First Digital SLR...suggestion?

[imagia]

So in about 6 months time I'm planning on buying my first digital SLR. Does anyone have any suggestions on a brand/model? I'm looking for something in the $500-$600 range. I also want something with a decent megapixel count. I don't necessarily need 10mp, but something in the 7-8 range would be nice. I've only had point-and-shoot models up until now and I'm really looking forward to finally being able to make the pictures that I want to make. So I thought I'd see what suggestions people had. Thanks for any input if I get any!

[xxpinballxx]

I was in your shoes a few months ago and I agonized over it alot more than most. Im sure some here will attest to that. However, I think the Pixel count is not as important as alot think. I thought I needed a 10megapixel and was set on the D80. After seeing a ton of shots with the D40 and some 18x24 shots made with it I changed my tune about pixel count. I am for more pixels if you are going to be cropping ay down and enlarging but ven some of that can be done just fine with the lower megapixel cameras. I chose instead of higher pixel and cropping way down to just go and get a longer lens. IN six months who knows where prices will be but I say and everyone, I mean everyone here will agree...you have to buy one that "feels right" in your hands. Go try them out. I found that my local camera shop was more than willing to let me handle the cameras and feel them with different lenses and battery grips on them. Right now for 500-600 dolalrs you wont be able to get anything over a D40 with a lens. Bow if you have lenses and go the reconditioned route you might be closer to getting a larger selection. Not much but maybe....I say go test drive them....

[inkista]

Short answer? If you don't know what lenses you want, go Nikon or Canon. They have full-frame bodies in their lineups. They have the largest current lens lineups. For full scope of future upgrading, you can't go wrong with either one. Other brands have great bodies, but their current lens lineups don't compare, and you can find yourself locked out of choices you may want in the future. (If otoh, you know exactly what you want, and another brand has the lens lineup that fulfills those needs, then go for it.)

You cannot interchange lenses with different mount systems (without losing autofocus and autoexposure and EXIF functionality). So if you go Nikon, you'll be buying Nikon lenses or Nikon-mount lenses from Sigma/Tamron. If you buy Canon, you cannot use Nikon or Pentax or Olympus lenses. So, the decision you make locks you in. Nikon & Canon are therefore going to be your "safest" choices, especially if you don't know what lenses you want.

Be aware that jumping from a P&S to a SLR is not a simple straightfoward "upgrade", like moving from one P&S to another. There's a very steep learning curve. And you are buying into a camera system; it's like moving from a swiss army knife to the world of big red tool boxes. Now, at last, you can pound that nail (high iso). But you can also smash your thumb pretty good (out-of-focus), and there ain't no toothpick (face recognition) or tweezers (video) in the box.

The body is just your tool "platform." You're likely to get a new one in five years (like any piece of digital equipment), and the lenses are going to be your long-term purchase. You may eventually spend as much or more on lenses as you did on the body. Be aware that's the kind of cost you're looking at. Some lenses can easily outstrip the cost of the body. The scale of expense of new on-brand lenses is: $100 = "dirt cheap"; $300 = "cheap"; $600 = "moderately expensive", $1000+ = "expensive." "very expensive" starts around $3000.

That doesn't mean you can't start out with the body and the kit lens and a $100 50mm f/1.8. But you will want more.

[xxpinballxx]

I like the analogy Inkista! very fitting. Although an out of focus picture doesn't hurt as much as a smashed thumb....

[Nicole]

Originally Posted by inkista

Be aware that jumping from a P&S to a SLR is not a simple straightfoward "upgrade", like moving from one P&S to another. There's a very steep learning curve. And you are buying into a camera system; it's like moving from a swiss army knife to the world of big red tool boxes. Now, at last, you can pound that nail (high iso). But you can also smash your thumb pretty good (out-of-focus), and there ain't no toothpick (face recognition) or tweezers (video) in the box.

Can I just say that I think you put together a fantastic metaphor?

[D40]

Originally Posted by imagia

So in about 6 months time I'm planning on buying my first digital SLR. Does anyone have any suggestions on a brand/model? I'm looking for something in the $500-$600 range. I also want something with a decent megapixel count. I don't necessarily need 10mp, but something in the 7-8 range would be nice. I've only had point-and-shoot models up until now and I'm really looking forward to finally being able to make the pictures that I want to make. So I thought I'd see what suggestions people had. Thanks for any input if I get any!

I would suggest you get the Nikon D40 which a very nice camera for an excellent price of 499.99 in many locatoins
or the
Canon Digital rebel Xt

i personally like the D40 better i like how it fits in my hand the comfortablity of it how everything is set up is great, also the huge screen helps !

try costco.com its a great place it has the d40 for 500 an a 3 month return policy

[inkista]

Originally Posted by xxpinballxx

I like the analogy Inkista! very fitting. Although an out of focus picture doesn't hurt as much as a smashed thumb....

I think that depends on what the out-of-focus picture was. Sigh. I'm still p.o.'ed at the random stranger I handed my carefully FOCUSED Olympus OM-10 (loaded with ISO 1200 film) to the night I got to have my picture taken with Jeremy Brett--and she "refocused" it, so all I have is fuzzy outlines.

Originally Posted by Nicole

Can I just say that I think you put together a fantastic metaphor?

Thanks! I keep finding ways to add to it...

Yeah, D40 or XT are in the price range. But does the budget also have to cover another lens? Because if so, then I'd vote for a used 6MP dRebel (~$350). Which leaves $150-$250, which could get a 50mm f/1.8, a Tamron 70-300 DO, a Vivitar 285HV and ebay triggers, or a good tripod. .

[smc1377]

Originally Posted by inkista

I think that depends on what the out-of-focus picture was. Sigh. I'm still p.o.'ed at the random stranger I handed my carefully FOCUSED Olympus OM-10 (loaded with ISO 1200 film) to the night I got to have my picture taken with Jeremy Brett--and she "refocused" it, so all I have is fuzzy outlines.

I have often complained that ALL cameras should come with some sort of lock button where all a person should be able to do is to press the shutter button. I hate it when you give someone your camera to take a picture of you and their fingers manage to change some sort of setting before they take the picture or in my case one time, a video instead of a picture.

But this is getting way off topic.

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by smc1377

I have often complained that ALL cameras should come with some sort of lock button where all a person should be able to do is to press the shutter button. I hate it when you give someone your camera to take a picture of you and their fingers manage to change some sort of setting before they take the picture or in my case one time, a video instead of a picture.

But this is getting way off topic.

It'd be nice for shooting sports too, I can't tell you how many times I've been shooting away and looked at the top LCD to realize my settings aren't where I started. It'd have to allow AF though.

[matthewchj]

Some of Canon's longer lenses have AF preset, which works something like a lock, if I'm not wrong, by limiting your focus to a preset distance. But needless to say, these lenses are the big, heavy and expensive ones.

Anyway, I agree with the others about going with Canon or Nikon. For Canon, you have either the 350D or 400D, both of which are cheap but good cameras.