Seriously tough decision that isn't getting easier!!

[krm4zd]

Ok so I've got ya'll advice before but I'm still stuck. I love photography but do not own a DSLR. I feel like I've checked out every brand but still can't make a decision. I've gone from a Nikon D40/D50 to a Sony A350 to a Nikon D90 to a Canon 50D and now a sales person suggested a Pentax K20.
At first I wanted to spend $500 but know my budget has increased to a little over $1000. What do I do? I want a camera I won't grow out of too quickly. Would like to do portraits, babies, engagement pics, weddings, basically I don't want to be restricted. (I know I'll need to buy more lenses/external flashes).
I don't care about video or having live view. I would like to be able to use manual settings and not be stuck w/ only auto. I've been told that Nikon D40 is like a camera for a mom or dad wanting to take better pics, not one for a photographer. Every sales associate says something different!!

[dcclark]

I'm a semi-professional photographer. I shoot with a D40 -- check out my sites below and see if you like the results!

But, truth be told, I am starting to feel like the D40 is limiting me a little -- but only in very specific ways (lack of certain control modes, in particular). I would recommend the D90 as a good all-around camera: lots of features, not too heavy or unwieldy, and all-around enjoyable.

That's just my (Nikon-centric) recommendation. What you should do is go try some of these in your hands. Don't listen to what others tell you about what "real photographers" use. As we all know... you can make great photos with any camera. The equipment just makes it easier for you to do what you want, it won't make great photos for you!

[Quo Fan]

You "should" outgrow any body that you buy. What you should also look at is lenses. This is where you will truly invest most of your photography budget. Think of it this way, you aren't buying a camera, you are buying into a lens system. Buy a body that fits your hands, and then start saving for lenses. You can get by with the less expensive lenses to start, but you will find that you will start lusting after better and better glass.

[mattdm]

Originally Posted by krm4zd

I've been told that Nikon D40 is like a camera for a mom or dad wanting to take better pics, not one for a photographer.

Sounds like a line delivered to try and goad you into spending more than you need. The D40 is an excellent little camera that gets all of the basics right — there's a reason it's been in Amazon's top-10 bestselling dSLRs for almost three years running.

Now, it's true an entry-level dSLR will have more features tailored at picking up the camera and shooting without thinking, and fewer features aimed at making life easier someone who knows what they're doing. On mid-range models, you'll see more physical buttons dedicated to direct access to important functions, and multiple dials. The low-price models will have interfaces which are less intimidating, and more things like scene modes.

Pentax K20D would be a good choice in the mid-range, by the way, if you can find it — it's recently discontinued. Likewise, the Nikon D40 is getting a little long in the tooth. The D3000 — just out this summer — is only slightly more expensive and comes with an image-stabilized kit lens. (Comparably, Pentax has a new K-x model just released.) I think Canon is weaker in this area — their lower-priced models don't seem particularly compelling to me. The 50D is a nice camera, but you're up in the next price tier. I don't know enough about Sony to really talk, but I know that people who have them love them. Basically, any brand will be fine.

I want to reiterate what Quo Fan said: the camera body itself isn't your major expense. It's the glass — having interesting lenses is what having a "real" camera is all about. And other accessories (I think a nice flash is essential) add up too. So, aim to spend less on the camera body and get some nice lenses. If you're going with Nikon, there's no excuse for not getting the new AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX (except for the fact that retailers can't keep it in stock). In fact, unless you're planning to spend even more on nicer primes (not a terrible idea — it's why I decided on Pentax for myself), this lens alone is a huge reason to go with Nikon.

[Saralonde]

Just about everyone goes through this problem when trying to decide on their first dslr. You can drive yourself crazy with it!

Don't put too much stock in what salespeople say. They are often working on commission or need to move a certain brand.

Pentax and Olympus have some good well-made cameras, but their choice of glass seems a little limiting. I know too many people that started out with one of those systems and then switched after a few years, so this is just MHO and I know there will be plenty who will disagree with me, but I'd look to Nikon and Canon if you are interested in expanding what you are doing photographically. Take a look at the cameras in your price range to narrow it down, hold them, imagine yourself using them. Remember that you will want to buy other things to go with your camera (another lens, accessories, etc.) that might eat into that budget, too, so plan accordingly. You will outgrow the camera body eventually, although it might be years before you do, so you really don't need to throw a lot of money at the body.

[mattdm]

Originally Posted by Saralonde

Pentax and Olympus have some good well-made cameras, but their choice of glass seems a little limiting.

It depends what you want. No one else has anything like Pentax's series of Limited primes, so from that point of view (and it's a great point of view) Pentax is (sorry, the pun is inherent) far less limiting.

But in general, while it's true the repertoire is a little smaller (and there's been an unfortunate huge jump in Pentax lens prices recently), all of the important bases are covered.

I often see this put forth as a downside, but I don't think it's really that big of deal.

[i speak in math]

Originally Posted by mattdm

It depends what you want. No one else has anything like Pentax's series of Limited primes, so from that point of view (and it's a great point of view) Pentax is (sorry, the pun is inherent) far less limiting.

But in general, while it's true the repertoire is a little smaller (and there's been an unfortunate huge jump in Pentax lens prices recently), all of the important bases are covered.

I often see this put forth as a downside, but I don't think it's really that big of deal.

Not to mention you can use every pentax lens ever made on all of their cameras. Thats over 300 lenses to choose from. Hardly limiting.

[amymnc]

Originally Posted by dcclark

But, truth be told, I am starting to feel like the D40 is limiting me a little -- but only in very specific ways

I feel that way too. I LOVE this camera but...not having commander mode for flash and the difficulty of finding AF-S lenses at a decent price is a bit frustrating. That's really my only complaints with it.

forgot to mention...only 3 auto focus points. I find myself struggling to stay focused on the eyes and still get the composition I want- but not too often

[inkista]

It sounds a bit to me like you're doing a classic electronics upsell. You go in with a firm budget and then you start thinking, "well just a little more..." and you've upgraded yourself into spending twice the money.

You don't need a Canon 50D. This is your first dSLR. Any entry level is going to do you just fine. Despite what the sales people and marketing literature and online boards are telling you, you don't need a higher-end camera. You just don't. And spending more isn't going to make the camera last any longer for you. The life of the camera is now like any other electronic/digital device. How long do you keep your cellphones? Your iPods? Your computers? Did paying more for a higher-featured device actually make you keep it any longer than a cheaper model would have? Or did you still swap models every three to five years on average?

Same deal with cameras. You're probably going to be upgrading in two to four generations, because a better sensor is like having better film. This is not the old days when camera mechanical advances were few and far between and you could shoot with the same setup for decades.

Right now, I say stick with the entry level selections, and don't consider upgrading, because you're going to have your hands full just learning the basic features on an entry level, without using all the fancy extras that a higher-end model is going to get you. And I'll bet nearly everyone who's talking about feeling limited by the D40 has been shooting with it for more than a year or two before feeling the pinch. You're still going to going up one huge bound from your P&S camera. And think about spending the money you save on better glass.

There are only two things that touch the light: the sensor and the lens. The rest is gravy.

[MSidPhoto]

Hmm.....you do have a problem at your hand, hope we can all solve it.

Firstly, I don't intend to confuse you or anything but have you checked out the new Sony A550. It is a much better camera than A350. One advantage of Sony is that it enable you to use most of the accessories of the old Minolta SLRs which means that quite often you can get really good stuff at cheaper prices. Another advantage of Sony DSLRs is that the have a built in Anti Shake feature which both Nikon and Canon lack. Nikon and Canon have Anti Shake feature in their LENSES which make the lenses pretty expensive.

Nikon D90 is a really great camera too. The Nikon D90 would definitely be "my " favorite choice. Although the Canon 50D is a much more professional camera with a much longer range of "professional" features. But that is the question ! " DO YOU REALLY NEED SUCH A HIGH END CAMERA," and if you do get it will you be able to learn on it easily. Let me tell you that I think Nikons are quite a user-friendly compared to other. Although i don't know much about the user-friendliness of Canon 50D.

If I were you, I would most probably go for a Nikon D90, because it is a medium level camera....and also fits within the price range you have written.