Choosing a DSLR

How do you choose a digital slr?

I am asking from the perspective of someone already whole-souled into nature photography. Me.

For someone who is contemplating getting into photography for the first time ever the answer may be a little different.

Here is how I go about choosing a DSLR:

My first consideration is the price range. Once I decide on that I look for the make and models that fit into that range. If none of them appeals to me then I wait until I can save up enough to go to a higher price range or see if prices will drop. Clearly patience is a fine virtue, especially when buying a DSLR.

I spend hours reading reviews and checking ratings and I came up with three possibilities. The Canon 30D. The Nikon D80. The Sony Alpha A100.

Last year I almost bought the Canon 20D. The 30D is an improved version of the 20D. What also impressed me was that Canon makes their own sensors while others use a second party. Additionaly, the cmos sensor is more dust resistant than the ccd. But the 30D is "only" 8.2 megapixel.

The extra megapixels of the Nikon D80 is attractive to me. (I know 8 or 10 megapixels don't make a big difference.) Also, the D80 is highly regarded, and a very solid camera. Pick it up and you know it is not a cheap plastic model. And it came with a highly rated lens.

I had my heart set on the Nikon D80 when I decided to check out the Sony A100. It compares very well to the D80. And I can buy the body for less than $1000 Can. The savings allows me to get one of the Carl Zeiss lenses that is made for the Sony A100. Specifically, the Vario-Sonnar T DT 3,5-4,5/16-80 ZA which sells for $900 Can here. The Carl Zeiss lenses are what won me over.

I read up on and review lenses with even greater intensity than the camera itself. The lens is the most important part of the camera. If I cannot afford the lens I want then I reject the camera and wait.

Back to my question. Am I overlooking anything in my way of choosing a DSLR? Your input is highly appreciated.

Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada

I would add another variable, the family the camera is part of and how often is that family upgraded. In other words assuming that you'll want to be adding additional camera bodies and lenses at a later time, what camera company has what you want in terms of upgrades and lenses.

For me a full frame DSLR is important. Even if I can't afford one now, I would be seriously considering Canon because once I had a 30D and some lenses, I would like to upgrade to a full frame camera and Nikon and Sony don't seem to have any plans for releasing one of these soon.


- Dan.

Hi Will,
I recently wrote an article about the things to consider when you choose a DSLR... http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/the_camera.htm

Personally, I've choosen Canon mainly for three reasons: low noise, fullframe and many IS lenses (I have the 24-105 IS, 100-400 IS, 600 f4 IS and I love them!)

Dan, since Sony has entered the DSLR market competition with their A100 as their first "challenge" then it would be reasonable to assume they would upgrade in the future if they hope to stay in the game. Their alliance with Carl Zeiss leapfrogs them to the front of the pack in my opinion.

Cindy, I know that Canon offers far more choices and is the only one I can find so far that offers a full frame model that Dan refers to. Full frame meaning the sensor size is the same as a 35mm film size 36x24? If you are happy with Canon then I see no reason to change loyalties. In my case I am still looking to establish an ongoing relationship with a camera manufacturer. So far I have had a Nikon, Pentax, and a Canon SLR. And a Shen Hao LF format.

Thank you Juza, I will read the article right away.

Thanks to all.

Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada

I would make which model DSLR secondary to the family that you decide to go to. Bodies will come and go (as Kent in SD) has pointed out, but lenses will stick with you.

Canon has more IS glass...
Canon seems to come out with upgraded bodies more often...
I like the feel of my Nikon better than the Canon D-Rebel that I have used...

Anyway...I say to choose the family first, and then choose the body in the family that best fits your price range and style.

Nathan

Will: I have the Sony A100 but bought it because of the lenses I had -many thousands of $$$ of Minolta glass- and not for the prospective future. That said, the big advantage of the A100 in my view is the in-body image stabilization. You don't have to buy specialty lenses with their higher price tags. I do believe Canon is the overall industry standard setter and clearly has the most comprehensive line. There is a bit of a risk betting on Sony albeit a small one IMO. I do like this camera and coupled with the good glass I already own I'm getting really good results and having a lot of fun doing it. >=))>

I don't think you can go seriously wrong with whatever you choose. Sticking with Nikon or Canon gives you the biggest range of lenses and accessories and probably the best opportunity for resale as you swap out equipment.

For myself, full-frame is huge factor in choosing a body. I already had some Canon glass from my 35mm days (went to LF, which is still my primary format), but I chose the 5D because of the full frame sensor. But you will do fine with whatever you decide.

I'm now at the point of buying my first DSLR. Only took me three years, LOL! My biggest gripe about them is you throw $1,000+ on one, and a year or so later they are obsolete. I don't spend all that much on a computer either. What I looked at is the camera system--mostly lenses and flash. Since I basically know what kinds of photos I like to take and know my style, that made it easier. The difference of 8 or 10 MP would not influence me at all. What I looked for is something that will do what I want for the lowest possible price. I considered a Nikon D50, but got to use the D80 in Chicago last August right before it came out. The nice, big viewfinder won me over. I'm also going to buy the cheap little 18-55mm lens. It's reputed to be pretty sharp and low distortion, and I just don't use the 28-70mm range hardly at all on my Nikon F100. I will also buy a Sigma 10-20mm ultrawide and maybe a Sigma 24mm f1.8 since I do a lot of night photography. There is a remote fire option for the D80, and I just love the SB-800 cordless flash Nikon has! I'm used to the accuracey of the Nikon meters and already have a bunch of Nikon lenses I'm used to. Even though I shoot almost every day, I couldn't justify the D200, and the viewfinder on the D50 is clearly not as good as the D80. I picked with D80 because it's a value, and it's just cheap enough I can throw it away in two years when a signifcantly improved D90 comes out. I really hate putting money into camera bodies. They depreciate so fast, where lenses tend to hold value much better.


Kent in SD

Will says he is already into nature photography. Does that mean he already has a collection of SLR lenses. If so, why not choose a body that will use his existing lenses? I don't think choosing based on the features of a current DSLR camera is a good idea. Your investment in lenses will carry forward for a long time. With the way technology is advancing it is likely you will want to catch up with current technology some time in the future. The brand that has the camera that meets your fancy at present may not be the brand you like best in the future. All the brands currently have very useable cameras now and are likely to continue to do so. I would make my choice based on lenses. If I already have lenses I would choose that brand (that is why I chose Canon). If I didn't have lenses that would work with any current DSLR I would choose based on the quality, availability and cost of lenses that would meet my needs.

Scott, I have two lenses. A 28-80mm that goes on my Canon EOS 3000 SLR (film) and the 150mm Rodenstock lens on my Shen Hao So choosing a body that will use my existing lenses won't work very well. I do not have a DSLR camera. I want one.

And I agree with you that the lens is the prime consideration when buying a DSLR. But the mention of a full frame camera ( Canon) and its advantages has me thinking it over again. Perhaps I may wait again until next year and hope the Canon will drop in price to make way for their new model. I want something that I will be happy with for many years. Even if it means waiting a bit longer.

What decides the quality of the image more? The lens or the sensor? I am a bit confused on that.

I want a camera that I can build on by adding lenses. I do not want to keep buying another camera every 2 or 3 years.

Thanks all for the response.

Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada

Hi Will

Like several others that have posted here I'm a long time Canon user. That said, for me the most important feature is how the camera feels in your hands as it is above all a working tool. Personally I'd chose either Canon or Nikon because they both have considerable history in making DSLRs. Not having the most current body really doesn't matter IMO - if you look at the images posted on NPN it's the photographer's eye that makes the big difference. For me, the Canon ergonomics worked best and I really love the long lenses they make, particularly the 500 f4IS (alone or with the 1.4 or the 2X or both!) and my 100-400 IS. I use both all the time. The Canon flash system I also like and fine works very simply and well. the controls throughout the Canon EOS line are very similar on all their camera bodies so I'm easily able to help friends with various models of DSLR or film SLR that I've never used myself.

The reviews suggest the new Sony is a good camera too. I generally don't like to be out there with a very new model so I'd want to wait and see how it works in the longer term. The one other point in favour of Canon or Nikon is that if and when you want to use a lens of a particular type for a short term there are rental opportunities out there.

So now that I've done my best to be reasonable: Go Canon!!!

William I use both systems, Nikon & Canon. The most important thing is that you settle on one and start shooting. I have the Canon 5D & the Nikon D70 & Nikon D200, they are all great cameras and you won't be disappointed with either of them. However so as not to sit on the fence I will give you my personal opinion. If you can afford the Canon 5D, buy it, although a relatively expensive body in comparison to the other contenders, the extra money is worth it. I would not recommend the 30D, although an excellent, time has passed it by and you would be better off getting the D80 or the Sony as it no longer represents good value for money. People mention the superiority of Canon lenses; I don't buy it, in fact I prefer Nikon lenses. I don't think Canon has anything that can beat the Nikon 12-24mm or 70-200VR lenses which are the zoom ranges I would use most. In addition if you intend to buy a kit lens, the Nikon 18-70mm beats any other kit lens available, bought with the D80, you will go a long way for the money. This kit lens can even be used with good results on the top of the range D2X. It is true that Canon seems to have a larger variety of lenses. If you plumb for the 5D you will have a great selection of lenses to choose from, but these won't be cheap. I wouldn't use the 5D with cheap lenses. You will have to look at the 17-40mm 4L or 16-35mm 2.8L, 24-105mm 4L and 70-200mm 4L or 2.8L. I don't believe in waiting around ages for the price to come down. The extra shots you get in the meantime will be priceless. Good luck.

If you can afford a FF camera and quality lenses to go with then 5D is no brainer.

I was thinking of getting one but thought of working a bit more with LF when the scene demands a 'huge' print. After a lot of thinking I sold all my L lenses, macros, 350D etc and got a D80 with consumer grade 18-70 Nikkor. And it is every bit as good as 17-40 with addition of 30mm extra at the long end. I also carry ShenHao with me.

Will, I'll chime in here but with a little different perspective. If you plan to continue to shoot 4 X 5 then almost any system will work. I will say that if you plan to give up 4 X 5 and shoot mostly digital then I believe Canon will serve you best, primarily because they have three excellent tilt/shift lenses in really great focal lengths. You might want to talk to someone like Jerry Greer who switched from 4 X 5 to Canon digital and uses the tilt/shift lenses a lot. He produces some wonderful work with them. I am personally a Nikon shooter for 35mm but still use 4 X 5 for most everything but wildlife and macro. I do use the 85 PC Micro for its tilt/shift feature even though I also have a 200 micro. Hope this helps.

Hey WIll

While I think it's important to consider the whole system, obviously, I disagree with what is (IMO) an outdated notion of the body not being, relatively, that important. All that changes drastically with digital cameras. I switched from a D70 to the D2x, and it's a huge difference. Not just with the handling, AF, etc, but the quality of your pictures changes from one camera to anorther .. that wasn't the case (in many ways) with film bodies.

I suspect there's more difference between an 8 mp camera and a 10 mp camera than a lot of people realise.

If you're shooting mostly landscapes, and not wildlife, I think the difference between the Canon and Nikon systems is markedly reduced.From your comments above, I don't see you being the tpe who's looking at buying 3 T/S lenses, a 70-200mm, a 24-70, and some ultra-wide lenses and a 600mm IS. The fact that you're looking closely at the Sony because of the Zeiss lens supports this. That being the case, go to a store and spend some time using the cameras.

Personally I'd go with the D80 for what I suspect you'll be looking for. But if you wanted to spend more cash and go with a higher level body, I'd probably recommend the 5D.

Bottom line is all 3 systems you mentioned should be great.

Cheers

Carl

The choice was easy for me. Having been a Pentax user for many years, I stayed with the brand
because I had all the lenses. If I could afford it, I'd jump to buy their latest, the K10D, a 10MP SLR with in-camera shake reduction and weather resistant body.

Am I overlooking anything in my way of choosing a DSLR?

One important factor that I haven't seen come up yet is what is your planned use of the images from your DSLR? I think the most important part of any camera purchase is coming up with a short list of things you NEED it to do and then WANT it to do.

For example, if large prints are a hight priority, holding off until you can afford a 10 or 12 MP camera makes sense. If you use a tripod regularly, IS may be less important than having a weatherproof body for use in inclement weather.

There's a lot of good info in these replies regarding pros/cons of the various models & manufacturers, but at some point you'll want to map it back to what your specific needs and wants are.

Sony and Pentax have certainly made things more complicated than they were a year or so ago! I agree that both are very good platforms worth a close look. I'm starting to think that we agonize too much about these things. Really, I think I'd be happy with any brand if I used their first class lenses.



Kent in SD

What I want to use the camera for is probably the most important factor in deciding which one to get. Carl, you are right. I am not likely to buy an arsenal of lenses. I never owned more than two in my entire life. Kent, I tend to agree that perhaps we agonize about these things to much. Sometimes I feel like an indecisive kid in a candy store

I think it is worthwhile to find a manufacturer that I can be happy with. Then when I want to upgrade the decision is much easier. I depend heavily on reviews and ratings in my quest for the right camera for me. What may be noteworthy is I took the How to Choose a Camera "test" at www.imaging-resource.com and guess what the very first recommended camera on the list was? Yes. The Sony A100. Will that clinche my decision. Time will tell.

Thank you all for the comments.

Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada

About in-body IS vs. VR/IS lenses... what should not be overlooked, IMO, is how much Sony are asking for their non-IS lenses (of course non-IS, because it's in the body ) compared even to the best IS/VR lenses of Nikon and Canon. I don't think there is much money saved when going for the Sony.

As far as I know, some Zeiss glass is also available for Nikon. I'm not absolutely sure since I really could care less about Zeiss lenses (I'm a student on a budget), but I guess it's worth looking into it.

Besides that... Sony is perfectly fine for CD players, TVs, computers, electric toothbrushes (ok, maybe not the last one...). But I'd never buy a Sony DSLR. Canon and Nikon (not in that order ) are the way to go, in my opinion... maybe I'm stubborn, but you don't go to McDonalds to have a healthy meal, either... right?

Basil

Basil, according to the price quotes from our local camera store I can get the Sony A100 with the Zeiss 16-80mm lens for $1868. Can. A similar Nikon D80 setup will take me back $2728 and Canon 30D $2518. I save at least $650. If I choose a Zeiss 85mm it would make the kit $2468. So I still save and I have a high quality lens. I also did a price comparison of the Nikon and Canon lenses with the Sony lenses and I do not see a significant difference.

Price is important to me but not the most important. I would gladly pay more if I can get a better system. The Canon 5D is definitely one of them but it is over my limit. Of course I can buy the body first and save up for the lens afterwards. My LF and my SLR would tide me over in the meantime. I am seriously considering that option. But as far as the Sony A100 goes from reading the reviews I don't see it as too inferior to the Nikon D80 or the Canon 30D.

Thanks for your reply.

Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada

I think this is the best value on the market, hands down. Please read about the future availability of third party lenses, and don't forget the ability to use a ton of very good lenses from the used market. The limited series of lenses, are excellent, very sharp. To me though the weatherproof body, the anti shake ( on every lens , new and old ) and the value . . . half the price of some the others on your list and may out perform many, perhaps all of the them in rough , or tough conditions.

I'm a little biased because I've used this brand for many years, they've always produced light,
tough cameras that are ergonmically joys and very intuitive in operation. Simple and smart,
but lots of useful features in a very tough camera. This will be my next camera Will, you should at least look at it before deciding. Tim

Thanks for your suggestion, Tim. I am looking at it even though I announced I am going for the 5D. I went to the camera store for a hands on look at the 5D and the clerk virtually tried to persuade me not to buy it. As to the Pentax I am looking for some reviews on the lenses so I know which one is the best. Without a good lens the camera is of little use no matter what the brand.

Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada