Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
Hello guys,
I'm pretty new to this forum and also don't have that much knowledge about photography.
One of my current dreams is to own and use a DLSR camera. Considering to have an allround model to use for various photo-styles: documentation, landscape, architecture, people/portrait etc.
After having a look on the market, I took some cameras into consideration. My budget is not more than about 800 Euros.
So I had a closer look on the Canon EOS 400D, 40D, Nikon D40 and Pentax K100d and K10d.
Nearly all have the kit-lens 18 to 55mm.
What I also learned is that I like a camera with a good viewfinder and with rubbered grip areas and maybe want to be able to use older 2nd hand lenses if possible.
Could you please help me to come to a decision?
I'm pretty new to this forum and also don't have that much knowledge about photography.
One of my current dreams is to own and use a DLSR camera. Considering to have an allround model to use for various photo-styles: documentation, landscape, architecture, people/portrait etc.
After having a look on the market, I took some cameras into consideration. My budget is not more than about 800 Euros.
So I had a closer look on the Canon EOS 400D, 40D, Nikon D40 and Pentax K100d and K10d.
Nearly all have the kit-lens 18 to 55mm.
What I also learned is that I like a camera with a good viewfinder and with rubbered grip areas and maybe want to be able to use older 2nd hand lenses if possible.
Could you please help me to come to a decision?
Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
I know that this website is for rangefinders. Thought there would be someone who could help me anyway.:angel:
ampguy
Veteran
I'd strongly consider the Pentax K100D if you can still get one especially with a rebate. I used to have an *ist DL, and am hoping this meets the expectations of that old one. The kit lens is cheezy, but there are 24 Million lenses that will fit on the K- and M42 (with adapter) mounts, most at very reasonable prices.
I think the move to 10MP on these mini-DSLR sensors is not a good thing for noise or dynamic range.
I think the move to 10MP on these mini-DSLR sensors is not a good thing for noise or dynamic range.
cmedin
Well-known
I just went through buying a new DSLR and I have to make one comment: the K100D is not very good if you want to use older lenses and manual focus. The viewfinder is small and squinty and not particularly useful. The K10D has a pentaprism one which is much improved; if you want 6MP and don't care about the built-in IS in the K100D I'd say look at the D, DS, DS2 and the Samsung GX-1S (I have this one; it's a DS2 with a Samsung badge) which all have .95x pentaprism finders. The GX-1S cost me $349 from amazon including the kit lens, which from what I've read on lens testing sites is actually a pretty decent one compared to the ones bundled with the Canons and Nikons.ampguy said:
mike goldberg
The Peaceful Pacific
Hi...
I'm partial to Nikon and have the light in weight D40 with its excellent 18-55 kit lens [Consumer Reports, June 2007]. Yes, you can mount older Nikon lenses, BUT...
No autofocus
No meter readout
The comments on Canon and Pentax above, are also relevant. More and more digital, and references to DSLR's are finding there way into our RFF forum. I see nothing wrong with this, so long as the primary area of interest is rangefinder.
I'm partial to Nikon and have the light in weight D40 with its excellent 18-55 kit lens [Consumer Reports, June 2007]. Yes, you can mount older Nikon lenses, BUT...
No autofocus
No meter readout
The comments on Canon and Pentax above, are also relevant. More and more digital, and references to DSLR's are finding there way into our RFF forum. I see nothing wrong with this, so long as the primary area of interest is rangefinder.
Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
mike goldberg said:
Thanks. Well, my main interest is to make good photos, of course. And use the FED-2 RF camera for the old style feeling.
Above all it might be a good and useful way to learn more about photography with it than with a digital one. But as you can see, I'm a total newbie.
Also thanks to the other guys for the (again) great amount of helpin comments.
wgerrard
Veteran
Hi Florian. All the cameras you mentioned have good reputations. You need to find a shop and look through the viewfinder of each to determine which seems brighter to you. Ditto the way the camera feels in your hands. If a camera feels awkward in your hands, you won't be happy with it.
This may be a rangefinder site, but there's a great deal of discussion about all forms of photography. The place has a high signal-to-noise ratio.
The 'Evil SLR' forum isn't directly linked from the home page, so here it is: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=126
Enjoy.
This may be a rangefinder site, but there's a great deal of discussion about all forms of photography. The place has a high signal-to-noise ratio.
The 'Evil SLR' forum isn't directly linked from the home page, so here it is: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=126
Enjoy.
Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
The main point going to DSLR is to be able to have a possibility to focus the way I want to (also to have a good and quick AF for Street/Documentation shots) which I can't achieve with my compact digital camera (Canon PowerShot A75).
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
My suggestion is the same one I gave my dad when he was looking: the Pentax K10D. it has a pentaprism viewfinder and not a pentamirror--the prism viewfinders are generally brighter than the mirror viewfinders--and there are a lot of good lenses you can use with it. From M42 screw mount to modern AF lenses in the various Pentax K mounts.
One caveat: don't go swimming with the K10D--it's fairly weather resistant but not waterproof! Dad accidentally went into the Mekong river with his and has since had to replace the body. But he likes his well enough that he got another one.
Not sure how the dollar is doing vs the euro right now but I think you should have no trouble staying in your budget for the K10D "kit".
Rob
One caveat: don't go swimming with the K10D--it's fairly weather resistant but not waterproof! Dad accidentally went into the Mekong river with his and has since had to replace the body. But he likes his well enough that he got another one.
Not sure how the dollar is doing vs the euro right now but I think you should have no trouble staying in your budget for the K10D "kit".
Rob
Florian1234 said:
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
From your list, the D40/D40x and K10D are the winners...
navilluspm
Well-known
Check our Ken Rockwell (who, can be a LITTLE baised) and his suggestions and reviews.
Here is a link to his recommendations: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm
BTW - I do not own a DSLR - just film a film SLR.
Here is a link to his recommendations: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm
BTW - I do not own a DSLR - just film a film SLR.
newsgrunt
Well-known
Consider the D200 and the 18-200 lens. This lens is tougher than you might think. Saw one that came back from Afghanistan, that was used naked, and the only issues it had was a bit of grit in the zoom/ focus rings. Didn't lockup at all.
Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
newsgrunt said:
The D200 is, unfortunately, out of my range of budget.
kuzano
Veteran
Disregard "kit lens bashing" and compare.
Disregard "kit lens bashing" and compare.
Florian,
All the cameras you listed are placed in the market by quality manufacturers. They are not first generation cameras for any of these manufacturers. Not one of these manufacturers would offer a good product and hang a piece of crap on the front end through which to take pictures.
There is a fascination in the industry with bashing so called "kit lenses" that come with the cameras. Yes there are higher quality lenses and a prime (single focal length) lens will usually produce better images than a zoom. But in reality the lenses that come with the cameras offer good value for the money spent, just as the cameras do.
As an entry level camera, I would say that you are looking at some top cameras for entry level. And as some say, go find these cameras and touch, feel and hold them up to your eye. Snap off a few images.
Here is one comparison suggestion I would make. There are three sites I visit for camera reviews. On two of them, I find the full review on the camera, but I don't read it at first. I first jump to the conclusion page/recommendation. Then if I like what I see, I pore through the whole review. They are exhaustive. The sites are:
www.steves-digicams.com
www.dpreview.com
www.dcresource.com
Personally, I think I would opt for the Nikon D40X, although the Canon would be a close second. Canon has the longest run in the Rebel body, but the D40X has captured the fancy of a lot of people.
You offered such a wide range of interest in photos, so pay close attention to things like shutter lag, startup time, and time to focus, if sports or fast moving events are in your areas of interest. Equestrian, or animal shows, etc, fall into that category.
Also, don't get caught in Megapixel Mania. Both Nikon and Canon have separate cameras for sports events vs. high quality images. Sports cameras are often 6-8 Megapixels, because the time to write the file to a buffer and get ready for the next shot is very important. You can't get an image to the memory card as fast with 12 megapixels as you can with 6.
This is likely to be a starter DSLR and you are likely to replace it in a year or so, when you have really found your interests in the digital maket. Therefore, I think every first digital camera should be the least expensive in the manufacturers line that you choose.
Disregard "kit lens bashing" and compare.
Florian,
All the cameras you listed are placed in the market by quality manufacturers. They are not first generation cameras for any of these manufacturers. Not one of these manufacturers would offer a good product and hang a piece of crap on the front end through which to take pictures.
There is a fascination in the industry with bashing so called "kit lenses" that come with the cameras. Yes there are higher quality lenses and a prime (single focal length) lens will usually produce better images than a zoom. But in reality the lenses that come with the cameras offer good value for the money spent, just as the cameras do.
As an entry level camera, I would say that you are looking at some top cameras for entry level. And as some say, go find these cameras and touch, feel and hold them up to your eye. Snap off a few images.
Here is one comparison suggestion I would make. There are three sites I visit for camera reviews. On two of them, I find the full review on the camera, but I don't read it at first. I first jump to the conclusion page/recommendation. Then if I like what I see, I pore through the whole review. They are exhaustive. The sites are:
www.steves-digicams.com
www.dpreview.com
www.dcresource.com
Personally, I think I would opt for the Nikon D40X, although the Canon would be a close second. Canon has the longest run in the Rebel body, but the D40X has captured the fancy of a lot of people.
You offered such a wide range of interest in photos, so pay close attention to things like shutter lag, startup time, and time to focus, if sports or fast moving events are in your areas of interest. Equestrian, or animal shows, etc, fall into that category.
Also, don't get caught in Megapixel Mania. Both Nikon and Canon have separate cameras for sports events vs. high quality images. Sports cameras are often 6-8 Megapixels, because the time to write the file to a buffer and get ready for the next shot is very important. You can't get an image to the memory card as fast with 12 megapixels as you can with 6.
This is likely to be a starter DSLR and you are likely to replace it in a year or so, when you have really found your interests in the digital maket. Therefore, I think every first digital camera should be the least expensive in the manufacturers line that you choose.
Leighgion
Bovine Overseer
I own the Nikon D40 and really like it, but with the lack of an AF motor its true potential for the shooter on a budget isn't realized unless you're willing to manually focus set your own exposures.
I own 12, soon to be 13, lenses in regular use. Of those, only two are AF-S lenses that give service metering and autofocus on a D40. Two more are AF lenses, but due to the D40's lack of an AF motor, they meter but need to be manually focused. The remaining 8, soon to be 9, are AIS-era manual focus lenses that don't meter on a D40. Must set the dial to manual and do everything myself.
Why put myself through this? The older lenses are bargains for their optical performance. For all 12 lenses (minus the D40 kit lens), I think I spent a total of less than $1500 USD, and I was splurging a little by insisting on AIS lenses. The D40 is unique among DSLRs in that it can mount even pre-AI Nikon lenses dating back 50 years, which are the most incredible bargains in glass around.
This path isn't for everybody, but for those willing, the D40 can be the core of wonderful budget system.
I own 12, soon to be 13, lenses in regular use. Of those, only two are AF-S lenses that give service metering and autofocus on a D40. Two more are AF lenses, but due to the D40's lack of an AF motor, they meter but need to be manually focused. The remaining 8, soon to be 9, are AIS-era manual focus lenses that don't meter on a D40. Must set the dial to manual and do everything myself.
Why put myself through this? The older lenses are bargains for their optical performance. For all 12 lenses (minus the D40 kit lens), I think I spent a total of less than $1500 USD, and I was splurging a little by insisting on AIS lenses. The D40 is unique among DSLRs in that it can mount even pre-AI Nikon lenses dating back 50 years, which are the most incredible bargains in glass around.
This path isn't for everybody, but for those willing, the D40 can be the core of wonderful budget system.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I have to agree that you would not go wrong with any of them. I might add a Olympus e-410 because of size and price. She takes the 4/3s mount so you can get several different lenses from several different folks including Leica!
I'm not into kit lenses, I like prime MF lenses so I'm going with a D300 and many of my old lenses. If I were not an old fart and trusted computers the E-410 or D40X would be at the top of my list.
To me I look at Canon about the same way as I look at Sony, great mass market product. They just do not feel like they have the heart of a photographer in mind. Nikon does, Olympus does, but it's not my heart, but it is that of a photographer.
B2 (;->
I'm not into kit lenses, I like prime MF lenses so I'm going with a D300 and many of my old lenses. If I were not an old fart and trusted computers the E-410 or D40X would be at the top of my list.
To me I look at Canon about the same way as I look at Sony, great mass market product. They just do not feel like they have the heart of a photographer in mind. Nikon does, Olympus does, but it's not my heart, but it is that of a photographer.
B2 (;->
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
If the pixel counts is not important, take a close look of new/used E-1. It is dirt cheap these days. IQ is outstanding.
Chris101
summicronia
The D40 is a nice camera, but it's low cost design locks out Nikon's best autofocus prime lenses. The D50 on the other hand can be bought gently used at less than the cost of a new D40, works with any autofocus lens, and gives better low light performance to boot.
gavinlg
Veteran
40d is an excellent camera with a big bright viewfinder.
Same with the k10, although it is slightly older and will be replaced relatively soon.
The D40 is great too, but not on the same level as the 40d and the k10.
Canon has the best super primes of everyone in outright quality - but they're very large. Pentax has the smallest primes that are still excellent. Nikons range lacks decent AF primes.
The 40d is very good overall.
The K10d is a little more noise at high ISOs, but cheaper
The d40 is the cheapest but less control and going to be replaced this month (or so it's speculated)
Same with the k10, although it is slightly older and will be replaced relatively soon.
The D40 is great too, but not on the same level as the 40d and the k10.
Canon has the best super primes of everyone in outright quality - but they're very large. Pentax has the smallest primes that are still excellent. Nikons range lacks decent AF primes.
The 40d is very good overall.
The K10d is a little more noise at high ISOs, but cheaper
The d40 is the cheapest but less control and going to be replaced this month (or so it's speculated)
ruby.monkey
Veteran
Opinionated, certainly, but he doesn't seem to have an uncritical preferrence for any one brand.navilluspm said:
Of the cameras mentioned, if manual-focus lenses are a requirement, then the Pentax models are clear winners (IS and easy stop-down metering with any lens that can be made to fit), with the K10D on top unless size and/or cost is a major factor; the Canon probably next; the Nikon nowhere.
I have the K100D and it's a tough little beast - it's become my son's favourite plaything, and two-year-old boys don't really understand the difference between a marvel of electronic ingenuity and a lump hammer.
Last edited: