Jump to dSLR....confuse...please help decide

[hbui]

I've recently invested a lot of times researching dslr. making a jump from my point&shoot. I need a camera that takes photos of family and friends at gathering, vacation, etc. I don't do landscape, macro or anything like that. My lens requirement I think is modest. I don't see myself upgrading lens too much...HOWEVER, I want something excellent right from the start and be happy with it. What i really want is image stabilization since I do some low light shooting such as indoor. So I focus on the pentax k100d and sony alpha. I was thinking of going pentax k100d body with tamron 17-50 f2.8 or sigma 17-70 f2.8-3.5.....This all with image stabalize. all this for no more than $675


Sony alpha...I can get this brand new $630 with kit lens. Now, I have a budget of around $700 so this doesn't really allow me to get any other lens but i hear this is a decent kit lens...It has image stabalize and i think its more than adequate for my casual shoot...

Canon...I really want to buy into this system due to the huge availability of lenses...If canon had a built in image stabilization, I would get it no questions. However, they do not and none of the short focal lenses have them and if they did, It's too pricey...My question is, if I get a canon XTi (I can get it at around $550 body) with a tamron 17-50 or sigma 17-70, do I really need Image stabilization for my shooting need....QUALITY AND SHARPNESS is most important to me...I don't want any blurr pictures..

Nikon...Similar feelings as the canon....I'm looking at the d40 because it's nice and small but not enough lenses..maybe the new sigma hsm 17-70 will change that...

Which camera would you recommend based on my observation...I've handled all of them and to be honest, I don't have problem with any...I can adjust to them all...that's not a big deal...My main goal is to get sharp quality image with a budget of $700-800

 

[tdawg]

What are you shooting in those low-light situations? The thing to remember about any image stabilization/vibration reduction system is that it is not a substitue for shutter speed, meaning that if you're shooting people dancing, etc in low-light with a slower shutter speed, the subjects will still be blurry (the static background objects will be sharp though!).

Not sure what you mean exactly by Nikon not having enough lenses. Sure they don't have as many as Canon, but each manufacturer offers lenses to cover pretty much every focal length. Canon may have some more "special purpose" lenses than Nikon, such as Tilt-Shift lenses, but the needs of the general photography public are covered by both mfgs.

Both Canon and Nikon offer great image producing capabilities. I haven't played with the otheres much.

 

[hbui]

Originally posted by: tdawg
What are you shooting in those low-light situations? The thing to remember about any image stabilization/vibration reduction system is that it is not a substitue for shutter speed, meaning that if you're shooting people dancing, etc in low-light with a slower shutter speed, the subjects will still be blurry (the static background objects will be sharp though!).

For indoor, I shoot mainly groups pictures and stationary object such as when I'm inside a temple, buildings, etc....I also shoot pictures of little nieces and nephews running around...I was just thinking...image stabilization technology is only good for high telephoto right? what I mainly shoot with is at most 17-70mm so would an image stabilization help with this focal lenght or it's just more beneficial at the high telephoto ends. I would think it can benefit my needs too even for stationary shots..

Not sure what you mean exactly by Nikon not having enough lenses. Sure they don't have as many as Canon, but each manufacturer offers lenses to cover pretty much every focal length. Canon may have some more "special purpose" lenses than Nikon, such as Tilt-Shift lenses, but the needs of the general photography public are covered by both mfgs.

If I was to go with the nikon, I'm only interested in their D40...not D50 (small screen..can't stand it) or D80..somewhat interested but too pricey...D40 menu is a pleasure to work with...just so limited lenses...

Both Canon and Nikon offer great image producing capabilities. I haven't played with the otheres much.

 

[rudder]

I take pictures of my daughters indoor basketball games using an 85mm f/1.8 lens at ISO800 - 1600 depepnding on the time of day. No image stabilizer in the lens, but still get great shots. This is with a Canon 30D.

 

[tdawg]

I think image stabilization can be beneficial at any focal length if you don't have the steadiest hands, even at higher shutter speeds. I personally wouldn't mind having it in all my lenses as I don't seem to be as steady as I'd like to be. Some people can handhold shots at slow speeds (1/10, 1/20 of a sec.) and get tack-sharp images. I'm not one of them.

That said, if Canon or Nikon make a body that you like better and offer lenses you want in the future, you can always use a tripod to make up for the "lack" of IS/VR in the camera body. You're going to want a tripod at some point anyway since it opens up new photographic options that handholding an IS/VR lens won't be able to offer. I think this would be the best option for the stationary situations you're looking at shooting.

For getting shots of nieces and nephews on the move in low light, IS/VR might help, but again if your shutter speed is too low to freeze the action, no amount of IS/VR in the lens or body will make up for it. You'd be better off with a higher ISO to allow for a faster shutter speed to get these type of shots.

Ultimately, you'll want to physically try all the bodies you're interested in and see how they feel in your hand. Also, you'll want to consider the high ISO capabilities of your chosen camera if you're going to be using a high ISO frequently enough.

 

[hbui]

I already have a tripod and rarely ever use it. I take pictures spontaneously and don't see myself carry a tripod anywhere...

i guess I would looking for a setup recommendation..but here is what i"m looking at

pentax k100d with sigma 17-70mm or tamron 17-50f2.8....$675 (image stabalize)
canon Xti with sigma 17-70mm ($850..over my budget)
alpha with 18-70 kit lens (image stabalize)
nikon d40 with kits and wait for sigma 17-70mm...around $750...

I will need to buy one by september as I'm going to hawaii and will doing doing a lot of outdoor shooting. which would you recommend? or do you have another setup for around 750

 

[magomago]

Image Stabilization is defnitely useful in many situations - and is not just limited to indoor low light situations. Of course if you shake like a waitress constantly spilling drinks it won't help, but in many situations it makes a difference.

Point in case:

http://forums.dpreview.com/for...m=1036&thread=24190457

This was taken almost 5 stops from the standard hand held rule (which would have been 1/350 sec). This blue was quite interested in us - or maybe it was the bird feed we put out

K10, Tamron 18-250 (@230mm - 345mm effective), *1/15 sec 5.6 (wide open for this lens), iso400, PP in LR 1.1 & CS3, Mt. Lemmon, Arizona (during a rain storm even)

So you just can't dismiss it.True - he is zoomed in pretty deep, but the conditions already show the difference that SR (IS in Pentaxian terminology) can make. And since its built in body for Pentax, then EVERY lens retroactively has this applied - and the K mount gives you YEARS of Pentax glass to go after if you have access to it or choose to go for it (while I emtion this, at the same time personally I'll only be interested in older glass for primes - ie: lenses of fixed focal length)

If you want pentax, the last day for the rebate is today ~ I jumped yesterday beceause I'm not interested in the super at all for a slightly greater right NOW (one of the draws was the amazing quality at a great price). However there are rumors that there will be another rebate that continues through september and that may include the K100D Super if you are interested in that. It has SDHC support which has already been added to K100D via firmware, SDM lens support [isn't an important fact to me - maybe when my taste in phototechnology matures in a few years] which might be a factor for you although I don't think any SDM lenses have been released YET, a lens cleaning system [which doesn't work - only olympus has a system that works], and I think sensor is coated with flourine or something like that...
basically its minimally different from the K100D - but it'll be priced higher.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Based on your needs and inclinations, I advise you to go with the

Pentax K100d with Sigma 17-70mm or Tamron 17-50f2.8....$675