the sensor dust thingy, it'll depend on how lazy you are. Usually those dust that can be shaken off by the filter can also be blown away using a blower. If your sensor has dust, it'll end up as black spots on your pictures.

Generally, all current dSLRs have quick startup. As for anti-shake, Canon and Nikon are all lens based. Sony's offering has sensor based, not too sure about other manufacturers.

As for focus, I usually only use one, the middle one. I'll aim at my subject, focus-lock, then I compose. Only when I'm lazy then I'll use AiAF (Canon)

Anyway, if you want 1st hand and below 1K, then I'll suggest you get Nikon, since that is the one that fits your budget. Go clubsnap if you wanna know more on photography

iaintmad SG

thanks darth
Laughing

im thinking of canon EOS 400D/350
what d'ya think?

its 500 above my budget, but i think its worth it

« Previous Page Next Page »