I need a new digital SLR camera: could anyone please suggest one?

[chontrell]

Hi All,

I am a novice in photography. I have a conventional Nikon N60, which I use from time to time. However, I want to buy a digital camera. Lately, I set my eyes upon Nikon D7000 and seriously considered buying it. Nevertheless, I came across a web site on the internet that has an elaborate description of the Nikon D7000 that changed my mind. I am hereby providing you with the address in case you would want to analyse it for yourself:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D7000/

I need a camera mainly for three functions: 1) Portraiture, 2) Landscape Photography and 3) Action Photography. The above review describes and demonstrates in detail the abilities/shortcomings of the D7000 as compared to Canon EOS D60; especially the 'buffer capacity' problems of the camera when it comes to shooting 'Action Photography'. I have a £1000 budget, which is inclusive of the camera body and the lens. Could someone please suggest to me a good camera to purchase.

Regards,

Chontrell

[Donald]

Perhaps the first thing you could tell us is what it was in the description that made you change your mind.

I cannot think of anything that might have been in that that will not, in one form or another, be in most other DSLRs. But if you can be specific about that, it will help people help you.

[Shadowman]

You'll find info on buffer capacity at the link below. If you are aware of buffer capacity you are far ahead of the game.

http://www.better-digital-photo-tips...ra-buffer.html

[chontrell]

Well Donald, firstly Nikon D7000 when compared to Canon EOS D60 is more costly pricewise and assumed to be better equipped with electronic components and light metering. The above mentioned article demonstrates clearly that the claimed advantages by Nikon over EOS D60 are not substantiated and minimal. They have also demonstrated that pictures taken by a Nikon D7000 on a sunny day have almost every time came out to be overexposed. My personal observation is that although Nikon Nikkor lenses are superior to that of Canon's, the colours in a picture produced by a Canon EOS D60 were more vibrant and closer to the natural colours of the subjects. The EOS D60 also behaves superior when both cameras were used in the 'burst' mode; I mean the buffer capacity as I explained in my previous message.

[Scott Stephen]

Well Donald, firstly Nikon D7000 when compared to Canon EOS D60 is more costly pricewise and assumed to be better equipped with electronic components and light metering. The above mentioned article demonstrates clearly that the claimed advantages by Nikon over EOS D60 are not substantiated and minimal. They have also demonstrated that pictures taken by a Nikon D7000 on a sunny day have almost every time came out to be overexposed. My personal observation is that although Nikon Nikkor lenses are superior to that of Canon's, the colours in a picture produced by a Canon EOS D60 were more vibrant and closer to the natural colours of the subjects. The EOS D60 also behaves superior when both cameras were used in the 'burst' mode; I mean the buffer capacity as I explained in my previous message.

Not to generalize, but generally, when speaking in generalizations, people see that backwards from the way you do. Typically "they" say Canon glass is better but (at least lately) Nikon sensors are better.

[Donald]

As John says, it sounds as if you're pretty much up-to-speed on technical issues.

I think you have to base your decisions on an appreciation of what your likely 'real world' situations are going to be as much as on the technical specs/reports that are around. If you rely solely on these specs/reports you would spend you whole life comparing and contrasting a never be able to make a decision as to which camera to buy.

For example, I would say that unless you were in the market for a very high end camera in order to specialise, almost to a professional level, in sports/action photography and needed high shooting rates and fast buffering, then you shouldn't spend too much time being worried about what might be pretty slight differences between models and makes.

At the end of the day either of the cameras that you are looking at is going to help you produce high quality images. You just have to learn to work within the constraints of whichever one you buy. Each one will, I'm sure, have strengths and weaknesses compared to the other. You need to get both into your hands and see which one feels 'right' for you.

[Manfred M]

I had a quick read of the review and some of their points are valid, while others are a bit more dubious and may or may not have any real life impact. So some thoughts and comments on the review and posting from others.

1. I rarely run out of buffer space because I virtually never shoot burst mode; it is too much of a pain having to review all of those almost identical shots to determine which one is "best".

2. I personally am not a fan of articulated displays as I worry about breaking them off, so a camera that has one is generally rated lower in my books. Funny how this is not a feature on pro cameras. I think this comment by the reviewers is a bit of a joke

3. The comments on the video and autofocus are a joke too, as no serious video shooter ever uses autofocus or auto exposure when shooting. Using them results in amateurish looking video. They are okay to set up the shot, but disable them while shooting. I don't shoot video on a DSLR, I use a dedicated video camera.

4. Better / worse glass; each of the manufacturers has lenses that perform extremely well and in real life shooting you will never be able to tell the difference, even if you are shooting pro glass.

5. Sensor quality - while the cameras launched this year by Nikon have some outstanding sensors, both the 60D and D7000 are around 2+ years old and are using an older sensor technology, so this is a moot point. You make comments on overall vibrance and image quality. Sorry to say that composition and post-production will have a far greater impact on look and feel than anything else. I have shot Canon and Nikon side by side under good lighting and frankly the results were pretty well identical.

I personally don't think you can go wrong with either camera you are looking at.

When I switched from film to a DSLR I had a hard look at both Canon and Nikon and if I added up the pluses and minuses; there really wasn''t a lot to choose from between them. My decision on which brand to purchase eventually went down to the unit that felt better in my hands and was more intuitive for me to use; i.e. ergonomics. I did not come from either a Canon or Nikon film SLR, so I had no preconcieved views on either brand.

[Carl in Louisiana]

If you was to ask me I would tell you that the Canon 60D is the better of the two. Ask a Nikon D7000 owner and he would say the Nikon D7000 is the better of the two.
Donald made a very good suggestion go to a camera shop and ask to hold each one. I was looking at the same two cameras when I was going to DSLR's. I downloaded both manuals and mulled over the features I most wanted plus browsing all the reviews on both. What I came away with may not be to your liking on the other hand it may be just what your looking for.
Action photography in camera RAW will fill the buffer faster than 4x6" JPEG's will, something to think about for action shots. Hope this helps you out some as I know it can be nerve wracking, too many reviews will drive you nuts. I'm still recovering!

[chontrell]

I had a quick read of the review and some of their points are valid, while others are a bit more dubious and may or may not have any real life impact. So some thoughts and comments on the review and posting from others.

1. I rarely run out of buffer space because I virtually never shoot burst mode; it is too much of a pain having to review all of those almost identical shots to determine which one is "best".

2. I personally am not a fan of articulated displays as I worry about breaking them off, so a camera that has one is generally rated lower in my books. Funny how this is not a feature on pro cameras. I think this comment by the reviewers is a bit of a joke

3. The comments on the video and autofocus are a joke too, as no serious video shooter ever uses autofocus or auto exposure when shooting. Using them results in amateurish looking video. They are okay to set up the shot, but disable them while shooting. I don't shoot video on a DSLR, I use a dedicated video camera.

4. Better / worse glass; each of the manufacturers has lenses that perform extremely well and in real life shooting you will never be able to tell the difference, even if you are shooting pro glass.

5. Sensor quality - while the cameras launched this year by Nikon have some outstanding sensors, both the 60D and D7000 are around 2+ years old and are using an older sensor technology, so this is a moot point. You make comments on overall vibrance and image quality. Sorry to say that composition and post-production will have a far greater impact on look and feel than anything else. I have shot Canon and Nikon side by side under good lighting and frankly the results were pretty well identical.

I personally don't think you can go wrong with either camera you are looking at.

When I switched from film to a DSLR I had a hard look at both Canon and Nikon and if I added up the pluses and minuses; there really wasn''t a lot to choose from between them. My decision on which brand to purchase eventually went down to the unit that felt better in my hands and was more intuitive for me to use; i.e. ergonomics. I did not come from either a Canon or Nikon film SLR, so I had no preconcieved views on either brand.

Grampy Diver: Thanks for your efforts. I checked Nikon D800 as well (this years camera). While technically superb, it is well beyond my budget; wish I could afford it!

[Manfred M]

Grampy Diver: Thanks for your efforts. I checked Nikon D800 as well (this years camera). While technically superb, it is well beyond my budget; wish I could afford it!

All I can say it is a wonderful camera (I've had my D800 since early May), but I still use my 3-1/2 year old D90 (and my 30 year old Leica R3). If I were starting out looking at cameras today, I would have a very hard look at the D600. It almost looks to be the D7000 successor.

[chontrell]

All I can say it is a wonderful camera (I've had my D800 since early May), but I still use my 3-1/2 year old D90 (and my 30 year old Leica R3). If I were starting out looking at cameras today, I would have a very hard look at the D600. It almost looks to be the D7000 successor.

D600 with which lens? Thank you!

[dubaiphil]

I used to post regularly at cameralabs. A good informative site for newcomers, but some of the reviews are very nit picky.

One of the first things you'll do with a new DSLR camera purchase is try out continual high - clickety clickety click

Or maybe it's just a man thing, I don't know!

In reality the amount of time you'll use continual high is very low, unless you're shooting sports for a local school. Sure, 12FPS is great for getting a decisive moment at a sporting venue, but 5FPS can get good results too, and a good knowledge of the action you are covering can put your composition and focus in a far better position for a good shot in single shot bursts than little knowledge of the sport/action and a high frame rate. Still you are very very seldom going to be shooting long bursts. I prefer a double or triple tap to a full on burst!

Personally if I were shooting sports I'd be more concerned about the focus capabilities of camera and lens than the frame rate. It's all very well having a large buffer and frame rate, but if your lens is hunting for focus or not tracking effectively, you're just going to end up with a lot of photos which aren't keepers.

[jcuknz]

If I found a camera was over exposing I would set it to a minusEV setting. But the whole question of judging cameras from -photos on the web is highly questionable since we don't know if your end is accurately set ...I know mine is not so never look at such photos

[Manfred M]

D600 with which lens? Thank you!

It depends on what you are shooting. The lens I use most often is the f/2.8 24-70mm and followed by the f/2.8 70-200mm, but these lenses are expensive and each costs about the same as the camera body.

[ajohnw]

I'm very much a Canon man on dslr's and study technical reviews very carefully as often there is what might be called misleading information in them. One of the best places to look for reviews on cameras is dpreview. They give very complete information but it still needs careful study. The forum is a different kettle of fish.

1st things first why am I a Canon man. Years ago Nikon was the major player in many ways. Few professionals would use anything else. Canon were not so successful. Then along came Canon dslr's and things changed. I understand that they still have the largest share of the market. The initial success was down to sensor technology. Looking at Canon and Nikon now things aren't so clear but when I look at dynamic range for instance carefully I still feel Canon has the edge even though a cursory look at the reviews would suggest otherwise. The sensor is a very important part of a camera. Which make someone chooses is up to them really and penalties are small if any as a lot depends on how the camera is used.

Given that most people have a budget the next question is which camera from the range and which lens as well. One way of look at that is if an £800 camera and a £200 lens is more desirable than a £400 camera and a £600 lens. A 15mp pixel count is less desirable than 20mp etc. If some one is going to remain seriously interested in photography for a long time the more expensive lens option is almost bound to be cheaper in the end. This doesn't mean choosing full frame lenses as some of the aps lenses are equally as good but they come at a cost. Pixel count on current cameras is almost irrelevant. I sometimes think of upgrading one of my Canon cameras so look through the features available on the entry and higher entry level cameras. The manufacturers are very good at omitting all sorts of things that aren't really of much advantage from the cheaper cameras. I concluded in real terms I could buy anything from 450D upwards but wouldn't have live view if I bought that one. 12mp is way to big for pc screen shots and ok for A4 prints. In real terms I would probably go for a manufacturers refurbished 500D or 550D or maybe the 1000D. Probably which one of those turned out to be the cheapest. I like doing things that way.

You have covered a wide usage range. To be able to do all fairly well on aps camera you would need a focal length range of 17 to 300mm. In your budget you would need to do that with 2 of the cheaper range of lenses. Image stabilisation would be essential on the one covering the longer focal length. You would probably need 3 lenses to cover that well with the more expensive lenses and to really justify using them.

You mention sports use so probably are in interested in buffer sizes and frame rates as this is the best way of capturing the action. Taking a tennis serve for instance you might get 3 useful shots taken during the actual serve at 6 frames per second. To be sure to get them you might have to start as soon as the ball was thrown up. 12 frames total? I don't know but will try something like that one day. There is another aspect to this though and that is shutter life. Canon do make one with a specified life of 100,000 shots but it a £1000 full frame camera. The lenses for these are always expensive. I get the impression from others that many lesser cameras are no where near as robust. Maybe some one on here can comment from experience. A lot depends on how often really.

Hope this helps. It might cause some confusion but I've tried to indicate what sort of camera and lens set up most people would want over time. Your interests aren't that unusual really other than frame buffer sizes. The frame rate is important too.

-

[AB26]

Hi Chontrell,
Advising someone on what camera to buy is a very difficult thing to do. A camera is very much a personal choice, like a new car. Canon or Nikon? Always a big question. I believe both are good cameras and both will do what you want it to do if you know how to operate it properly. You may get a lot of very good advice from a lot of very experienced people but the end of the day you will be “stuck” with the camera you buy.
No matter what, you should buy whatever you put your mind to and suits you best. Be a little patient in buying and investigate a little more. Go to a shop and handle both cameras you are considering, feel what it feels like in your hand and decide for yourself if you feel better with camera A or B.

I spend a lot of time on the internet reading reviews on different cameras. There is no such thing as Canon or Nikon or Nikon or Canon is better or worse, both are good cameras. It is a personal choice of taste, you like it or you don’t.
Read reviews from other reviewers as well, not only Camera Labs. Many of the reviewers are bias towards either Nikon or Canon. No matter what camera you buy, you can get great shots from both.

If you are in love with A why marry B just because someone else likes B more than A?

[NikonFL]

Hi All,

I have a £1000 budget, which is inclusive of the camera body and the lens. Could someone please suggest to me a good camera to purchase.

Regards,

Chontrell

Based upon your budget and current N70 film camera, buy a USED Nikon D90 and a USED Nikkor 18-105. Leaps and bounds beyond the N70, it would be a no comparison introduction to digital for you and fits well within your budget. Explore some well recognized Pro material on the internet, such as Ken Rockwell. Invest in a 3rd party manual such as Nikon D90 for Dummies. Unless you've changed your budget, I believe the D7000, D600, etc. are out. Good luck.

Gil

[ajohnw]

If people are interested in technical presentation type reviews of cameras I don't think that there are any that match dpreview. They also provide sample images. Lots of them. The technical stuff can be skipped if needed as they also contain the usual usage info and comparisons with other similar cameras. They also provide info on raw headroom and often how adobe software conversion increase what's available in the highlights. Pointless as far as Adobe goes in my view as curve changes can achieve the same thing on any half decent package. Often the easiest way of finding a review is to google dpreview make and model. It's a european model site. Before buying one of the range of cameras I mentioned I would spend several hours on there and also download the manuals from canon I have been through the manual exercise already but some one with no experience of dslr's might not find that so useful.

As to the Canon Nikon debate a comment about Canon being rather conservative in the highlight area often crops up. What this actually means is more likely to clip extreme highlights in jpg's. However this all really depends on where they are within the cameras dynamic range - ie exposure really. The dynamic range curves of the 2 makes tend to differ but are getting more and more similar over time usually as an option on the Canons. Nikon have a habit of having an extensively compressed black end to the curves over several stops. Also more like that at the highlight end. When looking at these figures they need careful study as in one situation one camera may look like it will cover more exposure values than another but later information may indicate otherwise. It often shows canon going further into the highlight area for instance.

Dpreview do make disparaging comments about cameras from time to time but as with any review site they probably wouldn't get any more cameras to test if they went too far. As always of course they may be provided with selected cameras to test. They may omit useful info too like Pens not having image stabilisation during manual focusing nor mentioning the problems of actually using the electronic view on cameras like these. In my view Pen's and such like are not really suitable for embryonic photographers. Comments like that would be very damaging to the manufacturer.

One thing I should mention noticing the comment about camera LCD screens it seems some dslr's may not be able to change focus while shooting video. I know no more but something else to look out for. When they do focus when shooting a video they seem to use contrast AF rather than phase. As always with contrast types it seems speed may be a problem. Curious really as my tiny sony compact does it quickly and accurately in reasonable light. No camera I have used is a good as early active infa red autofocus though. It has range limitations but I will always remember my dismay when I bought a compact and found that it would no longer focus in the dark. Some contrast systems at the time were awful.

-

[chontrell]

Based upon your budget and current N70 film camera, buy a USED Nikon D90 and a USED Nikkor 18-105. Leaps and bounds beyond the N70, it would be a no comparison introduction to digital for you and fits well within your budget. Explore some well recognized Pro material on the internet, such as Ken Rockwell. Invest in a 3rd party manual such as Nikon D90 for Dummies. Unless you've changed your budget, I believe the D7000, D600, etc. are out. Good luck.

Gil

Thank you Gil, your opinion has been very helpful. I know D600 is surely out of my range but fortunately D7000 is not: you can purchase a brand new D7000 for as low as £450.00 (the next lowest is £580.00) here in England. This would provide me with a budget of £420.00 to £550.00 to purchase a good lens, which I think is sufficient.

[Cogito]

here The main thrust of the thread is that there is no "best" brand. But most importantly "TRY BEFORE YOU BUY"