[John2e]

Looking for something around 1K ish

Primiraly will be used to shoot my Cats and landscapes. Though I can see getting into it a bit more.

No need for video

 

[bcpk]

Canon T2i looks very promising.

 

[RYCeT]

Nikon D90 + tamron 17-50 2.8

 

[bigshot]

With a $1000 budget, I'd suggest going to the lower end DSLR bodies so you have some money left over for a couple of lenses. Lenses make shooting a lot more fun than more buttons and marginally higher specs on the body do. I'd recommend the Nikon D40 with the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses and a 35mm 1.8 for low light. With those three lenses, you can do just about anything you want.

 

[DarkSpoon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif With a $1000 budget, I'd suggest going to the lower end DSLR bodies so you have some money left over for a couple of lenses. Lenses make shooting a lot more fun than more buttons and marginally higher specs on the body do. I'd recommend the Nikon D40 with the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses and a 35mm 1.8 for low light. With those three lenses, you can do just about anything you want.

he speaks the truth. i have that model with the first two lenses he mentioned.

 

[John2e]

Thanks for your responses.

It is apreciated!

What would I be giving up by going with the 40 over the 90 body?

I could stretch my budget.

 

[xkRoWx]

The Nikon D40 is "almost" perfect candidate for all beginners. The only thing it lacks, is the in-body autofocus motor. The D40 only autofocuses with lenses branded "AF-S".

If you want access to older (and often, cheaper) autofocus lenses then I would suggest snagging a D70 or D70s used (about $250-350). The newest consumer model with a built-in autofocus motor will be the D90 which cost over $800 for the body alone.

D90 has more megapixel
D90 has 11 autofocus areas, compare to D40's 3.
D90 has a built-in autofocus motor, D40 doesn't.
D90 has a handy top LCD screen that displays all your shooting configuration, D40 doesn't.
D90 also shoots more pictures per second compared to D40.
D90 is bigger and heavier.
D90 has an optional battery grip made by Nikon, D40 doesn't.
D90 performs better in low light (high ISO) compared to D40.
D90 have video option.
D90 has LiveView, D40 doesn't.

The D70 is like a "dumbed down" D90 (which makes sense, since the D90 is two generations newer) with many of the D40's features. It has 5 autofocus area, in-body autofocus motor and top LCD.

I think that's about it..

 

[John2e]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xkRoWx /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Nikon D40 is "almost" perfect candidate for all beginners. The only thing it lacks, is the in-body autofocus motor. The D40 only autofocuses with lenses branded "AF-S". If you want access to older (and often, cheaper) autofocus lenses then I would suggest snagging a D70 or D70s used (about $250-350). The newest consumer model with a built-in autofocus motor will be the D90 which cost over $800 for the body alone.

What are the benefits of having a autofocus body other than the availability of less expensive used lens. Sorry I am such a noob. My last Camera was a Cannon F-1


Thanks

 

[John2e]

Thanks XK I think I'll get the 90

 

[jilgiljongiljing]

D90 is great. D40 sucks. I'm sorry, its one of the most pointless DSLR's ever. You are better off getting a super zoom P&S camera.

I can vouch for the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens. I have it and its wonderful. Great landscapes stopped down, and f2.8 helps a good deal in indoors/low light.

 

[xkRoWx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John2e /img/forum/go_quote.gif What are the benefits of having a autofocus body other than the availability of less expensive used lens. Sorry I am such a noob. My last Camera was a Cannon F-1 Thanks

It's more "backward compatible". Without the autofocus bodies you're basically locked down to using AF-S lenses to autofocus. Although older lenses will work perfectly, manual focus will be your only option.

 

[bigshot]

I bought a D200 with the plan to use the lenses from my F3 film camera. But more recent lenses offer so much better quality, and have much better features, I ended up replacing all of my film lenses with new ones. The D40 body won't limit your lens choices if you are buying lenses new. There are plenty of lenses with focusing motors in both Nikon and third party brands.

For someone just starting out, the D40 has everything they need. The D90 is a good camera, but if it was me, I would put more money into upgrading the lenses than upgrading the body. For instance, instead of the 18-55 VR kit lens, substitute a Tamron 17-50 with focusing motor. That would give you a great fast midrange zoom. Or add a third party ultrawide in the 10-20 range to the two kit lenses. I would prefer those options over the D90 body any day.

Lenses offer MUCH better features than upgraded bodies do.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jilgiljongiljing /img/forum/go_quote.gif D90 is great. D40 sucks. I'm sorry, its one of the most pointless DSLR's ever. You are better off getting a super zoom P&S camera. I can vouch for the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens. I have it and its wonderful. Great landscapes stopped down, and f2.8 helps a good deal in indoors/low light.

I have to assume that was somewhat sarcastic. The D40 offers virtually every photographic feature of its older brothers save a focus-motor - otherwise, the camera is as capable as any on the market today.

 

[PerformanceFirst]

This is just my opinion, but I hate the small viewfinders some budget bodies have. The Rebel T2i looks like it has a lot of trickle down features from the 7D, so it should be technically excellent, but I don't like my Rebel's viewfinder. The small size is a mixed bag- great for carrying around, but poor ergonomically. I suggest you get a nicer body. Yes, lenses may ultimately last you longer, but you're still going to keep and use the body for several years.

 

[Mr. B]

If you're not afraid of buying used you could get a Canon 30/40/50D which would get you a solid metal-cased body and have a variable amount left for lenses depending on what camera you get.

It looks like you will end up with an entry-level plastic body but I just thought I would throw that out there. I know they don't bother most people but I could never bring myself to drop several hundred bucks on a camera that feels like a toy and not a tool.