Which should I buy?

[jake_will]

I am interested in getting into photography, particularly taking pictures of bands for promos and live

performances so im trying to keep it below $600 and i'd like to buy a full frame wide angle lens. I'd prefer to

not have to buy a flash and just use one that comes with the body so here are the cameras that im trying to

decide between

 

Nikon D40 DSLR

 

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541536652.htm

 

Tamron Fisheye

 

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-80mm-3-5-5-6-Precision-Fisheye/dp/B000S6SAQM/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1225814401&sr=8-3<BR>

 

that together totals around 600 dollars minus shipping costs

 

my second option is:

 

Nikon D40 package deal

 

http://www.fotoconnection.com/p56959-nikon-d40-package-3-18-55mm-70.html

 

the thing about this one is i dont know the quality of the fisheye and the extra lenses, but its cheap and

definately in my price range at 519 dollars minus shipping costs

 

my third option is:

 

Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS

 

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CNDRXSK1855

 

if i were to get this i would get just the body and buy a fisheye seperately but they are looking to be more

expensive for this camera, also the MP of the canon are 10.1 instead of the 6.1 that the nikon has

 

any help would be greatly appreciated and if you know any other deals or completely different cameras that would

work out great for what im going to be using it for let me know!

[ronald_moravec1]

Check reseller ratings on those sources. Ritz should be ok.

 

A fisheye is a very specialised lens you most likely wiil not use often.

[evan_goulet]

Not sure about fotoconnection as a source, definitely check them out on <a href="http://www.resellerratings.com">Reseller Ratings</a>. The fisheye that they offer is actually a converter that attaches to the front end of a regular lens like a filter. The image quality will be poor.<P>I would second Ronald's thought on the fisheye. I would hold off on buying one until you are sure that you will want it. I would put that money towards a good flash unit. The on-board flash will probably not give you what you are looking for in artificial lighting.

[jake_will]

what would be a good flash unit for a decent price if i decide to get flash instead of the fisheye..that would still keep me under 600?

[kari v]

Forget the Tamron kit. It's cheap standard zoom basically meant for film camera starter lens + cheap wide converter. Image quality will be downright bad. Actual fisheye is different deal and won't come that cheap unless you find used Peleng 8mm. But that's totally manual lens and has mostly limited use.

 

Try to find D40 + 18-55 + SB400 deal. Cheap yet highly usable. Consider used ones and you're way below $600, which is good as you coud like fast-cheap-good 50/1.8 (about $100) for band photography.

[jake_will]

so if i wasnt looking at spending less than 600 dollars would the nikon be a better camera either way?

[nilantha]

You may want to look at www.keh.com where you will find Nikon D40 or Canon 20D for good price. As suggested before kit lens is possibly the best to get started and can add 50mm 1.8 later. If possible you should try these models in a store to get a feeling for user interface/menu system.

[nathan_meador]

some people prefer Nikon, some prefer Canon...there are reviews that compare/contrast the two that would probably more objective. As for the fisheye, you probably won't have much use for, unless you are allowed to be on-stage to take the pics..you have to be real close to get any detail. Better off looking for lenses with fast apertures, 1.8 or faster.

[bueh]

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">I am interested in getting into photography, particularly taking pictures of bands for promos and live performances...

</blockquote><p>

Concert and band photography is one of the most difficult applications. You need a camera excellent ergonomics, great lenses and the experience when to use which lens with what setting. A reliable, external flash with multi-point <abbr style="border-bottom: 1px blue dashed;" title="autofocus">AF</abbr> assist is very, very handy.

<br> 

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">im trying to keep it below $600 and i'd like to buy a full frame wide angle lens.</blockquote><p>

Buy used. Check out used Pentax K10Ds, they are cheaper and offer a lot more features you are going to need for serious photography. Wide angle lenses come in all flavors and prices, but you will get what you pay for. As a starter just use an 18-55mm kit zoom to get experience, later a super-wide zoom lens is probably the most sensible solution for wide angle photography on a crop-factor body.

 

 

<br> 

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">I'd prefer to not have to buy a flash and just use one that comes with the body</blockquote><p>

Good luck getting professional pictures then! You might be better off with a high-end digicam. Proper flash technique is often the key to great pictures.

 

<br> 

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">if i were to get this i would get just the body and buy a fisheye seperately but they are looking to be more expensive for this camera

</blockquote><p>

Well, that's a bummer! But if you what to get decent results with a fisheye perspective, nothing else will be suffient but just a waste of money. But while fisheye photography looks impressive to beginners, they are almost worthless for 99.99% of your pictures. Fisheyes are a gimmick that will get old after 10 pictures or so. Using a super-wide perspective in a aesthetically pleasing way takes a LOT of experience and practise, by the way.

 

<br> 

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">also the MP of the canon are 10.1 instead of the 6.1 that the nikon has

</blockquote><p>

Almost no real photographer cares about megapixels.

 

<br> 

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">so if i wasnt looking at spending less than 600 dollars would the nikon be a better camera either way?

</blockquote><p>

No! Stay away from entry-level toys as these cameras are designed to be as cheap as possible. Ergonomics are a nightmare and often important features are missing, i.e., the Nikon D40 (etc.) will not autofocus with any prime lens -- which you will need for low-light work. Regardless of camera brand, go for "prosumer" bodies.

<p>

Nikon, Pentax and Canon make all very decent cameras and offer good systems. Canon has a extensive lens line-up (although expensive!) and offers the option of upgrading "inexpensively" to full-frame (by used EOS 5Ds). Nikon has great ergonomics and a better flash system, but cripples their cheaper cameras' functionality. Besides that, their stuff often is more expensive. Pentax has only a limited camera body selection that is not that appealing to professionals (no full-frame camera), but has a great and less expensive system for crop-factor bodies, including APS-C super-wide prime lenses (which neither Canon or Nikon offer). Their lenses are also cheaper and the latest generation also has SSM autofocus.

[jake_will]

thank you all you're input is greatly apreciated!

[ihasphotos]

if you dont want to use a flash, you need a super fast lens. I use a $70 lens from canon. its a 50mm 1.8. my dream lens is the canon 1.2 85mm, but its almost 2 grand. just find a lens that is in the 1.? range, and you will catch all the stage lights. Never use a flash!!!