Recommend me an DSLR

[Lbm]

 

edit: Budget would be around 700 quid I guess. I would be selling off my G1 if I find the right one. Would prefer a "widescreen" lens. Meaning a lens that would take it a wide view at a close distance. Not sure what's that called in photography terms

 

 

Well the D90 body only is around £600 and I believe it is a fine camera, although I've only picked one up in a shop (When comparing it to Canon's 550d) and loved it's viewfinder and buttons etc... I have a Pany FZ28 and I'm also wanting to go for a DSLR.

 

And you're looking for the term 'wide angle' lens (WA), or 'ultra wide angle' (UWA)

[jonathanc]

ah thanks for the heads up on the term Lbm I find I have to stand waaaay back when taking shots sometimes so would like a WA lens as I think UWA lenses are very expensive.

 

I think there deals for D90 on ebay for around 780ish quid but from HK...

[Ian W]

I did go for the Nikon D40x second hand.

 

It's a cracking camera and if I upgrade I'll likely go for a D90, however if I was buying my first DSLR I couldn't ignore that Sony.

 

It's one hell of a buy

[jonathanc]

I had the Canon 400D before. Great camera sold it off because I wanted a change. I had the flash kit too so it was pretty bulky and heavy

 

eBay D90 body only for 469 quid : Clicky

 

Can anyone recommend a good WA lens for the D90? Just wondering how much does it add up too.

[grahamc]

I would go for the D5000. Gives you very similar features to the D90, newer design (not sure if they have re-done the D90). Main reason, save the cash and buy a better lens!! The difference in the pictures is in the lens

 

The body is about making taking pictures in difficult situations easier , IE. low light, high speed, etc, etc.

 

EDIT:

D40x is a brilliant little camera, I used to have one until I traded up to the D300. Compared to the newer ones though, I think having the flexibility of HD video is more appealing.

 

If you are willing to buy from HK this place is great!! No duties guaranteed (they refund)... although prices having taken a beating due to the £ sinking.

http://www.onestop-digital.com/

[Ian W]

Can anyone recommend a good WA lens for the D90? Just wondering how much does it add up too.

 

The Sigma 10-20mm has some favourable reviews and is a bit cheaper than Nikon's own offerings.

 

Looking at on average £350+ for a new one.

[Ian W]

I would go for the D5000. Gives you very similar features to the D90, newer design (not sure if they have re-done the D90). Main reason, save the cash and buy a better lens!! The difference in the pictures is in the lens

 

The body is about making taking pictures in difficult situations easier , IE. low light, high speed, etc, etc.

 

The only trouble with the D5000 is that it has no AF motor built into the body whereas the D90 has (my D40x is the same and sadly limits you to only buying the newer lenses with AF built into them).

 

Take nothing away from the D5000 though, it's a very good camera that also has the swivel screen and HD video if that's your sort of thing.

[jonathanc]

The Sigma 10-20mm has some favourable reviews and is a bit cheaper than Nikon's own offerings.

Looking at on average £350+ for a new one.

 

£350 just for lens... I think the cheapest body only UK D90 I can find is around 560 quid... that with lens would be nearly a grand

 

Wonder how much my G1 would sell

 

edit: hmm the sigma lens doesn't have the image stabiliser function built in but I guess for that focus range its not needed?

[Ian W]

£350 just for lens... I think the cheapest body only UK D90 I can find is around 560 quid... that with lens would be nearly a grand

 

Any decent glass seems to be that price and upwards.

 

You can get some decent lenses for less. For example the 18-55mm VR kit lens is actually pretty decent

[grahamc]

The only trouble with the D5000 is that it has no AF motor built into the body whereas the D90 has (my D40x is the same and sadly limits you to only buying the newer lenses with AF built into them).

 

Take nothing away from the D5000 though, it's a very good camera that also has the swivel screen and HD video if that's your sort of thing.

 

agree... only problem with going for the D90 is that it does not leave much budget for the lens and I believe the lens is MUCH more important than the body. A decent AF lens would be perfect.

 

£350 just for lens... I think the cheapest body only UK D90 I can find is around 560 quid... that with lens would be nearly a grand

 

Wonder how much my G1 would sell

 

350 is nothing... I have spent a lot more on single lenses

[jonathanc]

Any decent glass seems to be that price and upwards.

 

You can get some decent lenses for less. For example the 18-55mm VR kit lens is actually pretty decent

 

Yeah I have the 18-55 on my G1 as well. Does ok job but I always wondered how much I can fit into a WA lens.

 

I bought a WA adaptor from eBay before but too much distortion for my liking for I got rid of that

 

I like the G1 but you can notice the picture is just not as sharp as my old 400D.

 

Thanks for the recommendation though I would scout for nice D90 and 10-20 lens deals.

[Ian W]

Thanks for the recommendation though I would scout for nice D90 and 10-20 lens deals.

 

Reckon you'll need some luck there mate.

 

It's not a likely combination to come in a package. Perhaps worth keeping an eye out for best separate prices.

[grahamc]

sorry but I dont think the 10-20 is good enough lens for what you want. Dont get me wrong its a great little lens, I own one and would not sell it. For things like holidays and with kids around you will want something with a little more length.

 

The 18-55mm is good, but it lacks the wide end and the length IMO...although, saying that, its not a bad place to start

[jonathanc]

The 18-55mm is good, but it lacks the wide end and the length IMO...although, saying that, its not a bad place to start

 

hmmm....sorry but I think you confused me here

 

18-55mm lens is a very common one I see bundled with most cameras. My 400D had 18-55 but I got a 25-250 because it looks big and long It's not very good when taking close up of big groups though.

 

So, let's say I won't be doing much zooming (I believe you would need an additional flash for proper zooming purposes or get one of those telephoto lenses?) but rather close up group pictures and sometimes just shots of sceneries and my car etc, what lens would you recommend?

 

Keep in mind I might take pictures in dark places too (some places don't allow flash) so a lens that aids towards that would help too!

[Ian W]

In that case, I heartily recommend the Nikkor 35mm 1.8G

 

It's a prime so no zooming at all, but is sharp and above all very fast (great in low light).

 

To top it off you can get a new one for £170. Mine is rarely off my camera

[grahamc]

18mm is not very wide, thats all. Yes its very common.

 

16-85mm would be my recommendation, not fantastic in low light. Low light is a completely different story..............

 

10-20 is a very specific lens with a very specific purpose. I use it for landscape, car rigs shots, odd angles, etc

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2592/3721221549_5d28f552f1.jpg

[jonathanc]

In that case, I heartily recommend the Nikkor 35mm 1.8G

 

It's a prime so no zooming at all, but is sharp and above all very fast (great in low light).

 

To top it off you can get a new one for £170. Mine is rarely off my camera

 

That's a nice recommendation Looks small too so shouldn't be too heavy. Is it wider compared to the 18-55mm?

[jonathanc]

18mm is not very wide, thats all. Yes its very common.

 

16-85mm would be my recommendation...

 

10-20 is a very specific lens with a very specific purpose. I use it for landscape, car rigs shots, odd angles, etc

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2592/3721221549_5d28f552f1.jpg

 

orrrr...... a 16-85? How does a 16-85 perform in low light settings though?

 

This guy seem to say the 12-24 is a good WA lens clicky

edit: lol 600+ quid for 12-24

[grahamc]

That's a nice recommendation Looks small too so shouldn't be too heavy. Is it wider compared to the 18-55mm?

 

no... good lens...

 

orrrr...... a 16-85? How does a 16-85 perform in low light settings though?

 

what do you classify as low light?

[Ian W]

A 35mm is about mid way of an 18-55 as the name suggests.

 

Its small and light alright, but there is the very odd occasion I'd like something wider.

[Lbm]

I do believe you've quoted the Rockwell

[Ian W]

I do believe you've quoted the Rockwell

 

Who, me?

[jonathanc]

what do you classify as low light?

 

Well I do most snaps in daylight but sometimes I would be indoors with not so bright lighting (not total darkness). I must admit this is low priority though. The priority I have for the lens in descending order :

 

1) Wide enough to take family shots so I don't have to stand waaaaaay back. Awkward if I set the timer sometimes

 

2) Mainly used for close ups, portraits, pictures of cars, sometimes general scenery (a little zooming sometimes but nothing too hardcore - I will get a proper lens for that in the future if I do need it)

 

3) Not too heavy. Had the 25-250 and it's pretty bulky.

 

4) Not too expensive - cannae spend 600 quid just for lens I guess the most I can squeeze is around mid 300s.

 

5) I do most shots by hand (rarely get chance to use tripod as on the move most of the time) so looking for a lens that compliments this.

 

6) Not very important but a lens that supports high ISO would be nice. For something like inside a museum or a castle where flash is no-no.

 

Seems like I have some experts in this thread so time to ask some questions You guys give better recommendation compared to that bloke down at Currys.

[grahamc]

ok, 16-85 recommendation stands... you have a fairly mixed range of needs, which in my bag equates to 3 separate lenses

 

Its a good mix of uses, etc....

 

Lets see what everyone else suggests.

[Ian W]

ok, 16-85 recommendation stands... you have a fairly mixed range of needs, which in my bag equates to 3 separate lenses

 

Its a good mix of uses, etc....

 

Lets see what everyone else suggests.

 

Absolutely, Graham.

 

Something in a similar focal range and as fast as possible (well, as fast as budget allows).