Choosing Good SLR

[shashank_suman]

Hi,

I am looking forward to buy a perfect Nikon which suits ametuers. I

recently became a photography enthusiast . There are a few things i

planned up to take pictures of, the more i think about them the more

i ponder about this matter.So i decided to share with more

experienced people, I assume most of the people should have passed

this situation before buying their first good camera.

 

There are a list i want my camera selection criteria.

 

1) Budget <= 275$

2) Take a shot of a person returning a tennis serve,preferably ball

and person hitting without blurring, Myself as stationary(i.e

anticipating the shot at a position).

3) Shot of a bird flying with me following it through the lens.

4) In a landscape picture object nearest and farthest with clarity .

5) Good flash for night use.

6) With this budget how much zoom i can expect?

These are criteria i expect in a camera.

 

Any suggestions are welcome !!!

Shashank

[rajiv1]

Shashank:

</br></br>

You can do all these things in almost all cameras. My guess you are new to the technical aspects of this field and a sensible suggestion will be to start with a minimum of equipment, get used to the system and after enough exploration, decide on upgrades. Try not to cram your expectations before you have even understood what camera systems are and how they work.</br></br>

 

Photography, you will learn, is an extremely expensive hobby for equipment enthusiasts and people who have very specialized requirements in mind. A lot is possible (with restrictions) with minimal equipment and you need to practice and work on the camera to understand what is possible and and to what extent. Firstly, ignore your budget and expectations and spend a lot of time reading about what a camera is. Go to a camera shop and talk with the salesperson and get a feel of what is involved. You will learn a lot of jargon associated. Try to understand them by playing around with the different varieties of cameras. You will learn than the equipment required for shooting Nat Geo style Bird Shots is exorbidantly priced and requires extreme amounts of patience and knowledge. At the same time, you will learn that most great images are made with modest cameras.</br></br>

 

You will also learn that once the camera is purchased, you will have to spend TONS of $$ on film before you get your first decent image. Then you will later see that the type of film used affects the type of images you wish to shoot. Well... search and learn from this site. There is a beginner's section in the 'Learn' menu item somewhere and you will find tons and tons more of information there than I can mention here. Do your research and read a lot. It is important to understand how an image is made (composition, exposure, interpretation) than it is to know what it is made with. Hope you will learn photography the right way and go out and buy yourself a cheap manual camera (fm2, fe, fa) and a cheap lens (50 f/1.8) and shoot 100 rolls before thinking about more equipments.</br></br>

 

cheers

[rajiv1]

And I forgot to mention. THERE IS NO PERFECT CAMERA. As a matter of fact, there is not even a "good enough" camera. All equipments are a compromise...

[bruce_garrett]

There is no perfect camera? How about the F5?

[roto]

An F5 for $275?

[shashank_suman]

I was thinking of Nikon AF Cameras though it takes out the punch out of taking SHOTS Manually.But somehow or other beginner needs assitance so a camera which can guide me in beginning and later on i can start manipulating whatever i see through the view finder.Nat Geo idea looks Good.Hope it happens down the line.

[jim_gifford]

<<These are criteria i expect in a camera. >>

Your budget will not allow you to accomplish everything you want to do. Sorry!

 

1) Budget <= 275$

 

It is easy to find out which autofocus Nikon cameras you can buy for this amount of money, and which lenses. You just have to shop at places like www.adorama.com, www.bhphotovideo.com and www.keh.com (a great site for used camera equipment) for a few minutes.

 

2) Take a shot of a person returning a tennis serve,preferably ball and person hitting without blurring, Myself as stationary(i.e anticipating the shot at a position).

 

This means you want to be able to use a fast shutter speed like 1/1000 second or so. Any Nikon SLR will do this for you.

 

 

3) Shot of a bird flying with me following it through the lens.

 

Birds are not very big, really, and most of the time they are not very close to us when they fly. You want a BIG telephoto lens to get this sort of shot, and there is simply no way to accomplish that when you limit youself to $275. This one requirement (birds in flight) is why people pay $5,000 or more for a single lens like a 500mm or 600mm or even 800mm telephoto. Really. I don't have that sort of money to spend on lenses either. Here's something you could try. You can get a Nikkor 70-300mm AF-D lens for about $250, or a 70-300mm AF-G zoom lens for about $125, and on a bright sunny day you can probably get some "bird in flight" shots. But it will not really be the correct tool for that difficult job.

 

 

4) In a landscape picture object nearest and farthest with clarity .

 

This involves what we call depth of field. When you want to keep near and far objects all in focus, you want maximum depth of field. Two factors are at work here. Wide angle focal lengths give you more depth of field than do telephoto focal lengths. Small aperture settings give you more depth of field than wide aperture settings. So for the shot you describe, with a lot of depth of field, choose a wide angle lens and select a small aperture.

 

5) Good flash for night use.

 

Many Nikon camera bodies offer an onboard flash. They are excellent for some things, espcecially for illuminating people and things 2-6 meters from the camera.

 

 

6) With this budget how much zoom i can expect?

 

If you buy a new camera, the best you can do for your budget is a 28-80mm G-series zoom on the entry-level Nikon SLR body. Add a little money to your budget and you can get that body with two lenses, a 28-80 and 70-300, both G-series zooms.

 

I don't think you can do much better than that in the used market, if you really only want to spend $275 or so.

 

However, if your budget could stretch to $500 or so, your choices would open up a LOT.

 

Have fun,

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"Hi, I am looking forward to buy a perfect Nikon

which suits ametuers." --Shashank Suman<br>

</em><br>

Well there is not perfect camera and no perfect Nikon. I own a

bunch of different Nikons including four manual focus Nikons and

two auto focus Nikon because I want different Nikons for

different uses.<br>

<br>

The lowest priced Nikon I will recommend and a very good one

indeed, it is the Nikon N80 or F80. These are one and the same

but the name is changed to N80 for sales by Nikon USA to N80. The

lower priced Nikons have significant compromises. The N80/F80 has

most every thing a serious amateur photographer might want.<br>

<br>

The lower price cameras sacrifice one thing that I will not do

without. The ability to set my own film speed. When the contrast

in a scene is greater using the published will often lead to

under exposure of negative films. This is true for both color and

B&W films.<br>

<br>

For all you want you will need to build the system slowly. <br>

<br>

Best,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[awindsor]

To add to the previous posters comments about landscape photos with foreground and background sharp I would recommend reading about the hyperfocal distance. This is a distance which is computed to "maximize" depth-of-field (though it depends on certain assumptions about how much blur actually counts as sharp). You will still need to use a small aperture though. This will mean a long shutter speed in many situations and hence for this sort of shot you will be better off with a tripod.

 

On camera flash is not very useful for taking pictures at night though it does provide nice fill during the day.

[olivier_reichenbach]

Sorry to be a little OT, but whatever you do, DON'T buy from Adorama on-line! Their

rating of their used equipment is very, very optimistic. And that's a gross understatement.

I once bought a Rolleiflex TLR from them and, upon receiving it, it took me all of five

seconds to see that the external meter not only didn't work, but had its plastic window

broken, crushed down, and that he whole unit had been badly put back in place with its

holding ring also broken. Nobody could have missed that. Yet, the eBay ad said «Meter

works fine». Also, the focusing had hard spots, and the viewfinder had to be forced open

with the fingers. Yet, the ad rated the camera as a 9/10. The good thing is that they

refunded me, but after five weeks of hassle and aggravation.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"On camera flash is not very useful for taking pictures at night though it does provide nice fill during the day." --Alistair Windsor</em><br>

<br>

I guess we have established that Alistair does not do

photojournalism or public relations photography.<br>

<br>

Cheers!

[ky2]

<p><i>"There is no perfect camera and no perfect Nikon"</i><p>

<p>Dave, I'm surprised! Ofcourse there is! it's the camera you can never afford!</p>

[jay_.]

The perfect Nikon was the F Photomic FTn. It's been all downhill since.

[douglas_green1]

An F5 won't be perfect until I can fit it in my pocket. There are any number of things that my Olympus 35RC does better than an F5. And vice-versa, of course.

[rob_malkin]

I second the F80. I think just as much of it as I do my F100. I am sure you would be very very happy with a F80 and a 50mm f1.8.

Gotta love those on demand grid lines.(better in that respect than F100 and F5)

And its small and will not attract too much attention. And that means a lot of you live in a city like me.

 

rob

[awindsor]

By on-camera flash I actually meant the built in flash as opposed to a hot shoe

mounted external flash. Sorry for the imprecision. I have seen no photojournalist who

relies on the built in flash.

 

To stay within his budget he will have to forego an external flash (though there are

some relatively cheap third party flashes). The built in flash is not powerful enough

for flexible night photography. It will serve to illuminate a subject as long as it is

close.

[jbjr]

I agree with the N80, and would suggest that a Tamron 28-200 or 28-300 be considered.

 

While these lenses are not of supreme quality they are quite good for the price. Either of these will cover a huge range of focal lengths at a price that can not be beat. Remember that you can start with a less than optimal setup and upgrade as your budget allows.

 

I might suggest looking at ebay for used equipment, BUT have someone who knows equipment help you, as there are great deals on great equipment and bad deals on bad equipment.

 

You can get a N80 with a 28-300 or 28-200 for about $300 if you will wait for the opportunity.

 

What ever you buy, learn to make the most of it by going to a local camera club or spending time with any photographers you know.

 

JB

[gcphoto]

If you really enjoy this, I can promise it will not be your last purchase. I'd consider

spending as little as possible on a very basic camera (most will do what you want). Check

out KEH.com for a reliable source of used equipment and also call all the other brokers--

bhphoto.com etc. Think about a simple old school 35mm with a good reputation like the

Nikon FM2 which has been in production forever. A 50mm lens will teach you to move

your body in order to get the best shot. I think this is important because so many people

who learn with zooms forget they can actually walk around to change their perspective

(keyword).

[bjarke_schulin]

If you want a nikon you can "grow" with and don't want a manual body as I prefer get the f80/n80, it's light good AF. and has all the features you will need.

I would recommnd you got a real nikkor standard zoom like a 28 80 G, or the better the 24 85 G. Instead of a 28 200/300 because these zooms have porer image quality.

Then you can save for a tele zoom later like the nikkor 75 300

And remember it saves you a lot of money to buy used..

happy shooting bjarke,

[everitt]

"There is no perfect camera? How about the F5?"

 

Let's see the $2000 F5 beat a $200 TLR for landscape or still life shots.

[armando_roldan]

PEFECT CAMERA?

 

1970's Pentax Spotmatic and 70-210mm zoom. Its worth about $125 but I shot some award winning photos with that set up when I was a teenager. Like someone here said about the Nikon F, I have been downhill since then.oh...I forgot the $35 Vivitar flash I used with that rig.

[xmms]

i think the F80/N80 is suitable......save ur money to get good lenses.

and ur last criteria,if u really think the quality is high priority,then the "how much zoom" is not the case.....

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"It's been all downhill since." --Jay<br>

</em><br>

I could not have been happier to switch from a chrome Nikon F w/o

meter to a chrome Nikon F2 w/o meter and then later added a back

F2 Photomic. Two items stand out. First I didnt have to

find a place to put the camera back while loading film in the

field and second I didnt have to waste frames to use the

mirror lock up.<br>

<br>

I do wish I had a Nikon F, a black Nikon F with standard prism. Id

take it out occasionally for a Sunday drive like a vintage car.<br>

<br>

It wasnt an issue for my Nikon F or first Nikon F2 but the

SPD metering of the Nikon F2As was a pleasure after using Cds

meters. I generally use center-weighted metering for slides and a

hand held spotmeter for B&W.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

Here are a couple of clips from the late Galen & Barbara

Rowells site...</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><strong>Nikon N80 </strong><br>

A lightweight camera with virtually all of the important

features that an advanced photographer could ever wantthis

may be the best value in a 35mm SLR. Galen used the N80

extensively on treks, climbs, and trail runs, and a number of

images made with it grace our gallery walls.<br>

<br>

<strong>Nikon F100 </strong><br>

This was Galens primary camera for the last few years

of his life, replacing his N90s. It may be the most practical

Nikon ever for photography in the field.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<p>I never knew these people except from Galens column in

Outdoor Photographer and his photos. I still feel a loss.<br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.mountainlight.com/" target="_new"><u>http://www.mountainlight.com/</u></a>

<br>

<br>

Best,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"Let's see the $2000 F5 beat a $200 TLR for landscape

or still life shots." --Jason Everitt<br>

</em><br>

Let's see, the $200 used TLR beats a $1300 used F5 for auto

racing, sports and macro?<br>

<br>

What did I say? <em>"There is no perfect camera and no

perfect Nikon."</em> Oh yes, I forgot, now the perfect Nikon

is the D2H.<br>

<br>

Cheers,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[everitt]

That was exactly my point David, there is no perfect camera, different cameras

for different jobs. For action, sports, etc. I would take the F5; for still

photography, I'll take a TLR over any 35mm system.