S/H 40D or d200 - OR - new 550d/k-r/d90? Assistance please

[jamesmurphy]

<p>Budget £700 max. I'm moving from SLR film/digital bridge to first dslr. Shooting about 3 years. Used to SLR handling from the manual, ok with technical aspects of photography.<br>

I shoot almost exclusively handheld, natural light, street/candid stuff (ignore anything on my page here, ancient rubbish).<br>

I'm looking for good high ISO/lowlight performance, decent autofocus and AI.<br>

(Lenses I can pick up a fairly decent mid zoom on mpb, and I'd hope to buy a 50mm prime in a couple of months)</p>

<p>I've done quite a bit of digging about, and it seems I'm down to a new 550d, a s/h 40D, a new d90, or a K-r.</p>

<p><strong>- Is it a risk to go with Pentax? I've heard rumours of problems with AF. The K-r (and the K-7) seem to offer an excellent feature set. </strong><br>

<strong>- Is there any difference in AI between 40D and d90?</strong><br>

<strong>- Is there any real benefits to getting the 550d over the others? They would need to be substantial as the handling is not to my desire. </strong><br>

<strong>- Given what you all know about photography, what would you choose? </strong><br>

<strong> </strong><br>

No point recommending compact systems to me, but any other help greatly appreciated.<br>

Mant thanks.</p>

[jamesmurphy]

<p>Incidentally, I just saw amazon/curry's/dixons all offering new K-7's for £699. Kit lens fair enough, but next month I'll have £200 to shop for something decent S/H. This seems a good deal to me..</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>There's nothing wrong with Pentax autofocus, especially on the newer bodies. On the older bodies it was a bit slower than Nikon and Canon, but on the newer ones I think you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "AI".</p>

<p>K-r and K-5 AF are improved, pretty good. K-7 was the best before that...if high-ISO is one of your highest priorities, the K-x, K-r, or K-5 are the best choices for Pentax. Suspect low-light AF might be slightly better-locking (but possibly less accurate) with Nikon.</p>

 

<ul>

<li><strong>High ISO </strong>- best: K-x, K-r, K-5, D90; average: 40D, K-7, 550D; worse: D200</li>

<li><strong>AF </strong>- best: D200, 40D; average: 550D, D90, K-5, K-r; worse: K-x</li>

<li><strong>Build </strong>- best D200, 40D, K-5, K-7; average: D90, K-r; worst: 550D</li>

<li><strong>Viewfinder</strong>: 550D and K-r have smaller pentamirror, others have larger pentaprism</li>

<li><strong>Controls</strong>: 550D and K-r are single e-dial while others have dual e-dials (better for manual shooting), these bodies will generally have fewer secondary dedicated controls as well.</li>

</ul>

<p>In my opinion the only reason to choose a 550D in this company is as an entry to the EOS system (if you prefer its lens lineup, etc. ) I'd rather go with a K-r.</p>

<p>You don't mention it but I would consider Nikon's flash system to be a strength vs. everyone else.</p>

<p>An advantage to Pentax's system is that the stabilization is built into the body so any lens (including primes) are stabilized.</p>

<p> </p>

[steven_moseley1]

<p>James from what you have said, they would all suit you for the specified use.</p>

<p>However, KX/KR/550D etc are all lower end models and with lower end DSLR's you get pokey little viewfinders which will shock you how small after a film SLR...I would avoid them.</p>

<p>The budget you have set is sensible and buying used is very, very sensible. Go to Currys or anywhere else, and handle & try; 40D/50D & D300 & K7. Buy which ever feels best in your hand.</p>

<p>I would stick to these higher end models as they all have super build quality and better viewfinders. They all also are pretty much at the lowest price they will reach...ie you will not lose too much money if you do trade them in any time soon.</p>

<p>I suggest you buy from a dealer, not a private seller on ebay. If you buy from certain UK used dealers you will only pay a little more than ebay AND get a 6 or 12 month warranty...which is WELL worth having with a digital camera, as some faults can take time to show, unlike film cameras.</p>

<p>I had the 40D it is super, the 50D has much better LCD, the D300 is now in your budget (forget D200 - too old now) I now use K7 as I like the much smaller size/weight compared to the Nikon and Canon semi-pro cameras...and I love the super & tiny Pentax digital prime lenses. However, If you can bear the extra size & weight of the Canon or Nikons, you will gain super fast AF which might be a deciding factor if you do street work. The Pentax AF is super, just not as lightning quick as C & N.</p>

<p>So; 1. Handle at Currys, 2. Check used lists on WWW of LCE and Ffordes, both good UK dealers (used both many times...just decide which cam you want then watch the site every week until the right item appears at the right price.)</p>

<p>cheers Steve.</p>

[jamesmurphy]

<p>many thanks for all your help. I did choose, and I imagine you'll be disappointed, but I chose the 550d. Reasons:<br>

- I did A LOT of research on forums/review sites blah blah blah, trying to seperate the bull from the truth about this camera. The general consensus seems to be that the extra MP <em>does</em> resolve more detail, obviously not with the kit lens, and obviously it's more pronounced when shooting RAW. I liked the idea of having the option to print huge, should I choose to. With this in mind, I'll spend the next couple of months s/h lens investigating, and buy myself a half decent prime and a zoom in a few months, by which time I feel I'll have the measure of the camera.<br>

- the movie mode became a factor. I'm interested in toying with short films, and this was easily the best budget option.<br>

- I couldn't find a d300 in my budget s/h, d200 yes and 40d, that was about as good as I could find. The build quality and handling of these (and the d90) was attractive, but not critical to a newbie like me. I plan to pick up a s/h 5d body around christmas (go for between £400-£800 on mpb anyway. <br>

- the d90 just did not feel right in my hand. the higher nikon's did. the 60d did. but not the d90. for whatever reason. and I wanted it to, I really did.<br>

- left me between k-r/spare cash or 550d. K-r was nice, zippy, better build, (though very noisy focussing) but ultimately not better picture quality or high ISO (from what I could tell pixel-peeking) and a poor movie mode by comparison.<br>

happy with my choice. the kit lens is rubbish, I can already feel its limitation, but I can rectify that, and I feel this camera will get me where I need to go before my next body purchase (the 5d, or by that stage other models may have become attractive on the s/h market).<br>

there you go.</p>