Looking for DSLR with particular concerns - Please help!

[vanessa_b2]

<p>I'm looking to buy a DSLR and need your expert advice. I have a lot of concerns about the DSLR and this is a long post. Even after plenty of reading I still can't seem to find the answers to those concerns so please, please bear with me.</p>

<p>This will be my first DSLR. For years I have used a trusty film Olympus OM1n with its fixed focal lenses. I need a DSLR for the ease of sharing digital files, and I will be using it for film set stills (small productions) over the next year and portrait and landscape/street. The manual Olympus is great but I'd like to try a new system for the DSLR. I have these in mind:</p>

<p>Nikon D90<br>

Canon 40D<br>

Nikon D200 (yes I know it's been discontinued:^))</p>

<p>Constraints on budget put a limit on my choices - about £12,000 for 1 body and 1 very good lens to start with. D300 is out of the question and to be honest I'd rather wait until the storm calms. I don't want a lower mid-range camera; can't afford the higher range, but I need this camera to last a while.</p>

<p><strong>Preferences:</strong></p>

<p>I need to feel confident my camera will work well in sometimes low-light conditions and hand-held. I tend to work 50mm-100mm rather than wide lens. I should add that I do have small hands and weight may be an issue if I'm on my feet for hours with a hand-held camera.</p>

<p><strong>Lenses:</strong></p>

<p>Most of all, I am completely confused about the lenses available for these cameras. Please forgive my ignorance on this subject but I can't seem to find info which makes sense to a DSLR novice! Does AF lens mean you cannot control it manually? I want to be able to have full manual control of my camera and lens, or auto if I choose. Are these cameras going to take the picture if I have it on manual or will it "refuse" to take a picture? For hand-held work will I need VR? Is there a lens which gives me that plus manual control if I choose?<br>

I am more interested in investing more in the lenses than body; What I don't know is which system is good for what - or which camera system will best address my particular concerns.</p>

<p><strong>Image quality:</strong></p>

<p>I do have a concern about Canon and DSLRs in general, perhaps you can clarify this for me. I hear a lot of talk about pixelation and detail, but what bothers me more is the strange flatness I've seen in digital work (more obvious in prints than on screen). For example last year I went to a wedding and spoke to the photographer there, who had a flashy new Canon (I can't remember which). Weeks later when I saw a few shots I felt that, although every atom had been captured, the pictures were strangely soulless and lacking in tonal depth. I really DON'T want this from my camera/lens. I want a camera which is closer to the analog film in terms of depth of tone, true colour and contrast...It's a kind of clarity of subject rather than the fact that each atom has been described, if that makes any sense... Kind of like the way we REALLY see things.</p>

<p>I also dislike the idea that cameras now are marketed like elaborate toys/computers and this prevents me from getting the answers I need... in the sense that I believe creativity is in the photographer, not the camera as advertising would have us believe.</p>

<p>Another thing, what kind of thing should I be looking for in terms of battery strength and memory cards and if I should find a camera which plugs straight into the computer? I really don't know.</p>

<p>No camera is perfect, I mean it bothers me a lot that the D90 has a plastic body (why oh WHY?!) but I'd like to hear your advice and thoughts. I'm going to try to see some cameras in the shop soon. Thank you!</p>

<p> </p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>Digital, done well, is very good. Any flatness that you see in images is because of the way the photographer processed them. Soul comes from the use of light and how you choose to photograph your subjects - it isn't a product of the tools that you select.</p>

<p>As for which camera - go handle some of the contenders and then buy whatever you feel comfortable holding and using. Just make sure that you dive into the menu system and give the cameras a thorough look. I use Nikon, but there are excellent offerings from other manufacturers (yes, even Canon!).</p>

<p>As for the D90 being plastic, that's just not true. It has a metal alloy frame and lens mount. Plastic is used, of course, because it's light and strong.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

I'll take your questions one by one. All or most autofocus lenses allow manual focus, but the travel is often so short that manual focusing is difficult. Some cameras refuse to take a picture on certain settings, e.g. focus priority, but most models have settings to override that. If you have not used VR yet you don't "need" it now, although you might like VR/IS, and you can disable it. Many cameras have hook-up cables for computers, but the most convenient workflow is to remove the memory card from your camera and put it into your computer to make a DVD.

 

Robert addressed your flatness question. Also: our eyes are trained to interpolate 3D from film grain, so lack of grain could give an impression of flatness. Consumer P&S models are optimized for snappy JPEG results, but many DSLR models produce a flat tonal curve that requires RAW conversion and post-editing for optimum results. Booooooring!

 

All this said, my recommendation is to buy a Panasonic G1 with OM adapter, and continue using your manual focus lenses. It is easier to manual focus with this camera than with most APS-C partial-frame DSLRs.

[luis_g]

<p>I just wanted say that I agree with the above posts, and wanted to add that DSLR Jpegs can be tailored for snappy out-of-camera rendition too.</p>

<p>From your description, I'd say to go for the D90 with a 35/1.8 Nikkor and a 50/1.8 or better yet, for your stated low-light work, a 50mm /1.4 G. And you can do HD video.</p>

<p> A Canon 40D with 28/1.8 or a 35/2 plus a 50/1.4 would also work well. I believe there is an adapter for the Canon 40D (but none for the Nikons) that will allow you to use your OM lenses on it.</p>

<p> One important consideration for that type of photography is the availability of a blimp for your camera. You may want to look into this before making a choice.</p>

<p> </p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>I routinely apply an 'S' curve in post that compresses shadow and highlight detail while increasing mid-tone contrast. Without that adjustment my images look a bit flat.</p>

[jeffrey_synn]

<p>(Did you mean 1200 GBP or 12,000? Or am I just being stupid? I'll assume a budget of around 1200 USD since you imply full frame is too expensive.)</p>

<p>You have good suggestions above already. Since you already have Olympus lenses, really consider staying with the system. The original small size/light weight promise of 4/3 is only now starting to be seriously delivered with micro 4/3. Standard 4/3 cameras are already among the most compact SLRs out there. That is, unless Canon or Nikon makes a lens in particular you really really want to use...</p>

<p>Regarding manual focus, Bill pointed out that AF lenses are not really designed for manual focus and this is very true. The throws are often quite short since this increases AF speed. The focus rings are often narrow and uncomfortably placed. Still, manual focus is available and usable; a nice benefit with live view is that you can zoom in on a part of the frame (often up to 10x), which you can't do with an optical viewfinder.</p>

<p>Hand held and in low light, I say VR would be a pretty valuable addition. It works best at shutter speeds from roughly 1/60 to 1 sec (optimistically), pretty common shutter speeds for these situations without flash. 4/3 cameras have in-body stabilization so you can even benefit from it with your manual lenses (or at least I would hope so). VR doesn't make sharp images extra sharp (though I suppose it could), it makes borderline images usable. It lets you play the percentages better. Say that at 1/8 sec at some given situation, you can get 10% images with acceptably low blur by yourself; VR may increase that percentage to 50% for example. You will throw away less pictures due to camera shake.</p>

<p>Regarding batteries and memory, DSLRs only seriously drain power with live view (LCD is on) and with long exposures (noise processing can last as long as the exposure itself). A rechargeable battery and charger are included with every model and I imagine a spare battery is a common accessory. Two full batteries would probably last most users for a full day of shooting--though maybe not with micro 4/3 since they have no optical viewfinder.</p>

<p>You can pretty much use any memory card of the appropriate type (SD or CF), but either way I would favor higher speed cards, which make a difference with video (if you have it) and with continuous shooting. Newer cameras are shifting to SDHC cards, so you should use class 6 cards if you can. Memory cards are essentially commodity items, so you don't need to worry about brand unless you are really picky. (I use the <a href="http://flash.atpinc.com/p2-4a.php?sn=00000185">ATP Promax</a> line since I fancy their bragging about their cards surviving heat, water, dust and shock. I've not personally tested the claim.)</p>

<p>I haven't seen a camera that could not plug directly into a computer. Maybe they exist, but I would think definite minority. Whether or not you can use the camera in tethered shooting is another matter.</p>

[vanessa_b2]

<p>Thanks ever so much for your replies. You have all given me excellent advice which helps a lot. In a way it's made my choice harder in the sense I could be using my old Olympus lenses. I had considered sticking to Olympus, but the cameras in the mid-range seem marketed at a consumer/lower-mid range level and then there's a sudden jump in price to the E-3 so I don't feel quite sold on it yet (oh yes - Jeffrey, I meant £1,200 oops! :-D) As for Bill's suggestion, the Panasonic G1 - this looks very interesting, though I'm wary of the sensor being exposed as the lenses are changed. Doesn't it have an optical viewfinder? I'll consider that model though I'd rather go for something that's been tried and tested for longer, if you know what I mean!</p>

<p>The other thing which perhaps I wasn't clear about was that although I use fixed focal lenses on my old Olympus, I think for the kind of work I'll be doing I will need a variable focus lens - not that I wouldn't want to use my fixed lenses ever.</p>

<p>Yesterday I went to a good camera shop I know but I haven't been there for a very long time and unfortunately they didn't have much from my list of options to look at. I looked at a Nikon D5000 only to get a feel of this kind of camera (in terms of size - OK) and I was surprised at how small the world looked through the viewfinder - so very different to what I'm used to on my Olympus. Are most DSLRs like this? Still undecided and thinking about your responses.</p>

 

[vanessa_b2]

<p>PS<br>

I must look into the possibility the 40D has an adapter for Olympus - they didn't know for sure in the shop. Thanks Luis!</p>

 

[sandysocks]

<p>You might as well get an Olympus, since what you really need is a D700. The flatness you speak of has mostly to do with focal length. DX and 4/3 lenses are shorter. The D200 is not a low light camera. The D90 is not weather sealed but it is pretty tight which means that when you get moisture into it, it will be very hard to get out. Moisture is everywhere and if you use a camera a lot outdoors, there will at least be condensation. Moisture freezes in cold weather. Sorry, I just do not know the weaknesses of the 40D.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>You may also want to consider a Pentax K20D. Nice big VF, weather sealed and well built. It may be just what you need and more. All the automatic functions (except focus) work with Pentax "A" series manual focus lenses. There is also a new 18mm-55mm weather sealed kit lens that is quite good.</p>

[photographicsafaris]

<p>Despite what you have said about Canon, Vanessa;<br>

- I would suggest a used Canon 5D with the the 50mm 1.4 and 85 mm f1.8 standard lens.<br>

- This will be within your budget on the used market (probably buy the 85 new - theyre virtually unavailable second hand)<br>

- Unless you are shooting wide open you could get the 50mm f1.8, but it is plasticky to put a positive spin on the feel, I would describe it as "anti-magnetic" however stopped down it is surprisingly good, and very cheap!<br>

- I should suggest the 24-70 f2.8 (or a used 28-70 f2.8) to cover your "vairable lens" needs but your budget doesnt stretch that far yet. </p>

<p>The advantages are: *Very good low light performance (High ISO) *Able to print out large prints and retain detail. *Larger viewfinder *One of the defining "Wedding cameras" ie High quality -low light -portrait tones, large prints<br>

*Being full frame you will enable more of a separation effect on the depth of field for your chosen lens and focal length, thus for portraits it enables more sculpting to the shot.<br>

Whilst this is the range of the 2 lenses you have mentioned, these in particular are very good value for money, allow Manual focus override, (just turn the gnarled bit on the lens) and suitable for your chosen focal length being that the 5D is full frame - if you go for any of the Nikons you mention you will need to scale down to a 35 and a 60 lens for your chosen focal lengths. (divide your 35mm focal length by 1.5 to get equivalent)<br>

As to the concept of flat images, I do agree with you from many of the results.<br>

But here I have some bad news for you, you must go back and re-learn the digital side of the darkroom because YOU now have to process every image to the way you want it. This is Raw image processing becomes a feature, Apples Aperture is very useful here as it is an easy intro, but camera manufacturers have their own software that is pretty good (does it come free with the nikons - I dont know). And then there are the variety of Adobe options too.<br>

Most digital prints looking flat are because they are not set up for printing to that size and have consequently crammed too much information into the image loosing detail that you might not want to have lost - this can be corrected in post processing, but requires tenacity.<br>

Flatness has a variety of contexts to it - large depth of field (exacerbated by cropped sensors) doesnt help, but its principally the cut off between dark and light areas that is unnaturally sharpened and thus looks flat. Film being random makes this look more natural somehow...</p>

<p>Good luck and if you are still using Film in the digital age then you presumably know what you are doing behind the camera and know what quality to look for. Remember the £1200 gets you allot of 645 gear, and you can get them scanned or an epson v700 flat bed scanner<br>

You will not be satisfied with a crop sensor camera, if you insist on going down the Nikon route, then wait until you can afford the D700.<br>

OR a final suggestion on the Nikon front:<br>

A used <strong>FUJI S5 pro</strong> will be up your street, great image quality, without that Jpeg flatness that most digital cameras have, and fully compatible with Nikkor lenses. (basically a D200 with a decent sensor)</p>

<p>Lastly I am presuming we are talking about Colour negative film here when we say that DIgital is as good as... - because Film based Black and white is streets ahead of what digital imaging can deliver. <br>

I still feel that slide film retains better feel than digital, but needs accuracy. I am not a fan of Colour negative film (other than Kodak Portra 160nc) as I have had better output experiences with Digital images.</p>

<p>*Think of VR technology as "replacing" the tripod - it wont stop the subject movement in longer exposures, but will eliminate (reduce) mirror vibration and minor hand holding issues.<br>

DX lenses means designed for smaller sensors (multiply focal length by 1.5ish for 35mm) FX or normal lenses work on everything, but obviously have a telephoto effect on crop sensors - Otherwise nothing has changed, they're still fundamentally the same lenses.</p>

<p>Nothing in the camera world can compare to the ON1n viewfinder, it was and still is the best designed viewfinder ever. (being able to see with the same eye through the lens and around the prism was and is ingenious)<br>

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Olympus-OM-Lens-to-Canon-EOS-EF-40D-50D-450D-Adapter_W0QQitemZ120324167806QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Photography_CameraLenses_Lens_caps_hoods_adaptors_ET?hash=item1c03e1187e&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_1803wt_910<br>

Should solve many of your starting off issues, but I would also purchase the split focus screen for the canon. (or Nikon of you choose that route)</p>

<p>Good luck G</p>

[j.w.]

<p>I would recommend the Lumix G1 as well. Yes, the sensor is exposed during lens changes, but Panasonic have a very good ultrasonic dust removal system; I've yet to have my images degraded by dust specks.</p>

<p>The Electronic View Finder of the G1 is, in my biased opinion, better than an optical. It gives you the exact composition of the scene; you can preview not only depth of field but shutter speed effects before hand; it gains up in dim light so you can still focus and/or compose. And when you need it, the folding, flip-out LCD is indispensible.</p>

<p>As for its longevity, it's too early to tell. But the Micro Four Thirds consortium (currently Panasonic & Olympus) are both producing compatible lenses; the choices are currently limited; the whole format has only been out less than 1 year. But there's also a world of additional lenses to be mated to the G1 via the appropriate adapter ring.</p>

<p>Considering you prefer longer focal lengths to wide angles, the G1 seems like the perfect candidate. There are some great quality older lenses, with great optical character, in the sub-F/2 aperture range that can be had for pennies on the dollar; their angle of view becomes effectively a double of the focal length from what you're used to on your film Oly. For instance, I have a Vivitar 35/F1.7 in Minolta MD mount -- a great lens -- that gives an angle of view equivalent to a 70 on FF. A great piece of glass, with great character. And a Minolta 50/1.7 with even better optical properties than the Vivitar, for a 100mm effective angle of view.</p>

<p>~Joe</p>

[john_demott]

<p>Vanessa,<br>

You've received a lot of great advice already so I won't attempt to go over the same ground, but instead I want to raise two points that you didn't ask about (and that your questions suggest you may not yet have thought about):</p>

<ol>

<li><em>Learning to use the camera.</em> My first serious camera was an OM-1 so I am delighted to hear of someone still using one, but I also appreciate how much of a change it will be to move to a modern DSLR. Yes, you will be able to set a DSLR in fully manual mode, but don't overlook the benefits of the newer automated technologies. Changing ISO settings on the fly, changing white balance to get accurate color in changing light conditions, using a histogram to get accurate exposures, choosing among various auto focus points--these are all valuable tools but they take time to learn. A DSLR can be bewilderingly complex the first time you confront it. So, my suggestion is simply to budget a little time and money to master this new technology--take a course, buy a few books, or whatever sort of learning works best for you.</li>

<li><em>Learning to process digital files.</em> Once you have shot some photos with your DSLR and transferred them to your computer, then you'll have to do something with them. One of the great advantages of digital photos is that you are no longer at the mercy of a photo lab to process your photos, but that means you have to do the job yourself--that requires some sort of software and the know-how to use it. For someone who is just entering the digital world I think Nikon's program Capture NX2 offers a very easy route to good results without a long learning curve. Many adjustments can be made with a simple point and click interface. Others may have different suggestions, but the basic point is to be sure that you've thought about processing your files.</li>

</ol>

<p>On your original question about what camera to buy, I'll just say that that the D90 would be an excellent choice. It is well made and well designed with a good user interface and controls. Image quality is excellent and in its price range it offers outstanding low-light ability. I would certainly recommend it over the D200. I don't have enough knowledge of the Canon 40D to offer any thoughts on that.</p>

[dianedh]

<p>LIke Vanessa, I too am looking to purchase my first serious DSLR and had many of the same questions, chief among which was the option to manually focus. I've been out of the semi-serious photography loop for a while (my preferred camera was my old Minolta X700) and am having a hard time getting used to the autofocus Nikon Coolpix 8400 my late husband bought. For this Nikon, if you leave the battery in teh camera with the battery cover closed, the battery discharges - even with the camera turned off. If this true of ALL Nikons? Other DSLRs?</p>

[john_demott]

<p>Diane,<br>

I've never used a Coolpix but I have three Nikon DSLRs. All exhibit very good battery life. Like any rechargeable battery, they will lose charge <em>very slowly</em> even when turned off, but that is over a period of weeks or months, not within a period that should be a concern to a typical user.</p>

<p>Compact cameras like the Coolpix line have their place but they are not substitutes for DSLRs. The better DSLRs have the responsiveness and control that you associate with your past SLR experience.</p>

[vanessa_b2]

<p>Goodness, I missed out the more recent responses. Thank each and every one of you very, very much for your time and advice. Greatly appreciated. You have given me a lot to think about. Yes, I am aware and happy to work on the digital files afterwards though my main concerns are the ones outlined in my first post. I have been using manual SLR for years and I AM a bit daunted by the digital age. There are some things I still find hard to understand - such as the focal lengths are now different and it just throws me. I know I have a long way to go with DSLRs. By the way what I meant about flatness has nothing to do with the depth of field - it is something in the quality I can't explain, but it is to do with how light is recorded.<br>

I still haven't made a decision and will need to make one soon...but I will be weighing up all you have said. By all means keep contributing if you wish to do so, I am very interested and will continue reading. Thanks again :)</p>

<p> </p>