SERIOUS - Canon EOS-1000D DSLR Camera with EF-S18-55mm Lens

[schoolbusdriver]

Now that my youngest (29) son's not in ICU every few weeks, we've had time to see more than the inside of a 10 bed ward. So. Last year, I bought a Fuji finepix F50fd (PAS). It's ok for off-the-cuff snaps, shaky video and grainy night shots, but I'm thinking of getting something that will take shots that match what my eyes see rather than the opinions of a half blind Fuji engineer (either that or I've got Monet's eyes)

After a bit of searching, and bearing in mind I'd like to be able to take shots from a distance by radio remote control (so as not to spook the wildlife), I've noticed the "Canon EOS-1000D DSLR Camera with EF-S18-55mm Lens" as a possibility. Knowing there are a few VBF'rs with far more knowledge about this than me, I thought I'd ask for opinions. So, opinions about the camera anyone ?

(I've also just been given an unexpected cheque for £93 that will offset any costs. And I'm looking for an autosleeper)

[mendhak]

Looking at the specs, it looks quite nice. How much are you getting it for and are you willing to get other cameras in the same price range?

I also think that no matter what you get, you'll have to go through the initial phase of coming to grips with the difference in how pictures are taken; but right from your first shot you'll notice a huge difference in the quality, before and after.

[schoolbusdriver]

It's currently going for £342.59 at Argos, but I haven't done a proper price search yet. Ebay etc. is no good for this - I want to be able to thump the counter and make demands if something goes wrong. This means a big-name, local (within, say, 30 miles) store that isn't going to go bankrupt because of the recession rather than online, but sometimes it's worth it.

I'm more than happy to buy other types/brands if they offer a similar spec at around that price. I was looking at the (cheaper) Sony DSLR-A200K Digital SLR Camera + Zoom Lens Kit (18-70mm F3.5-5.6), but the lack of a "live view" put me off.

The cheaper SLRs always seem to have a flaw, such as no remote shutter . I was rather hoping to find one that did mpegs, I'd even have settled for mjpegs, but if there is a good one I haven't come across it. Besides, I can get a proper camcorder for that.

[wossname]

something that will take shots that match what my eyes see rather than the opinions of a half blind Fuji engineer

Love your work.

Argos' products do suck, but they do have one saving grace. They will take any product back for a full refund, even if you've opened the box.

[mendhak]

Not a lot of SLRs have the viewfinder/live-view thing. But once you start using it, you'll notice that it's not that big a deal. When you look through the eyepiece at the top of the camera, there is a lot of information around the view which lets you control and understand what's going on, so it's not that big a deal. I thought it would be at first, too.

Assuming you are willing to go up to 350, another 2 to consider are

Canon EOS 400D
Nikon D40X

I don't know their prices at Argos, these are based on Amazon.co.uk prices. It too, will not go bust.

Comparisons:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp..._d40x&show=all

Finally, it's also always worth going to flickr.com/cameras to see a few more details on the camera to see more details on it as well as the great shots that you and I will never be able to match

[penagate]

Live view is not tremendously useful. It has applications in certain situations, but that is it. Even in a camera with live view, it is not practical to use it continuously, since it drains the battery and cooks the sensor (SLR sensors are much larger than those in compact cameras — power means heat and heat means noise in the images). So don't be put off if the camera doesn't have it.

The 1000D is essentially the older 400D rebranded and cut down slightly. Look for a 400D instead, or the newer 450D (which has live view!); or look in the next series up (30D, 40D, 50D).

All Canon DSLRs (and I think all Nikons) have remote shutter trigger capabilities if the appropriate accessories are purchased.

Assuming you are not going to be triggering the camera remotely all of the time, I recommend going into a camera store and getting a good feel of both the xxxD and xxD body sizes. I find the xxxDs uncomfortably small to hold, but others find the xxDs cumbersome (especially if you are used to a compact).

[I_Love_My_Vans]

Ditto, the Nikon D40x would be my recommendation.

But, please please please do not buy a Sony DSLR, they are not very nice to hold, very plasticy, feel very poorly built and expensive.

If you really want to try before you buy, http://www.hireacamera.com/ will rent you a camera and lens allowing you to have a good play before hand. I have used them before, and they are very good.

[grilkip]

Are you really hard pressed on buying new?

What my esteemed photographic nemesis Penagate was talking about, ergonomics... I think that's actually the most important aspect in selecting a camera. Everything, image quality included comes after that. A good camera is one that feels natural, like it belongs in your hand.

So.. what if for the same price you could get a new Nikon D40 or an old D70? I would get the D70. Bigger body, more buttons (you will use them eventually). In this particular example the D70 also handles a few more lenses.

You mentioned the 'kit' with the 'kit lens'.. That's not the best lens ever. If you buy an DSLR and start playing with it and reading a bit, it won't be long until you demand fast expensive glass... If you were planning to just stick with that kit lens (because hey, it's a lens), you might still consider a P&S, yet a more high end one with which you can zoom 'all the way'. I don't keep up with those, don't ask me.

Oh btw live view is very nice to have, but on most of the dslr's, the way it is implemented it's only usable for tripod work.

[schoolbusdriver]

After taking your expertise into account, as well as price and counter thumping capability, it's the 450D.

I see what you mean about the "live view". After my first couple of test snaps, I was cleaning my nose-print off the screen. (Despite the SERIOUS tag, humourous comments on this point will not be frowned upon )

Now all I have to do is learn how to use it properly and get the accessories...

[mendhak]

Yeah, I now instinctively make my thumb swivel back and forth (much like an LCD-screen-wiper) as I'm looking through the eyepiece, even when it's off.

[Arrow_Raider]

I bought my dad a canon eos 450d for Christmas. I haven't used it very much, but it seems to be a very good camera. I am completely unfamiliar with DSLRs other than that one got good reviews on amazon. I took the one and only picture I submitted for marty's photo contest with that camera. This is the picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/3464969...16743/sizes/l/

[schoolbusdriver]

Nice. That pic shows the "reality" (I'm not talking artistically) that I want. i.e. I've only taken a few test snaps with the 450D so far, but even they display what my eyes see (the LCD screen is very useful on this point). I'll risk frostbite and take some night shots later.

Some pics taken in bright sunlight from my F50fd show a blue/purple sheen. I sometimes see this in TV adverts and live outdoor TV news broadcasts. I used to work in lamp manufacture, and the only time I've seen something similar is when someone bypassed safety switches and flooded the factory floor with intense UV radiation (frowned on but not sackable). Presumably UV is affecting the sensors, but I would have thought manufacturers had taken this into account and compensated for it. Night shots with the F50fd contain a completely unrealistic blue component.

Anyway, now it's time to RTFM.