Cheap/used DSLR or something similar

[Pandamonium]

I'm not terribly well-versed in photography, but I'm looking for a camera that takes photos with a narrow depth of field. So the object is in focus on both the foreground and background are in varying degrees of blurriness. My understanding is that this has something to do with the f number that is associated with a lens.

I'm looking for a camera that is strictly going to be used at home or for otherwise planned/posed shots. If any camera is too big to fit in my pocket, the odds are that it won't be leaving the house.

Since I don't plan on taking many pictures and I don't know that much about photography, I don't want to spend too much on a camera. Is it safe to say that something 3-4 generations old will suit my needs? If so, are there any good places to begin looking for this? I mean, I'm okay with a banged up (but functional) camera if I can get it on the cheap.

 

[weez82]

First, read up on photography. Lots of info on the web or get a few books from a library. Start learning about aperture, shutter speed and how those effect the exposure and overall look of the photo.

Second, used gear if it's in good condition can be a good deal. Look on craigslist. In my area there is lots of people trying to sell their cameras. Lots of good deal to be found but be careful, some people over price their cameras just cause it is a Canon or Nikon brand. Newer used Sony and Pentax models and just as good as older and newer used Canon and Nikon models. Just do some research on the camera if you find something you think is a good deal. dpreview is a good place for info.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

I'm not terribly well-versed in photography, but I'm looking for a camera that takes photos with a narrow depth of field. So the object is in focus on both the foreground and background are in varying degrees of blurriness. My understanding is that this has something to do with the f number that is associated with a lens.

I'm looking for a camera that is strictly going to be used at home or for otherwise planned/posed shots. If any camera is too big to fit in my pocket, the odds are that it won't be leaving the house.

Since I don't plan on taking many pictures and I don't know that much about photography, I don't want to spend too much on a camera. Is it safe to say that something 3-4 generations old will suit my needs? If so, are there any good places to begin looking for this? I mean, I'm okay with a banged up (but functional) camera if I can get it on the cheap.

So you want cheap, easy, and beautiful results? I eagerly look forward to the suggestions.

However, I would suggest that if you want to generate the kind of results you will really be happy with, you need to take the time to learn the Art and Science of Photography. You can always rent a nice camera for occasional shots, but you won't be happy unless you know what you're doing.

Get these two books and you'll be on your way to understanding the Art.

http://www.amazon.com/Art-Photograph...4194696&sr=8-1

http://www.portraittipsandtechniques.com/ae/specialoffer/affiliate.html

The Science you can, pretty much, learn on the internet.

Get a decent camera. Maybe a good P&S like the Canon S95 ($400). That way you'll have a camera that'll fit in your pocket. Learn all you can and rent a Canon 5D Mk II or a Nikon 700 for the big day with a good portrait lens (85mm f/1.4 or a 70-200 f/2.8 zoom). These numbers will make more sense to you later.

JR

 

[shortylickens]

After you get done researching I would recommend you look into a refurbished Nikon D40.

 

[Sp12]

Not really old, but the NEX-3 will get you narrow DoF in a pocketable package.

 

[CuriousMike]

After you get done researching I would recommend you look into a refurbished Nikon D40.

+1

 

[JohnnyRebel]

After you get done researching I would recommend you look into a refurbished Nikon D40.

I really liked my D40. My 13 year old is using it now and making some interesting shots with the 35mm f/1.8 lens.

Seems refurbs are going for around $400 with the 18-55 kit lens. The 55-200 Kit lens ($100 or so) can do pretty well especially if you back off and zoom in for head shots. After he got the 35mm lens, he almost never uses the kit lenses any more.

JR

 

[Rottie]

Canon EOS Rebel seem cheaper new or used still affordable.

 

[drizek]

Olympus cameras are cheap used, and they will do what you want. The E410/420 and particularly the E510/520 in general are better and possibly cheaper than a Nikon D40.

If you want to spend more and get something pocketable, the Olympus XZ1 is pretty interesting, as is the Panasonic LX5. Then there is also the new Sony NX coming out any time now.

 

[weez82]

Olympus cameras are cheap used, and they will do what you want. The E410/420 and particularly the E510/520 in general are better and possibly cheaper than a Nikon D40.

If you want to spend more and get something pocketable, the Olympus XZ1 is pretty interesting, as is the Panasonic LX5. Then there is also the new Sony NX coming out any time now.

Yep, Oly is great. I've owned the e510 and now own the e-620. Very good for the photography I do (nature/waterfall/outdoor stuff). The largest I've printed so far is 16x20. Turned out great. I would print larger but I'm a cheap ass and dont want to spend the $, lol

 

[drizek]

Yep, Oly is great. I've owned the e510 and now own the e-620. Very good for the photography I do (nature/waterfall/outdoor stuff). The largest I've printed so far is 16x20. Turned out great. I would print larger but I'm a cheap ass and dont want to spend the $, lol

Same here. Built in IS and 2x crop make it excellent for telephoto and macro work, which is what I like. I'm not very good with landscapes. Never printed anything yet though, although once I have some free time I should.

I do want to sell it though (OP, if you're interested...) and get the Sony NEX or an m4/3rds. Olympus is not going to build sub $1k SLRs anymore, and their lenses, while excellent, are too expensive for my blood. I got a good deal on my 70-300 and the kit 14-42 is one of the best, but once I started looking at the 7-14mm, 50mm and 50-200mm, I just can't afford it. I would buy the 50mm at $400, but it wont autofocus on m4/3rds, and I'm just not sureh ow much of a future this platform has. It's a big risk to take.

Sony is supposedly coming out with an xx-200mm telephoto for the E-Mount sometime soon for around the $300 mark.

 

[fralexandr]

as with most purchases, it might be nice for you to check out some ergonomics before making purchases. for me the canon's kind of feel a bit nicer maybe because my fingers are too long or something. I'm currently using a Pentax K100D and its a pretty nice camera for ~200$ used (ebay and pentaxforums and stuff). After you get a body it'll be all about the accessorizing lenses, tripods, flashes and a few cleaning supplies etc. Maybe replace the camera neck strap if you plan on toting your camera around for a while and don't want to bring a camera bag (black rapid rs/quick rapid knockoff or spider camera holsters or something).
i really like being able to use AA batteries in my camera (not a common feature, most manufacturers use battery packs, but most pentax dslr's are AA capable) wooooo! as i have rechargeable AAs (eneloops mostly)

my friend has a sony 330 and it wasn't bad for its cost either (deals for ~300-400$ sometimes), they're cheap and functional, and feel pretty sturdy.
the nikon d40 or d60 is nice too (highly recommended by many) i've never used one before though.

the only problem i've had with pentax at least is that lenses are harder to find and slightly more expensive than for canon and nikon (except if going old manual/used). I'd expect this to be the same with other non canon/nikon bodies as well.

i kind of want to get a weather resistant body now though...

although i don't think any dslr is truly pocketable.... maybe if you have a pancake lens and the portable bodies (like the sony nex, and olympus pen) and just keep them detached... but the nex and pen aren't cheap