What's the best "First DSLR" for an experienced photographer?

[elitejp]

better lenses and flashes will prove to be far more valuable than a better camera body
edited
Just some other thoughts:cameras within the same generation and within the same sensor size are all going to produce just about the same level of pic quality. The main difference will be found in ergonomics, build quality, and frames per second among other things.

 

[finbarqs]

Nikon D3X would be the best for a beginner. You wouldn't have to worry about video!

 

[Gintaras]

better lenses and flashes will prove to be far more valuable than a better camera body
edited
Just some other thoughts:cameras within the same generation and within the same sensor size are all going to produce just about the same level of pic quality. The main difference will be found in ergonomics, build quality, and frames per second among other things.

With cameras within the same generation and within the same sensor size can be "produced" very different level of pic quality. The main difference is someone, who operates camera.

If you look around the net, forums, there are thousands of people who do nothing else but discuss cameras specs - those are so-called "photo engineers", those, who take good or very good photos, rarely get involved in discussions about camera specs - those are photographers - pro or hobbyists...

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

better lenses and flashes will prove to be far more valuable than a better camera body
edited
Just some other thoughts:cameras within the same generation and within the same sensor size are all going to produce just about the same level of pic quality. The main difference will be found in ergonomics, build quality, and frames per second among other things.

AF is night and day difference on a Rebel and a 7D. I love the 19 pt AF. Even for portraits and engagement shots, it makes my life 10x easier being able to select amongst 19 points.

You're right my T1i produces roughly equal image quality as my 7D. I'm sure the same-sensor T2i or T3i would be even more comparable, but the features of the 7D such as AF and ergonomics are definitely worth it.

My friend suggested that I dive into the 5D2 first. I was hesitant, and I bought my Rebel. I don't think I could've gone wrong with a 5D2 either.

The thing is you have to be interested, and you have to see yourself moving there one day. If you're experienced, and you know that once you get your feet wet you will want to dive in, then just spend a month or two struggling with a bigger jump, and you'll be happier in the long run. I'm now waiting to trade my Rebel up to a 5D3 so I can run a 5D + 7D combo. I could've just skipped all this had I jumped into FF first.

 

[elitejp]

The main difference is someone, who operates camera.

I thought that was what I was saying. But i included the "within the same generation" because iso continually seems to improve from generation to generation

AF is night and day difference on a Rebel and a 7D.

You're right my T1i produces roughly equal image quality as my 7D. I'm sure the same-sensor T2i or T3i would be even more comparable, but the features of the 7D such as AF and ergonomics are definitely worth it.

AF on the 7D is also night and day better than the 5d classic or the 5d2 but both produce better quality pics than the 7D. Thats why I included ergonomics, AF, and fps as secondary considerations because not everyone needs these and yet they can be crucial to actually capturing the pic. I thought about getting the 7D and would love to have one, but had enough sense that lenses and speedlights would be a better overall upgrade than trading in my 50D.

 

[finbarqs]

what about the pentax 645D?

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

With the camera itself, I want control. IMO people who shoot a DSLR on auto should probably just sell it and get a D#&% point and shoot.

I take great offense to this and view it as being highly ignorant. Even people that don't want to learn like my wife get much better shots with a DSLR. Simple example is motion blur. I don't know, but I also suspect that the digital sensors are of higher quality.

 

[elitejp]

^the sensor is bigger. The bigger the sensor the better the picture.

 

[finbarqs]

motion blur does NOT become eliminated with a bigger sensor. Don't get a point & shoot. Instead, get the Fuji X100 or the Leica x1

 

[maniac5999]

I bought a used D200 from Adorama for $500. It was the cheapest camera that would meter my 50mm f1.4. To be honest, I view this as a bit of a stop-gap. Long term I see myself switching back to full frame at some point (likely 3-5 years in the future) but I don't want to wait that long to start shooting again. My next decision is going to be choosing a lens to compliment the 50mm, as it's a bit long on the crop-frame sensor. Any reccomendations? (I'm allowed to jack my own thread, right? )

 

[CptObvious]

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 at $200 would be the obvious choice, but somewhat hard to find. Amazon has had them in stock for the past few days.

 

[Munky]

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 at $200 would be the obvious choice, but somewhat hard to find. Amazon has had them in stock for the past few days.

^ seconded.

 

[finbarqs]

Japan Quake is a big problem these days...

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 at $200 would be the obvious choice, but somewhat hard to find. Amazon has had them in stock for the past few days.

Thirded.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

I bought a used D200 from Adorama for $500. It was the cheapest camera that would meter my 50mm f1.4. To be honest, I view this as a bit of a stop-gap. Long term I see myself switching back to full frame at some point (likely 3-5 years in the future) but I don't want to wait that long to start shooting again. My next decision is going to be choosing a lens to compliment the 50mm, as it's a bit long on the crop-frame sensor. Any reccomendations? (I'm allowed to jack my own thread, right? )

I like the D200. I just picked up one on the cheap to replace a D2H I sold for a lot more than it's worth. The D200 has limitations, compared to more modern cameras, but is just as good a camera as it ever was...and it was a great camera. I would rather have it than a D3100.

I hope that by next year the D700s/x/D800 is out and D700's are aplenty on the used camera market. In five years people will be looking at the D700 as that old camera that used to be really great.

As far as lenses, it is very tempting to buy a fast zoom from a third party maker, but there are QA issues. You'll probably have to send the new lens off to be fixed, but I understand that when it actually works, both Tamron and Sigma lenses are good.

I would get the Nikon 35mm f/1.8. It is the "standard" lens for DX and is sharp and fast. Order from Amazon or Adorama. If out of stock, put in an order with Adorama and they will fill it pretty soon. On DX, the 50mm is getting to the short side of portrait lens territory. The 35mm f/1.8 is the only DX lens I would buy, as you are looking forward to FF. Buy glass that you will be happy using on FF.

JR

 

[twistedlogic]

I'll go against the grain here. While the 35 1.8mm is a great lens, its DX only.

The 35 f2 AF-D is FF ready, so when you do move to FX all lenses will work. The 35 f2 will also focus closer than the 35 1.8, which might come in handy depending on how you shoot. But on the other hand, its slightly softer than the 1.8G and costs more.

The next step up from that is the 35 1.4G, for only $1700, .

Are you looking for another prime or a zoom? Wide or telephoto?

If your more into portraits, the 85 1.4 AF-D, 85 1.8 AF-D, 85 1.4G, or Sigma 85 1.4 would all work great. There is also the CHEAP manual focus 85 1.4 by a few different companies that will get the job done.

 

[finbarqs]

i'd like the CCD sensor of the D200... One of my favorites from Nikon! But low battery, and not very good in low light.. but I like the noise characteristics of the D200 anyways. FF is over rated anyways... there are lenses out there that would compensate for every single focal length that you would achieve.

I always see crop sensors (in terms of "zoom") to be "digital zoom" as that's exactly what digital zoom does: it takes the frame, and zooms in, and blow it up to your megapixel size!

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Adorama has the Nikon 18mm - 70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED IF AF-S DX Wide Angle Autofocus Zoom Lens - Refurbished by Nikon U.S.A. for $239.95. I understand this to be a very sharp lens, with build quality like the 28-85 f/3.5-4.5 for 35mm/FF.

http://www.adorama.com/NK1870DXR.html

 

[Sp12]

i'd like the CCD sensor of the D200... One of my favorites from Nikon! But low battery, and not very good in low light.. but I like the noise characteristics of the D200 anyways. FF is over rated anyways... there are lenses out there that would compensate for every single focal length that you would achieve.

I always see crop sensors (in terms of "zoom") to be "digital zoom" as that's exactly what digital zoom does: it takes the frame, and zooms in, and blow it up to your megapixel size!

Yes, but they can never make up for the DoF and image quality advantages a larger photosensitive area gives you.

I mean, some high-end portraiture is still shot on medium format film (and sometimes digital) just for the DoF advantage, ignoring any IQ benefits.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Yes, but they can never make up for the DoF and image quality advantages a larger photosensitive area gives you.

I mean, some high-end portraiture is still shot on medium format film (and sometimes digital) just for the DoF advantage, ignoring any IQ benefits.

You are absolutely right. Which is why Joey Lawrence (joeyl.com) hauled one to the badlands of Ethiopia. However, for most of us the difference between a crop sensor and FF really isn't. If anyone needs FF (or medium format) they already know who they are. IQ-wise the D200 is worlds behind the D700, but the D7000 is almost always just as good in the field.

JR

 

[Sp12]

You are absolutely right. Which is why Joey Lawrence (joeyl.com) hauled one to the badlands of Ethiopia. However, for most of us the difference between a crop sensor and FF really isn't. If anyone needs FF (or medium format) they already know who they are. IQ-wise the D200 is worlds behind the D700, but the D7000 is almost always just as good in the field.

JR

Very true, I'm completely blown away by the sensor tech in the D7000, and if I needed a crop body that would be it.

I can't wait to see what Sony does with that tech in a full-frame sensor. If they can get 14 stops of DR on a crop....

 

[twistedlogic]

Yes, but they can never make up for the DoF and image quality advantages a larger photosensitive area gives you.

DoF advantage? Tell that to a Macro shooter,

 

[Sp12]

DoF advantage? Tell that to a Macro shooter,

Well, on full frame you can always stop down (which has a side benefit of almost always making a lens sharper) to equalize DoF (and diffraction effects), then raise your ISO to compensate for the reduced shutter speed (which will equalize noise). You can never reduce diffraction or get less DoF or get cleaner files on a smaller sensor format.

 

[maniac5999]

You are absolutely right. Which is why Joey Lawrence (joeyl.com) hauled one to the badlands of Ethiopia. However, for most of us the difference between a crop sensor and FF really isn't. If anyone needs FF (or medium format) they already know who they are. IQ-wise the D200 is worlds behind the D700, but the D7000 is almost always just as good in the field.

JR

STOP IT! otherwise I might just return my D200 and buy a D7000. :hmm:

 

[twistedlogic]

Well, on full frame you can always stop down (which has a side benefit of almost always making a lens sharper) to equalize DoF (and diffraction effects), then raise your ISO to compensate for the reduced shutter speed (which will equalize noise).

But to get the same magnification on FX you would also have to move closer or use a longer lens, so you will have even less DoF on FX.