What camera do I buy?

[ine_haesaert]

<p>Hi,<br>

I'm a 20 year old student in Belgium and I'm planning on going abroad for half a year to Spain in january. I'm quite advanced with analogue photography (the lomography-stuff, you might have heard about it), but for this big trip I want to end up with a little more than just a bunch of 35mm rolls.<br>

So my budget is around 300-400 € and I want to buy a good quality digital camera. Any advice on that? I'm not planning on getting a reflex because my budget is too limited for that at the moment. What I do prefer is a camera that also produces good quality, but the main feature I expect from my future camera is that I can easily adjust and choose the aperture settings, exposure time, ISO values and so on.<br>

Hope you understand what I mean, it's a bit hard expressing myself.<br>

I hope that anyone has some helpful advice for me?<br>

Thanks in advance!</p>

[franklin_white]

<p>You might want to consider the Canon S95. It's a small compact sensor, but it has good quality and manual controls.</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>Ine, the only suitable option that I can think of is the Canon G series. In the US the G12 can be had for $375.<br>

I am sure that others will come along who are better informed.</p>

[Alan Marcus]

<p><a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_powershot_sx130_is_review/">http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_powershot_sx130_is_review/</a><br>

I advise the Canon Power Shot SX 130. It is a small senor<br />digital but it packs lots of camera for a low price.<br>

For traveling I like the fact that it uses AA batteries, you can buy them anywhere, no need to worry about recharging. If you buy the new Lithium AA batteries, they just might last you the entire time you are traveling. This model has the conventional rear LED view screen plus an electronic eye level viewfinder that works in bright sunlight.<br>

<br /><br />For the money this is a best buy!</p>

 

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Is second hand an option? Just a thought, but 400 euro is quite a bit of money. New DSLRs start at 500 euro, so you may find a really nice, not too old, 2nd hand DSLR for this money.</p>

<p>Else, for compacts, I think there is first a choice between the type of camera: there are the bridge cameras with a very wide zoom range (the mentioned SX130 is a very fine sample), or the 'premium' compacts which sacrifice zoomrange for faster apertures and frequently some more direct controls. For the latter category, the already mentioned Canon Powershot G-series, or the Panasonic LX5, Olympus XZ1 make very good choices. I think they'll all fit your budget, so it's more your choice on where the emphasis needs to go.<br>

Enjoy Spain, the bit I've seen is gorgeous and full of photographic opportunities!</p>

[jean_yves_mead]

A Ricoh GRD-III would fit your budget, now that its replacement has been released. Lovely wide-angle lens and offering full manual control.

 

Having said that your budget would just about cover a Pentax K-r with kit lens, and that's not a bad little combo.

[paulo_fonseca1]

You can certainly find a nice used DSLR for 400EU which will give you better image quality than a compact.

[Alan Marcus]

<p>The Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) is rapidity standing aside in favor of electronic viewfinder systems. The SLR was chiefly designed for film systems. The full size and a compact digital chips are best but technology moves on meaning miniaturization is fast on their heel. Unless you will be making giant over mantel prints you likely will not need the larger image sensors. Why not start with a less expensive full featured tool and then after you find your calling, you will be in a better position to choose your weapon. </p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>If money is the issue and not camera size, then a used DSLR makes sense. A good Nikon D50 and 18-70mm lens could be had for under e300 for example. Otherwise, the Canon S95 or G12 are sound suggestions.</p>

[ine_haesaert]

<p>Thanks a lot for the response!<br>

So the general opinion is that I should look out for a Canon S95/G12, but that I also should consider a reflex that fits in my budget.<br>

Also, except for the previously mentioned Ricoh GRD III, is there a Canon/Nikon camera that has a wide angle lens? Or is the only way to shoot wide angle with that Roch or with a DSLR?</p>

[zack_lau]

<p>The best feature of the Panasonic LX5 is the wide angle lens--24mm equivalent--most other cameras, including the Ricoh, stop at 28mm.</p>

[ine_haesaert]

<p>And when it comes to reflex cameras, what are the recommendations on that? Because the size isn't really the biggest issue, but I thought that with a budget of 300-400 euro you couldn't get equipped with a dSLR. But apparently you can :) So now I'm also considering this. Aww it's getting harder.<br>

Thanks for helping me everyone!</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>With a used DSLR the key thing is the number of shutter actuations. I bought a D50 last year with a few hundred actuations for £175. Anything less than 10000 is fine ( they are usualy OK for 50000 or more). For a lens, the 18-70mm can be had for £90 to £110. The lens goes from decent wideangle to moderate telephoto. I've used the lens for more than one wedding with excellent results. </p>

<p>Even a used semi-professional Nikon D200 can be had for under £300 with a low shutter count - very well built, weather-sealed but a bit heavy and relatively low battery life (c 300 shots per charge). </p>

[jcuknz]

<p>You don't need any particular camera to shoot wide and if you learn the simple ways to stitch several overlapping frames you will end up with far wider view than anything available in the regular camera range.<br>

I suggest that you will find excellent cameras in your price range from Panasonic in their FZ line with moderate wide angle and good reach for those inaccessible things. That is what I took on my last trip.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>JC, Stitching is not the same as a wide-angle lens. You cannot stitch together the effect of a wide-angle used close to the subject, or the effect you can get in cloudy skies with the extreme perspective. If people prefer to shoot at wide angles, then the only thing that really works is a wide angle.<br>

_____<br>

Ine, coming from Nikon myself, a camera to look for (2nd hand) might be the D80 - they have a "bad" reputation because the matrix metering is a bit temperamental (no issue if you're used to manual, or using spot or centre-weighted metering - coming from a Holga/Diana, this could well be a non-issue to you). But otherwise it was a really fine camera, and their second hand prices are relatively low. If you find a store that has the last stocks on D3000, you may find one new, though, which might be preferable.<br>

Canon, I think you can find fine 2nd hand samples of the EOS 400D, 450D within your budget, or even the 30D; maybe even a new EOS1100D if it's on offer. Pentax was already mentioned, very worth considering too. You can't go really wrong with any of these.<br>

Also very worth considering may be the micro-4/3rd cameras (such as Olympus Pen) or Sony NEX. You may find these within your budget, new. All these cameras deiver a significant better image quality than any compact.</p>

[zensphoto]

<p>Take a look at the Canon SX30 IS or the new one Canon SX40 HS. Both are flexible, I have the sx30 and a friend of mine purchased the SX40 and both do a very good job at point and shoot and also have settings you can use to just like a big DSLR camera. Obviously, I am a canon camera guy so all I ever talk about is Canon. Nikon has some pretty good smaller camera's worth looking at as well.</p>

[zack_lau]

<p>A true wide angle lens is great for emphasizing something in the foreground, such as a pretty flower. There are excellent wide angles for DSLRs, but it is likely they will all be out of your budget.</p>

[zack_lau]

<p>The cheaper DSLRs have a smaller sensor, which means an 18mm lens is effectively 28mm.</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>It might also be useful if you could give us some idea of the kinds of subject you like to photograph. For example, I like architecture and candid people shots and like to isolate details with a longer lens.</p>

[ine_haesaert]

<p>I personally like using digital cameras to photograph landscapes, views, nice buildings, street views etc. For the closer photographs (portraits etc) I'd rather use my analogue cameras. Ofcourse this is not 'a rule', but just the thing that feels natural to me.<br>

That's why I'd like to try a wide angle lens on my digital camera too (I got one on my analogue camera, but thats not an interchangeable lens), for picturing landscapes and skies (I'm in love with the sky).<br>

I also like macrophotography, but only with the digital ones.<br>

Oops, I'm a difficult person.</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>That's helpful. An 18-70mm lens on something like a Nikon D80 (or D50 or D200) gives you a horizontal field of view of 66 degrees and a vertical field of view of 47 degrees. For landscapes, I personally like the field of view 24mm gives you on such a body (well it was good enough for Cartier-Bresson who liked 35mm on 35mm film cameras for landscapes!). At the 70mm end, you have a horizontal field of view of 19 degrees and vertical FoV of 22 degrees. On the other hand, macro is another thing all together and really needs a specialist lens on a DSLR (although the 18-70 has a close focus of 0.38m from memory. </p>

[ine_haesaert]

<p>Ok, so now I'm planning on buying a Canon EOS 1100D.<br>

It's on sale and costs 333€ with a 18-55mm lens. I think it's a good deal, no?<br>

Only downside is that it doens't have an image stabilizer. Is that a problem? Will it disturb me from shooting quality photos at night time or under dark conditions? I read somewhere proper image stabilizers are built in the lens with Canon camers, so that means I could buy that camera and if it hinders me I could still buy a lens that has IS?<br>

Thanks in advance !</p>

[ine_haesaert]

<p>Anyone? An opnion on the low-light-shooting-capabilities of a Canon EOS 1100d with a 18-55mm DC lens?</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>I'm not a Canon owner, but the price sounds OK. Looks like the seller is packaging it with a cheaper, non-stabilised lens. I believe the Nikon D3100 with 18-55mm VR lens to be better, but at higher cost. There's an old saying - the poor person pays twice. In other words, buy the best you can possibly afford, even if it means pushing the boat out a little. Low light really needs a tripod or other support: a combination of fast glass, good high ISO capability and IS/VR can help.</p>

[ine_haesaert]

<p>They're also selling a Nikon D3000 with 18-55 VR lens within my price range. But this one has lower megapixels (12.2 for Canon vs 10.2 for Nikon, but coming from analogue photography thsi isn't really a problem for me actually) and also lower max ISO value (6400 Canon vs 3200 Nikon - about that I am kinda worried, cuz I really value low light situations).<br>

So the dilemma is: Canon without image stabilizer but with better MP and max ISO or Nikon with image stabilizer but with lower MP and max ISO.<br>

(also according to their website: with the Nikon you can't shoot using the LCD-monitor, is that a drawback or not?)<br>

Thanks a lot for helping, I'm really a newbie.</p>