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

[Manfred M]

I agree!

I wasn't being 100% serious by the way - really just saying that one needs to use the right tool for the job. Obviously using video mode isn't really the right tool for capturing longer sequences if individual frames are desired ... but then again, shooting sequences of stills longer than 3 seconds isn't really what DSLRs were designed for either.

Just trying to point out that the D7000 doesn't appear to be any better or worse in terms of buffer capacity compared to any other camera (probably no worse than my 1DX) - and that even a faster frame rate can't always be used to it's full potential.

I rather thought as much Colin, but I figured I should explain some of the technical reasons for this not working, should someone have taken you seriously...

As we both know, camera designers have made tradeoffs in their designs to meet the technical requirements and price-point targets. I suspect that there is a data processing limit, as even the Sony A77 can only hit 12 fps with a fixed mirror design.

[Colin Southern]

I have read somewhere (but don't remember where now) that linear polarisers MAY have some effect on camera metering so 'they' were advising the reader to purchase circular polarisers.

Linear polarisers sure will -- but that's exactly why we don't use them (we use CP filters).

This link also provides a lesson on polarisers (Lesson 17) and describes the effect I have mentioned beforehand:

http://www.udemy.com/karl-taylors-fr...graphy-course/

I had a quick look at the link, but it ended up taking me to a page of other links, and I got lost from there. I have to say that I've never been a fan of polarisers; in my opinion if one is wanting to shoot world-quality landscape then it needs to be done during the golden hours - and during those times there just isn't any benefit to be gained by them (I've got 2 very expensive ones -- and I never use either of them). At others insistence I've occasionally "given them another go" and each and every time I come away thinking "I just don't get it".

[Cogito]

..."Try before you buy" could be a good idea but reputable makes make this less important. I don't think one should visit bricks and mortar and then buy on the web. Good cameras are so complicated these days that whatever you buy will be a steep learning curve.

Not necessarily "use", but HOLD. Much as DSLRs all look pretty identical, the size of the handgrip, where the shutter release is etc. are different. Do you switch ISO setings a lot? Then where's the ISO button? Don't forget, you're forking out a fair bit of cash, you're going to have to live with it for a bit. Make sure it feels right!

[Colin Southern]

Not necessarily "use", but HOLD. Much as DSLRs all look pretty identical, the size of the handgrip, where the shutter release is etc. are different. Do you switch ISO setings a lot? Then where's the ISO button? Don't forget, you're forking out a fair bit of cash, you're going to have to live with it for a bit. Make sure it feels right!

This has often been said (Manfred will be posting next!), but I like to equate it to rental cars in that jumping into something you're not familiar with will always seem strange and uncomfortable AT FIRST -- but after a couple of days we adapt and from there on in don't give it a 2nd thought. So personally, I think one shouldn't give ergonomics between models of a similar price bracket too much weight; I'm sure that most folks adapt to any body very quickly.

[Dave Humphries]

This has often been said (Manfred will be posting next!), but I like to equate it to rental cars in that jumping into something you're not familiar with will always seem strange and uncomfortable AT FIRST -- but after a couple of days we adapt and from there on in don't give it a 2nd thought. So personally, I think one shouldn't give ergonomics between models of a similar price bracket too much weight; I'm sure that most folks adapt to any body very quickly.

I kinda agree, but would raise two things;
1) I know you don't mean this applies to choosing between a model with only one command wheel vs another model/brand that has two, but others may not - in other words, the OP be sure to compare "apples with apples"
2) If the OP is retaining and also regularly using the previous camera, if possible, it may make sense to stick to something that closer to what you're used to - I speak from experience of using two cameras and quickly finding the EC or ISO buttons when they are in a totally different places still catches me out

Cheers,

[Manfred M]

This has often been said (Manfred will be posting next!), but I like to equate it to rental cars in that jumping into something you're not familiar with will always seem strange and uncomfortable AT FIRST -- but after a couple of days we adapt and from there on in don't give it a 2nd thought. So personally, I think one shouldn't give ergonomics between models of a similar price bracket too much weight; I'm sure that most folks adapt to any body very quickly.

Correct Colin; as I have said before, I put a lot higher value on ergonomics than many, but then, designing equipment and business processes is my day job, so I get to live this day in and day out. The design process is really about managing trade-offs, and this is also very much the case when buying something. The problem is that you cannot change the way that your body is built, and I agree with you to some extent as you can adapt to certain things, while with others you will never be comfortable with. I can list many examples in my professional experience where this has been the case time after time. Some things you can adapt to, while others will never, ever feel quite right.

I think your car example is a very good case in point. I do a lot of business travel and I have driven many hundreds of different cars. There are some that I would NEVER buy; purely because of the way my body fits in it. It could be that the controls are harder to use, or that it is difficult check for the blind spot, etc. I can honestly say that when we bought a new car this year the one model I thought we would buy was eliminated purely on ergonomic grounds; I found that the seat was uncomfortable (and I would never get used to it) and my wife had trouble seeing the blind spot because of how the door pillar was designed. The car we ended up with was slightly more expensive, but fit both of us a lot more comfortably.

I went through very much the same situation when I bought my first DSLR. One camera manufacturer’s models never fit comfortably and frankly I felt that they would easily slip out of my hand, while the other fit quite naturally. From a technical standpoint, I could have gone either way; as the main competitor had a slightly less expensive and a somewhat more expensive model. At the time I did not come from either a Canon or Nikon camera, so had no positive or negative bias toward or the other brand. In the balance of things, I went for ergonomics and am absolutely convinced that this was the right choice for me.

With everything being more intuitive there is a lower risk of missing a shot; and while we can adapt to some things, this is definitely true across the board..

[Colin Southern]

Correct Colin; as I have said before, I put a lot higher value on ergonomics than many

I know what you're trying to say - but from my perspective, at a given price point anyway (eg a mid-range pro-sumer with a QCD) I think the ergonomics of most cameras are pretty much identical. Case in point -- I'm a Canon power-user I could operate my 1Ds3 blindfolded (literally). When I got the 1DX it felt weird for a few days -- but now I feel pretty comfortable with it. If someone threw me a Nikon D4 I'm pretty sure it would feel exceptionally weird - but I bet I'd be producing professional quality images with it within a day - be relatively comfortable with it in a week - and would probably find the CANON strange a month after that if I went back to it - but - if I followed the "common advice" then I'd need to reject the D4 imediately because of how the ergonomics felt ... which would have been a mistake ... which is why I don't think it's a good idea to put too much decision weight on "how it feels".

In your case - ie designing business equipment - I suspect that there are far greater design possibilities, whereas (again, at a given price point), a camera is a camera is a camera. Probably Airbus -v- Boeing are a good example -- completely different ergonomics - pilots don't like changing - but when they do they generally find it's just fine.

[Manfred M]

Colin – You discount ergonomics (a.k.a. human factors) and anthropometrics more than I or in fact the camera manufacturers do. What I am saying once you have narrowed down the overall functionality and other requirements for your purchase, then ergonomics should come into play. I do admit I am more sensitive to this than most, but then it is my day job to be that way, and it carries over to my hobbies as well.

All designers will design for a target population base, and the target envelop will tend to vary. There is anthropometric data available at different levels describing norms and ranges for different population groups. There is worldwide data and it is available in many cases on a national level as well, at a gender and age specific level. If, for instance, a high end pro camera is designed for a user who is primarily male sports photographer, you will end up with a design that is not as good in the hands of a female photographer. A design for the Asian market will not work as well for Caucasians, etc. Usually, but not always, it is easier for someone with larger hands to use a smaller camera, but not the other way around. Our fingers diameter and length varies from person to person. A control that is easy for me to find without moving my eye from the viewfinder can be a bit awkward for someone with longer or shorter fingers. While I agree, there are some things that we can adapt to, that is not something one can say universally.

As a personal example, my wife has normal sized hands, but short fingers (still in the normal range when you look at anthropometric charts). She has no problems at all with her D90, but finds my D800 awkward to use and if I put the battery handle on, she finds it totally unwieldy. The bottom line is that a tool that is uncomfortable to use, will not get used. It would be a shame to have someone buy a lot of camera gear and then not use it because they find it awkward to use. This is why I push fit and function as an important decision when buying a piece of camera equipment.

[Colin Southern]

I think we're going to have to "agree to disagree" on this one Manfred. I'm not saying you're wrong (at all), but I do think that one needs to be darn sure that there IS a definitive problem with a camera's ergonomics before disqualifying it, and not just a "feeling strange because it's unfamiliar" (or at least try to consciously make that distinction).

I've handled a fair share of cameras in my time and the ONLY one I've had an ergonomic issue with was a member of the xxxD range due to buttons instead of a QCD - all the rest I've adapted to from a 20D all the way through to 3 1D series cameras, without a problem.

[JBjorn]

Sony A77...theres your new camera

[Manfred M]

Sony A77...theres your new camera

Why? Most people would at least explain why they are making the recommendation.

The camera has some interesting features, but if you are not someone who who doesn't need them, there are other more compelling options out there, especially given the high price versus the D7000 that Chontrell is looking at.

[GrahamS]

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

That's good advice, but I would recommend an entry level model such as the Nikon D3100/3200 or Canon 450D/500D. Chontrell is, by his own admission, a novice in photography. He will get much greater pleasure from a camera that is not too advanced, which I think the Nikon D7k and Canon 60D are.

[talkingchief]

This guy has gobs of reviews on YouTube. Very detailed. Check out this one on the Nikon D800, etc.
Philip Bloom review of D800, D4 & Canon 5D mk III

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdC3y...feature=relmfu

[Mark von Kanel]

Chontrell - There has been a lot of good advice given here which will hopefully help you. I have been involved with photography most of my long life and have say that either of those cameras would not be the limiting factor in my photography. The limiting factor is me. You can see from my signature I have chosen the D7000 and am totally pleased with my choice over the 7D which I was also considering. That is not to say that I wouldn't be just as happy with the 7D. Like has been said before, try out the cameras, see how they feel and how convenient the controls are for your hands. Forget whether it is a Nikon, Canon, Sony or other. Like me, I suspect that the camera you choose will not limit your photography for a good number of years.

Best wishes and enjoy this wonderful hobby.

John

+1

[Mark von Kanel]

Perhaps it's time for a Frequently Asked Questions" section located with the tutorials or the New Member section. I don't think it will restrict these frequent questions from being asked, but if the section also included some examples such as:


"My lens has a focusing issue (I've asked this one many times), what can I do?" Provide steps to take to test the lens, suggestions for contacting the manufacturer, etc.

Now that would take all the fun out of us being able to pontificate about our equipment.... Honestly.... call yourself a man!!!

[chontrell]

That's good advice, but I would recommend an entry level model such as the Nikon D3100/3200 or Canon 450D/500D. Chontrell is, by his own admission, a novice in photography. He will get much greater pleasure from a camera that is not too advanced, which I think the Nikon D7k and Canon 60D are.

Guys, my situation has changed! My brother suggested I buy a used D90 and a second hand prime lens and use it for a year until I decide what I want to do in photography; he then suggested I buy a more expensive camera and an additional lens set.

I compared the D90 to the D7000 and decided that D7000 is better equipped technologically/electronically and a competent camera to buy, which a brand new one is well within my initial budget. This would also be my very first digital camera. However, I did a little investment (with a little part of my money) in a box of Viagra ( ) and now my girlfriend decided to buy me the camera as well as the lens set I want; she gave me an open cheque for whatever I want to buy, however costly it would be...

I thought 'this is once in a lifetime opportunity!'; what difference would it make whether I learn digital photography on a D7000 or on a D800. I popped down to John Lewis yesterday and tried D800 with prime lens 24-70; it felt heavy, but the feeling was marvelous. In fact, I want to buy the D800E version of the model. This camera would definitely last me for at least two decades, why waste time and money with a lower model?

In addition to D800E, I am planning to buy two prime lenses; the 24-70mm and the 85mm f/1.4G. I will see where these equipments will take me...

By the way, I am not that novice on my Nikon N60 film camera; I have shot great pictures with it although I posted just a few of them on this website. Nevertheless, I know digital photography is a different kettle of fish; that's why I refer to myself as 'novice'!

[ajohnw]

I ddn't know about used lenses and cameras. I don't think that they are good value really compared with something like a Canon 1100D with it's standard zoom lens. That lens actual isn't a bad one and it's easily possible to do worse or no better even going to a full frame lens.

Clearly you are associated with a nikon person. Me I am canon man. With the 1100D these days you can have either a Nikon style compressed highlights and low lights or the usual canon chop it off if over exposed. This would come in at a bit over £300 in the UK and as usual with canons minimum entry level camera it is something of a bargain. You may find that Nikon offer a similar set up.

When you buy used it isn't possible to be entirely sure what you will get and any used camera with more than something round 12mp tends to retain rather high values compared with basic entry level cameras. These retain good used values too.

The best way to find out what is omitted from these cameras is to look at the manuals. I am going to ask a question on here as to why I should choose one of several cameras over the 1100D as I am toying with the idea of upgrading my 300D. A rather old very early 6mp camera. As I see it I may get 7 AF points rather than 9. There may be other factors. One obvious one is pixel count but in real terms I have good reason to be happy with 12. One factor that I will loose out on in these ranges of camera is long term life. That's likely to apply until a camera is bought that has a specified shutter life. The 300D was made when camera were cameras and men were men etc. Things aren't so straight forwards now.

-

[Polar01]

I would forget the 24-70mm, get a good wide angle, the 16-35mm f4 is very sharp, then pick up a 50mm f1.8D, it is the lowest cost of the 50mm but works great and I like that it goes to f22 instead on only f16. As for the 85mm f1.4D, do you really need 1.4 compared to 1.8 no, what will end up happening is, it will sit in your bag, once realize that you need a longer each, the 70-200mm 2.8 will cover over the 85mm. As for, last for at least two decades make that 6 years at most 10, that is pushing it at that, the technology will make it as useful as a film camera, however the glass will last forever.

Cheers:

Allan

[Journeyman]

Recently confused regarding DSLR purchase option.
For decades prior to the digital age I primarily shot with the old reliable Pentax K-1000. It was a great, rugged & reliable camera for me & I loved it. I mostly shot landscapes, night shots, custom cars, some sports & occasionally weddings with a lot of candid b&w reception shots. For a while in the 80s I did a fair share of propped commercial product shoots with it as well. I had great service with Pentax. Also for a while in the early 80s I used a Minolta A! that took great pics till it suffered some internal mechanical issue at which time I discontinued use of it. However, in 2005 I purchased my first DSLR. It is a Konica Minolta Dimage A2. My reason for choosing this model at that time is that it was one of the first & few 8 mpx models out & was highly rated without the tech problems that were being reported with the Sony & Nikon of that era. Anyhow bottom line, it has been a fair camera but I never have never been completely satisfied with its image quality for various reasons. It is past time for a new camera & I've been researching again. I have been leaning toward the Pentax K-5. Right when I thought I had made up my mind I viewed a You- to altube visual comparison between the Pentax K-5 & the Nikon 7000 images. Now I'm set back to review & research mode again. In the y-tube comparison the difference in image quality was considerably great. Perhaps some of the experienced photographers of this site may have a helpful opinion or two to help me regarding the choice between the Pentax & Nikon.

[rpcrowe]

A Nikon executive has been quoted as saying, "If you own any recent DSLR camera and are not getting eccellent images, It is not the fault of the camera!"
I shoot with a Canon 7D and a several generations older Canon 40D. Both are excellent cameras. The 7D has a few more bells and whistles but, both cameras are capable of achieving excellent imagery!
I'd like to be shooting with a pair of 7D cameras but, frankly, I would rather shoot with a pair of 40D cameras than with a single 7D. But, that is just my own liking for shooting with two cameras...
An articulating screen and video capability holds no interest for me... I always use eye level viewing and I shoot my video with a dedicated video camera.