DSLR choice help requested :)

[darren_malbut]

<p>Hi folks :)</p>

<p>I’ve been an amateur photgrapher for a while now. It’s something that I really enjoy. I sold my Canon 30D a couple of years ago in a fit of clearing out, because I was only using film at the time, and have been since. Of course, only shooting film means I shoot a (heckuva) lot less now than I used too (which has it’s pros and its cons), but I’m looking to get another DSLR. </p>

<p>If I wait ‘till the end of the year then I could get a budget of around £1,200 - £1,600 together for a kit, but it means I’d be waiting for a good 6 months-plus to do so. Or, I could get a good, but older, camera now and start on my way much faster.</p>

<p>So, typically, I am asking for some advice. First of all, should I wait until I can afford the gear that my GAS wants, or compromise and get going sooner (which makes more sense to me I think)?</p>

<p>And then, if I <em>were</em> to get something a bit sooner, what would people recommend? I guess I’d be looking at spending around £400-£750 tops if I were to get something very soon.</p>

<p>(I’m thinking of the Canon 5D mkI? or Nikon D700?... _______? As for lenses, I’m really not sure. I’d like a 50mm prime and used to love the Canon 50mm 1.8 II I had with my 30D, but I don’t know how good the Nikon equivalent is. I’d really like another, general purpose lens as well (a zoom, like the 24-70 or 24-105, kind of range?). I know I don't like the kit lenses that tend to come with Canons.</p>

<p>I currently have no real preference for either Canon or Nikon DSLR systems (although I would only want to invest in either of these two manufacturers). I do have a nice 105 2.5 AI Nikkor which I enjoy using, but it wouldn’t be the end of the world if it were much better for me to be using a Canon system as I’d still use Nikon for film anyway.</p>

<p>The kind of work I enjoy the most is with people. Either candid on a walkabout, or more formal portraits. Having said that, I’d still like to be able to capture landscape shots, too. I guess, I’m looking for something versatile.</p>

<p>This is something I’d quite like to take pretty seriously and I’m planning to do some travelling with whatever I get, so I’d also like it if whatever I get could be pretty durable.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for any help or input. There's just so much information available now that it can become a bit of an overload.</p>

[famico]

<p>For me, I would get something now, rather than miss opportunities until I had more to invest in a system.<br /> I won't recommend either system.</p>

<p>Instead I would suggest you find a store where you can try both Nikon and Canon to see which feels better in your hands. Both are very capable cameras, but ultimately it will come down to which you are comfortable with. Even though you would be handling new cameras, the older models of each system are close enough to their newer stablemates, and different enough from the other system, to help you make an informed choice.</p>

<p><br /> Case in point - when I went looking for my first DSLR, I had a particular brand in mind. Was pretty sure that was what I would buy until I actually handled it and others. Turns out it just didn't feel right in my hands, so went with another brand.</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>Although I didn't test it, from immediate experience the Tammy 90/2.8 seem sharper than the Nikkor F2.5....and it offers a macro. Yet, I'll hold onto the F2.5 for years to come. The 90mm is a great portrait lens, tho. If macro is not all that important, I'd look at Nikkor 85...either 1.8 or 1.4. But, there are lots of options...</p>

<p>Cameras change often and I'd get (initially) quality glass and a so-so camera body....till I could afford a better model.</p>

<p>Overall, get few lenses, that fits your vision, and go out shooting. Eventually you can decide whether F2.8 bokeh is more important than the lighter weight of the 70-200/4, etc, etc. Perhaps someone will chime in what works well on the Canon side.</p>

<p>Les</p>

 

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>A new crop-sensor camera from either maker with the appropriate lenses will probably take better photos than something as old as a D700 or 5D Mk I. Yes, you'll be able to get shallower DoF, but you'll be able to shoot in way lower light with a newer camera.<br /><br />There are insane refurb deals all the time here in the states, don't know about where you are.</p>

 

[Member69643]

<p>I kept my 20D and my 30D because they were, and still are, great cameras. Buy a used 30D and get a nice lens with your excess cash. Lenses can be reused, bodies are practically disposable every few years.</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>Canon and Nikon cameras don't quite match up one for one. If I was in your position I would get either the Nikon D7100 or the Canon 70D which are loosely equivalent in quality and I would choose between them by their feel and my preference for their controls. With either camera I would get the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 lens for it, one of the best lenses and best lens deals out there right now with excellent image quality and stabilization. This may be in you budget or just outside of it but for me either of these cameras would be a high quality image making machine that would be all you need to do pro level photography. Good luck!</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Which film system(s) do you have, with which lenses? For example, I wouldn't rule out Pentax, especially not if you'd own a lot of Pentax lenses ;-)<br>

Given you already own at least one Nikon lens, do you happen to own more? Maybe you won't need to buy additional lenses, which could free up money to get a bit more recent body. As much as I love my D700 (and not looking to replace it short term either), it's not a body I'd buy used today, neither a 5D Mk.1. Not because they're bad, but they're reaching an age where failure becomes more likely. I'd rather get a solid, recent APS-C DSLR than an aging full frame one.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>The kind of work I enjoy the most is with people. Either candid on a walkabout, or more formal portraits. Having said that, I’d still like to be able to capture landscape shots, too. I guess, I’m looking for something versatile.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There are soooo many cameras which fit this criteria. i wouldnt rule out mirrorless, either, if you want something compact for travelling, but im not sure i would go with a 5DI or a D700 at this point, unless there were specific reasons to want an out-of-date full frame body. Even a D5500 or D7100 (if you wanted to use older lenses) would probably fit the bill, and i doubt you'd be disappointed with a Fuji XT10, either. If you go with a full frame body like the D610, you'll probably end up spending more on glass compared to APS-C lenses of similar specification, and the benefits of that approach may be dubious. My advice actually would be not to overspend on the body, and invest more into lenses as a long-term strategy. </p>

[darren_malbut]

<p>Thanks everyone, I didn't expect so many good replies so quickly! :)</p>

<p>I understand your thinking about going mirrorless Eric Arnold, but it's not for me I don't think. Not for this camera anyway. I'd like to keep glass to a minimum though. If I could eventually wind up with 2 or 3 really nice, versatile lenses that are all used regularly then I'd be a happy camper. I know that still isn't quite as portable as an XT10</p>

<p>I felt comfortable with the 30D when I had it, but after visiting a shop (had a look this evening in-between posting, as suggested by Hosteen Yendikeno), I noticed that Canon's lower end bodies come with a different control layout now (and a variable angle screen, which really turned me off for some reason).</p>

<p>The newer Nikons didn't feel as natural to me, but they did feel more substantial/dependable than their Canon equivalents. I guess, not having had a DSLR for a while, it wouldn't take me long to feel comfortable with a Nikon over Canon, and at least I've got a couple of nice MF lenses already.</p>

<p>Wouter Willemse, I have a couple of lenses for my Nikon, the 105 2.5 AI and a 50mm 1.8 (can't remember if AI or AIS).</p>

<p>Will my AI/AIS lenses meter properly with a digital body? Just set to aperture priority (and adjust aperture manually) and good to go?</p>

<p>I'm surprised about the suggestion to go for the D710 over the D700, as they're about the same price (body only, D700 second hand, of course). I would have thought the 700 would have been a generally better camera, because of it being positioned as a higher end model when new (and FF)? </p>

<p>I had a look at the D710 and it seems like a nice camera indeed, but I can't help but think that if I got an APS-C camera now, I'd still feel as though I wanted to upgrade it to a FF. Or is that honestly being silly when comparing the D700 to the D710? </p>

<p>Wouldn't it affect my lens choices? Buying for a cropped sensor, knowing that I'd want to move up to a FF sooner or later?</p>

<p>Thanks again :)</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Nikon Ai/AiS lenses can be used with metering indeed, on the D7x00, D300 and all full frame bodies. On lower end bodies, you can use them too, but no metering and no registration of the aperture. For pre-AI lenses, the situation gets a bit more tricky.<br>

As for APS-C versus Full Frame - first define for yourself what it is in full frame you want? Nice as it is, it does command a price premium no matter which way you look at it (note you're comparing a 7-year old Full Frame to an up-to-date APS-C camera at the same price range!). What justifies the extra cost? I'd first try to put that into words for myself, before making the jump. APS-C isn't that inferior, nor FF the holy grail.</p>

<p>And again, if you have more/other lenses, do not discount the respective brands (Pentax, or Sony SLT cameras for Minolta). There is more than just Nikon/Canon, even if their marketing departments make you believe otherwise ;-)</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>Darren, i did read that you only want to consider Canon and Nikon products. Nothing wrong with personal preference, but this isn't 2005, and one of the benefits of today's oversaturated camera market is the sheer number of choices out there. My druthers would be to consider the system which best fits your needs, but too much choice can be an overwhelming thing as well.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I would have thought the 700 would have been a generally better camera, because of it being positioned as a higher end model when new (and FF)?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not really, because digital bodies don't quite work like that. The D2x was a top of the line DX body upon release; it was soon superceded by the D300 which itself was overtaken by the D500. Nowadays, a lowly D5500 will give you better image quality and be better in just about every respect (except for maybe frame rate) than a D2x. The D700 may have been state of the art in 2008, and does have better build quality than the 7100, but its also several generations older and less refined in a lot of ways. if you can find a low-actuation one, it could still work especially with legacy lenses, but for the purposes you stated, there's almost no practical advantage to getting a vintage 12mp FF body over a newer 24mp APS-C body, except maybe slightly better low-light performance. it's entirely a myth that APS-C is an inferior format, though there was a wider gap 8 years ago. IMO the biggest reason to shoot FF now is to use FX lenses at their native focal lengths and/or if you plan on printing larger than 20 x 30.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Wouldn't it affect my lens choices? Buying for a cropped sensor, knowing that I'd want to move up to a FF sooner or later?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, it would, although replacing 2 or 3 lenses down the line isn't really that big of a deal. You can buy FX lenses only for use on a DX body, but it's an imperfect solution, especially in the wide-angle side of things. If you are dead set on full-frame--and i say that with the caveat that you haven't thusfar laid out a rationale of why DX wouldnt work for you--i would suggest a D610, not a D700, for the reasons listed above. Be advised, though, that FX glass tends to be bigger, heavier and more expensive than its DX counterparts, especially at the pro-spec level.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>I would not overlook smartphones. I have been a photographer for over 60 of my 74 years and was an early convert to digital with my Nikon D-1. Recently, I have found that I turn to my iPhone 6s for some photos -- particularly panoramic shots. It is nothing short of amazing. A brief search on images taken with smart phones should astound even the most skeptical. Keep in mid that photographs are taken between your ears and not in your camera. Find the tool that best fits your mind, rather than getting wrapped up around the illusion of equipment. It is imagination that makes a photographer, not the camera.</p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>FX is relatively 'affordable' secondhand - you can pick up a D800 for under £1000 now, or a D610 for under £800 at a dealer. A D700 can still fetch over £500, which for a camera of this vintage says a lot about its well-balanced specification, but it's probably only worth considering now if you need the framerate, which it doesn't sound like you do. I have the D800 - it's not perfect (a little heavy, a rather loud shutter, and only 4fps in FX mode), but excellent build and handling, and of course that great sensor.</p>

[02Pete]

<p>From your currency reference, I assume that you are in the UK. Don't know enough about dealers in the UK to offer any recommendations -- if you were in the US I'd recommend KEH.com.</p>

<p>If you don't want to spend a lot of money or wait a long time, a good used Nikon D5200 with an AFS 35mm f/1.8 G lens would be an affordable but effective shooting combination.</p>

<p>For a film shooter who learned photography on manual cameras and still owns some older manual focus lenses such as Nikon AI or AIS lenses, but wants to do some DSLR shooting and hopes to be able to use the older lenses, a Nikon Df might be an ideal solution -- it can do manual metering with AI and AIS lenses, it's a full-frame FX format camera with no crop factor, and it has manual rotary-knob shutter speed, ISO and exposure compensation dials as well as menu-driven digital controls -- but it would cost more than you plan on spending.</p>

[Two23]

<p>I always suggest first figuring out what you want to photo, and under what conditions. You've done that. That determines what lenses you need to do the job. I'd suggest a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS and Nikon 85mm f1.8G to start. Camera is the least important thing--go as cheap as you can. I'd suggest a used Nikon D7100. The priority should be the lenses.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Recently, I have found that I turn to my iPhone 6s for some photos -- particularly panoramic shots. It is nothing short of amazing.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>meh. you can do iPhone projects. but the 'cameras' have almost no physical controls. it's not the same thing. </p>

[mervyn_wilmington]

<p>May I suggest you think a little more broadly. After using 'big' Nikons for 30 years, I sold mine recently, including a D700. I bought a Fuji XT1. No regrets at all. More compact and lighter. The quality is stunning. I used the 35mm f1.4 at a christening a couple of weeks back. I couldn't fault the results. I've just bought the 14mm f2.8. The image quality is exceptional. You read the reviews, but assume much is hype, but it isn't. </p>

<p>Take a little more time before deciding where you go.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Eric, it is all a matter of learning how to use the tool. There are apps for the phone that enable the user more control. My point being that cameras that emulate film like operations are limiting and that digital imaging is much broader and capable that film ever could be and by orders of magnitude. I can do some things with my iPhone that I would not consider with my big Nikons.</p>

[darren_malbut]

<p>Thanks very much for all the responses again guys, really appreciating all the input.</p>

<p>I've been doing more reading and watching and a bit more looking at stores and I think I've narrowed my options a bit.</p>

<p>Whatever I get, I know I'm aiming for full frame as a 'final' camera. I know in many ways that probably doesn't make much sense, but I know myself and I know that I won't be 'happy' with my equipment unless I'm using FF. I know this will cost me much more. I think I'll also feel happier putting my money into a Nikon system. I can't get over how much more capable they feel than the Canon equivalents, and it looks (from reading around, especially on the Rockwell site) like Nikon produce some really good, usable lenses in lower price brackets (making it easier for me to get a higher end body and still get good optics while saving for more durable gear).</p>

<p>That being said, I'm not certain if now is the right time for me to invest in a FF set-up.</p>

<p>Looking closer at prices in the UK, if I <em>were</em> to go FF from the start, then the D800 is probably the best route as I get the impression that it won't be outdated technology and image-wise for years, and low shutter count bodies can be had for around £800-850, whereas the 700 is still commanding closer to £550-600 for a (seemingly) much less equipped camera.</p>

<p>So, the other alternative would be to buy a Nikon APS-C camera in the full knowledge that I wouldn't be 'happy' (again, my loss) in the long-term, but at least I could get going quicker. <em>But<strong>,</strong></em>because I know in my mind that I'm aiming for a FF set-up, I won't want to invest very heavily in a body or DX lenses, and that means I could be limited. For this option, at the moment, I've been checking out the D3300, which can be had with the VRII 18-55 for about £340 in the UK. Not sure if that's a good contender or not though as it does look very geared toward the 'great image quality if you don't really want to learn much about DSLR photography' end of the market. And it won't automatically meter with my existing MF lenses, which is a bit of a bummer.</p>

<p><strong>Where I'm at:</strong> If I could know for certain that 4 years down the line I'll still be loving using my DSLR, and really getting full value from it, then I'd happily get a D800 and start building from there as I feel like that's the sort of camera that, if I can avoid camera magazines and gear sites, could tick all the boxes for many years to come <em><strong>if</strong></em> I keep it cared for.<br /> <em>But</em> being concerned that there's a chance the DSLR bug might pass, leaving me with a very over-spec'd home camera, makes me also think about getting a cheaper-end APS-C with a kit lens and seeing how I get on for a while. Hopefully, by which time I'll have a better idea about what I'm looking for and be comfortable with how Nikon lays things out and how their menus work, etc.</p>

<p>Do either of these options sound not crazy? :s Thanks again :)</p>

[richsimmons]

<p>Unfortunately, companies thrive on the seemingly obsolescence of their products so you'll buy "new and better." But if the camera took great shots before, it will continue to do so. I think the only time you need to upgrade is when the equipment can no longer fulfill your vision or it is not performing to your standards.<br>

That being said, I've always owned cropped sensor bodies. I've had the Nikon D5100, which took excellent photos, but the menu system drove me crazy. I think you may experience this as well with the D3300. The one glaring advantage Canon has over Nikon is in the entry level cameras, because Canon keeps the controls on the camera and Nikon puts them into the menu. Slows your process down, IMO, and I got tired of it. I bumped up to a D7100 and love this camera. Got it a month after it came on the market and didn't look back.....until yesterday when I got a used D700.<br>

What? Why would he get an 8 year old camera? Few reasons. I would have loved a D800, just wasn't in the budget, even used. I already have a couple of full frame lenses. The D700 has the D3's sensor and auto-focus and even at 12mp, it's still quite good. It has pro control layout. Also, the camera only had 8800 shots taken, it looks and handles like it's brand new. And, I needed a second body. I could have gotten another D7100 and I probably would have been happy, but wow, what a hefty beast the D700 is to hold in your hand. <br>

I know event photographers that still use D300's successfully. Met a guy over the weekend who used a D800 and D300 combo for a job. The end result is if you'll be happy. <br>

I don't think you'd go wrong with the D800 and I don't think it's technology is going to fade anytime soon. I'd go with the D800 and build your glass from there. 36 megapixels is a lot of leeway to crop around with. I don't think you'd regret it.</p>

[Two23]

<blockquote>

<p>That being said, I'm not certain if now is the right time for me to invest in a FF set-up</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would definitely use the word "invest" when thinking of digital cameras. Their value drops like a rock! My strategy has been to build up a system. The system has a foundation of the very best lenses available since lenses are THE most important thing. The other part of the system is a solid professional level tripod and a lighting system. Every couple of years I buy a used camera to plug into the system. In the past three years my system has seen three cameras come and go. As for "FF", I shoot a DX, a FF, and also 6x6 Rolleiflex, 35mm Nikon, 4x5 Chamonix, and now a 5x7 Gundlach Korona. There's really nothing "special" about any of the formats. I do own a Nikon D800E. It took me a couple of months before I started getting anything I liked from it. It's very demanding of perfect technique. I use a tripod with it about 90% of the time. I paid $1,500 for the camera and ended up spending about $5,000 on lenses for it. Very demanding on lenses. Now that I've got it all dialed in (took awhile), I make and sell very big enlargements to customers. Nikon's best general purpose right now, value for the money, is probably the D7200. Next is D750. The D8xx series are best choice if you often crop down a lot or make big enlargements. For enlargements they are unequaled (if you use state of art pro lenses.)</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[darren_malbut]

Glad to hear you're happy with your 700 Rich :)

 

 

 

I think I'm tending to agree with you at the moment, and it mightn't be a bad thing that I'm not able to purchase an 800 right away. The few months or so needed to get a bigger pot together will give me time to make sure I'm really happy with the decision.

 

 

 

Hopefully I can have a proper look at one in between time aswell.

[darren_malbut]

Kent, I actually use large format printing with my job (graphics and exhibition work), so the opportunity to create very large

prints is something I'm finding very appealing with the 800. Glad you are happy with yours.

 

That's quite a list of formats! :)

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Whatever you do, do not put too much value in what Rockwell writes. Seriously. His site has some very useful bits and pieces, some decent and some are sheer fantasy. Yes, Nikon has some good lenses at lower prices too, but I'd recommend photozone.de over Rockwell if you want to see that point proven ;-)</p>

<p>Given your description, I'd really consider getting a low(er) end camera. There is little wrong with the D3x00 and D5x00 models for a lot of uses. If you can stretch a bit, a D7x00 is nicer as they'll give metering with the lenses you already own (do not discount the D7000! Can be found for a lot less than the D7100). The 18-55VR lenses aren't bad, the 18-105VR is a very decent performer that can be found for little money.<br>

Build a system, at your own pace and budget. Consider that lenses last, and bodies last a lot less (repair becomes uneconomic faster than you like). Don't make the body the centrepiece of the decision, because a seriously good lens on a mediocre body delivers more magic than a mediocre lens on a stellar body. Next, see how things go, before dropping big money on a body, that will loose value the second you take it from its box.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Having owned and used both, the D700 blows the MkI Canon 5D out of the water. No contest there. Handling, menu options, better dynamic range and built in AWL commander flash all make the D700 a clear winner. I can't speak for any other Canon/Nikon comparisons.</p>

<p>Also, unless you're going to stick with the 105mm Nikkor as your only lens, you need to budget a fair amount for glassware. Even a decent used 3rd party mid-range zoom could easily cost you half your budget. However I can recommend the Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8 zoom, which is an absolute steal for the sort of quality it delivers.</p>

<p> </p>