Help buying first dslr camera please!

<p>Hi all, i'm new here and I apologize if I've posted in the wrong spot. I am looking for a new dslr camera ( my first). I have been doing tons of research but am still undecided. I really need the input of people with more camera knowledge than I have and this site was recommended.<br /><br />I have been looking at the Pentax K-x and the Nikon D3000. My budget is about $500 - $600. My main interest in buying is to get good shots of my boys playing football and basketball, and then just general use.<br /><br />It appears the Pentax is superior, but then I read it isn't good for sports photography. Also I have read here not to get kit lenses. What would be a good option if I were to buy body only and one lens?<br />I have read that the 50mm 1.8 is one standard lens I should get, but don't see one available for Pentax. <br /><br />Thank you so much for helping me out! The more I read, the more confused I get!</p>

<p>Hi Kristi and welcome to PN!</p>

<p>A good place to start is to read <a href="../equipment/building-a-digital-slr-system/">Building a digital SLR system</a> or <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/choosing-a-dslr-camera/">Advice on choosing a Digital SLR</a> articles in the Equipment and Guide tabs on the homepage.</p>

<p>In short . . . Go to a Photo shop, handle the different models and pick the one you like the feel and features of, and start to narrow down your choices.<br>

Canon or Nikon are the two major manufacturers, and most recoginized and, I expect will have the most selection of lenses and accessories to choose from. Not knocking any of the other manufacturers in any way! Just a fact!</p>

<p>Many do seem to want to "shed" their kit lenses within a short time . . . .</p>

<p>The 50mm f/1.8 . . . Probably referring to the Canon "Nifty Fifty" which can be bought new for around $100.00 . . . "Biggest Bang for the Buck" in lenses around.</p>

<p>Hope this helps! Narrow down your choices and come back and ask some more questions . . ."We all love spending someone elses money!"</p>

<p>Best wishes,</p>

<p>Thanks Jim! A week ago, I was 100% sure I was buying the Nikon D3000. Then I made the mistake of reading more and got interested in the Pentax. My main worry with that one though is the availability and price of lenses. <br>

Yes, I was referring to the Nifty fifty! Would I be able to use that lens for sports photos? I have zero lens knowlege, so bear with me! <br>

I will go check out those articles, thanks again!</p>

 

<p>The 50 would not be my choice for sports, most use something in the zoom's and usually in the 70-200mm range with larger apertures to maintain a faster shutter speed etc., etc..</p>

<p>The 50 could be adequate for indoor stuff where the lighting is lower because of it's f/1.8 aperture. I guess it could be o.k. if you can get close enough to the action!<br>

The 50mm on a small sensor digital (or 1.6 crop sensor) would be like an 80mm lens on a full frame sensor. Full frame would be like a 35mm film camera. You will find that Focal Lengths of lenses, i.e., 50mm, 24mm, 100mm etc., etc., are compared to the days of the 35mm film terminology. Not the best description in the world . . . but, basically with that said . . . a 50mm lens gives an image (field of view) somewhat equal to what the Human Eye sees. This is on a full frame camera, so . . . on a small sensor camera, to achieve the field of view of the Human eye you would need a lens with a focal length of somewhere around 30mm.<br>

Clear as mud!</p>

<p>Back to my original response to your posts . . .<br>

If and when you visit Camera Shops to handle your choices (after you narrow down the field some!) watch for salespeople that will often try to "push the sale" of "slow moving" equipment.<br>

So my recommendation would be to return here to PN, ask some more questions, get some <strong>good advice </strong>before actually pulling the trigger and making the purchase. You can also get some good recommendations here for places to purchase once your decision has been made.</p>

<p>I know it's tough . . . but don't get in too much of a hurry, and make certain you start a "Camera System" that <strong>you like </strong>and <strong>suits your needs.</strong> "Not too little, and not too much in the features category!"</p>

<p><strong><em>"It's not the equipment that makes the photograph, it's the person behind the equipment!"</em></strong></p>

<p>One more quick question, how important is live view?</p>

<p>I've had my 50D for nearly a year now, and until very recently always used the "viewfinder."<br>

I started using the live view doing some Macro work on a tripod and it's very useful there. You can zoom in to obtain exceptional manual focus. And . . . although not certain yet, but I think it also provides "mirror lockup" when used. Hopefully someone else can chime in on the advantages or disadvantages of "Live view."<br>

My experience's thus far are very limited with it, I'm still learning that feature! So far, it seems pretty unnecessary for the majority of my hand held shots because it's like a long shutter lag. Of course this may just be because of my inexperience and the lighting I've tried shooting in. But appears very useful from a tripod!</p>

<p>I have a Nikon D5000 and, when I bought it, I thought I would use the Live view more than I do. The Live view focuses very slowly, so I rarely use it for pictures of my children - they move too fast. The D5000 Live view has a swivel screen which is useful for taking pictures of stationary things that are low to the ground. Other than that, I never use it.</p>

<p>I echo the advice to take your time choosing your camera. I spent several weeks doing research last summer before buying the D5000. I love my camera and it's just what I need right now. But it has its limitations and now that I have used it for a year, I can see myself moving up to something else in a couple of years. </p>

<p>It is a existential decision. What choice you make will likely commit you to a particular platform/camera system for many years into the future. So it is worth some thought and fretting.</p>

<p>On the other hand, the good news is that while getting a particular marque is a little like choosing a spouse in terms of commitment, there are no real bastards (or for males, bitches) among the potential suitors. Even the "dark horses" are just fine, although it is true that the big two, Canon and Nikon, tend to drive the market.</p>

<p>So this one can be a truly and largely painless existential decision in which you can choose one and never have to look back and wonder "what if I had...?" [however, everyone is permitted to be a little jealous when some other manufacturer introduces the very feature you have been unknowingly lusting for since you were 12. Rest easy, your marque will respond in due course.]</p>

<p>I don't love Live View except with tripods and when I want to zoom way in to check focus. AF isn't as quick in Live View and shutter lag is noticeable, so it's less practical for shooting anything that moves. I do love the 50/1.8 Nikon lens, but not on a D3000 - it doesn't autofocus on cameras without built in focus motors. For what a 50/1.8 is normally used for, a 35/1.8 AF-S is often better on a camera like that, and it's not good for sports because usually with sports you're working at a distance and want more zoom. If you don't want to spend what a 70-200/2.8 lens costs, there are a few good 70-300 lenses in the consumer price range - just make sure to choose a model with AF-S or other built-in motor technology if you go with the D3000.</p>

<p>I can't really speak for Pentax but it strikes me as odd that they don't have an inexpensive 50mm lens. That's been a staple for decades.</p>

<p>K-x is a good camera. I don't know why it would be any less suitable for sports than a D3000. First Nikon I would pick ahead of it would be the much pricier D90. </p>

<p>Pentax hasn't sold a 50/1.7 for many years, but do offer a better & faster 50/1.4 but it is more expensive than the cheaper & slower 50/1.8 lenses that Nikon & Canon offer. Until relatively recently it was attractively priced at ~$220--unfortunately prices went up significantly in the last year or so. Pentax also doesn't have an exact equivalent of Nikon's inexpensive 35/1.8; there was an excellent 35/2 that was recently discontinued; either of these can be found used but even used copies will usually cost more than the cheap Nikon 50/1.8 or 35/1.8. </p>

<p>No word yet whether a replacement for the 35/2 is in the works; Pentax has many other high-quality 'Limited' prime lenses (31/1.8, 35/2.8 Macro, 40/2.8, 43/1.9 in this range), but they all feature top-quality construction and are priced accordingly higher. I believe the 50/1.8's are frequently recommended mostly because they are a cheap way to get a fast lens. Pentax has a lot of good compact lenses available, but not so many that are super-cheap and autofocus. There are lots of cheap and really-well-built manual-focus lenses--easily get an excellent and really solid Pentax-A 50/1.7 for well under $100, A50/2 for even less, maybe $50.</p>

<p>I would encourage you not to neglect the Pentax kit lenses unless you really know what you want instead--they really are quite good and you'll pay a lot for anything better. And even if you end up with a better lens, there may be times that you like the versatility, and compact size/light weight of the kit lens. If the basketball you want to shoot is indoors, you might find yourself wanting to spend more than you did on the original kit on a fast lens like a 70-200/2.8.</p>

<p>Thank you all for your help. I was in Sam's Club today, so I picked checked out their cameras. I looked at the Nikon D3000 and the comparable Canon, but they didn't have the Pentax. Of course, two guys helped me, one preferred the Nikon, one the Canon. I need to do more research on what lenses I would need because going back and forth between the three and looking for comparable lenses, is just giving me a headache! This isn't easy when you have never used a dslr before!<br>

I will most likely end up getting the kit lens with whichever I end up choosing. It seems that Nikon and Canon are the popular routes, but Pentax reviews better. I've never been one to go the popular route anyways ;) I don't want to get myself in a Pentax and not be able to afford lenses, but a quick glance on ebay shows plenty affordable ones, just don't know if they are what I would need.<br>

Thanks again!</p>

 

<p>found this package for $569, would this realistically get me started for now? <br>

Pentax Kx 12.4 Megapixel SLR Digital Camera w/18-55 & 50-200 Lens Kit (Black) K-x</p>

<p>You said you wanted to get pictures of your boys playing basketball among other things. The focal length range that the package is offering seems fine, but you also need to look at the apertures offered on these kit lenses.<br>

The 18-55 is f/3.5-5.6 and the 50-200 is f/4-5.6. These are fine for shooting outdoors, but you will probably struggle shooting indoor basketball, you really need a 'fast' lens i.e. one that lets in more light. You will need something f/2.8 or faster. The problem is that 'fast' zooms are more expensive. Personally, I would stick with the 18-55 kit lens, but think about getting a 'faster' 50/70-200mm lens.</p>

<p>So I would be covered for football, but basketball, not so much :) How about price for this kit compared to the other two? Is this the best option?</p>

<p>Kristi,<br>

Although I've never purchased from them, I often hear/read here on PN that B&H Photography is a good place. Hopefully someone will chime in for assistance!<br>

Another preferred is Adorama and I found this link for them <a href="http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?sid=11861396881065411">Adorama</a> . As I understand it, buying from Adorama helps support PN in some manner.<br>

KEH is another one that I hear/read of here and is also recommended, but again, someone will have to chime in.</p>

<p>I am certain however that any of these would probably provide you better pricing than Best Buy and they would also have better service in the long run.</p>

<p>If you might consider buying used, then I would recommend checking out the "Classified" section here on PN.</p>

<p>There is a section under the "Equipment Page" tab from the Homepage that also gives some advice and information on "Places to buy" which might be of some help.</p>

<p>It's quite an "investment" so make your decisions wisely!</p>

<p>Best regards,</p>

 

<p>"found this package for $569, would this realistically get me started for now?"</p>

<p>Kristi,</p>

<p>Beware of some sellers. Let us know WHERE you found any camera price before you pull the trigger. There are plenty of "too good to be true" deals out there that are rip offs.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>That package is $623.95 at B&H and Amazon, the $569.95 price was from Central Digital. I would pay the higher price at one of the more reputable sites, unless someone here can vouch for Central Digital.</p>

<p>Kristi,<br>

I'm not familiar with Centra Digital but probably someone else here on PN is and can give you a <strong>"good or not so good!"</strong><br>

As John indicated above, Please keep checking before you pull the trigger!</p>

<p>I've been fortunate in that my area has some excellent Camera Shop's and I buy in person, with the exception of some "used" purchases that I have made here from the PN Classifieds.</p>

<p>In general, I have read many many times of people getting ripped off when they find packages that are much lower than B&H or Adorama.<br>

That would certainly destroy your photography interest before you got out of the gate!</p>

 

<p>Sadly, there are no camera shops nearby. I have looked and there are some listed about an hour away from here, but I have no idea what they are like, what they carry, price, etc. Other than that, an hour also from here, I have typical stores like Sears, Best Buy, which are all much higher priced than Amazon. Of course yesterday I happened to be in Sams and looked there but I didn't have an SD card so I could only hold it and look at it, no pics.<br>

After reading several more reviews last night, the Pentax K-x is looking like the one for me. My main question now is do I add the extra $100-130 to get the 50-200 lens as part of the kit or save that towards a better one.<br>

I really appreciate all your help. It is exactly what I needed and was looking for!</p>

 

<p>Kristi, there are also K-x packages including the 55-300/4-5.8. The 50-200/4-5.6 is fine but the 55-300 is better; The 50-200 is extra light compact, not much bigger than 18-55. The 55-300 is a bit larger but still compact for a zoom going to 300mm. If you expect to frequently use the longer part of the zoom, the 55-300 is a better performer. Put another way, the 50-200 is at its best in the 70-135 range--good for general telephoto use, portraiture, etc. It also has a shorter minimum focus distance. The 55-300 is better and a little faster at lengths longer than this (wildlife, outdoor sports from the bleachers).</p>

<p>I mention it because these kit lenses are cheaper when purchased with the kit, more expensive later. Also be aware that the kit lenses are usually "DA-L" which are economy versions of the aftermarket lenses--optically the same as "DA" but don't come with lens hoods, have plastic bayonet mounts, don't have quick-shift manual focus touch-up, and don't have distance markings printed on the focus rings.</p>

<p>Kristi, your primary consideration should be lenses, since the body will quickly become obsolete and the lenses will not. My opinion is that Canon offers the best range of lenses; others will, of course, favour Nikon.</p>

<p>As far as bodies go, the T2i probably delivers the best image quality for the money of any "entry level" DSLR.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>After reading several more reviews last night, the Pentax K-x is looking like the one for me. My main question now is do I add the extra $100-130 to get the 50-200 lens as part of the kit or save that towards a better one.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hi Kristi, the 50-200mm will get you good close ups during sports. It is however, a "slow" lens (the aperture values f/4 etc., are slow [the lower the number, the larger the aperture opening of the lens, the more light it takes in, thus the faster the lens]). It should be fine if you're in bright daylight and set your ISO high [or use the sports setting on the camera].</p>

<p>If however, you're doing indoor sports, or anything other than bright daylight, the 50-200mm might be a challenging lens to use. A 50mm lens f/1.8 or f/1.4 will be faster... it won't get you close, but it will get the shot.</p>

<p>If you don't plan in buying many lenses, the Pentax K-x is a great camera. If however, you later plan to get a ton of lenses (say 4 or more), you should give serious consideration to Canon or Nikon. Other industries, yes, it's ok to pick the not-so-popular brand, but cameras are different because 3rd party lens manufacturers will make lenses mostly for the popular brands. You will have a lot more choices if you stick to Canon or Nikon. [for example, I can pick a given Sigma or Tamron lens and see if it's available on Pentax mount, sometimes it's not, sometimes it's out of stock]. If however, you plan to get no more than say, 3 lenses, it really just is a matter of taste, and you will be very happy with a Pentax K-x if you get it.</p>

<p>I really don't see myself buying more than a couple lenses. Of course that could change, but I would be surprised if I bought more than one or two outside the kit.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Say I go with the kit with just the 18-55 lens, because the 55-300 is a little out of my budget right now, and I don't want to get the 50-200 if it isn't what I need. I see that I can get either the Tamron or Sigma 70-300 for $159 which would be only a little more than getting the kit 50-200. Which would be the smart option?</p>

<p>Kristi,<br>

Get just the 18-55 to start, use the "extra" for a fairly decent tripod or an external flash, . . .or, nothing extra! One lens will be enough for now.</p>

<p>This is your first DSLR . . . . "slow down, keep the costs down, be patient!"</p>