What considerations do you have when buying a new SLR camera?

[gilpal]

<p >I'm thinking about buying a new camera. (Currently have a Nikon D50 and its time to upgrade)</p>

<p >I will be using it for landscape, architecture and family reunions, weddings etc. So I need a generally great camera. So what do I have to take into consideration on my next SLR:</p>

<p >Make</p>

<p >Price ($600- $1500)</p>

<p >Mega pixels</p>

<p >ISO</p>

<p >Lens</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Do I have to stay with the big 2 (Nikon or Canon) or should I be looking for another make?</p>

<p >Landscape is my main interest.</p>

<p >What are the main considerations that you have when you buy a camera?</p>

<p >Thanks for your help guys.</p>

</p>

[mark_chartrand]

<p>What Nikon can I afford that will do what I want it to do. I know there are many camera brands that will do what I want it to, but my first good camera in the 60's was a Nikon, and I want to stay with them.</p>

[phule]

<p>If you currently own a DSLR and you can't figure out how its feature set is limiting you then I question whether or not you need a new camera.</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>One issue is how big do you intend the final prints to be? Up to 16x20 I'd suggest you keep the camera you have and purchase a higher quality lens for the work you specialize in.</p>

<p>All your questions can be more easily answered if you have a clearer idea of what you want the gear to do.......above, you list everything from landscapes to weddings to architecture. Each of these fields are specialized, and likely there is no one camera/lenses combo that will do it all.</p>

<p>Do more thinking on your own and try to see what you would most like to do with the gear........it will be much easier to offer suggestions....Regards, Bob</p>

[Ray House]

<p>Will the features meet my needs and $.</p>

[bmm]

<p>I'd consider 2 features which you have not listed. Not indicating a preference either way, but only because these 2 features form a clear 'threshold' which you have to make a decision about depending on what you want out of the new camera.</p>

<p>1. Does the model have 1 or 2 control wheels (ie can it be easily and flexibly used in fully-manual mode)?</p>

<p>2. Does the camera have an on-board (screw-drive) AF motor so that it can be used with older lenses and primes?</p>

<p>By the way what lens or lenses do you have?</p>

[sketch_tbhotmail.com]

<p>I really don't think anyone else could possibly answer this for you. Everyone's given some good advice already so I'll leave my two cents at that.</p>

[dried_squid]

1) Mirror lock, or at least the ability to lock it up via the self-timer. I have a Nikon FE. When I trigger the timer, the mirror locks up. An F100 does not have mirror lock. Not everyone really cares.

2) Interchangeable focusing screens. The opportunity to change focusing screens is a convenience. Like comfort food.

3) A PC synch socket ... just in case I want to fool around with the light source when my camera's tripod-bound.

[rossb]

<p>If you were interested in moving away from the Big 2 as you say you could look to the Sony A700. It's a nice durable camera with magnesium frame. The body is about $999.00 or about $1150.00 with a kit lens such as the 18-70. Do a search on the A700 and see what PN folks say about it.</p>

[machts gut]

<p>If landscape is your main interesst you might want to think about a MF camera like the Mamiya RB 67. You will be surprised about the results.</p>

[ianmaleny]

<p>I chose a Pentax DSLR because of the backward compatibility with all Pentax fitting lenses, inbody shake reduction and the Pentax prime lenses. No one else has the LTD series lenses. Image quality from Pentax is second to none and the price is right. The K20 is a bargain right now, and the K7 represents excellent value for money. Both of these are weather sealed, have mirror lockup, stainless steel chassis, K7 has mag alloy body and electronic level, and much, much more. Also they feel very robust and fit my hands nicely.<br>

But only you can decide what is right for you.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Durability and longevity. I use these items. I have dropped them, knocked them, shipped them to other places and back, gotten rained on, ". . . heat. . ."; they get used as refined, scientific optical instruments were probably not meant to be used. Durability.</p>

<p>Durability includes weatherproofing. Longevity includes backwards compatibility in lens mounts, and life of any electronic circuits in the camera.</p>

<p>Price. Just makes durability that much more important. I have not always been able to afford camera equipment; and, I know full well that I'm going to want to continue using the equipment; and, I know full well that the money for operating it may not always be there. I want to be able to own it from the get-go, and have it keep on working for a good, long time.</p>

<p>Compatibility. When I get one system, I want it to work with what I already have on hand, as much as possible. Revamps, re-works, incompatible fittings; those are severe design setbacks that may turn away my purchase.</p>

<p>Basic functions. Fancy features go unused; electronic accessories (like a switch instead of a cable release fitting) instead of basic mechanics look like minuses to me. Batteries? Common AA or old watch battery or any other common battery is always preferred to Space Shuttle technology crammed into an obscure shape. I want to be able to find the battery in a mud hut bazaar on the other side of the world, or at my local gas station (<em>our</em> mud hut bazaar).</p>

<p>With the exception of my DSLR, I think all of my camera equipment is of a design that's at least 20 years old. I use a lot of Pentax equipment. There are many good brands out there; but, I prefer the individual cameras that fit my way of thinking most closely. Just personal preference. Some people are going to be the opposite and want the latest thing. They'll believe that is the best. I want as much utility out of that @#$%^ as possible.</p>

<p><strong>Utility.</strong> All of these ideas are unified by the concept of long-term utility. Utility is number one. The camera is the photographer's hammer. The lens is his saw. Utility. It works. Go for utility as much as possible.</p>

[alan_ginman]

<p>Kind of following up on what Bernard said: Lots of buttons.</p>

<p>I want to be able to control as many factors as quickly as possible without having to go into menus.</p>

<p>By the way, why is it "time to upgrade"?</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Alan</p>

[johnny_anderson]

<p>I want a camera that gives me the lowest noise at the highest ISO that I can afford. You will find that many times you don't have enough light and the only cure is add more light or use higher ISO. Adding more light is not always possible, especially if your doing landscapes!<br>

I want a camera that meters and focuses accurately.<br>

I want a lens system that gives me enough choices at prices I can afford.<br>

I want to be able to change critical features without digging thru tons of menus (WB, ISO, Aperture, Shutter Speed, etc.).<br>

I shot Canon film cameras for nearly 35 years but when I went digital I went with Nikon. I liked the menu system and ergonomics better. Nikon makes some great prosumer lenses at decent prices. But each person has to choose what's best for them.</p>

[sd_woods]

<p>I say keep the one you have and get a film camera and some velvia for landscape work.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>It's hard to find a bad DSLR being made today so whatever you buy will be capable of good pictures. My considerations may be different than yours, but maybe they will give you something to think about. Things that are important to me include: compact size, light weight, low noise at high ISO's, ergonomics (how it feels in my hands and how the controls work), and availability of doodads.</p>