Help with digital SLR choices

[fkshiu]

You'll be happy with either a Canon or Nikon - remember, it's less about the body than the lenses when it comes to SLRs.

What I would recommend is to try out the cameras before you buy as they can feel quite different in your hands. Make sure the particular model you buy is comfortable.

[jus68]

I went thru all the same q's myself. I ended up with the d90 w 18-200 lense and I love it... If I was to get Canon I would've waited to get the 60d which won't be until dec or early 2010. I really enjoy the video capabilities too since I have kids, its a great all arounder.

[blacknife]

I have a d-200 with that 18-200 lens, It is a good all around lens but i wish i had a few others to go with it. when taking pictures of my tank and other things i wish i had an actual macro lens. I find sometimes when taking downward shots the weight of lens trys to pull the zoom out, i am not sure if it is just my lens in paticular or all of the 18-200's that do this, i have been forgetting to call nikkon or a camera shop to ask about it. There are not to many times where this bothers me but it is just that little bit of annoyance. If i knew the new gen of slr's was going to have video capabilities i would have waited a year, oh well i will have to upgrade or buy a camcorder instead

[sphelps]

I went with Nikon over Canon because the body just felt better, I think this is probably most important, the feel. Canon's are supposed to have a little faster focusing ability while Nikon is better at color rendering, this is why you see mostly Canons at sporting events and Nikons with the nature guys. Also most professional photographers will use Canon and most normal hobbyists use Nikon.

You're looking at some pretty nice bodies, so if it's in your budget definitely check out the D700 as it's basically the D3 but smaller. Next I would say the D300 and then D90. The D90 is really nice if you want the video feature otherwise go with the D300 which has the aluminum body and extra shortcut keys.

Since you're looking at good bodies I would skip the 18-200, this is a good lens for those who do not want to switch out lenses but you sacrifice quite a bit by using it, things like sharpness and speed. The focusing is also kind of sluggish. You'd be better off spending the same money on a couple lenses instead like a 18-70mm and the 70-300mm VR. If you've got extra money you could go with an even better combo like the 16-85mm and 80-200mm. Next you can get yourself a couple prime lenses like the 50mm for portraits and aquarium, and the 105mm for macro.

[blacknife]

^^ I agree on the lenses, I should trade my 18-200 in for a couple more suited to my needs. or just wait till I am working again and buy others.

[OceanicCorals-Ian-]

From my experience shooting with both Canon and Nikon, I find that Nikon is alot more accurate for skin tones and warmer colors. Not only are hobbyists using Nikon, but if you look at fashion photogs and landscape photogs most are shooting Nikon. Sports photographers use Canon because of the extremely fast focus tracking system but some of their L series lenses are priced outrageously.

The barrel on the 18-200 lens should be quite stiff and not too loose. If your barrel is loose, contact Nikon because their lenses have a 5yr warranty and they should cover that issue for you. Having said that, most zoom lenses are designed to be shot in a horizontal fashion and not so much vertical so maybe the barrel will slip a bit. I am a huge fan of the 18-200 because of it's versatility. The 18-70 is nice but is limited and at 70 mm I think the minimum aperature is 5.6. Where as the 18-200 at 200 you can step down to 5.6, great for blurring background noise.

I have the 80-200 f2.8 and that is a very big lens to take around. The 70-200 f2.8 VR was not around when I bought the 80-200 or else that would be the best choice for long range telephotos.

Here are my choices for lenses that I would have in my photographic arsenal:

General Lens for Vacation and family/Kids/Pets
Nikon 18-200

Macro photography
105 VR if you have a full frame DSLR

*60m if you don't

* this is because of the 1.5x conversion factor when purchasing an APS size sensor DSLR. If you are using 105mm on anything lower then a D700, the lens is magnified due to the small sensor size and you will be around 155mm macro and that is way too much magnification is you are working in a small room with walls.

Large Zoom Teles:

70-200 f2.8 VR

Prime Teles

400mm f4

Fisheye:

10mm f2.8

Portrait lens:

105mm VR macro.

There are also a lot of really nice old school lenses available as well that the D700 would take.

Can't forget the 50mm f1.4, sharp sharp lens and incredible for low light.

OC.

[sphelps]

The 18-70mm will do f3.5 at 18mm and f4.5 at 70mm.

I don't agree with what was said about the 105mm and the requirement for a full frame camera. The D300 has a 1.5x CROP FACTOR not magnification. The image is in no way magnified, but rather simply cropped. Therefore you don't actually loose image quality, you're just not using the far edges of the lens. In addition DX lenses take this into consideration and when used with a DX body you will use the entire frame from the lens, the FX bodies can still use these lenses but don't gain anything from them.


Full Frame
1.3x Crop Factor
1.5x Crop Factor
1.6x Crop Factor

The D3 and D700 are fantastic bodies and have large advantages but don't think you need to spend that kind of money just to use a macro lens. The 105 will work very well with the D300 and other DX bodies. Also keep in mind if you buy an FX body, don't waste your money on DX lenses, you have to buy all the expensive FX lenses if you want to take advantage of the full frame.

[lastlight]

I own the d80 and borrow the 105VR from time to time. It's takes the most amazing portraits and is very sharp. Yeah it crops on my body but I've taken some really nice macros with it as well.

[Skimmin]

So I finally decided and... I cheaped out and went with the Canon 50D. That being said I bought a couple 'L' series lenses and I am very happy with my purchase. I ended up with the EF 17-40mm f/4L IS and the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS. I think they'll work quite nicely for now, and I'll obviously have to add a lens or two (or 10 lol) to my arsenal to get full range capabilities. Anyways. Thanks to everyone with all your input and advice. It was very helpful and also the reason I made(what I think is) the right choice, going with the lower model camera and the good quality lenses.

Thanks again