Are there any bargain dslrs?

[micah_pepper]

<p>I dont have a lot of money to spend, but was just wondering what the best bang for your buck in the dslr field would be?</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Used 30D, the Nikon equivalent, there's probably some decent Pentax ones. Since you give no details on what matters to you, it's hard to really make any kind of reasonable recommendation.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Yeah, what Jeff said. You may not even need dslrs. Depends on what you want to do with it...</p>

<p>Used 20d, 30d, d70, E1 etc...</p>

[jgredline]

<p>seriously, take a look at the pentax k20d's. they are fantastic and can be found at very good prices right now. i have 2 of them and i love them. lenses are cheap to buy as well.</p>

[micah_pepper]

<p>Well i'd just be starting out into photography. So pretty much just a good general use slr.</p>

[jgredline]

<p>what is your total price range?</p>

[robert lee]

<p>Pick a lens system you want to grow into. Pick the lowest-end DSLR body from that manufacturer's <em>current</em> stable. </p>

<p>All things equal, the imaging performance of a current low end DSLR will outperform that of a mid-range body a couple generations back, and be much better than that of a high-end body from four generations ago.</p>

[newmanuk]

Hi Micah. *2.used canon 20d.. plus roberts call on the canon range current (if money can get you there regards miken

[goldbergbarry]

<p>Can you provide us with your budget so that we can give you appropriate recommendations. </p>

[phule]

<p>For a new camera body and basic kit lens, the Canon XS (aka Canon 1000D outside the US), Nikon D3100, Pentax K-x, or Sony A230 or A290 would all be good choices. What you pick should depend on your budget and (if possible to determine) how the camera feels in your hands. All will allow you to explore photography for a long time.</p>

 

[micah_pepper]

<p>I would give a general budget range but i'm more or less just curious, i doubt i could afford spending very much on a camera right now. I'm pretty much submerged in pharmacy school loans, but i always had an interest in photography. In general my budget is as low as possible. Less than 500 for sure, i'm not really sure the complete price range dslrs vary.</p>

[phule]

<p>[[Less than 500 for sure, i'm not really sure the complete price range dslrs vary.]]</p>

<p>You can easily look up prices at B&H:<br>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/SLR-Digital-Cameras/ci/6222/N/4288586280<br>

Sort by lowest-price. If you want to eliminate manufacturers you can select the ones you want to see.</p>

 

[bill_tuthill]

I bought a used Fuji S200EXR for under $400. It has macro capability (saving $500 on a macro lens), 420mm telephoto (saving $450 on a telephoto zoom), and good DOF control at the short end (saving $460 on a fast zoom). Lens prices quoted are Tamron. The S200EXR is a bridge camera, not a DSLR, but produces excellent results at 6 Mp.<div></div>

[john v.]

<p>You can check out Adorama for refurbished cameras. They're usually good as new and come with a warranty. I've seen a couple digital Canon Rebels listed recently for under $500.00.</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>You can get a factory refurbished Nikon D3000 with 18-55 VR lens for $399.95 at Adorama, with free shipping. I don't think you'll find a better price than that, and you'll have more peace of mind/protection than buying a used camera on craigslist or ebay.</p>

<p>http://www.adorama.com/INKD3000KR.html</p>

<p>Or, if you don't mind spending an extra $100, you can get a brand new Pentax K-x with 18-55 lens for $499 at Adorama (again with free shipping), and honestly it's quite superior to the D3000 in almost every way:</p>

<p>http://www.adorama.com/IPXKXBK1.html</p>

[starvy]

<p>If you don't have much money, a situation I can relate to rather well, do look out for manager's specials. Second hand is recommended by many but I would say that you are better off buying the not so latest model or maybe a customer returned body. If you would be experimenting with cheap old lenses take into consideration the price of an adapter. Canon churns out bodies rather fast so there might be more of a bargain there. However, the likes of Pentax with in body stabilisation might represent better value in the long run.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>+1 to RT's suggestion of the d3000 kit.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Lens prices quoted are Tamron.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>pretty selective pricing there, bill, considering that a fast (1.8) lens for nikon costs as little as $120 new, used macros (55mm AI-S) can be found for under $100, and telezooms (55-200 or 70-300G) can also be had for far less than $450.</p>

<p>bridge cameras are one step below DSLRs in image quality--due to their smaller sensors--and tend to have dynamic range issues, as well as high amounts of purple fringing and distortion. i imagine this would be true even with the EXR technology, when compared directly against a larger sensor camera. small sensors are also fairly challenged at high-ISO. though if you never need interchangeable lenses and are on a tight budget, i suppose they could be alright. i'm not sure i would buy a 12mp camera if it only took acceptable images at 1/2 resolution. 6mp would be a little challenged for printing anything larger than 8x10. there's also the issue of build quality--Fuji makes good cameras, but they cheap out on build sometimes to keep the cost down. the s200EXR--which is just over $300 new @ Amazon btw-- does have some nice touches, like 2.8 wide-angle and 5.3 @ 420mm, an actual zoom ring and filter threads just like a "real" DSLR, but the beauty of DSLRs is that they can be individually customized. i dont know, for instance, if there's any way to go wider than 30mm with the s200EXR, which would seriously cramp my style, especially when traveling. the other thing with an all-in-one is if the AF motor goes out on the lens or the glass gets scratched, etc., you can't just send in the lens for repair or replace it. with an all-in-one, you also can't upgrade to a lens which is 2.8 throughout the zoom range, or stick a f/1.4 on there for low-light shooting.</p>

<p>honestly, the S200EXR isnt quite in the DSLR leagues, it compares more to hi-zoom P&S cams like the panasonic FZ35 and FZ40, with perhaps a slight edge in image quality.</p>

<p>OTOH, 18mm on a crop sensor DSLR is much wider than 30mm and the 18-55, though plastic, is as good a kit lens optically as nikon makes. you can always add features via different lenses as you go, though the d3000 wont AF with some lenses. and, if you go Nikon, you get the benefit of Nikon's excellent CLS flash system.</p>

<p>caveat: in my experience, saying 'i want to purchase a DSLR' is equivalent to opening up a hole in your wallet, because there's always more gear to buy. if you just need a decent camera that can do stuff and dont want to spend any more cash in the future, a bridge would be an okay option, especially if you like long zooms, but you'd get about the same or better IQ from smaller, faster P&S cameras like the Panasonic LX5 and Canon S95. OTOH, you might decide the D3000 kit--or the Canon or Pentax equivalent-- is all you ever need to take quality photos.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

> bridge cameras ... tend to have dynamic range issues, ... I imagine this would be true even with the EXR technology, when compared directly against a larger sensor camera.

 

No, hardware EXR has about one more stop of highlight detail than any DSLR with RAW processing, and about two more stops than JPEG. I'm not necessarily recommending the S200EXR, just saying that it can save a lot of money if you are not a working pro. Nikon does not make a fast zoom for $120, you must be talking about some single-focal-length lens.

 

Another thing I should mention: the 18-55 kit lenses all have flaws, including bad bokeh and lack of sharpness at the long end (especially Canon). Also the zoom range is pathetic compared to 24-720 or whatever you're getting on current bridge cameras.

[eric_arnold]

<p>bill, for $300 new the s200EXR has a lot of features for the price. so i agree it can save money.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>EXR has about one more stop of highlight detail than any DSLR</p>

</blockquote>

<p>pardon me for being skeptical of this claim. i dont think you can really get too far away from the fact that a 1/1.6 sensor will be noisier and have less DR than an APS-C or FX sensor. maybe Fuji has some tech tricks built in which raise it against most P&Ses in terms of IQ, but couldnt you just do HDR with a DSLR and get better results?</p>

<p>also, you say at 6mp it produces acceptable results. but it's a 12mp camera. does that mean full-rez results are unacceptable?</p>

[bill_tuthill]

Usually the 6 Mp (or whatever) EXR image looks better upsampled to 12 Mp (etc.) than the 12Mp image itself. Here is DPR's dynamic range graph:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/FujifilmF200EXR/Images/Drange.png

[John Crowe]

<p>Canon and Nikon have the best overall systems. Avoid the cheap intro Nikon bodies that do not have focus motors because building a good lens system is very restrictive. </p>

<p>Don't be afraid to buy used equipment, and the latest cameras are not always the best solution.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>Adorama has a Nikon D3000 with a Nikon 18-55 VR lens, both refurbished by Nikon, for $399. You can add a refurbished by Nikon 55-200 VR for another $150. That's a very nice kit to start with. If you get into photography seriously you can grow with this kit until you can afford to upgrade. Then you could either sell any or all of this gear or keep it as a back-up.</p>

<p>I'm most familiar with Nikon, but I'm sure you could get good deals on other brands of refurbished cameras. You could try finding a good used mid level DSLR, but you would have to go back several generations to get one for a price similar to those above. Some will disagree, but I wouldn't go back more than one generation. Try keh.com. and the used departments of B&H and Adorama for good used gear.</p>

<p>There are a lot of crooks in the camera business. I stongly suggest that you only deal with reputable dealers like those mentioned. Remember that any deal that seems too good to be true, almost definately is not true.</p>